The Book of Exalted Deeds - It's Here! (merged - full ToC posted)

[reiella]

Any thoughts on the revised domains? I was particularly surprised at crown of flame, the 5th level Glory spell -- it's useless for almost all PCs! Was that intentional?

The Archon Component? Yea.
(Last Judgement is another one)


I'm not so sure I like the existance of those 'Components'.

A few PrCs get spells like that as well, just very ... little use for PCs as you said. At a glance, it just feels like BoED gave more 'head way'/space to the concept of playing good outsiders (Than bovd and evil outsiders).

 

[Olive]

The Archon Component? Yea.
(Last Judgement is another one)


I'm not so sure I like the existance of those 'Components'.

I'd probably just allow it if it's a domain spell...

I like the components in general, but it's pretty poor if they're sticking them on lists (esp. domain lists) and not many PCs could take them.

 

[Psion]

Any thoughts on the revised domains? I was particularly surprised at crown of flame, the 5th level Glory spell -- it's useless for almost all PCs! Was that intentional?

Waitaminnut...

Wasn't crown of glory in the Glory domain before in Defenders of the Faith and Deities & Demigods?

I'd probably just allow it if it's a domain spell...

Works for me.

 

[reiella]

Waitaminnut...

Wasn't crown of glory in the Glory domain before in Defenders of the Faith and Deities & Demigods?



Works for me.

That it was actually.

However, this was about Crown of Flame (5th level Glory Domain spell, replaces Holy Sword).

And Crown of Glory wasn't changed, except general 3.5e changes( casting time, area went from fixed to 10ft/casterlevel. And it gained the good descriptor.

Personally I think I would just allow the cleric to use Holy Sword instead for Glory (Last Judgement I'm still ponderous on).

 

[Ysgarran]

Granted, the situation described is a manufactured one but don't get hung up on the particulars. Generalize a bit about the situation and ask under what situation(s) would a Paladin grant the possibility for redemption.

Except that the creatures described are always Evil. They are physical manifestations of Evil itself, brought into existence in realms of pure wickedness. To say that the Paladin should even consider sparing them because of one possibly redeeming characteristic is patently ludicrous.

 

[Kender42]

I appreciate the idea of Mercy Vs. Justice. Is it Good to forgive a serial killer who has changed his ways, or is it Good to bring him to justice for those crimes?

Personally, I'd say it was Good that you forgive him. Lawful that you bring him to justice.

 

[Ysgarran]

I would say your view is what makes most D&D campaigns rather bland when it comes to the question of good versus evil. The PCs run around killing evil, thwart the bad guys and collect the treasure without any kind of self-sacrifice and call it 'good'.

The situation you provide is a case in point. While doing nothing for the choking victim would be an evil act, the situation is not a dipolar one.
The situation you provide is the:
"If I am not evil, then I must be a good person."
kind of situation.

You may disagree that Sacrifice is a pre-condition for good but you do not provide any other meaningful measurement of what it means to be 'good'.

Here is the objectionable quote further focused:
"Even the most generous altruism, when it comes without sacrifice or even serves one’s own self-interest, is neutral at best."

Doing good without sacrifice or with a personal interest is not good, it is at best, neutral.

I say again, rubbish.

Performing the heimlich maneuver on someone who is choking in a restaurant and saving their life is not a good act, but at best a neutral one, because there is no sacrifice involved.

Sacrifice is not a necessary pre-condition for good.

 

[Voadam]

I would say your view is what makes most D&D campaigns rather bland when it comes to the question of good versus evil. The PCs run around killing evil, thwart the bad guys and collect the treasure without any kind of self-sacrifice and call it 'good'.

The situation you provide is a case in point. While doing nothing for the choking victim would be an evil act, the situation is not a dipolar one.
The situation you provide is the:
"If I am not evil, then I must be a good person."
kind of situation.

You may disagree that Sacrifice is a pre-condition for good but you do not provide any other meaningful measurement of what it means to be 'good'.

Generally:

Helping, making things better is a good act,

Doing nothing is neutral,

Harming, making things worse is bad.

Specifically:

Helping the choking person is good.

Not getting involved is neutral.

Evil is stealing the choking person's purse while everyone else is helping her or watching the spectacle.

I do not think doing nothing is evil. You can't help everybody and that does not make you evil. But helping is a good act, period.

Society may expect you to do good and help out, but I only count active harm as evil.

On the topic of self sacrifice, dedicated evil guys make big personal sacrifices for their causes all the time. That does not make them good, it simply makes them dedicated.

 

[Voadam]

Yes there is. A sacrifice to time, convenience and even soem risk that if it went wrong you could be blamed. Not seeing the sacrifices in that is what makes you good!

Thank you, but no. I like thinking of myself as a good person who helps out, so there is an element of self interest in my helping people. Therefore my actions when I help people is, at best, neutral under these guidelines.

 

[Particle_Man]

Thank you, but no. I like thinking of myself as a good person who helps out, so there is an element of self interest in my helping people. Therefore my actions when I help people is, at best, neutral under these guidelines.

That only works if you take the time to think "hmmm...if I help this person out, that means I am a good person, which makes me feel good" as opposed to "ohmigod, that person is choking! I had better help him/her." Most people don't have time to do the former, so if they help others in emergency, time-sensitive situations you can get inductive evidence that they are doing good.

So if one habitually thinks of others' interests directly, and not their own, to the point where they could sacrifice their own interests, not for their own longer-term interests, but simply for others' interests, that would be good.