The darkness of magic...

[abri]

Yes I know another alignement post...
The PhB class some spells as Good or Evil. Is it me or is there some serious problem behind this:
Ok so vampiric touch is evil, I can understand, after all it can make sense that draining the life of your adversary to heal yourself isn't a selfless act...
But that's way over-simplifying it: IMC, we have 3 wizards (1 necromancer, 1 enchanter, 1 evoker) and honnestly if the necromancer is the Evil one then I'm a little worried about the definition of good for the other two.
Let's face it DnD wizard and mage are almost always tooled-up to be killing machine: a mage who spends his life learning spells to kill people or monsters doesn't seem to me as sane or good.
I know we are supposed to cast "suspension of disbelief" on ourselves, but as a DM I can't really see me telling the necromancer in the group that his alignement shift to evil because he often cast enervation or other necromantic spells (which cause no collateral damage or death among bistanders), while the evoker burns douzains of ennemies with fireballs (which do cause heavy collateral damage).
I know the FAQ says that intentions have nothing to do ith a spell being evil or not, but I think this really remove some moral responsability from the characters...

 

[Angelsboi]

actually, in something im writing, i have a class that has something called The Destiny Mechanic. It regulates 'Karma' basically. Do good, Good happens. Do bad, Bad happens

 

[Nightfall]

This is where Monte's Unholy Riven is fun to use. I'd love to try that out on a PC. "Oh I'm sorry but the magic and gods decided that your use of fireball is evil and therefore you are now cursed as an unholy riven! "

 

[abri]

This is where Monte's Unholy Riven is fun to use. I'd love to try that out on a PC. "Oh I'm sorry but the magic and gods decided that your use of fireball is evil and therefore you are now cursed as an unholy riven! "

Interesting, where can I find this?
I know my players will love it.
Maniacal laugh of evil DM...

 

[Dave G]

You've got to remember that the game has a lot of abstractions. I wouldn't rule that the use of Vampiric touch is evil in all circumstances. If the wizard started casting it on old ladies or unsuspecting city guards, it is different than if it is cast upon an ogre who'd really like you to stand still so he can introduce you to his coffin-sized club!

 

[Claude Raines]

Interesting, where can I find this?
I know my players will love it.
Maniacal laugh of evil DM...

http://www.montecook.com/mpress_BOEM2preview.html

It's open game content, so enjoy.

 

[Cerubus Dark]

Magic and its Evils....

Well, I would have to agree here. Magic is a simple tool, use to get to a result. The same could be said of a fighter weilding his sword at a monster or a person for that matter. The sword is a tool used to reach its master's goal. If that sword is used to slaughter innocent people then its not the tool's fault. Its the one who uses it that should be blamed.

On the subject of magic, if your groups Necromancer is using his powers for the benifit of the group and the innocent people around him then he is not doing evil. As the old saying goes "With great power comes great responsablity." In my campaign world my players know better than to abuse their magicks, for the gods are alive and they do see things. Just keep in mind there are lots of ways to deal with a power abusing mage. Anti-Magic fields being the most boring, but a personalized ring that grants its weilder a Anti Magic field all their own can be funny.

 

[Oni]

Question, if an evil mage cast a spell that has the good subtype does that mean his alignment is shifting toward good?

The subtypes are there for enforcing the restrictions on whats spells a cleric of a given alignment can cast and to show what they detect as in regards to some divinations spells. No where in the core books can I find anything that suggests that a wizard casting a spell with the evil subtype is grounds for changing his alignment.


Here is a for instance. I had a chaotic good conjurerer who would only summon evil creatures because she didn't feel it was right to subject good creatures to the dangers, agonies, and rigors of combat. Tell me is that anysort of grounds for an alignment shift?

 

[abri]

Question, if an evil mage cast a spell that has the good subtype does that mean his alignment is shifting toward good?

The subtypes are there for enforcing the restrictions on whats spells a cleric of a given alignment can cast and to show what they detect as in regards to some divinations spells. No where in the core books can I find anything that suggests that a wizard casting a spell with the evil subtype is grounds for changing his alignment.


Here is a for instance. I had a chaotic good conjurerer who would only summon evil creatures because she didn't feel it was right to subject good creatures to the dangers, agonies, and rigors of combat. Tell me is that anysort of grounds for an alignment shift?

Totally agree with you, just wishing there were more Dm feeling this way. In my gaming club I often feel that I'm the only Dm thinking this way.
And yes the necromancer in my campaign don't use his spell to kill, just to help the group ("false life" in battery, plus home made spells.) or fight undead.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Allow me to post an opposing view:

I have no problem with certain spells being [Evil] and others being [Good]. Nor do I have a problem with the "let's not destroy buildings while killing our foes" Necromancer sliding to evil, while the "burn, baby, burn!" Evoker coasts happily with his chaotic-good.

D&D is defined by the four cardinal alignments: Good, Evil, Law, Chaos. These alignments exist as tangible forces in the D&Dverse. Drawing on such a force, calling it into the prime material plane, is allying yourself with said force.

So the Necromancer isn't blowing up buildings. What he is doing is calling upon the powers of Evil. The very magic itself is evil in nature. Naturally, his soul is going to eventually start feeling the effects of this.

The Evoker may piss off the local landlords, but his magic is not tainted by association with Evil. It's "clean," so to speak. So the only thing he must worry about are his motivations, and the end results of his magic. (Whether or not he's blowing up innocents along with the brick and mortar.) He may still slide to evil, but it won't be because of the spells he chose, be he didn't choose to cast [Evil] spells.

I don't see any problems with this idea. Yes, a wizard who studies evocation spells is very much molding himself into a combat mage. But killing in D&D is not evil in and of itself. Nearly every PC in neary every campaign will kill every adventure. So long as that combat mage is killing the right things, he can safely consider himself Good.

The Necromancer, on the other hand, is dealing with "Dark Forces" in his studies. He's studying death and un-death, and these are things which (often) touch upon the force of Evil in the D&Dverse. He cannot contact such a force and remain unchanged by it forever.

Anyhoo, that's my take.