Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6160545" data-attributes="member: 6681948">Did something change on my posts?  I haven't changed anything from defaults, to my knowledge.1 minute per level for Sleep seems like enough time to disarm the Orcs so they are not an imminent threat.  Considering the sheer volume of Goblins our Sorcerer has used Sleep to deal with, and the fact we have few prisoners, perhaps our alignments are in jeopardy.  But if we return them as prisoners, I suspect the local authorities (also ostensibly Good, or at least not Evil) seem rather more likely to kill them than to feed and house them.Which, practically, is what makes the discussion interesting, at least in my view."Has a soul" seems a reasonable dividing line, as reasonable as sentience.  To extraplanar creatures, I'd draw the line at any creature which just goes home, rather than actually losing its life.  The extension of souls to animals is an unusual step, but not an unreasonable one.  What does this mean to carnivores?  Are most societies, or at least most non-evil societies, vegetarians in your games?  Seems like that costs a lot of historical verisimilitude, but is certainly consistent with knowing absolutely that animals also have souls.  What does it mean for carnivores in the animal kingdom?  Is a plow horse slave labour?  Is a war horse drafted?  Is a Druid who makes regular use of Summon Nature's Ally evil fro risking their lives so cavalierly?  It opens up a lot of questions.  Which is not, in itself, a bad thing.Bison are domesticated now - would they be if agrarian societies were coupled with plains of buffalo?  That's 5 HD, more if we breed them for size and strength like horses were bred for war.  Elephants have been domesticated, and they have 11 HD (again, breed them for size and strength and they get bigger, right?)  Even whales don't have much higher starting HD, so we are hitting a limit in that area, but that's a pretty substantial level.From your comments above, good aligned societies would have to be vegetarian, wouldn't they?  Given most weaponry started out with the purpose of hunting, what does that mean for the arms race?That's a logical outgrowth from one perspective, although again it is returning a soul from the afterlife, so I could see that going either way.Again, I return to the vegetarian society - seems that Neutral societies would not find this acceptable either, given you indicate this is not acceptable for those who are not evil.I'd use the same interpretation.  Undead lacking souls is a classic reason why creation of Undead is evil while raising the dead is not.Unquestionably - but much of the POW rules of war we know arose within the last 100 years, and they did not evolve in a model where the death of an enemy soldier could restore the life of a comrade or an innocent.Well, clearly, any Good creature choosing between another +1 for his magical weapon and spending the wealth on returning the innocent to life would choose that weapon enchantment, right?  Of course, that's just as much a moral issue for the standard raise dead rules.Indeed it is - but you indicated you have made a specific decision to depart from those core rules, and my understanding was that it was intended to further restrict such occurrences.   If the cash and the cleric level remain the only, or even primary, restrictions, I question the achievement of that goal.  Your nobleman needed 10k to get a Resurrection as Raising fails with death effects (IIRC).But, again, that Noble had no problems doing so.  Why would it be tougher for player characters?</blockquote>

Verification