Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 1905289" data-attributes="member: 2268">Well, I'm sorry if that may be a bit unclear here, but there are no detailed rules as to what constitutes an evil or a good action. That is, ultimately, always up to the opinions of the DM and the player in question, and just in case this has escaped the whole discussion...in the end, the DM will have to judge the behaviour and adjust the alignment as he sees fit. And yes, that is in the rules.As for your argumentation, you go and claim that, as long as a deed has no lasting effects, it's cannot be considered evil. This is where I, and not just I, beg to differ.And before I go on, let me just state again that killing a summoned creature is not like putting a human to sleep and waking him up 24 hours later, no matter how much you'd like it to be. A flesh and blood creature is summoned from it's home, it's dropped to -10 hit points (or lower), effectively killed, with all the blood and gore and pain you want to describe with that, then it's material body vanishes, the soul is sent back home and gets a new body after 24 hours. And that's from the rules, too.Killing an ally, without a second thought, without hesitation, and without consent from said ally is, except in the most extreme cases, an action no good character can do without consequences. In the long run, with repeated actions like this, that simply means a shift in alignment.Yes, there is no "lasting damage" done...great. Does your character know that? If yes, that still is no real excuse to simply kill off an ally in a callous, disregarding manner like it is described in most examples here. Good and evil are not simply judged by the consequences of a deed, but also by the means to those consequences, and by the motives with which those means where applied. And in all the examples that have been given so far for this "Summon Swarm of AoO Victims" tactics, not one of them sounded even remotely like they could be executed by a good character without alignment infraction. A paladin doing stuff like that would permanently lose his powers by the rules.All other arguments you bring on stem from a mix of rules, mainly going "It works by the rules as written, and as per the rules, no permanent damage is done, so it can't be evil." And here's where you simply go wrong. You can go with the rules by the letter in your actions, and still commit one evil act after the other, even if no permanent damage is done. Alignment judges the mindset and behaviour of your character, more than the consequences of your actions. And using an ally the way it is described simply shows a very shallow, callous view on the life of others by the character, who dispatches it left and right without second thought because by that he can shine a bit better in combat.Otherwise, if we follow your line of arguing, a villain can- run around, kill people without remorse, because hey, there's Raise Dead and Resurrection available, so if they are resurrected, he didn't do anything evil, and if they aren't, those who denied those spells are just as evil as him.- kidnap the wife of the local tyrant, torture the informations of the castle's secret entrance out of her, then kill her in a gruesome manner to leave her mutilated body in the market square the next day to infuriate her husband into sending all his guards after him, then sneak into the castle while everybody's busy searching for him, poison the tyrant with a nasty poison, and afterwards claim that it was all done in a good name.Alignment is not written in stone...but it also isn't as simple as some might want it to be. AoO+Clav works as per the rules of the game. If it's allowed to work is up to the individual DM...as are the consequences of abuse in the way portrayed through the Summon Monster tactics. And that's always based on opinions, not rules.</blockquote>

Verification