Are there any spells/powers/particular RPG tropes that you consider

File: 1484665211151.jpg (103KB, 500x620px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 500x620px

>>53269610
Necromancy. I will never allow any sort of good necromancers at my table.

>>53269610

Yes. A lot. Far too many to list. Pick an IP and once you've narrowed it down I'll get back to you.

Sacrificing virgins.

Fusing or merging living beings together. This is never done for good.

>>53269610
Anything that permanently alters minds.

I can buy almost anything else being done for a 'good' purpose.

>>53269610
Possession/mental control.

File: Gotenks.png (541KB, 1024x1272px) Image search: [Google]

541KB, 1024x1272px

>>53269748

>>53269610

Magic fueled by death and suffering is amoral. Period.

To take away another's agency, their free will, is amoral. Period.

Rape. Harming children. Amoral. Period.

>>53269610
Mindcontroll, raising undead, forcefully manipulating souls , enslavement and creation of chimeras.

>>53269820
Anon, 'Amoral' isn't the same as Evil.

>>53269820
>life is amoral the post

>>53269610
Mind control is a common one on /tg/, and I agree. There are ways that other people justify it, but I disagree with those people. If that's ultimately a LG vs CG thing instead of a Good vs Evil thing that's for history to decide.

Necromancy is commonly evil. I can understand some of the arguments for non-evil necromancy but it depends heavily on the metaphysics of the setting. In settings like many D&D published 'verses it tends to be noted that necromancy uses a sort of magical cancer power that poisons the very fabric of reality and enslaves souls, so in those settings yeah if you want non-evil skeletons make a bone golem don't use fucking necromancy.

I'd argue any spell explicitly designed to kill is evil, but if it's used with good intentions towards good ends in a sensibly restrained (ie: don't refuse to defend yourself but don't instantly explode the brain of someone who isn't an immediate threat to life and limb) the good of its use outweighs the evil of its nature.

>>53269748
Your post is rather imprecise, someone has already replied to it with an example of a consensual fusion of forms to grant the users greater power.

>>53269820
I believe the word you're looking for is "immoral".

>>53269820
So you can do any of these things with no moral consequence?

>>53269878
D&D is shit though.

It has inflicted the cancer known as "alignment tables" on traditional games and nerd culture as a whole, where it has become terminal and impossible to root out.

>>53269878
Spells don't kill people, spell-users do.

>>53269898
>>53269917

젠장할...I still need to work on my English.

>>53269942
We need a sensible, sane spell control. Nobody needs Disintegration for self-defense.

>>53269927
To be fair, these can be used sensibly. Just not as D&D intended, and often by shifting each axis to something that actually matters in-game.

For example, if you were playing in a game with heavy Victorian themes, that homebrew system with the Dapper/Scruffy and Gentleman/Hooligan axes could be fitting: Your Alignment shows how you fit into society's view of propriety by two of its important characteristics.

Overall it should be noted to use Alignment as a knowingly simplified description of your character's traits in those respects, not a rule that limits character actions.

>D&D is shit though.
A lot of shitty things act as cultural anchors.

>>53269951
S'ok. Amoral is >>53269917, it means there's no morality tied to it. Being thirsty and drinking water is amoral. Immoral is the subject of this thread, and is being evil or underhanded. Drinking a thirsty man's water when you're not thirsty is immoral.

The question of grey morality is when both you and the other guy are equally thirsty, but there's only enough water for one of you.

Spells that require you to sacrifice someone else are always evil. If you have to drain someone's blood or sell their soul for your magic to work and you are ok with that, you are a villain.

Similarly, necromancy needs to really prove itself in order to be seen as morally grey. In most systems, it's pretty villanous as well, with the trapping of souls and/or creation of servants openly hostile to life itself.

>>53270202
>Spells that require you to sacrifice someone else are always evil.
Not inherently evil.

All that is required is the sacrificial individuals consent and the right context for it to be a heroic thing.

File: those who serve.jpg (29KB, 243x348px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 243x348px

>>53269629
why? Zombies can be used for cheap manual labour, especially in a soceity that has a different culture around the dead

>>53269753
What about someone employing a mage to get rid of a trauma?

File: latest-1.jpg (33KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x480px

>>53269748
>>53269780
>>53269896
I think they don't mean fusions like in DBZ or Steven Universe, where they are usually temporary, voluntarily, and consensual, but more like permanently combining two beings in the way owl bears were made, Dr. Moreua, or pic related.

>>53269780
>>53269896
Not that anon, but I'm assuming he meant when the party doing the fusing is not part of the fusion.

DBZ-style is A and B consensually fuse into Z.

The kind I think he meant was A forces B and C to fuse into Z.

>>53270372
That pic isn't a good exemple. They are a culture developed by an evil dragon for nefarious purposes.

Most necromancy. It's like mind control for the soul that never wears off and does collateral damage in the process.

>>53269748
>>53270799
>>53270897
The Rite of Duplessence would like a word...

>>53269610
GET THE NON-EVIL DEMONS AND DEVILS OUT OF MY SIGHT WHY EVEN CALL THEM DEMONS THEN

>>53271160
but then how will I be able to snowflake about muh special demon that's dark and edgy but really yet misunderstood and persecuted by prejudiced fascist paladins?

File: 1436851756129998460.jpg (23KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 400x400px

>>53271701

File: 1483980023933.gif (1MB, 430x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 430x360px

>>53269820
>magic fueled by death and suffering
>taking away free will
>rape

>..."harming children"
That's a very strange list.

Remember that tools and means are not evil, only those who use them can be evil.
You wouldn't call a knife of a murderer evil, would you?

>>53270372
I might be talking utter tripe, but isn't it almost an accepted fantasy rule that necromancy involves fucking with your soul, other people's souls, disturbing spirits trying to sleep or just a corrupting power in general. Am I wrong?
If you do, sauce because I'm interested how they portray dat shit

>>53271160
What about a demon with the soul of a Paladin sealed in their right arm?

Any kind of mind control is very evil and gives mages a bad name. A merchant or any other civilized member of society can deal with someone who can set you on fire with a word, no problem - it's no different from a brigand with a very sharp sword on some level. But when someone can mess with your head, binding your will and changing your memory, they're beyond evil. Any time anyone gets seen casting even the mildest charm spell, there ought to be a lynch mob.

Aren't don't souls in 5e only respond to people of their alignment? So necromancy can be used for good if you're a good aligned character communing to a good aligned dead person


The way I use Speak With Dead is that the spirit has no knowledge of the afterlife since that's left wherever they go when they die.

>>53271785
You'd be surprised.

>>53270407
Questionable at best. You're fundamentally altering who someone is rather than letting them work through the problem.

>>53273042
I know Resurrecting someone requires a soul's consent unless they're forcibly stolen by a lich or something. If an evil cult wants to Rez your PC and only have rudimentary Resurrection magic your dead PC can say "Fuck You" and stay dead.

>>53271829
No I hate this shit, in a good amount of settings (many DnD versions, Fate, Rifts) Your animating the corpse with magic/negative energy. Only incredibly specific undead deal with the original soul, holy shit.

>>53273097
Working through the problem is fundamentally altering who they are.
Should we burn all the therapists and professors?

>>53271040
Yeah, but the bad part of that is the whole "Living exclusively for the purpose of getting killed" thing. They live on a plane where everything that dies comes back, they may as well make use of the zombies.

>>53273216
Obviously. Life is suffering and chaos, the only Lawful Good solution is elimination of life itself.

>>53273257
Oh shit the AI has gone out of control

SHUT IT DOWN

>>53269951
Your english is actually pretty good so far. Keep it up!

>>53269753
>>53269756
This. Mind control is mental violence and it absolutely would be criminalized IRL if it was real.
Any application more severe than "confuse or paralyze them for a few minutes and run away" makes you an anti-hero at best.
Remember, when Obi-Wan said "these aren't the droids you're looking for", he didn't say "walk off a cliff", so the end result for that one soldier was the same as if they had never crossed paths.
Permanent mind alteration without consent would have to be reserved for very dire cases, such as dangerous criminals who would never be set free anyway.

>>53269820
Straight up child abuse is bad, but semi-frequent beatings are a good way to prevent culture from warping from one generation to the next.

File: m-Rattling-Skeleton.jpg (42KB, 400x524px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 400x524px

>>53269629
Depends on the type of necromancy. Forcefully binding souls to a rotting corpse is bad, puppeteering an unoccupied corpse via magic is A-okay.
Banning a class with no exceptions makes you a bit of a faggot.

>>53269820
So I guess, your worst nightmare would be magic fueled by raping and beating children whose to take away their agency?

>>53273372
It takes a lot of skill to write non-edgy good necromancers though

>>53273372
>Stan, you can't be an astronaut, this is a fantasy campaign.
>REEEEEEEEEE FAGGOT BAD GEE EHM REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Shut up.

>>53273459
Necromancy isn't evil in all fantasy settings though and I don't see why it should be

>>53273483
Neither is mind control. Mind control is amoral, like a gun.

Necromancy (in most settings) is soul rape.

File: 1493914304901.jpg (35KB, 500x501px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x501px

>>53273459
wew lad. A player wanting to play a core class in a game =/= wanting to play lel randumb class. It would be like banning paladins because you don't like religion.
You're either baiting or retarded, either way get off the board.

>>53273459
You earned this (you)

>>53269610
Is becoming a lich inherently evil? My character is planning on dabbling in that kind of stuff to fuck up a powerful vampire who destroyed his village and has a position of power as a baron. He also plans on crusading into forgotten lands to benefit his country with his powers.

>>53273505
Another (you) uuuu

>>53273458
It really isn't though, people just assume necromancy must be evil. It would be just as easy to say "Necromancy just allows a magic user to manipulate a corpse"

>>53273553
90% of the time yes, because the process generally involves doing some pretty evil acts in the process, that said there's always cases where it isn't the case, but they are the exception and rare.

>>53273553
generally a Lich must feed their phylactery souls in order to become immortal. If that's not how it works in your DM's game then there is nothing really evil about it. Learn the spell that lets you preserve a corpse.

>>53273566
Telekinesis allows a magic user manipulate a corpse in a morally appropriate matter.

Necromancy animates it with either evil energy or forcibly chains a mortal spirit to it, not to mention desecrating remains.

Comparably, making a golem and forcing an elemental to power it is A-OK because elementals aren't people and don't have rights.

>>53273623
depends on the setting
This is the problem with talking about pretend games.

>>53273459

>this is a fantasy campaign

But we're playing Starjammer, Jack. Why can't I play a fantasy astronaut in a fucking campaign about fantasy astronauts, you insipid cunt?

>>53273623
I've always found it ironic that the writers always ignore the fact your binding elementals into essentially slavery and it's some how ok but using negative energy, which is both completely natural and non sentient/sapient is ebil because of reasons that are always assumed and never greatly explained in setting many times.

>>53273239
I suspect the curse was placed there by Bolas as well, but I agree in principle.

>>53273640
In my setting necromancy doesn't deal with death or corpses at all, it just shoots rainbows at things.

>>53273372
If you want, you can host your own games - with good necromancy, good demons or good rapists.

>>53269610

Bloodmagic
Shadow walking
Bonecraft
Flesh Artisan
Demon Summoning
Poison Maker
Psychokinesis

>>53273695

*Pyrokinesis

>>53269629
So are you just afraid of creative gameplay or

>>53273695
>Bloodmagic
If the user only uses their own blood, or blood spilled in self defense as a catalyst then why would it be evil?
Actually curious, this isn't bait.

>>53273713
*magic

>>53273672
Non-mortal creatures are expendable and aren't really people. That includes demons, angels, elementals, anything that doesn't die and go to afterlife.

>>53273595
>>53273616
I guess my characters response to this would be to get tribute from the country he's defending by having criminals who are sentenced to execution to be sent to him.

He definitely wouldn't be a good guy anymore, but I don't want to fall to such evil that I lose control of my character.

>>53273690
ethical necromancy is much more plausible than ethical rape though

>>53273690
>banning a core class is good

>>53273732
Sounds lawful evil, people will probably want to kill your character after a while.

>>53273766
What if you cast Charm Person first?

>>53269955
>>53269955
If you ban spellbooks, only criminals will have spellbooks!

>>53273796
How is charm person being used?

>>53269610
Being a wizard.

>>53273797
Banning spellbooks is affirmative action for sorcerers and bards.

>>53273797
>ban high capacity assault spellbooks
>no one needs more than 5 spells

File: be62b2d71749d9e9ddb89669bb0d1e94.jpg (76KB, 736x736px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 736x736px

>>53273459
>not riding a moth ship into the glorious void behind the sky

Look at this faggot

>>53270202
If a regular mage fucks up a simple offensive spell and it goes wide, it could kill an innocent person. Necromancers that can't keep their servants on a leash aren't necessarily evil, they're just shitty necromancers.

>>53273838
It would makes sense for there to be some regulation of magic by governments, it would be an interesting way to flesh out a setting

>>53273641
Silliness aside, how is Starjammer? I know it's attached to the PF ruleset, but does that majorly hinder it at all?

>>53273786
>core class
Citation fucking needed.

>>53273908
I mean necromancy is a core school of magic in DnD

>>53273897
Government? Why not a Mage's Guild holding copyrights over all the popular spells. Want to learn Fireball? Better pay up. And if we catch you pirating Fireball, or cooking up something too similar to it... there's ways for dealing with you.

>>53273934
Just because it's there doesn't mean you're entitled to call yourself a good guy while using it.

>>53273908
>not playing 5e
Geez get with the time grandpa,Necromancer isa core wizard school.
Next you'll be saying we should use THAC0.

>>53273959
That could be said of every class

>>53273959
Nowhere in the rulebook does it say a wizard using necromancy is automatically evil.

>>53273959
Same with rogues imo. Or should I say, thieves?

You don't get to be a good guy while stabbing people in the back.

>>53273934
>I mean necromancy is a core school of magic in DnD
So is Desecrate, Dispel Good, Nightmare, Symbol of Pain, Unhallow, Unholy Aura and Unholy Blight. Your point?

>>53273985
That's funny, because necromancy spells have "Evil" tag on them.

>>53274002
Those aren't magic schools

>>53274002
The post that was replied to implied necromancy wasn't in the core rulebook

>>53269629
I think there are plenty of ways to do good necromancy. Animating mindless corpses, contacting or contracting spirits of the departed, healing magic or 'pure death' /necrotic damage spells, etc

>>53274022
There's a good majority that dont

>>53274029
No, those are spells that are part of those magic schools you are talking about. Do you plan to argue semantics?

magic whoose source requires you to drain the life energy of someone, even if they are willing its an evil slippery slope

>>53274047
True, true. Some don't. But Animate Dead does. Create (Greater) Undead does. Contagion does. Desecrate does. Many other necromancy spells do.
You can play a necromancer without using those spells, yes, but it wouldn't be much of a necromancer.

>>53274022
Pretty sure that is only with 3.X, plus the GM might not even care about the evil tag

>>53269610
Spells to destroy the world.

>>53274053
Yes, where do you think we are
>>53274088
>all those delicious debuff spells
>no a good necromancer
Get out

>>53274095
>plus the GM might not even care about the evil tag
We are not talking about other DMs. We are talking about me, since the very idea of someone on the internet not allowing good necromancers is absolutely unacceptable to you autists.

>>53274123
That changes things, your game is your game and how necromancy works in your setting is up to you, that doesn't mean you get to bitch when other games aren't like yours though

>>53269632
No one cares.

File: tumblr_omaunrCAti1s7fs91o1_500.jpg (79KB, 500x604px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 500x604px

Spells and effects that inflict more pain than is necessary.

There should be no Good fire wizards, or Neutral fire wizards. If there are, they never use their magic fire on people. If you're looking at ways to kill people, and you pick the magic flamethrower to roast a humanoid alive, you are an evil person. Fire is one of the worst ways to die, especially if you die while you're conscious. And if you're hit by Burning Hands or Fire Bolt, you're going to be aware of your skin melting off.

Same thing goes for psychic pain. If you can make someone feel like their liver is getting torn out through their mouths, that's an ability that can never be used as a first resort. That's something you would probably have to go to Magic Superjail for, to live with Magic Saddam Hussein and Magic Hitler.

The other damage-dealing spells can fall under your traditional Geneva Conventions laws. Cloudkill? Fuck that. Fireball? See the notes on fire above. Spells that deal necrotic damage, like Horrid Wilting, probably count as nuclear for our purposes, so those are out, as is anything that deals poison or acid damage.

So you're basically left with lightning, thunder and radiant damage.

>>53274241
Getting blown up by a mundane explosive, shot with an arrow or cut up with a short sword, leaving infected wounds that slowly and painfully kill you days and weeks after the initial blow is A-OK though!

>>53273720

Fire Magic then

>>53274348
Getting stabbed isn't as bad as burning live tough

>>53273719

depends, but the ability to use blood for any source is there. It will depend in the individual but it's most of the time evil.

>>53274383
*though

>>53274383
>throws perfectly mundane alchemist fire

>>53274241
Extreme temperatures will kill you pretty fast, you know. Not really that much more painful than any explosives or throat cutting.

>>53274383
>get stabbed in the gut
>get sepsis
>die weeks later from horrible infection
Sounds pretty great senpai. Fire is pretty horrible, but your nerves get burned away eventually. Plus you'll die pretty quickly from actually being covered in fire.

>>53273459
>Stan, you can't be an astronaut, this is a fantasy campaign.

>Banning a class with no exceptions makes you a bit of a faggot
>no exceptions makes you a bit of a faggot
>no exceptions
>NO FUCKING EXCEPTIONS

If I was playing in a space fantasy game, would an astronaut be okay? Because guess what, that's an EXCEPTION.

>>53274423
Which would be as unethical as fire magic

>>53271160
What about ultra lawful, evil to goodish ends tormentor of the wicked type devils?

>>53274241
As a hero you regularly fight things that fire is the best method to kill

Getting electrocuted to death ain't a picnic either.

File: 1452018591767.jpg (79KB, 600x612px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 600x612px

>>53269748

>>53274475
They should still be dicks though or it doesn't feel right

>>53274497
You just proved his point

>>53273695
>Bloodmagic
It seems like a gray area.
>Shadow walking
?
>Bonecraft
Like woodcraft, but with bones? Very normal if you are using animal bones, or you own bones.
>Flesh Artisan
Ok, this one can be used in a lot of evil ways.
>Demon summoning
Also fair.
>Poison maker
A lot of people in real life are evil then.
>Pyrokinesis
This one is weird. All magic spells that use magic, or just the psionic abilities that use fire?

File: 1470369622267.png (177KB, 649x538px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 649x538px

>>53274527
I know

File: slug.jpg (32KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 720x720px

>>53269820
>rape magic

>>53274534

>Bloodmagic
Not so great unless you want to bleed yourself out every time you want to use your power. You could use animals but that's evil too if you begin killing chicken and dogs to harm other people.

>Shadow Walking
Ability to uses shadows as teleportation or clocking. Not evil per se, but if you want to be in the shadows is mostly you are spying someone or you want to kill someone.

>Bonecraft
Again, like bloodmagic you could use animal bones but most of the time you will use them to create golems or shit.

>Poison Maker
are you thinking that guy that makes rat poison is evil? Ok, I was meaning about people trained in creating poisons FOR HUMANS or sentient beings.

>Pyrokinesis / Fire Mage
Most of the Fire magic has a tendency to lean over destruction. Check Mustang from Full Metal Alchemist, his power didn't have any other use than to burn and crisp people. He was a good guy that killed a shitload of people.

>>53274241
I think that the "inflict more pain than is necessary" is a good way to say if something is evil.

>>53274674
>Most of the Fire magic has a tendency to lean over destruction. Check Mustang from Full Metal Alchemist, his power didn't have any other use than to burn and crisp people. He was a good guy that killed a shitload of people.

There aren't any "good guys" among state alchemists. Just bad guys and bad guys who realized it and tried to redeem themselves.

>>53273695
None of those sound super immoral. I don't get it

>>53273901
You're thinking of Starfinder, and I think they're thinking of Spelljammer. The first isn't out yet, and the second is rad

>>53274729

>Just bad guys and bad guys who realized it and tried to redeem themselves.
>None of those sound super immoral. I don't get it

really?

>>53274674
Blood is going to be very common in a battlefield; saying that shadow walking is evil is like saying that using a war-horse is evil; bonecraft still looks pretty harmless, there are a lot of people that use bone as a base material; poison is not evil, this is like saying that weapons are evil; fire cause destruction, but a lot of things are mainly destructive in nature and that doesn't mean that is evil to use it in combat (a bomb for example).

>>53274787
What. Like the only one that sounds potentially evil is demon summoning, and even that's debatable with traditional goetia literally relying on the power of God

>>53270372
>>53273372
>>53273208
>>53274039
To me a Necromancer is somebody who interacts with the dead. If he is animating corpses "with just magic", meaning no soul ripping, binding or whatever, then he isn't a Necromancer. Just some magic user that decided to animate corpses, instead of suits of armor, robots, sticks, etc.

Not really, unless the mere use of said magic would fuel an evil entity.

Even the most destructive magics could just be correlated with heavy firepower weaponry or bombs which again could be used for "good".

>>53269632
You know, you could try actually giving examples instead of trying to look smug.

>>53274241
>Radiant damage is okay according to this

you've never been sunburned in your life, have you

>>53274854
Well I mean that's a debatable definition. Even sticking to that though I can think of a lot of at the very least neutral uses of soul affecting magic. Namely summoning the dead for info or voluntary service. I mean a guy who summons the spirits of his ancestors is a necromancer still, even if the only thing binding the ghosts is a desire to help, right?

>>53274821
From a mechanistic (autistic?) perspective, of course.

The issue is that many flavors of magic aren't that, they have essentialism or metaphysics built in. Blood magic is brutally stealing the life of others to prolong your own, shadow walking is injecting dark-n-sketchy into your soul because you don't want to hide better the ordinary way, bone craft is...I dunno, literally ripping the foundations out of life itself to make a cool walking stick, you get the idea.

Letting your players know beforehand which kind of magic the setting uses for helps avoid a lot of salt and paladin-falling scenarios, IME.

>>53274712
You shut the fuck up, Armstrong was a saint.

>>53274952
That's making a lot of assumptions about the nature of the magic, though, that won't necessarily be true for all or even most settings.

>>53274241
Basing the morality of a weapon's use on the pain it inflicts is not a good standard. A weapon is foremost chosen for it's efficiency at dealing with a threat. The morality of a weapon's use is more tied to why it is used in the first place.

Typically this means that using a weapon to defend your rights is seen as good, while using it to attack the right of others is seen as bad.

Since it is the attackers fault for provoking the use of the weapon in the first place, it is of little concern on how "cruel" a weapon is as long as it is the most efficient means to defend yourself from the unjustified attack. Choosing a less effective means of defense to spare the attacker undue pain would increase the risk the defender has to take without any benefit for him in return.

Should you be the attacker however, you are already morally wrong through the act alone and thereby it would make little difference to your morality should you cause more suffering than necessary.

What is more morally wrong: Incapacitating your attacker through intense pain that will eventually subside and he will survive, or killing him in a painless way?

>>53274952
The number is got smaller, right?
>Blood magic
That was very specific. But yes, that is evil.
>Shadow walking
Again, very specific. I assumed that it was using shadows as portals.
>Bonecraft
What? You know that bone is a material, right? Humans have used bone as raw material for crafting tools and making art.

>>53273623
>Necromancy animates it with either evil energy or forcibly chains a mortal spirit to it, not to mention desecrating remains.
I always find this line of thought funny as a counter to "no good necromancers, necromancers must be evil". Necromancers have access to quite a few spells that could feasibly lead to a "good necromancer'. One of which is Speak with Dead to converse with the spirit, explain why you would like to bind them to their earthly remains and reanimate them.

Not that hard to come up with easy solutions to simplistic problems.

>>53269610
fucking Mindrape. that shit is utter evil

File: gits-movie-137.jpg (99KB, 854x464px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 854x464px

>>53269748
Question: Is the Puppetmaster a living being?

>>53275018
I think that he is talking about two equal weapons in the practical sense. One is more painful and the other is less painful, the unnecessary pain to accomplish the mission is what makes it evil.

>>53275099
Yes

>>53269610
Sacrificial magic and necromancy are always evil in my games. Possession, mind control and demon summoning are usually evil.

>>53274997
Of course. SOme settings aren't that way; but historically/culturally, that is how most magic is - that is how magic works. Not mana thermodynamics.

So if you're in a setting where magic isn't "magical" - it's amoral mana engineering with nothing spiritual or arcane about it - then let your players know, so they can make shadow-walking flesh puppets without tainting their immortal soul (which probably doesn't exist).

>>53275066

I find that most people who say "Necromancers cannot be good" tend to have a mental image of Necromancers being graverobbers and/or violators of the spirits of the dead.

Many who think "Necromancers can be good" have a more "Necromancers interact with the spirit of the dead" mentality.

>>53275243
Well now you're being hyperbolic and going to the other extreme. You can have magic have metaphysics without it being those specific metaphysics

>>53275243
So if I cast good magic I will eventually became a goody two shoes?

>>53275105
At what point is a weapon equal, though? Talking game wise, hitting an enemy with 10d6 instant fire damage or 10d6 instant acid damage can both instantly kill your target or leave him hurt with no special pain status effect applied. Even damage over time effects only deal hitpoint damage but cause no additional pain.

You can instantly incinerate someone with an intense heat, but you can also cause him intense pain with a badly placed stab. Ultimately most people who kill you will not go out of their way to delight in the pain they cause, even if they might have chosen a more painful means to do so from their arsenal. So when their intention is not to cause pain, even if they inadvertently do so, are they evil?

At the end it comes down to: Don't like to die in a fire? Don't pick a fight with a guy with a flamethrower.

>>53275274
You play your games how you want. I certainly will, and I prefer traditional magic to manatech.

Psionics already cover the manatech niche anyway.

File: matt_easton.jpg (33KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 1280x720px

None. It all depends on CONTEXT.

>>53275261
And then there's that book no one likes to talk about, BoED, which covers good necromancy and even introduces the Deathless as a means of bypassing that pesky [Evil] descriptor.

>>53275346
If they are not thinking about the pain that they are inflicting, but have other options that are less painful, they are inmoral for ignoring the suffering that they are causing. Not outright evil, but close. If they are using the best way to kill someone and it happens that is very painful, they are just using the best of what they have, so they are not doing something inmoral.
Another thing that we have to consider is what is the intention. For example, a doctor can worsen the condition of a patient trying to help, this is something normal in beings that can make mistakes.
Is a flamethrower a weapon that only evil people use? Well, it depends of the condition. If I am using a flamethrower to execute enemies that I can kill with a shot in the head... But is not evil if I am doing it because is the best weapon for the job.

>>53275575
That was the basis of my thesis: A weapon is ultimately only relevant for the morality of its use due to the intentions of the person using it, but has no inherent moral worth by itself. Thereby saying that a certain type of weapon is always morally wrong has no basis in objectivity.

>>53275575
Now I imagine a necromancer who used necrotic magic during the war.
>and the english are bearing down on us, we are reeling and breaking
>so i said a quick prayer and asked my old buds for forgiveness
>and i brought them back, hungry for the flesh of the living, the flesh of the english
>and when the english retreated, i made them return into the eternal slumber
>that is why i went on pilgrimage, young man
>the court absolved me of the crime because i served my lord to my best ability, but the sin is still here on my hands

>>53275758
That's a pretty common "regretful soldier" archetype to begin with.

Imaging, charging into battle and stabbing other young men with your sword or bayonet. They probably have wives and children back home, and were recruited by their lords and masters over same pretenses you were. And now you have spilled another human being's guts all over the ground, and what for?

>>53275674
True.
Normally to be evil you have to go out of your way to make miserable others, or do extremely hideous things to other so you can archive what you want. In battle we don´t have the luxury to make a enemy suffer or not.
>>53275758
Yeah, in a modern setting it can be like that. A society that see necromancy and cannibalism as equals is very logical (if we don't take into account that eating human flesh can get you a very nasty illness). Maybe they are doing it out of necessity, have a different culture around the dead, or are reluctantly practicing it to not be in a worse situation. A lot of soldiers hated using flamethrowers., and not only because they are very dangerous.

delusional moralfagging is about as no fun allowed as it gets

>>53269860
What is it, then?

>>53276254
Outside of scope of black and white morality.

>>53273945
Well this will be used

Thanks a lot cunt now I have more writing to do

File: Archon_SC2-LotV_Cncpt1.jpg (956KB, 3448x4200px) Image search: [Google]

956KB, 3448x4200px

>>53269748

>>53276254
>>53276334

Example, I am mortal, A god is immortal, Death is amortal

>>53269610
raising the dead and consorting with demons is pretty fucking evil if you ask me

>>53276666
Agreed, Satan. Fuck that Jesus dude

>>53273523
>the picture
Hmmm... I think you CAN fish with an ERPPC. The fish are not torn to pieces or burnt to a crisp are probably cooked afterwards, but it should work.

>>53269820
>Magic fueled by death and suffering is amoral. Period.
What if it's by your own suffering, or that a volunteer? What if you're making something good of a death which you don't actually cause? Like an old man's about to die and you fulfill his final wish of doing some magic about it?

>To take away another's agency, their free will, is amoral. Period.
Authority, coercion, force of any kind...
What if you're doing it to a bad guy? What if he's about to kick a baby and you seize control of his motor functions to stop him?

>Rape. Harming children. Amoral. Period.
wtf is rape magic

>>53276727
Don't forget ritualized cannibalism!

>>53276745
>wtf is rape magic
I think they call it "canola magic" now. Get with the times...

>>53276254
Immoral means you're violating morals and being naughty
Amoral is not playing that game to begin with

>>53276745
What did you think the rape factories were for, anon?

>inherent morality
Ugh.

>>53276745
>wtf is rape magic
Inb4 rape ghosts

>>53276879
Let me guess...

Mana is life-force. Mass production means we need to get the life force from somewhere.

We need a renewable resource for baby sacrifices...and that's where the "input" factory comes in.

>>53277059
Actually they are for producing cheap oil for cooking. But good guess!

Oh boy.
>>53275105
>>53274241

Harry Potter had the 'unforgivable curses' and there were three of them. One killed you instantly (and painlessly), one was essentially a torture beam, and the third let you puppeteer people's bodies around against their will.

What makes these 'unforgivable' seems to be that casting them requires genuine malice from the caster. ESPECIALLY when spells that stun or disarm are almost as reliable and easier to cast.

For another example, let's say a prisoner is being executed, and you've got two options. Number one is a needle that kills them relatively painlessly. The other is to strap them to machine that electrocutes them until their muscles detach from their bones and their hair catches on fire.


Even when you don't have magic providing a framework for objective morality in your setting, the method that causes unnecessary suffering is going to be frowned on. In a similar way that it's considered moral (usually) to kill someone in self-defense, but immoral to paralyse them from the waist down and keep them as a slave to do your laundry.

File: the power of love.png (285KB, 720x1152px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 720x1152px

>>53269610

>>53277010
Why not grape hosts?

>>53273312
>such as dangerous criminals who would never be set free anyway.
I see that as worse. Yes, dangerous, horrible criminals are horrible human beings but they're still themselves. Someone who changes who someone is on a fundamental level, to suit their needs, even if it's for the greater good, reeks of greater evil to me. It's like original Jekyll and Hyde. Jekyll had completely compartmentalized Hyde as a separate part of him after the elixir took first effect and physically separated them, but he still considered Hyde an essential shard of his humanity, albeit the monstrous part. It was only when he suppressed Hyde out of fear of the law that his transformation into Hyde was uncontrollable. After all, someone who suppresses their own humanity, what else can that then be but a monster?

Changing someone's nature regardless of intent and outcome to me is inherently evil.

>>53277629
I'd say the morality would have to change if these things would become possible. If resurrection was relatively easy, murder wouldn't be a horrible sin - maybe a misdemeanor at best.

File: IMG_0877.png (48KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x500px

>>53269610
Necromancy. There is no case of necromancy that doesn't require the desecration of the dead or a perversion of the natural order. At the worst, you are binding souls, a currency that neither belongs to you or anyone else, and preventing them from rest. I think I would make exceptions for a wizard who animated a dire wolf in an extreme moment of need for example, but never a creature with consciousness. And since I'm not a terrorist, the end doesn't justify the means so even if you're doing good with them, you're still going to be evil.

>>53277883
If a dire wolf lacks consciousness, how do I Speak with Animals? Checkmate, anthropocentrist.

>>53277883

Bitch, people going outside at night in droves perverts the natural order.

>>53277883
If necromancy exists then its a part of the natural order and using it is natural

Everything is natural :^)

File: 1490991083953.jpg (239KB, 1400x1050px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 1400x1050px

>>53278009
>Uhhh, AHHHCTUALLY raising the dead to do my bidding is perfectly fine.

>>53277927
They have like 3 int, I imagine they can impart some information, but I still don't think they have consciousness. That is however vague and ill defined, so I'll give you that. The Druid would be mad at the least.

>>53278009
What?

File: 1420589764331.gif (320KB, 307x293px) Image search: [Google]

320KB, 307x293px

>>53269610
I'm scared shitless of mind reading and mind control. Being able to see or even edit what's in someone's head is the most invasive, horrible thing you can do. A man's mind is his last sanctuary, going in and tinkering with it is fucked up. Someone else should not be privy to or get to decide what happens in your head, otherwise your ideas, desires and identity are worthless. Worse than death.

>>53278031
The supernatural is by definition not natural ;)

>>53278311
The supernatural doesn't exist. Anything supernatural upon discovered is natural. In a setting with magic recognized by the populace, it's a natural system of the world.

>>53278366
>Anything supernatural upon discovered is natural

That's a logical contradiction. It is also usually false historically and culturally. You are reciting reductionist propaganda.

>>53278413
Go back to /x/ with all the other retards

What about preternatural?

>>53278442
>classic continental philosophy is /x/ spookspam

I'd tell you to educate yourself but this is a pearls/swine scenario. Someone who can't even perform a syllogism is not qualified to handle historical anthropology.

>>53269610
i try not to include anything inherently evil, whatever power exists, there will always be two sides to it, there is no good or bad only use and misuse

i dont care if players become too edgy, as long as they have fun

Philosophy is mental masturbation for people who failed to get into real science or make anything of their lives.

File: morrowind036[1].jpg (22KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 400x300px

>>53269629
n'wah

>>53269629
>>53273372
>>53274039
Necromancy is evil, don't fuck around with other people's corpses

I don't know about you guys, but I would be extremely pissed if someone started puppeteering my dead mother or brother's carcass for cheap labor because "lol dude it's just a VESSEL"

>>53278571
if you grew up with necromancy as a mundane tool, and everyone and their mom using necromancy no big deal, and you knew tons of fine upstanding people with a skelly butler or two, it wouldnt be so bad

>>53278561
he makes a point,
what if I'm summoning my grandfather to look after my fathers tomb?
who in turn will be summoned to guard mine, ect..

>>53278627
>if you grow up with people doing bad, evil, wrong things around you, you'll get used to it and it won't be wrong anymore!

do i really need to point out how flawed this line of thought is

>>53271701
Anon, most fantasy RPGs are about getting away from real life.

>>53278667
from their point of view it is not evil

your anti-necromancy views are the ones that are evil, and they will see you as a raving no-fun allowed fundamentalist

i know anakin was wrong about the sith, still using the line unironically

>>53269629
What if I use my skeleton servants to bake cookies and my zombies to guide the blind?

>>53278855
then you are doing gods work, dont let anyone dissuade you from using your skellyman powers for good

homosexuality

>>53278960
.

>>53269629
What about Abhorsen style Necromancy
Using power over the dead to return them to the state. Bringing friendly souls to fight for control of Animated creature bodies.
I don't play D&D, so I don't know if its possible, but would you allow that?

>>53278960
Just lol if your setting doesn't have a homosexual order of paladins, who avoid traditional marriage so they can fully dedicate themselves to battling evil.

>>53273695
Isn't poison just a matter of dosage though? Like if you make pharmacological products, that would be poison making, if someone took enough of them. I remember in one Campaign we went to an apocethary, for something or other, and they turned out to be a serial kilelr, cause they were giving like 50 doses of super concentrate healing potion to kill people

>>53274943
Yeah, what about having a Necromancer whos basically facilitating Ghost Trick? Your entire village got slaughtered by a vampire, skeleton army, evil #21098? In that case, I'll give you the power to find vengeance, give you a second chance

File: 1423463920163.png (400KB, 865x1300px) Image search: [Google]

400KB, 865x1300px

>>53269629
In my setting plague doctors are necromancers. They use necromancy to dispatch the undead that plagues tend to create and animate bodies of plague victims (With consent) to perform duties that would risk others, i.e. corpse removal or errands in plagued districts. Necromancy's only really bad depending on the context. I'd argue demonology stuff is worse by a wide margin.

>>53275099

the moment a software turns self aware is an AI and it has life.

In theory all the laws applied to human being should be apply it to it. Not slavery, human rights, protection and right to work and settle are minimal rights it should be able to get.

>>53278667
Bad evil wrong things like pervert the natural order by healing the sick, wearing clothes, using tools, and stopping your children from mutilating eachother in battles for dominance?

Don't forget that it's immoral to perform surgery, because that involves causing injury to a fellow human. And even if it wasn't, healing an injury means artificially prolonging someone's life past when they were fated to die. Medicine is just what we call necromancy when it's socially acceptable.

>>53276115

it's fun defending your perspective of good and evil. Only brainlets and edgy kids are evil because "it's cool" or they are too dumb to debate.

>>53278789
>There's been a lot of grave robberies in the village lately.
>Go up to the necromancer's tower to see if he knows anything.
>Knock on the door.
>My recently deceased 12-year-old daughter opens the door wearing a slutty French maid outfit.
>The necromancer rushes up to the doorway and explains she's just an unoccupied vessel being puppeteered by magic.
>Tell that it's still inappropriate and you want to rebury her.
>The necromancer tells me it's a subjective cultural thing and people in distant lands do this all the time, and I'm being inefficient and a bit of a faggot.

>>53279462
>moving the goalposts

because "i tend to wounds" and "i don't think painting easter eggs with my father's ashes is unacceptable because it's cheaper than paint" are equal statements

>>53278571
What if it was a revolutionary who wanted to give the people the means of production by teaching them necromancy and thus creating a near post-scarcity society that no longer uses people for hard labor?

>>53273434
Sounds like some MKULTRA Shit. I had a thing like that in a home brew game I was making. It was a means of making synthetic demons, ended up with an incredibly evil version of Kermit the Frog.

>>53269820
>Harming children. Amoral.

meh, children are just tiny people and people are awful.

>>53279602
It's not grave robbery, it's recycling.

>>53274241
>shaking a person's bones apart and burning someone's soul out of their body are acceptable

>>53269629
I've always liked the slippery slope reasoning for necromancy being an evil art, even if you're reanimating corpses and not interacting with wills or souls at all. Working with material so little removed from people seems like such an easy way to lose empathy and inhibitions.

I treat good necromancers as "the exception that proves the rule", they're always characters who've had to overcome an evil art rather than good guys using something darkly neutral.

>>53274440
>get stabbed in the gut
>collapse
>get coup de graced after the fighting is over
I don't know why you think the victim will have time to die from sepsis. Does their enemy just fuck off when everyone's down?

>>53273459
Spelljammer.

>>53273718
How is "sterotype that should be evil but it's not" creative in this fucking century?

>>53274088
>Be necromancer
>Be a generally chill and cool guy. Pick daisies for children, always pay for my bread, that sorta thing.
>How do I make money?
>I'm a Final Contact Facilitator.
>Say your great grandaddy Arthas finally keeled over. Nobody knew it was going to happen, and now there's some contention over the will.
>It's tearing the family apart.
>Well, if you got the gold on hand, I can contact Great Granddaddy Arthas for you, and we can ask him himself.
>You really miss Mom after that carriage accident?
>5 gold and you can see her and talk to her again. As much as you want, as long as you got the dosh.
>Murder Mystery? Got an in with the local guardsmen. The murderer will be caught by noon.
>Curious Historian? Why not ask the ancient emperor yourself why he decapitated his fourth wife?
>And as for myself? I'd prefer not to die. I've been fiddling about with the Ritual of Endless Night for a few years now, trying to clear out the Evil.
>I'm down to only three abortions and a sacrificial puppy, but I'm not content with it yet.
>Once I'm done, I'll sell that service too.
>I'm a Necromancer, and I am NOT a villain.

>>53275389
Yes, it all depends on how much CON the rulebook says you have.

If you have enough CON, you do anything. Even supplant god.

I've always found this "mind control = the worst evil" thing to be a bit weird when mind control is right next to a dozen different ways to murder someone. While I'm sure (almost) everyone would prefer neither, I'm also sure most people would prefer to have their mind read or controlled briefly than to be fucking murdered by acid arrows and fireballs. It's kind of like the rape vs killing argument, except here we all forget how terrible killing is because even good heroes tend to do it constantly and all is fair in times of war.

A counter point to the thread. What if death is a void, and by being reanimated by a necro you are escaping nonexistence. Even though you're technically having your free will restricted, I think most peoples self preservation instincts would make them happy to have cheated death. Especially if the mancer doesn't treat them like slaves to step on, I think it's pretty easy to make the case that necromancy isn't inherently evil.

>>53280671
Why is void less preferable? Void is the highest goal of any buddhist.

File: Vegito(1).png (49KB, 197x499px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 197x499px

>>53269610
Mind control.
>>53269629
In a setting where dead bodies are just husks without souls, there is literally nothing wrong with being a recycler.
>>53270799
>I think they don't mean fusions like in DBZ or Steven Universe, where they are usually temporary, voluntarily, and consensual, but more like permanently combining two beings in the way owl bears were made,
You mean like caused by the Potara Earrings?

>>53271160
Non-Evil demons are called Angels. The demons are the fallen angels that followed Satan out of heaven.

>>53280511
Death is preferable to slavery.

>>53280803
Not everyone is a buddhist. Plenty of people would chose to live, even if it meant being a mook for some guy in a cave.

>>53279630
>an ideology that has killed tens of millions
>not evil

Arguing about necromancy is basically pointless unless you know what setting it is in. The broad things you can label as "always" evil almost always have exceptions even in the most black and white settings. Corpse desecration being considered evil is a purely emotional and not logical thing, some cultures do things that others would consider to be that and they think of it as a holy act (see Zoroastrianism). Cannibalism when necessary saves lives. Slavery can be used to reform instead of as cheap labor, as unlikely as that is.

Then there's also the pretty benign things considered necromancy like talking to spirits, restoring the flesh to a skeleton before resurrection, casting debuffs on bad guys (as opposed to straight up fucking murdering them), etc.

If the undead you raise are mindless then it can only be evil if you invoke some "their soul is trapped" bullshit (which doesn't make any sense if they are mindless, if you ask me) and if they have a mind then the evil should come from when you make them into slaves, unless being raised corrupts you somehow or requires sustenance that causes suffering (vampires/werewolves/ghouls kind of shit). Unless animating dead or casting certain spells inherently makes the world shittier by bringing negative energy into it, which is a mostly valid way of making those spells evil but you will notice it is never explored and gets weird if you start comparing it to fire or consider death to be a neutral thing.

This is without getting into how in dnd even paladins have necromancy spells on their spell list or how cure spells are bullshitted into being conjuration spells when they clearly are necromancy.

>>53280887
cure spells aren't necromancy, but Resurrection spells are.

>>53280838
For you.

You can escape slavery, you can't escape death.

>>53280934
Fuck off.

I'm creating a setting where mind control doesn't exist, that's how inherently evil I consider it to be.

>>53269610
>particular RPG tropes that you consider to be inherently evil?
Using d20 to homebrew anything. This is the work of of someone who made Satan himself say "Fuck! Now THAT is some evil shit right there! Now I need to make super hell just for them."

>>53280868
I guess these lowly unbelievers will reincarnate as dogs that eat their own poop. Ha!

>>53280958
Does it still have murder?

What's more evil: Throwing a fireball at two people and having them both die an agonizing death from their burns over the next hour, or mind controlling one into stabbing the other in the throat and then killing himself?

>>53273553
One of the ingredients for the ritual is the blood of a baby killed with a specific poison. At best you bought it on the black market, but an evil act was used to get it in the first place. There are less evil ways to gain immortality.

>>53280914
>cure spells aren't necromancy anymore
FTFY

>>53280887
/thread

but really, a lot of people just like playing as a necromacer, they aint trying to be edgy, they just want to use skelly servants en masse

if anything, by forcing necromancers to be evil, you encourage super dank edgy necromancers to play, instead of a normal dude who happens to have skeletons ready

and if he wants to play a good necromancer he will, the DM can write EVIL all over his char sheet, but at the end of the day, if he wants to selflessly save the world with no thought to reward or personal safety, aint nothing is gonna change that

>>53279623
I'm saying that we as a culture say that it's socially acceptable to have a knee transplant or a pacemake as an artificial method to keep us alive and functioning. Who's to say a fictional society wouldn't have the same attitude towards necromancy, or that another culture would have a negative reaction towards medicine (tempered by a high birthrate?)

>>53280094
I like the Old Kingdom model of necromancy. Returning from the dead requires devouring the living, copious amounts of highly toxic magic, or both.

What this means is that upwards of 99% of the people you see carrying necromancy bells are straight up using them for evil. You can't even have skeleton butlers unless you let them kill a bunch of people every now and again.

The ONLY "good" use for necromancy is to permanently kill the Dead. Except that necromantic magic is horrendously harmful and speaking words of Free Magic will (eventually) burn your tongue/eyes/etc directly out of your skull.

If you're going to make (X) school of magic permanently evil, that's how you do it. Or check out the Elder Scrolls- soul trapping sentients is outlawed because it legitimately IS a soul-trap and locks you out of the afterlife. Not because it's 'creepy' or 'too op.'

>>53269629
Im currently dm for a good necromancer. Before we even started any game play he asked everyone's characters if they were okay with him bringing back their characters as undead if they happen to die and arent able to be brought back. He also only brings back only the bodies of humanoids that are evil and whose bodies are not revivable.

>>53281193
funnily enough, actual necromancy is treated just fine in skyrim

you can have ghosts, even ones of sapients, skeletons, wraiths, etc. in public and no one minds that much, they might show discomfort, but overall they just look the other way

its only a problem when they attack something

>>53269629
how boring

>>53280511
>>53280838
>>53280990
>>53280958

Mind control is a fuck. Jessica Jones on Netflix (and the comics too i guess) really gives a good depiction of why people find it fucking terrifying as a concept.

As a person with severe mental illness, the idea of losing control of my actions is so severe that I've never even gotten drunk. I've been known to have panic attacks triggered by shit I did DURING panic attacks, for context.

For anyone vaguely similar to me, the fear of being fireballed to death has nothing on the fear of being charmed to see your best friend as a rampaging owlbear and bisecting them, only to realise holy shit you've cut dave in half what the fuck no what and he's on the floor bleeding out just staring at you in total betrayal as you desperately look around for something that can undo this even though you know it's too late

...which is why my evil PCs use lots of charm magic.

As for the whole "rape is worse than murder" thing, I think that ties into the 'unnecessary cruelty' side of things. I can think of VERY few situations where a rape can have any real motivation behind it except "I'm an asshole and want to hurt someone."

Rape shouldn't be compared to murder, it's more akin to those kidnappers that make victims eat their own ears or something.

>>53281193
>Or check out the Elder Scrolls- soul trapping sentients is outlawed because it legitimately IS a soul-trap and locks you out of the afterlife. Not because it's 'creepy' or 'too op.'

I always thought it was amusing that soul trapping animals and undead was a-okay. Though I don't know if animals have an afterlife in elder scrolls or anything.

I like that they make a very clear line between "this is okay" and "irredeemable monster" though. No one cares if animate a corpse and it walks around smacking bad guys, but if you steal that bad guy's soul you're fucking terrible.

File: 1488731154486.png (289KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 720x720px

>>53269753
>Anything that permanently alters minds.

Healthy Debate.

Life Experience.

Weed.

>>53269610
I was having a surprising amount of trouble thinking of something. I thought it'd be easy, but I kept imagining certain contexts in which the thing in mind would be at least in a moral grey area, if not outright acceptable.

Then I remembered FATAL's existence.

My answer is any spell from FATAL.

>>53281328
There's a mod I use that adds corpse-embalming and stuff and I love the addition. People will straight up just refuse to talk to you if you're hauling a half-butchered corpse, but it's not a CRIME to do it.

Unfortunately the engine doesn't discern corpses, so if a couple dies in front of you the game doesn't care if you fuse their corpses together into a giant shambling abomination while their kids and siblings watch.

>>53281399
Oh yes, as the first post there I know exactly why rape/mind control are considered worse than murder and could go into detail on the first at least, I just find it weird and non-logical and fun to talk about.

There was a pretty lengthy debate in a pathfinder general thread about a month ago where people argued whether reeducation/indoctrination was worse than murder or not, and that was loads of fun. But I still think anyone who says murdering a village of baddies is a better act than teaching them how to live like normal people and incorporating them into your nation is insane.

It's kind of the same with mind control vs fireball/murder. Both are tools that have a right time to use them, and can be used in ways that are both incredibly horrible or actually improve lives and make the world better somehow. But it's really hard to say killing someone is always better than making them do something they normally wouldn't, unless you know how they feel about it first at least.

You can also use mind control to make someone evil become a better person. Anyone remember that scene in star wars where Obi-wan made a deathsticks dealer go home and rethink his life? Is that evil? What if he just chopped his arm off and he died of shock instead, which would be better for him or the world?

>>53281450
Yes, those too.

>>53281725
>Obi-wan made a deathsticks dealer go home and rethink his life? Is that evil?
No, but only because, canonically, the dealer got home, did some soul searching, and went right back to selling deathsticks.

>>53281193
Actually now I think, the webnovel Pact does a similar thing with demon summoning.

Basically, there's a finite amount of Planet Earth and the demons have all of eternity. Any pact you agree to gives them something. Even if it's as small as a single glass of water, that's a glass of water less in the world because the demons ate it.

Other stuff demons eat include people, towns, memories, connections/attachments, and parts of people's identities.

>>53281799
So
>drug dealer ruins lives
>person forces them to contemplate this
>drug dealer continues ruining lives
The person who forced them to stop and think did nothing wrong.

But
>drug dealer ruins lives
>person forces them to contemplate this
>drug dealer finds a legitimate profession and does that instead
The person is evil as fuck?

I mean, ideally the second thing is what a nation's prison system is supposed to achieve. Is that evil if it succeeds but okay if it fails?

>>53269610
anything that uses blood is evil
blood was meant to stay on the inside, and if your magic uses that as its source of power you should be banned from this dimension

>>53281811
That's pretty interesting but I find it hard to consider connections/attachments/identities/memories finite. You can forget memories naturally and make new ones constantly, so isn't that inherently both constantly decaying yet renewable? If memories are indeed infinite somehow, wouldn't brain damage cause as much damage to the world as a demon pact? What about killing someone full of memories?

>>53281725
I guess it's the difference between "go home and rethink your life" and "you are now a happy and content supermarket clerk who never does drugs."

Also yeah, self-defense vs aggressive action. We've never seen a jedi mind trick used for anything more serious than "walk into that other room" or "nah man I'm totally legit and not a wanted fugitive at all."

That's basically all normal bad decision stuff people do when they're drunk or scared or whatever. Compare that to "stab your buddy" or "abandon your friends and occupation to become a baker" or "take off your pants and shit in your own mouth."

Plus there's the combat side to it. Setting someone on fire and watching them burn to death is fucked up, but if they're trying to kill you it's potentially a proportionate response and mind-hacking them instead might be considered a merciful option that lets them rethink their life later.

The issue is that (often) burning someone to death leaves traces, while mind-raping them until their entire identity is replaced might be harder to notice. So a mind mage might be feared because they can make you do something horrible without leaving a trace. Imagine how crazily society would react if 0.01% of the population could silently and undetectably kill anyone with a glance?

>>53281897
It's temporary (he rethinks, then continues about his life), non-hazardous ('rethinking' is about the safest thing you can do in most cases), and limited (he just 'wants' to do it, so any significant reason potentially including another deal might snap him out of it), as opposed to full rewrites which are at most one of them.

Legitimate Necromancy:
>Mediumship (seances, Ouija boards, spirit channeling, etc.)
>Planar travel to the afterlife
>Magical embalming
>Ghost banishing

Illegitimate Necromancy:
>Resurrection
>Defiling of corpses
>Raising the living dead
>Prolonging one's life by evil and unnatural means (lichdom, vampirism, etc.)

>>53281931
Sort of, but some of the connections and memories are things like your 'connection' to the ground, and its 'memory' to be solid and let you walk on it. Plus, shit like eating people's memories of having made demon pacts, or what they gained from the last pact.

Shit like "I'll give you my house if you give my family colossal amounts of magical power" actually ends up favourable for the demons, too, because they have the house (and land) for ETERNITY, and the family has goodwill towards them and is inclined to make another pact.

>>53282302
Imagine that you could, at will, make an ant queen infertile and gain $100. Harmless, right?

Now imagine that everyone on the world gets this ability simultaneously.

File: 4e39fb809643f97d75e1f9f8eb1c84ca.jpg (336KB, 500x649px) Image search: [Google]

336KB, 500x649px

All magic outside of the auspices of the Colleges of Magic

>>53271160
what about Falls-From-Grace?

>>53269610
No. That would imply it's possible for something to be objectively evil. It isn't.

>>53269629
Shit taste my man, Eberron's country of Karrnath wants a word with you (and so do their eternally-loyal undead soldiers).

>>53281725
>You can also use mind control to make someone evil become a better person.

This kind of thing exists in real-life. We have plenty of drugs that are basically just crude ways to alter the way that people think.

Most people are fine with consensual mood-altering. I don't think anybody would have a problem with a mind-mage who casts an anti-anxiety spell on a willing adult.

Non-consensual mind manipulation is where it gets tricky. In the real world, we have a long history of forcefully administering mind-altering drugs to people. Generally, we reconcile this by saying "this person is not of sound mind, and therefore is no longer able to accept or deny treatment".

If a psychotic person is harming themself, we (aka: modern western medicine) believe that it's moral to dose that person with anti-psychotics, even if that person is loudly refusing to take drugs.

In the 1950s, we considered it moral to forcefully dose homosexuals with hormones to eliminate their sex drive (and usually cause depression and suicide).

Basically, instead of "would it be moral to cast this mind-affecting spell", you can ask "would it be moral to forcefully inject someone with this syringe of mind-altering drugs"?

>This merchant doesn't want to trade with me. I inject him with a syringe of chemicals to make him more friendly.

>This bandit is trying to murder me and steal my belongings. I inject him with a syringe of chemicals to make him calm.

>This farmer hates his life and is trying to kill himself. I inject him with a syringe of chemicals to make him stop hating life.

>This king believes that random members of the court are possessed by demons and are trying to steal his memories. I inject him with a syringe of chemicals to make him listen to reason.

>>53269629
so if a party member has just died moments ago from a disease or wound etc. and I use a phoenix down. Is this evil?

>>53275099
He is an artificial kind of life.

>>53277477
I love BM

>>53285647
You had to kill the Phoenix to take it's down. What do you think?

Think about how many phoenixs are killed for you to continue on next time you play FF.

Evil.

Honestly basically any enchantment spell. Like seriously imagine that in the real world... It just magical date rape.

File: shrugs.jpg (100KB, 500x715px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 500x715px

>>53285757
They just come back later anyway. It's like a grand total of five minutes and they're back to being even better than before.

>>53285757
>kill the phoenix
I don't think you know what a phoenix is man

>>53269951
Your English is pretty impressive.
There's a lot of tricky words for foreigners with "a", "un", and "in" prefixes.

What do you think should be done with slaves, who are liberated
I'm curious since your neighbors live in Juche.

Fire magic is always evil.

>>53285757

>Kill a phoenix to get its down
>Down is the soft, heat catching feathers of the young or located on the breasts of adult birds
>Not just having a phoenix aviary, periodically snipping some down off the adult birds or gathering it from molting baby birds

Seriously, do you even birb?

>>53278274
You have nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide, right?

... right?

>>53286331
>who decides what one has to hide.
Ebin.

>>53269610
Mind control, in any shape, way, or form.

>>53278855
Fuck you anon, let my family bones rest in peace.

>>53269748
I agree with this anon. Fusing together people who are not willing to be fused together and to do so in a permanent way is absolute and utter shit and should be avoided like the plague.

File: foxy_loxy_by_foxspirit259-d4nciin.jpg (84KB, 900x850px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 900x850px

>>53286456
Mind control is good, instead of killing a villain you can have him contribute to society.

But brainwashing is better, because then he will do so happily.

>>53280458
This... actually gave me a little inspiration on how to play a necromancer (Good. Thanks, Anon.

>>53280458
Wait a little. I thought ghouls were mindless.

>>53286150
>Down is a type of feather.
One of life's greatest mysteries has been revealed to me.

>>53274952
I spent a lot of time /out/side. You can find old deer bones everywhere. You don't have to kill someone to get bones

>>53274955
Armstrong flexed while punching civilians to death

>>53285506
There we go.

What's moral in the context of "life or death, high pressure" is not the same as what's moral in the context of "everything is fine but maybe I'm slightly inconvenienced or bored."

As I said above, invasive surgery is pretty fucked up to see/do. Performing invasive surgeries (like say, hip replacements) on someone against their will and/or when it's not vitally necessary is seen as a very different thing to performing an identical surgery on a willing patient who needs it.

>>53278009
Just because a species tends to be diurnal doesn't mean they can't be active at night bud

>>53285757
Phoenixs are immortals and you don't have to kill a bird to get its down anyway

>>53286979
>what are you doing?
>crafting a skeletal warrior out of deer bones
>why don't you revive a deer as a skeletal beast?
>i did that once... the bandits didn't stop laughing even as they got gored and trampled...
>ah okay

>>53286673
Who said anything about ghouls?
https://astranauta.github.io/spells.html#speak%20with%20dead

>>53280823
Well, with the earrings, it was an act of self sacrifice. If they were to force them on someone else, evil as fuck.

>>53273796
Probably similar to putting molly in a girl's drink

>>53269610
>Any world-ending magic
>magic requiring sacrifice of other people's lives for personal gain

>>53288624
What if the sacrifice of other people's lives is being done to stop world-ending magic?

>>53288657
necessary evil =/= good

>>53288666
Well if I'm going to hell for saving the world then I'll just go pull a kitten out of a tree instead, as reality is shredded around us. At least then I get to boop its nose before our sadly preventable demise; much preferable to an eternity of torment.

>>53269629
I've always felt that necromancy is the "evil" side of the rise of industry.
The "good" side is gnomish tinkers, and shows the expense and unrelenting quirkyness of advancing your local tech level. Everything's fragile and unique and unexpected and gets sentience or upends your economy.
Undeath is soulless authoritarian man-shackled-in-satanic-mills industry and is reliable because it is powered by horror.
I don't like my PCs mixing the aesthetics because it suggests they have a very tonally different world in mind.

>>53269610
Anything that involves trapping or destroying souls. Similarly, anything that involves trapping someone in one form or another and making them powerless to escape.

Really, anything where the end result is trapping someone in a torturous existence is utterly unforgivable to me.

>>53281420
I really don't like how all enchanting in Elder Scrolls depends on fucking around with souls. It's basically impossible to play a non-evil enchanter unless you do some headcanoning to say that "soul" is a misnomer and it's actually just some vaguely-defined energy you're taking instead of an actual consciousness.

>>53288827
>He's one of those GMs who tyrannically enforce tone instead of just starting out with something and then seeing where the game takes us.

>>53289062
And proud of it.

>>53289113
>He's one of those GMs who somehow manage to be proud of robbing his players of the satisfaction of being able to make any kind of appreciable difference in the game world

>>53279602
It's only an evil act if the corpse of your daughter is your property. Otherwise, it's just a bit of wasted crying and getting upset over a thing that does literally nothing aside from hurting your own feelings.
At this point it could just as well be a puppet that looks like your daughter's corpse.

you could argue that the necromancer in question is performing a malicious act because he is doing this in order to hurt your feelings, or that his manners are questionable at best.

I'd say it's more of just a chaotic rather then a straight-up evil action

>>53289234
>he expects the world to warp around his desires

>>53269610
Those are just tools. Some are more useful for evil purposes, some are less, but it's people who are evil.

>>53273623
Actually im many settings manipulating corpses is easier than, say, suit of armout beacus of some metaphysical bullsht. This is the case with the world of darkness or drezden files - animating corpses is easy because they were animated before so it's easier to convince reality to animate them once more.

>>53288914
In the vampire dlc you go to a place called the soul cairn. Every being that gets trapped in a souk gem goes to the soul cairn instead of getting an after life. It's basically a big purgatory