Need Help Otimizing Blind Monk w/VoP

81 posts / 0 new
Last post
I haven't played 3rd ED in several years so I'm a bit rusty. I have an concept idea for a character I want to play in the upcoming campaign some friends are starting but not really sure how viable it will be.

It's setup for 28 point buy chargen with base stats starting at 8. Characters are level 1 and we are restricted to only WoTC books, as DM says he doesn't want to deal with much of the unbalanced 3rd party material.

So my idea was for a character was a Blind Human Monk with Vow of Poverity. I have a back story and such planned out for the character but being blind is a major hinderance. I know there are some ways to get around but they often require magic items or high level feats. I kind of have the character Toph in mind in terms of ability, can sense most things going on around but still can get caught off guard by things as simple as someone tossing a belt at her.

I'm look for advice both on the monk build itself and potential ways to negate much of the harsh penalties that come from blindness. I'm fine with limited senses of 30ft or such which increases as I level, that's part of being blind.

Also some outlines on path of progression through the levels to keep my monk in top form as well as build up the negating of blindness penalties would be nice, as I know it's unlikely I will be able to completely remove the penalties at level 1.
Multiclass monk/psionics with the Tashalatora feat (Secrets of Sarlona) and use the Synesthete power (XPH or SRD) as often as possible. Completely skip VoP.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls

The deformity (tongue) feat from Heroes of Horror gives you blindsense 30 out to 30 feet. It requires you to be evil and have the willing deformity feat. Blindsense lets you determine which square someone is in, but you still have the normal miss chance.


The mindsight feat from Lords of Madness (page 126) gives you an ability similar to blindsense with a range equal to that of your preexisting telepathy ability. The ghostwise halfling race from Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting give a sort of limited telepathy out to 20 feet.


The scent ability tells you which square a creature is in if it's within 5 feet. The uncanny scent feat from Savage Species increases this range to 20 feet. It requires the improved scent feat and the scent ability. There are a few ways to gain the scent ability at 1st level.

I'm going to go ahead and second draco1119 on this one. Tashalatora instead of VoP, if at all possible. Synesthete and eventually Ubiquitous Vision would make sense to the old blind monk cliche. Don't fall into the trap that is the Dex based monk unless you're dipping Swordsage to get Shadow Blade easy. That's still a cost of 1 class level and 2 feats (Weapon Finesse) in order to do as much damage as a Str based monk, but you're not power attacking like they would be. You're better off if you want to be combat effective just considering Str Primary with Wis and Con secondary, Dex is tirtiary, and only because you've got no max Dex to AC. Str and PA will give you damage, as will some of your psionic powers.
Yeah, Dex-based is attractive to relieve the Monk's MAD, but you need a way to deal damage. You could potentially focus on Stunning Fist and other special attacks and work primarily as a disabler, but I think that some of the feats you'd want (Pharoah's Fist?) have a Str requirement.

As one weird possibility for the blind monk, you could simply leave them as a completely normal human (in terms of statistics) and just describe them as blind, with their "special" senses simply replicating normal sight.  I know it's not what is literally being requested here, but it's an interesting possibility.
VoP is strictly inferior to WBL in every respect, especially on something like a monk, which is incredibly easy to shut down. Furthermore, VoP is an Exalted feat, thus requiring you to be super-awesome-smiles-painted-on-your-soul-happy Good, and if you do anything non-Good, you permanently and instantly lose all benefits. VOP is awful.

Just a couple of points here to address; firstly, the Vow of Poverty does have some very useful elements, like constant true seeing, extraordinary freedom of movement, and damage reduction (which is costly to replicate), so it's really that it's inferior to WBL in the overall sense, rather than in every respect.  Secondly,  being exalted only requires you to avoid willingly and willfully committing evil acts, not simply any non-good act.

That said, it's true that it's not a very good match with the monk (who can't cover the shortcomings of an ascetic lifestyle through spellcasting), and is better suited for a character who can really benefit from its lack of gear-dependence, like a wild shape-happy druid.  At the very least, you don't want to take a Vow of Poverty unless you can separately cover a method for gaining flight, since having no means of flight can really suck later on.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
I think the most effective VOP monk build I ever made was a human half dragon that went monk 2/ fighter 2/ barbarian 1/ fist of the forest 3/ initiate of the draconic mysteries 10. The fist of the forest not only reduces your mad by allowing you to focus more on con than wis for your unarmed ac, but it also meshes well with the life style of someone with vow of poverty. Taking the lion totem and whirling frenzy variants for barbarian make you a decent charger in the first place, but also going with the monk variant style of the overwhelming assault you get power attack and improved bull rush as monk bonus feats, setting you up eventually for shock trooper. Since the build was a half dragon he qualified for the dragon wings feat tree which cut out the bad weakness and vop non caster has of flight at higher levels. To top it off, since you have barbarian levels and other natural attacks other than your unarmed strike you get a few more uses out of other exalted feats such as righteous wrath and sanctified natural attack. the down side is if you want all the exalted bonus feats and the dragon wings feat tree, you need to be able to use flaws.

As a brief side note I believe the build had improved sunder as well, seeing as how vop actually gives your fist an enchantment bonus to your fist which maxed out at +4 by 20th level, since you don't really care about money smash away and leave your enemies with no weapon to fight with.

The build also utilized the decisive strike alternative class feature instead of flurry of blows since it had whirling frenzy and the spell reflection variant instead of evasion at second level since you get not only evasion, but improved evasion from initiate of the draconic mysteries. If I can find the full build in my backlog of old characters I'll post a full write up.
If you were in any party I've ever played in, you'd have been PK'd for destryoing everyone elses wealth selfishly. Also, VoP Wild Shape focused Druid, just sayin'.
If you were in any party I've ever played in, you'd have been PK'd for destryoing everyone elses wealth selfishly. Also, VoP Wild Shape focused Druid, just sayin'.



It's probably worth mentioning that the party consisted of a VOP healer, a VOP soul bow, and a wiz/ war mage ultimate magus, so no one really cared all that much about weaponry. otherwise I think the feat was there as a qualifier for combat brute feat, which meshes well with shock trooper.
In my experience, the difference between this and Scout's Headband is nearly nonexistant.

I would have to disagree.  Based on my own experience, the ability to actively detect things isn't anywhere near as useful when you need some evidence of their presence before trying to detect them.
Easy enough to replicate. An intelligent Third Eye: Freedom is around 3500 and functions in an AMF. Also? the VoP FoM doesn't function in an AMF. Exalted feats are Su, and so, IIRC(AFB), it disappears.

The only real reason for noting that the freedom of movement effect is extraordinary is for it to be different from the supernatural benefits of the feat.  While the feat's supernatural benefits are suppressed, you don't lose the feat itself any more than a magic item physically disappears in an antimagic field, and its extraordinary benefits remain fully functional.  This specific question was directly addressed in the FAQ.

On the other side of things, while the intelligent third eye itself is unaffected by the antimagic field, its magical abilities are still subject to suppression, and it only offers the effect for a single round per day, making it utterly pitiful compared to the benefit given by the vow.
Except that DR sucks hard after level five or so. Damage scales too fast.

It may not seem like much against a single heavy attack, but its cumulative effects are impressively helpful, especially for an adventurer facing an endless procession of challenges.
Fiendish Codex said merely allowing demons to exist is an evil act. So, in other words, any Exalted character will fall for not going on a suicide rush into the Abyss.

And that's not counting the other massive flaws in the alignment system. I doubt a character can go a day without doing something minorly Evil, given the absurdity of the Alignment system. 

The alignment system is only absurd when you try to use absurd and extreme interpretations of it.

Frankly, I don't recall where the Fiendish Codex 1 (I assume, since you said "demons") said that merely allowing demons to exist is evil, but since the upshot of assuming that it means allowing them to exist anywhere under any circumstance simply by not actively trying to kill them is that everyone everywhere is evil, that's probably the wrong reading of it.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Getting past being blind is very hard at low levels. Blindsense is just that "sensing". You will know the square the target resides in, but there is still a 50% miss chance when you try and hit them. You need to find a way to get Blindsight. These are the ways I know how to get Blindsight:

Listening Lorecall (SpC): gives you Blindsight 15ft if you have 12 ranks in Listen
Eye of Gruumsh 5, ecl 11, Complete Warrior, 5', 10' at level 8
Scout 20, Complete Adventurer, 30'
combat awareness, feat, PHB2 - 5'
Henshin Mystic, PrC, Oriental Adventures
Shade Hunter 10, ecl 15, FR: Champions of Ruin, 30'
Slime Lord, PrC, Player's Guide to Faerun
Blindsighted, weapon enhancement, Underdark
Blindfold of True Darkness, item, Arms and Equipment Guide, p.130, Grants 60' Blindsight and immunity to gaze attacks, but negates all
Tentacle whip, symbiote, Eberron Campaign Setting - the symbiote has blindsight 60 feet and can communicate what it "sees" telepathically
Cerebral hood, symbiote, Fiend Folio - see above
Necrocarnum Circlet, soulmelt, Magic of Incarnum, 30' for undead only
Shadow Mantle, soulmeld, Magic of Incarnum, 5' or more, see text
Orthos, vestige, ecl 17, Tome of Magic, 30'
Umbral Disciple 7, ecl 12, Magic of Incarnum, 10' per essentia
Scorpion Wraith 4, ecl 9, Eberron: Secrets of Xen'drik, 60' limited use, see text
Devil's Sight, feat, Fiendish Codex II, grants darkvision and limited use blindsight 30', see text


Hope this helps.
I'd have to argue the fact that all of those stipulations were from book of vile darkness which is a 3.0 source book, making it outdated in terms of 3.5 alignment constrictions. Not only that, but by your argument that means the game is unplayable by it's own rule set because everyone is inherently evil simply for breathing, which in turn takes precious oxygen from other people. If you read the book of exalted deeds it's implied that "good" behavior is subject to the DM"s interpretation of good over all, with a few guidelines on what is classically considered good by fantasy role playing traditions. Using your line of reasoning, Frodo Baggins was evil because he willingly used an evil item in order to kill an evil over lord, or he was evil simply because he killed the evil overlord, causing many evil but potentially remediable orcs to die. Gandaulf the White was evil because he overthrew the acting government of the city of Gondor in order to instal the rightful ruler, causing the death of the raining stuierd due to his involvement. All of the dwarfs from the hobbit where evil because they where using weapons with the equivalent of of bane orc weapons used in a war where elves slaughtered hundreds in the name of peace.

All the hobbits in the shire? Yup, evil because they stayed out of the affairs of the world and kept to themselves, meaning they did nothing to stem the tide of evil. Morality really has little place in the game mechanics of D&D because it is itself a subjective thing in life, and by that reasoning is subject to the DM's whims. If a DM believes that evil is good and vise versa you have a dramatically different outlook at how things like exalted feats work, which is why it takes a little common sense when it comes to calling what is and isn't an evil act. Stabbing a person for no reason, evil act. Stabbing a person because he is about to slaughter a child as an offering to orcus, neutral to good act depending on the personal reasons that your opposing the action.
Except that it's exactly what you're doing, CJ. Quit trollin' the hood, brosef.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
As far as I'm ware there is no "grandfathering" of 3.0 rules into 3.5, as a matter of fact I'm pretty sure that its explicitly stated that if a 3.0 peace of material wasn't updated it's exclusively up to a DM as to weather or not to even involve it in the game. Further more seeing as how anything outside of the three core books (MM, DMG, PHB) everything else is supplemental, meaning the rules in book of exalted deeds are just more guidelines as what the game designers feel is traditional of thee "good" alignment spectrum, and up do personal DM consternation. Certain things in D&D are considered base line evil, animating dead for instance, but once again you can find neutral motivations for necromancy, or even good reasons. The ebberon setting for example has a prestige class that mixes paladin with necromantic themes. As far as I have read into it, anything alignment base is subject to DM discretion. Once again to point out how the game would be unplayable by your understanding, every commoner in the game would be inherently evil for not charging their chickens into the abyss to fight mains and dretches to the death.
And that is why Boccob gave us Mindsight. And Listen.

So you can eat up other invested resources (like feats, and your method for gaining telepathy) to maybe use your single daily shot of high-grade detection.  That's not very impressive compared to walking around with full-grade detection on 24 hours a day, and you can back up your true seeing with mundane senses either way.
I actually believe RAW would disagree here. Or, more accurately, its abilities become Natural abilities(Or Extraordinary, or whatever the RC calls them).

I would seriously doubt that its ability as a magical item to confer freedom of movement on its wearer has ceased to be magical.
AMFs are 10' radius.If you cannot escape a 10' radius circle with FoM on, you're not trying. Like, at all. I see no practical difference. I am, once again, unimpressed.

Even if the item's magical ability to bestow freedom of movement wasn't nerfed by it, antimagic field itself typically lasts for hours (even with the minimum caster level with its 10 minute/level duration), so unless your only concern is running away immediately and not coming back, there's a good chance that you'll want the effect more than once.
Okay, it helps against Tucker's Kobolds. Or, it would if not for the facts that DR is easy to circumvent, and fails in usefulness compared to a couple of low-level Cleric spells. So, you're once again behind in abilities and have no WBL to help.

I don't really know which particular low-level cleric spells you're considering without some context as to what you're considering useful, but adventurers face a lot of different enemies and threats, most of whom aren't as well equipped to bypass DR as the typical adventuring party.  Against most of your threats, you've got a nice, continuous buffer to help shield some of your precious hit points.
Also on that list is cheating(BoVD, pg 7) theft(pg 7), betrayal(Even unintentionally doing it), worship of evil things(I hope your monk ain't a Pelor fan), causing despair(Geez, I hope that Kobold you killed doesn't have a family dependant on him)(pg 9), and tempting others to evily stuffs(Hope you lose every dime in your charity-funding poker game, just so no one else there is tempted to cheat)(pg 9).

Overlooking for a moment the flaws in some of those specific descriptions that would render them irrelevant, that section is devoted to giving ideas for how to run evil characters, not defining each element as always being evil.  Only a few are specifically identified as inherently evil; the others simply tell you how evil might use these things in their behaviour.

I would like to read the part from the Fiendish Codex 1 about failing to kill demons being evil, for the context if nothing else.  Which section or page was it from?
See, in D&D, Alignment is purely objective. Either doing something or not doing something is evil, period. No extenuating circumstances, no anything. Worst of all, it's clearly spelled out. 

Only a few acts are specifically identified as being evil by their basic nature, and assuming that intent is unimportant simply because the rules tend to describe concrete examples is a misleading way to look at alignment.

The alignment that you currently possess may be objective, but it's the cumulative result of actions taken with intent, and your relation to those actions does matter, as do the circumstances.  Stabbing a kobold to stop him from gutting your helpless friend isn't evil; stabbing that same kobold in front of his nonhostile family in order to fill them with hopelessness and despair is evil.  It's the same action with different circumstances and intent.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
would seriously doubt that its ability as a magical item to confer freedom of movement on its wearer has ceased to be magical.

It's an untyped ability of a Construct. Therefore, it is a mundane natural ability.

The fact that that "mundane" ability can be temporarily disabled by dispel magic suggests otherwise.
If you can't finish something, or at least stall and severly damage something in one round as a caster, urdoinitwrong. And if you're a melee, you really shouldn't care.

"Stall and severely damage" can be readily translated as "leave my enemy alive with the opportunity to put me right back in an antimagic field".  If your enemy is using antimagic and doesn't have even the most basic means to prevent you from moving away, they're the one doing something wrong.
The only attacks it'll shield you against are weak enough not to bother worrying about. Oh, and it's beat by a large number of spells in a standard buff routine.

It's a constant chunk out of any relevant attack or other cause of adventuring damage, which all adds up.  And if your enemies are throwing out heavy attacks, that chunk can be the difference between being active and bleeding out on the ground.
Plus? DR is totally inferior to, say, the smoking weapon enhancement? Any other easy miss chance?

I'm not familiar with the smoking weapon enchantment.  Anything common?
They're called out as specifically evil acts, IIRC.

A few acts are; many are not.
I would like to read the part from the Fiendish Codex 1 about failing to kill demons being evil, for the context if nothing else.  Which section or page was it from?

BoVD, the section about dealing with fiends.

So was it the BoVD or (one of) the Fiendish Codices?

Even the Book of Vile Darkness has an entire chapter devoted to fiends (as opposed to either Fiendish Codex, where it's the entire book), and demonic elements scattered through the rest of the book, so it would help if you could narrow that down.
No. Quite a lot were.

No, fewer acts than you might think are specifically described as evil.  Most of them are simply presented within the framework of an evil character.

The alignment that you currently possess may be objective, but it's the cumulative result of actions taken with intent, and your relation to those actions does matter, as do the circumstances.  Stabbing a kobold to stop him from gutting your helpless friend isn't evil; stabbing that same kobold in front of his nonhostile family in order to fill them with hopelessness and despair is evil.  It's the same action with different circumstances and intent.

So? Fringe example compared to the number of normal, mundane acts covered.

I've picked outliers to more clearly depict the fact that different ends of the scale exist for the same basic action.  But try me; pick a normal mundane action covered by the books and we'll talk about how intent relates to it.  Some of them are genuinely things with which exalted characters (and ascetic characters in particular) have no business being involved.  Others are more variegated.
Also? Look up the damnation section in FC whatever one it's in.

You mean the entirety of two books?  They're both about fiends who make dooming mortals their daily business.

If you could be a little more specific with your references, it would help to clarify the specific points that you're addressing.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Uh, no. Again, if you're a wizard who can't escape or kill something in an AMF in one turn, urdoinitwrong.



What would you suggest the Wizard do at this point?  Most, if not all, of the character's spells are useless (unless you knew specifically to expect AMF) and, since the field moves with the caster, all it would take is a character specialised in keeping you nearby to completely neuter you.  This also doesn't take into effect the fact that you might also be fighting a Cleric which, when you've only got your combat ability, generally spells doom for a Wizard.
PaO stone hats are the answer to every AMF problem.
So? I fail to see what this has to do with anything. The rules are quite clear. Plus, look at golems. Constructs have weird interations with spells.

Yes, they're clear.  The magical effect produced by the magical item is magical.
Really? I was under the impression that the Smoking enhancement was common knowledge. It's in Lords of Darkness.

That's 3.0 and campaign-specific, both reasons for it to be overlooked.
But, beyond that, smokesticks? Blur? All of those miss-chance armors? Mirror Image? Shadow Sibling? Minor(Read actually good) Cloak of Displacement? Every other Shadow Hand boost and their dogs?

You can't really consider anything except the items when comparing to a Vow of Poverty; everything else the character could potentially exist in their character design anyway.  Ironically, apart from the smokesticks, an antimagic field would already be killing them stone-dead, and the smokestick is just as bad for its wielder.
See, if a kobold attacked you, and you killed it, you'd be killing it for selfish purposes and fall. Eating meat will make you fall. Not going on a suicide run into the Abyss will make you fall. Worshiping Pelor will make you fall. Accidentally using a poisoned weapon will make you fall. Using weed will make you fall. Drinking spiked could make you fall.

Self-defense isn't evil, nor is meat-eating, nor a lack of stupidity.  The accidental use of poison or drugs is only a problem for those with things like Vow of Abstinence, and ways exist for them to recover from events that could shake their surety.

The Pelor example is an example of deliberate hyperbole, pretending that Pelor is evil for comedic effect.  Not, of course, that a good god can't occaisonally do things that fit more directly with their portfolio than their alignment, since few gods are actually exalted.
Also? Look up the damnation section in FC whatever one it's in.

You mean the entirety of two books?  They're both about fiends who make dooming mortals their daily business.

If you could be a little more specific with your references, it would help to clarify the specific points that you're addressing.

The whole damnation points nonsense that makes genocide the most efficient path to redemption.

Unless you can give me some hint as to where they are, I'm going to have to treat them as imaginary, since it's the most effective categorization until more information emerges.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Except it is no longer produced by a magic item. It is now a natural ability of a construct.

The magic item is still a magic item, it simply happens to be a construct that's also a magic item.  The two aren't mutually exclusive, since item is not synonymous with "object" in D&D.
Really? I was under the impression that the Smoking enhancement was common knowledge. It's in Lords of Darkness.

That's 3.0 and campaign-specific, both reasons for it to be overlooked.

Incorrect.

No, those are valid reasons for it being overlooked.
Wizards can't memorize spells without books(Unless VoP changes that), and Shadow Hand maneuvers are quite cheap. Miss chances are quite cheap.

Wizards aren't the only class with access to those spells (if nothing elese, almost all wizard spells are available to sorcerers, and vice versa), so they're assets available to classes that can take the vow, ditto for Shadow Hand maneuvers.  For the sake of completeness, I'll note that there is a variant from one of the Dragon magazines that could get around the spellbook requirement, but since it still requires a costly element for learning additional spells, it doesn't serve the wizard any better for the purposes of Vow of Poverty, unless someone has a way to negate that cost.
Don't you remember the whole deal about intelligent items?

Addressed above.  Their abilities as magic items are still derived from being magic items, and are just as vulnerable as ever.  Many of their abilities that are specifically gained as part of being intelligent are spell-like, so those can also be affected by antimagic.

A few of their abilities, like their senses, their mental ability scores, and their ranks in the specified skills, could be reasonably considered to be natural parts of them, but that's certainly not true of the benefits they gain from being a magic item in the first place, and those are our point of focus here.


Killing for a selfish purpose. Evil

Defending your interests from direct aggression isn't selfish in any real determination of the word, otherwise everyone would be evil simply by virtue of having an immune system.
 Party to murder for selfish reasons. Evil

Again, the slightest hint of self-interest does not make an action worthy of the term "self-interest".

If you want to avoid meat-eating, you can take a Vow of Purity.  Since meat-eating is specifically mentioned by the vow, and not for exalted characters in general, we can safely assume that exalted characters can normally eat meat.
Drugs are Evil, period. Therefore, any Exalted character automatically falls.

Vow of Abstinence covers the same state as Vow of Purity in this regard.
So?

I would have thought that it's obvious, but since you need it pointed out, Pelor isn't an evil god.  If nothing else, he's specifically noted as good, consequently, he's good if you want to be even vaguely in touch with the system of alignment.
Fiendish Codex II, page 20-something or 30-something, IIRC.

Assuming that you're talking about corruption points, from page 30-31, the fact that removing corruption points requires you to give up all benefits gained from the relevant actions, and apologizing, and making restitution, and making a donation, and receiving an atonement if your rating is too high, it's hard to see how it makes genocide the most effective path to redemption.  It's a nice path to being flat broke, though.
Alignment it absolutely objective, and Evil acts are always Evil, period, regardless of how there are Good versions of them that do the exact same thing.

Considering that you used Pelor as an example of evil despite him being explicitly stated as having a good alignment, I'm going to take your adherence to the actual rules with a grain of salt, the fact that you're using an absurdly extremist view of them notwithstanding.

However, the interpretation you're using does explain why you think the alignment system doesn't work.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Stop the violence.

I'm curious about one thing, if murder, let alone even harming someone else is evil (which in reality, sure I'll bite, but this is D&D) why did they bother having Vow of Peace and Vow of Non-Violence seperately rather than making them prerequisites of being Exalted? I think really this is an RAI situation, and also.... play to have fun, not to follow the rule to the letter. If the DM says it's okay, it's okay, leave it at that, sometimes you need to make up the rules as you go so they make more sense for you. 
Construct's natural abilities do not stop in an AMF. These abilities are not specifically SLAs or SUs, therefore they are natural abilities, which function in an AMF. Therefore, an inteligent magic item doesn't cease to function in an AMF.

Its abilities as a magic item aren't natural abilities that it has as a construct, so the fact that its "natural abilities" are unaffected is unimportant.
Wondrous Item in ToB. Maneuvers are cheap.

The item is relevant for comparison with Vow of Poverty; the manuevers themselves are not inherently out of reach for an ascetic character, so they are not.
Even if their abilities were derived from being magic items, they are not magic items.

They never stopped being magic items.  They just happen to be constructs that are also magic items.  There is absolutely no rule preventing them from still being magic items (which they are), they are directly referred to as magic items within the DMG, and the FAQ confirms that they are both constructs and magic items.

Since only permanent magic items can be intelligent, failing to be a magic item would prevent an item from being intelligent.
The magic item abilities are untyped, and therfore natural abilties according to the rules compendium. Totally mundane.

That's something of a tricky point; the intelligent item has the ability to use certain spells, and simply having the ability to use spells would count as a natural ability, just as the ability to cast spells does for a wizard (since spellcasting is also not noted as a supernatural or spell-like ability).  However, the spells themselves are still spells, and their effect once cast is suppressed by an antimagic field, even though the ability used to activate them is nonmagical, since the effect is a spell (note that spells are noted as being blocked by an antimagic field in addition to spell-like and supernatural abilities).

It is in self-intrest. That's the only requirement. Therefore, murder in self-defense is evil. Period. It may or may not qualify as unintentional, but Exalted doesn't care. Evil act>fall.

There's actually a slight misstatement on my part: What I meant to say was that including any elements of self-interest does not make an act "selfish" (I mistakenly wrote "self-interest" and didn't notice).  Your stated requirement was "selfish", and you can satisfy elements of self-interest without being genuinely selfish.  That said, it's not "murder" if it's in self-defense.

Even from your viewpoint (where arbitrary selfishness is king), all a character has to do is protect themselves in the name of the good they can do for the world and they're unaffected, which is an easy thing for a character of good alignment (since they tend to help others, rather than being neutral).
The rules are quite clear. It is killing for selfish reasons. Therefore, it is evil.

Self-interest does not automatically equal selfish.  If you really want to split hairs, as above you can avoid selfishness by citing your attempt to help the world with your survival; non-selfish and miraculously non-evil.

If that kind of hair-splitting makes a fun game for you, good luck with that; the alignment side of things and the exalted status still permit it.
They are specifically called out as evil. Therefore, you cannot be Exalted after smoking weed.

You'll have to provide a quote of where that is stated if you'd like to discuss it properly.
It's a joke, son.

Son, your posts do make a lot more sense if I simply assume that you're joking with your "examples".
Don't have it on me, so I can't quote exact text, but it's quite simple. If you kill everyone you ever wronged, and then kill everyone who would be wronged by the killing on the wronged, and so on, you have eventually no one who you've wronged. Then, you go and humiliate a subordinate(Speficially called out as a corrupt act in there somewhere), make ammends, and atone.

No, in fact that just digs you a deeper hole, since those people have still been wronged even when dead.  Bang, attempt at attonement via genocide fails.
The Pelor thing was a joke. A joke that helps show the absurdity of the whole thing.

It certainly shows that the literal extremist approach is an absurd one.  But alignment only looks absurd in the weirdly deformed bizarro world of the joke.
I am doing no interpreting. Only using the exact rules. By the rules, eating meat is an evil act. By the rules, someone who drank spiked punch, or accidentally cut themselves with a poisoned knife is not Exalted. Those are the rules. You're trying to add shades of grey, and "levels" of how evil something is, or why something shouldn't count. The issue is, the rules are binary. It either is evil, which is a totally objective thing in D&D), or it isn't. Period. There is no "middle ground" in there.

Your failure is assuming the black and white of it.  Certainly a character's exact alignment is objective, since it's intended to interact with hard rules, but the actions that eventually produce those alignments are acts that function just as they do in the real world, with their true nature buried in intent.  The rules are in fact a little simplistic in their description, since they assume the baseline that those playing won't be easily able to grasp the subtler issues on which the system is truly founded, so they state things in terms of exact actions, and for those acting on the most uninsightful and surface view of things, that probably works.

But, as is indicated in the Book of Exalted Deeds, dealing with the tough questions of morality requires a bit more involvement and at least a little less blind obedience, because the actions that determine alignment aren't quite so simple.
I am saying the alignment system is absurd, because the rules say it's absurd. Morality doesn't work in a binary fashion, and it is not objective. The system just does not function.

If you treat it as you're currently doing, it will certainly seem absurd, because once you begin to remove the training wheels, you start to see that the issues aren't quite so simple.

Admirably, from a design viewpoint, the hard mechanical elements of alignment are largely based upon the final alignment result, allowing a great deal of flexibility in the judgement of acts that accumulate to determine that alignment.  You can generally substitute a very complex interpretation of morality for the entry-level version and still have characters subject to things like alignment-based spells.  The Book of Exalted Deeds is a little more complicated than that, but it's supposed to be.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
CJ, if you hate the alignment system so much, why not just play 4E?
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
Which, I think, is the point Slagger's been trying to make. You seem to be taking alignment rules to the extreme.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
They are abilties with an unlisted type. The rules compendium was quite clear on this. They are, therefore, natural abilities, which are uneffected by AMF.

Their abilities are now the untyped abilities of a creature. Which are natural abilities, and function in an AMF.

They're not abilities that the intelligent item has as a construct, they're abilities it has as a magic item.
Since only permanent magic items can be intelligent, failing to be a magic item would prevent an item from being intelligent.

Wrong.

No, true.  Only permanent magic items can be intelligent items; if you're not a magic item, you can't be an intelligent item.
That said, the effect of the magic item is not the same type of ability. Spells are specifically shut down in an AMF. Inherent abilities are not.

We disagree on this; the magic item abilities are those of an item; they exist independently of its state as a construct (even if it were to somehow lose its intelligence, it would retain its magical abilities as an enchanted item).
Placing your life over someone else's is inherently selfish.

No, it really doesn't qualify as "selfish" unless you're deliberately acting without any real care for others.  You can still care about others in spite of the fact that you're defending your life from their attacks.
Are they acting selfishly in any way. This is a yes-or-no question. If there is any selfishness in there at all, it's Evil. Period. Defending youself "in the name of good" would still be placing yourself above another, and thus be Evil.

It's entirely easy to state that you're only defending yourself for the sake of the world.

That aside, actions are not selfish simply by including any acts that are self-beneficial.  That requires an upholding of self-interest without care for others. 

I hate the Alignment system.

Of course you do; the way you're trying to use it is generally unsatisfying for those whose playstyle includes any care for the subtleties of being human.
The "literal extremist approach" isn't an approach. It isn't an interpretation. It is the rules.

If you believe that every single word in even the non-technical sections of the book is intended to be an immutable law, alignment will always suck for you.
The rules give objective, black-and-white morality. Alignment is, in D&D, just as much a part of the world as gravity. Beings and acts are all objectively Good and Evil, regardless of whether they would be considered good or evil IRL.

Alignment is objective, the acts that cause it are not so much, unless you can ultimately trace them back to their true roots.
There are no "Training wheels." The rules determine what is Good and what is Evil. They are objective facts. Somethings morality is just as much of a simple fact as its size.

The creature's alignment is indeed objective; the actions that lead to it are not so, at least on a practical level.
That does not make him a good god, and the background would seriously place him into the evil catergory. He is an evil Good god. The thing is, whether something is good or evil doesn't affect whether something is Good or Evil.

If alignment in the real world is not objective, how can you state that Pelor is "evil"?
Admirably, from a design viewpoint, the hard mechanical elements of alignment are largely based upon the final alignment result, allowing a great deal of flexibility in the judgement of acts that accumulate to determine that alignment.  You can generally substitute a very complex interpretation of morality for the entry-level version and still have characters subject to things like alignment-based spells.  The Book of Exalted Deeds is a little more complicated than that, but it's supposed to be.

No. You are incorrect. The rules are the rules.

The acid test for that is whether or not it works.  Alignment doesn't work or make sense given your interpretation (that every word dealing with alignment is immutable law), consequently it's wrong. 

Even within the most thoroughly mechanical aspects of the system, there are segments that rely implictly upon human flexibility to bridge the gap and make the whole thing operate.  Alignment simply shows a lot more of this than other sections.  The sections dealing with particular acts are also written a little differently to some of the mechanical sections (in the same way that things like racial descriptions and character backstories are written differently), which helps to highlight them as "fluffy" parts, different from the "crunchy" parts of the system.  The fluff enjoys far more flexibility and is far more tolerant of customization than the crunchy mechanics.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
"Magic items sometimes have intelligence of their own. Magically imbued with sentience, these items think and feel the same way characters do and should be treated as NPCs. Intelligent items have extra abilities and sometimes extraordinary powers and special purposes. Only permanent magic items (as opposed to single-use items or those with charges) can be intelligent. (This means that potions, scrolls, and wands, among other items, are never intelligent.) In general, less than 1% of magic items have intelligence."

It's clearly a rule regarding "consumables", it's not even really getting into temporary enchantments, or the ability to turn enchantments off. 

"Intelligent items can actually be considered creatures because they have Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma scores. Treat them as constructs. Intelligent items often have the ability to illuminate their surroundings at will (as magic weapons do); many cannot see otherwise."

Treating a dog as a cat does not make it a cat.

"Unlike most magic items, intelligent items can activate their own powers without waiting for a command word from their owner. Intelligent items act during their owner’s turn in the initiative order."

It's still a magic item ability, it's just being activated by the magic item, which is treated as (but is not) a construct. Therefore, if in an antimagic field, and magic items don't work, it can't activate the item ability. 
Actually sorry, in that post I missed the real key, the key is "activate" an Iron Golem does not Activate its breath weapon, it just uses it. You activate a magic item ability, which stops working in an Antimagic field, even if the weapon remains intelligent, and it does, it is supressed but still permanent in the field.
There is no distinction between those two. It is an untyped ability of a creature. That is all that matters.

They're not untyped abilities of creature.  The ability in question is the ability of a magic item, not of a creature.


It is now a construct, and therefore functions in an AMF.

Also, something going into an AMF does not cease to be magical.

That, in fact, is an unanswered point as far as the text goes, since it is not directly stated one way or another.  Its magic is suppressed, so in any functional sense it's nonmagical.

Since we're talking about an effect founded upon its nature as a magical item, the outcome is exactly the same in any practical sense.  If it needs magic to be an intelligent item, that magic is suppressed within the field.
You may "disagree," but it will not change the fact that you are objectively wrong, and are trying to form opinions about the rules of a game by inserting irrelevent information into your reasoning.

It's baseless to state that the effect is an inherent ability of the construct, particularly since it exists entirely independent of the intelligent item.

But if you want to address the general reasoning of the situation regarding constructs, according to the text of antimagic field, the constructs that are unaffected are those that are imbued with magic during their creation process and are thereafter self-supporting (by magic, since that's the only way in which support is addressed by the spell).  As an intelligent item is constantly supported by magic (as with all magic items), it does not meet the criteria for being unaffected by the antimagic field and remains subject to its effects.
How much you "care about others" is irrelevent. Is it selfish in the sightlest? Yes, okay fall. Period. No mitigating circumstances, no "IT was only a little bit," nothing. You fall. Period.

Containing even the slightest hint of selfishness does not make an action "selfish" any more than containing the slightest hint of blue makes a particular shade of colour blue.

There is, in fact, no statement that being selfish to even the tiniest degree causes a "fall".
Disingenuous. Alignment is purely objective. Defending yourself "For the sake of the world" is irrelevant. You are putting yourself and your mission ahead of this guys.

Unprovable and perfectly capable of being completely incorrect as far as the character is concerned.  The fact that you're unable to believe the character could genuinely be thinking that way is irrelevant.
Selfish acts would be self-beneficial with risk or cost to others, basically. Self-defence falls into this category. Total nonviolence is the only way to safetly play Exalted.

No action is ever without cost to someone else, and following your own mental decisions is ultimately selfish, even if you think you're acting to benefit someone else (since you're simply satisfying your own morality).

And if you were to permit your own murder, you'd be allowing an evil act to occur without taking action to stop it, which would be making you party to the act.

That is not the way "I am trying to use it." that is the way it is.

Incorrect.  The only genuinely concrete part of it is the fact that there are nine different alignments on two axes.  Beyond that it's simply quibbling about the fallout of actions.
Is this "rules" concept really that complicated?

Is this, "not every word printed in the book is a blind statement of absolute truth" really that complicated?


The rules give objective, black-and-white morality. Alignment is, in D&D, just as much a part of the world as gravity. Beings and acts are all objectively Good and Evil, regardless of whether they would be considered good or evil IRL.

Alignment is objective, the acts that cause it are not so much, unless you can ultimately trace them back to their true roots.

Incorrect. Try again.

Incorrect.  Try again.
Wrong, Actions are Good or Evil, period. Killing something for a selfish reason is evil. Period. End of story. Using a poisoned weapon is evill. Period. End of story. Alignment is an objective fact. What someone thinks or feels is irrelevent.

If what someone thinks or feels is irrelevant, how can any action be selfish?
That does not make him a good god, and the background would seriously place him into the evil catergory. He is an evil Good god. The thing is, whether something is good or evil doesn't affect whether something is Good or Evil.

If alignment in the real world is not objective, how can you state that Pelor is "evil"?
Because alignment isn't that subjective. Most people have similar-ish views on it. See Gandhi, or any number of psychotic despots.
So he's evil if it conforms to your view of evil and you think some other people will agree?
It is the rules. Therefore, it is not wrong. Any opinion contradicting said rules is, however. wrong.

And is there any rule describing statements about alignment as immutable law, or are you simply assuming that?
There is no "flexibility." There is no "gap." Alignment is a totally objective, rules-based fact. Any claim otherwise is simple wrong.

The DMG has both of these statements about alignment (on page 134):

"Actions dictate alignment, not statements of intent by the players."
"There are exceptions to all of the above." (referring to the earlier sections).

According to the rules, alignment is not totally objective, since there are exceptional cases in which statements of intent dictate alignment, rather than actions.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
It is the natural ability of a creature. That is the only thing that matters.

It is the magical ability of a magic item.  That is the only thing that matters.
It's a construct. Therefore, it is unaffected. Nothing you posted contradicts this. Posting things that support my claim and claiming they don't doesn't mean they don't.

According to the text, only constructs that are self-supporting without magic are immune to the effects of antimagic field.
Alignment is purely ternary. It is either Good, Neutral, or Evil. Period. That's it. And if the act of killing is for a selfish reason, in any way, it is Evil. Period.

Even assuming that we were talking about the actual aligment, rather than the actions that produce it, it's not ternary, but nonary.

We aren't talking about the exact alignment, of course, but the actions.  And actions do vary in degree on one axis of alignment and/or the  other, they don't simply exist in one of nine pure states.  There are, for example, actions that demonstrate extreme good, and those that demonstrate mild good, featuring different degrees of effect upon the character's overall alignment.
If you are putting yourself, your desires, or anything like that above someone else's, for any reason, that is inherently selfish.

Thinking beings inevitably follow their own desires (whether they know it or not), so that idea fails to provide any distinction.
Which there are rules for. I am talking about the rules, you're talking about what you feel the rules should be, and then deluding yourself into thinking those are the rules.

It's quite the opposite.  You've read the examples given about alignment and deluded yourself into thinking that they're immutable laws.
Yes, actually. The flavor text falls into that, and for it to hold any weight, it would need to be specific.

And how have you decided what constitutes flavour text?
The rules are the rules. This is not complicated.

And the examples and guides are examples and guides.  This is not complicated.
If what someone thinks or feels is irrelevant, how can any action be selfish?

Because selfishness is inherent in the act. Killing in self defense is inherently selfish. Not complicated.

You can protect your own life for both selfish reasons and selfless reasons; selfishness is not inherent in preventing your own physical death.  Not complicated.
Pelor is not Evil, and Pelor's acts are generally evil by most moral standards I can think of.

Therein is the contradiction in your reasoning; if his actions are generally evil, he can't have a non-Evil alignment.

Either he's good, since the rules immutably state that he's good, or he's evil, since your own awareness of real-world morality suggests that his actions are evil.  Are you choosing to follow the letter of the rules, or a reasonable comparison of them to real-world morality?
Otherwise, the more specific rules trump that absurdly general "rule."

Your previous statements indicate that you're opposed to any suggestion that the exact text could be less than completely correct ("rules are rules"), yet this particular segment seems to earn your scorn for some reason.

Could you tell me a bit more about how you determine which exact text from the books is a rule and which is merely a "rule"?

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Pardon me for saying this, but, please stop the arguement.  I could be wrong, but the thread has been seemingly derailed from the original intent.  Please move this arguement to a new thread if you have to so as to better discuss a relevant topic to the OPs' post.  I'm not trying to be rude, but sooner or later, somebody's going to get the mods' attention to the thread, and if the words are heated enough, someone could get banned.  So please stop and take a breather, then go and dicuss this in a new thread.  Thank you.
I bowed out of this argument silently for my own sanity's sake but a few things in your post just scream at me to pick at, so I'll try and keep this brief. For one Andarious pointed out the wording that you treat the magic item as a construct, which does not make it one. A construct has physical ability scores save for con (if there is a construct out there in any of the monster manuals with no str or dex score I have yet to see it) , motility (once again I have yet to see a construct with no moment mode at all), and most importantly hit dice. An intelligent item has non of these things. One can use the us magic device skill to emulate a race in order to use race specific magic items, that does not make one a member of the emulated race. Not only that, but when you look at the rules for sundering, they don't change with a magic item, nor with how they make saving throws. As a matter of fact intelligent items fallow all of the rules for interaction with objects that they did before being imbued with magic, all of which suggests that though they are to be treated as constructs for the classification of their own existence, they gain no other benefit, save for perhaps immunity to mind effecting effects.

On the note of them being imbued with magic, that is another thing that goes against you, the fact that they are not created with the craft construct feat kind of blows your argument out of the water. aside from effigies and homunculus, I have yet so see a construct that could be created without the craft construct feat as well.

On to your notion that there are no varying degrees of evil, I believe the analogy you used was "There are no rules that state burning down an orphanage and devouring the babies is any more evil than swatting a misquito'. Putting aside the commonsense for a moment that arson/cannibalism/murder of the innocent are in fact more evil than killing an insect rendering that argument wrong, a simple spell does in fact disagree with you; and its called detect evil. This spell locates and discerns the nature of evil alignment, and surprise surprise, evil auras have varying strengths! if there is such a thing as one evil being more so than the other, that implies both evil and good have varying degrees. If there are degrees to an alignment, that means that actions are more often than not subjective to intent since rarely does someone go from being a good person to stabbing babies in the face. Small acts of questionable nature general result in alignment change, and those acts are generally of a conscious nature.

A good example is steeling money from the rich and giving to the poor. the robin hood factor generally leave most people going "well theft is a chaotic act, case closed" and move on. There are several cases in which steeling can be both a good and an evil act. stealing money from a commoner who needs it to pay for medicine for his sick wife, evil, steeling money from the evil lord of the land who ignores his peoples needs and wallows in his own opulence, good. There you have the same act, that being theft, that has two moral outcomes. As such alignment in D&D, although there are certain absolutes of any spectrum such as cold blooded murder, and the sacrifice of your own life to save an innocent, is inherently subjective to circumstance and intent.

With those points made, I agree with what New-Shadow said. This has gone horribly off topic, and if my two cents didn't sway it one way or the other, I highly suggest actually making a thread were this can be debated with a fresh slate and where other people can actually see what the debate is about in the thread title, which may introduce a new perspective to the argument that could end it in one persons favor or the other.
Actually you're wrong about something for sure there CJ, if not all of it. Here's one for you that's universally accepted by any group of decent gamers everywhere. Therefore actually if you don't like the rule, it can make it not the rule, maybe not in overall context but certainly at a lot of gaming tables you'll find the same rules are ignored because why? Because they're arbitrarily unfun.
It is in fact the only correct rule in ANY rpg. White Wolf Published it as Rule 0 actually. It's more sensible than Rule 0. This is an arguement you cannot win, so go ahead.
Have you got a condition CJ? If so I'm sorry. If not... get diagnosed.

You're stuck on at least three arguements that nobody agrees with you on.


Regarding the whole Magic Items as Constructs being immune to AMF. I've been thinking more on that. It's simple really, the key phrase indicates that the magic item can activate its own abilities. It does NOT indicate that the construct creature gains those abilities as special attacks. That would make them untyped abilities, as stated it is as simple as a Use Activated, Command Word, etc ability and that cannot be activated even by a construct that has it built in (say a warforged with enchanted plating, or a component that's enchanted to use X spell Y times/day).

Regarding Alignment, it's all arbitrary and nobody plays entirely by those rules. Everyone changes something to make it easier to deal. If you can get a group of more than 1 to agree with you that they do not I'll be proven wrong here. It's like multiclassing XP loss, the vast majority of the community that still plays ignores those rules altogether. Sure the rules there, but who gives a flying f***.
Wait what? 
It is NOT a magic ability, because it is a Natural ability of a Construct.

It is NOT a natural ability, because it is a magic ability of a magic item.
Only self-supporting constructs. Okay, that's fine. Now where, exactly, are the rules about somehow needing to upkeep your intelligent magic items? Plug them into a wall socket? Because I haven't seen any rules for a +5 Anarchic Burst USB Adapter.

The only kind of support it could possibly be talking about is magic, as the relevant sentence of the spell indicates by mentioning that the constructs which are unaffected were imbued with magic during their creation and self-supporting thereafter.
An action is of an alignment or it isn't. Those are the rules. Period. There are no rules that state burning down an orphanage and devouring the babies is any more evil than swatting a misquito.

If that's true, then it's impossible for an exalted character to do any evil by killing in self-defense, since self-defence is a neutral act and thus cannot contain any elements of evil (as it's not an action of evil alignment).  It is neutral and cannot be anything else since "An action is of an alignment or it isn't."

But that wouldn't even be a functional system; without a recognized difference in degrees of alignment there would be no way to change between alignments, since no single action could cause an alignment shift on its own and the alignment itself could never be more than just a single state so you could never accumulate the effect of multiple actions in order to eventually produce a change.
Irrelevent. Those are the rules.

The fallout is of vital importance, since if everything is "selfish", then there is no real distinction in the term, and nothing is truly selfish (it's only a valid state if it's possible to be in some other state).

Consequently, no-one can be selfish if it's determined on that level, making it impossible to suffer any ill-effects from it.
Those are the rules. Any attempt to claim otherwise is just as incorrect as claiming that Epic Spellcasting is a first-level Fighter class feature.

From the Player's Handbook, page 104, from the section on "The Nine Alignments": "Use these descriptions as guidelines, not as scripts."

Even the Book of Vile Darkness includes a section on how intent and context are important, which it immediately follows with a section noting that there are still going to be grey areas, even with the most black-and-white, objective approach to good and evil.  That's in the section on "Defining Evil", immediately before the section on "Evil Acts".

Notably that section on evil acts doesn't appear to state self-interest or self-protection as a reliable basis for evil.  In fact, it even states that killing a creature of consummate, irredeemable evil, such as a chromatic dragon, is not evil, even when done for personal gain.
The absence of any actual rules, for one.

Therefore, that "rule" carries no weight, and has no impact whatsoever on the actual rules.

Because a rule has mechanics, and a "rule" is pointless text in the area where the rules should be.

And how do you determine which sections are "actual rules" and which are not?  For example, you've mentioned the presence of mechanics, so exactly which segments of the descriptions of evil acts are mechanics?

If you have some other criteria, please explain that criteria, preferrably with an example.  I would suggest quoting a paragraph or two from the evil acts section of the Book of Vile Darkness and pointing out which segments are rules, which are not, and your reasons for making the distinction.
Killing for any selfish reason is Evil. Period. Tempting others to Evil is Evil. Period. Those are the rules.

I suggest you read the Book of Vile Darkness more carefully.  Only the temptation of good individuals is described as an evil act (accidental cases of temptation notwithstanding, as the section before "Evil Acts" describes), not tempting creatures of any other moral alignment.  And in addition to not stating the mere existence of selfishness as the basis of evil, it also directly describes a circumstance in which killing another creature for personal gain is explicitly not evil.
Are you being intentionally slow? I cannot think of any way to make this any simpler.

Fortunately I am happy to attempt some further predigestion of the material if the moral roughage is a little too harsh for your mental stomach.

For any game purpose, Pelor is either evil or he is not.  There is no "evil but not Evil" or the reverse, nor any other kind of difference in the standards of moral alignment within the game world (at least within the simplest determination of Good/Neutral/Evil).  You can either judge that by the immutable statement of the game material that he is good, or you can apply real-world morality, possibly determining that he is evil and voluntarily choosing to regard his stated alignment as incorrect, despite it being an official part of the rules.  In terms of alignment he cannot be both, since enacting acts of evil as your general behaviour is incompatible with having a good alignment.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
CJ, I know it's hard for you to accept, but you lost this argument days ago. And you've just plain lost it with that last post.
A) If it's in the 3.5 PHB, why does it need to be stated in the 3.0 BoVD or -ED?
B) Who made you the final arbiter of what is and is not relevant in the books? I know it's hard to understand, but it's considered bad form to ask for citations, receive them, and promptly dismiss them as "irrelevant".
C) It seems that you're the one having trouble understanding the difference between crunch & fluff.
And seriously, dood; quit trolling.
"Today's headlines and history's judgment are rarely the same. If you are too attentive to the former, you will most certainly not do the hard work of securing the latter." -Condoleezza Rice "My fellow Americans... I've just signed legislation that will outlaw Russia forever. Bombing begins in five minutes." - Ronald Reagan This user has been banned from you by the letters "O-R-C" and the numbers "2, 3, 4, and 6"
User Quotes
56788208 wrote:
I do, however, have one last lesson on this subject. That last one? The only build in this post that can one-shot average opponents[by dealing twice as much damage as they have HP? I would argue that it is not optimized. Why isn't it optimized? Because it's overkill. Overkill is NOT optimizing. This means that there are portions of this build dedicated to damage which can safely be removed and thrown elsewhere. For example, you probably don't need both Leap Attack AND Headlong Rush at the same time. You could pick up Extra Rage feats for stamina, feats to support AoO effects, feats that work towards potential prestige classes, and so on. However, you could also shift our ability scores around somewhat. I mean, if you're getting results like that with 16 starting Strength, maybe you can lower it to 14, and free up four points to spend somewhere else - perhaps back into Charisma, giving you some oomph for Intimidating Rage or Imperious Command if you want. You can continue to tune this until it deals "enough" damage - and that "enough" does not need to be "100%". It could easily be, say, 80% (leaving the rest to the team), if your DM is the sort who would ban one-hit killers.
Tempest_Stormwind on Character Optimization
So when do you think Bachmann will be saying she met a mother the previous night that had a son who got a blood transfusion using a gay guy's blood, and now the son is retardedly gay?
When she meets CJ's mom?
Resident Pithed-Off Dragon Poon Slayer of the House of Trolls
Need Help Otimizing Blind Monk w/VoP
Need Help Otimizing Blind Monk w/VoP

Optimization tip -  Don't take VOP, it is worse than just buying gear. 

"In a way, you are worse than Krusk"                               " As usual, Krusk comments with assuredness, but lacks the clarity and awareness of what he's talking about"

"Can't say enough how much I agree with Krusk"        "Wow, thank you very much"

"Your advice is the worst"                                                  "I'd recommend no one listed to Krusk's opinions about what games to play"

Wrong. Care to try again?

You can parrot this all you like, but it's not a real argument and as long as you rely on simply stating that something is wrong, I can continuously state the exact reverse of everything you say with equal conviction and basis.
And I fail to see the rules for a +2 thundering wall socket. I see no evidence that a sentient +6 Belt of Magnificence isn't "self-supporting."

It relies on magic, which is what antimagic field describes as support.  There isn't anything else it's possible for the spell to be talking about.

You can willfully ignore that if you want, but I'm not currently seeing any argument from you more credible than vague hyperbole.
Wrong. Killing in self-defense is Evil. Period.

It does not involve self-sacrifice, but neither is it inherently performed without qualms or care; it's neutral.  As such, by your standards, it cannot contain any evil.
The alignment system ISN'T functional.

The core system of it isn't a problem; on a rules level there are nine alignments and certain effects work differently with them; these most mechanical aspect work without a hitch.

It's only the specific alignment interpretation of different actions that becomes incompatible with inflexibility and absolutism when you deal with more complex situations like those described in the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds.  This is understandable since it's a much less mechanical part of the system that relies more on context, intent, and judgement calls made by a reasonable DM.
Incorrect. Nice try, though.

Your constant implications that someone else has made a failed attempt are the least interesting part of your posts.  Try proving a reasonable counterargument if you can.
"All the cool kids are doing it" doesn't change where an action is, alignment-wise.

No-one said it did; a description like "selfish" is only meaningful when distinguishing between selfish and non-selfish possbilities.  Any reading that concludes that everyone is selfish is meaningless (and there are equivalent arguments proving that everyone is selfless, making selflessness equally meaningless).
And I see no crunch in that section. Exactly where are the rules for these "shades of grey?"

By that standard there aren't any rules in the section on acts of evil either.
Okay, so killing fiends and Chromatic Dragons isn't evil. Give any more specific examples? See, if it isn't specifically called out as having that property, then it doesn't, and so killing it for self-interest is Evil.

The book never states that killing for self-interest is evil, so it doesn't have that property.
What do you mean? Are you really incapable of telling a rule from flavor text?

If the difference is so clear, you should have no trouble explaining it.

Please, go ahead and outline the differences.
So some very fringe examples of otherwise Evil acts not being evil. I fail to see how this is relevent.

The fact that temptation toevil is only described for good individuals is hardly a fringe example since it's the entire definition of that act, and the fact that the book doesn't actually state what you claim it states about selfishness is extremely relevant.

The example is useful in highlighting exactly how out-of-line with the book's text your initial recollection of it was, and I hope you will read the exact text in future before throwing the full weight of your opinion behind it since that can lead to adopting an undesirable stance an an issue.
Evil(Capital E, for the purposes of this discussion) is an objective in-game fact. I am using evil(Lower-case e) as what it is if real morality would be applied to it. Hence, you can get Evil acts that are not evil(Such as not going on a suicide rush into the Abyss just 'cuz there are fiends there), and non-Evil acts that could very easily be percieved as evil(Such as attempting to massacre all Chromatics, despite 1 in 20 being not Evil).

That's the entire point of my attention to it.  In attempting to determine an alignment for Pelor, only one of these standards can be used, since it's only possible to produce one alignment, and only one method (either real-world morality "evil", or stated game morality "Evil") can be what the game classifies as "evil" since they offer contradicting positions, and by choosing one, the other is invalid and meaningless in any game sense.   So, to return to the question, in judging Pelor do you adhere to the real-world or game world definition of his alignment? 

As for the chromatic dragons, I'll have to hunt up the reference, but I've heard the exceptions to the "Always" designation for racial alignment described as closer to one in a million, rather than one in twenty.  The Monster Manual itself notes that creatures that "Always" have an alignment are born with it, and those that change their alignment away from that are rare or unique.  While a good character should be open to the possibility of an exception if there's any evidence of it, it's not unreasonable to make the evil nature of chromatic dragons the baseline assumption when dealing with them.

The kraken stirs. And ten billion sushi dinners cry out for vengeance. - Good Omens

Co-Author of the Dreamfane, Euralden Eye, Fulminating Crab, Gajuisan Crawler, Gruesome LurkerIronglass Rose, Sheengrass Swarm, Spryjack, Usunag, and Warp Drifter, and author of the Magmal Horror from Force of Nature.

My most popular campaign item; for all your adventuring convenience.
Zauber's Mutable Rod: This rod has a number of useful functions that make it easier to live in the wilderness. It is made of polished wood, with five studlike buttons on one end. Each button produces a different effect when pressed. Unless otherwise noted, the rod’s functions have no limit on the number of times they can be employed. When button 1 is pressed, one end of the rod produces a small flame, equivalent to a candle. When button 2 is pressed, the rod unfolds into a two-person tent, complete with bedrolls and warm blankets. When button 3 is pressed, the rod becomes a one-handed hammer, suitable for pounding pitons into a wall. When button 4 is pressed, the rod becomes a sturdy iron spade. When button 5 is pressed, the rod becomes a wooden bucket able to hold 2 gallons of liquid. Once per day, it can be commanded to fill with fresh water. If the rod is seriously damaged or broken in any of its alternate forms (button 2, 3, 4, or 5), it reverts to its basic rod form and cannot be activated for 24 hours. Moderate conjuration; CL 9th; Craft Rod, minor creation; Price 375 gp; Weight 2 lb.
Rules are mean to be broken and changed, otherwise no progress would ever be made.
Sign In to post comments