Summoning evil monsters - alignment loophole?

[Laughingmanlol]

While looking at a summoner build, I remembered the issue that the summon spells take the alignment of the creature summoned, making demon- or devil-summoning an evil act regardless of intent or context. Any such summoner should become evil eventually as a result of these actions. Since I'd like to avoid the character becoming evil, though, I think there's a possible workaround.
Assuming the moral weight of summoning a creature and not doing anything with it is the same for summon spells of the same level (so a Dretch might not have as much effect as an Ice devil on your alignment), and that the alignment impact of good and evil spells are equal and opposite, would such a summoner be able to summon devils, demons, and other evil creatures for combat, taking an alignment hit in the process, but then during their downtime spend any empty slots on summoning lots of celestial monkeys and similar good creatures? Provided the same number and level of slots are used, there should be no overall effect on their alignment, if the prior assumptions hold true.

In short, if a summoner's concerned about being corrupted by the fiends they summon, could they spend their free time summoning celestial monkeys in an orphanage to compensate?

[Troacctid]

No. Using an evil spell corrupts your soul. Using a good spell does not cleanse that corruption. You need a program of repentance under the guidance of a qualified spiritual advisor. Fiendish Codex II goes into some detail on this issue on pages 30-31.

[Uncle Pine]

I'm pretty sure summoning an Evil creature influence your alignment only if you're a divibe caster (a Cleric, for example).

[FocusWolf413]

If you set a house on fire, and later spray water on it, is it good as new? Heck no!

[Crake]

I'm pretty sure summoning an Evil creature influence your alignment only if you're a divibe caster (a Cleric, for example).

Nah, divine casters are RESTRICTED in the alignment of spells they can cast (cannot oppose their own or their deity's alignment). Casting an evil spell is explicitly an evil action, though according to the fiendish codex II, is equal in terms of evil-ness as humiliating an underling, and performing intimidating torture (ie, not hurting the torture subject, just scaring them), neither of which is exactly horrendously evil, just more distasteful/being a jerk. Of course, the result of your casting the spell may add to that of course. Casting contagion in a vacuum may not exactly be a hugely evil act, but unleashing a plague on a town, causing all sorts of pain, suffering and death definitely is.

Likewise, summoning a demon and ordering it to attack your enemies might be a minor act of evil, but if the demon decides the best way to attack your enemies is by hurling fireballs all over the show and cause a tonne of collateral damage, then that's all on you.

If you want to be immune to the alignment effects of casting evil summon spells, that's what the malconvoker prestige class is for.

[Abithrios]

Doing good and evil in equal measure seems like an excellent way of becoming neutral. You could bias that toward one end or the other by doing other things of a single alignment, but those actions would be partially cancelled by the neutrality of the summoning.

[Crake]

Doing good and evil in equal measure seems like an excellent way of becoming neutral. You could bias that toward one end or the other by doing other things of a single alignment, but those actions would be partially cancelled by the neutrality of the summoning.

Generally you need to do more good than you do evil for it to be neutral. Saving one life doesn't give you free reign to commit murder after all.

[Florian]

If we play lawyers and look only at the technical side of it, meaning casting a spell of an alignment, that'll move the character spell level steps towards that alignment, then yes, it would even out.

But hopefully, that's not how it is intended to work...

[Chris in Duluth]

IMO, this is a case where the desire to make the rules legalistic and consistent in some way has warped the game. It never used to be an issue to summon an evil monster. In fact, it used to be assumed that your good aligned magic user would end up summoning demons, devils, etc. The evil beastie arrives, you threaten it into fighting another evil monster for you (there were other spells to help do this), it either dies or goes home afterwards, not liking what it had to do, but so what? Alignment is not supposed to be a purity test. Good does not mean always nice.

[Segev]

Mechanically, you're absolutely right, OP: if you cast summon monster XI to summon a fiend 20 times, and similarly cast it another 20 times to summon a celestial, your net alignment shift from those 40 castings of summon monster XI will be zip. What you order your summoned minions to do, as well as what you do, yourself, will still apply to shading your alignment, but the net result of casting all those specific spells in those specific ways will not be a shift to your alignment as a result.

Whether this is how it "should" be or not is a matter for heated internet debate, but that IS how it is, mechanically.

[SimonMoon6]

Generally you need to do more good than you do evil for it to be neutral. Saving one life doesn't give you free reign to commit murder after all.

Okay, so how many lives do I have to save in order to get free reign to commit murder? I keep asking my lawyers but they just look at me funny.

I think this is mostly a construct of players who play in RPGs where morality is measured. "I can become neutral as long as I balance acts of pure evil with acts of kindness, right?" Uh, no, that's not how it works. If you willingly commit acts of evil, you are evil. Doing nice things doesn't ever change that. (There is such a thing as repentance but a person capable of repenting is not the sort of person who would be so cold and calculating as to count up how many lives they have to save in order to balance an act of murder.)

I have to admit the funniest "balancing acts of evil by doing good things" game was one of the games in the Fable series, where I murdered a whole bunch of innocent people but then I become a saintly virtuous person by being a vegetarian for a long time. Sure, that balances that, right?

I also find it funny that taking absolute control of the mind of a good-aligned being and sending it to fight (and probably die) for a whim... that's an act of pure goodness. Hmmm, okay, whatever.

[Segev]

Okay, so how many lives do I have to save in order to get free reign to commit murder? I keep asking my lawyers but they just look at me funny.

(...)

I have to admit the funniest "balancing acts of evil by doing good things" game was one of the games in the Fable series, where I murdered a whole bunch of innocent people but then I become a saintly virtuous person by being a vegetarian for a long time. Sure, that balances that, right?

The OP asked about a very specific act. Not about one which requires subjective judgment as to "how" good or evil it is. The act of casting a spell of a given level with an alignment descriptor is quantifiable.

In that specific context, you can balance out your "evil" summoning with "good" summoning. It's silly, but no sillier than the notion that merely casting "Summon Fiendish Badger" is inherently an evil act, and "Summon Celestial Badger" is inherently a good act.

[Grek]

In short, if a summoner's concerned about being corrupted by the fiends they summon, could they spend their free time summoning celestial monkeys in an orphanage to compensate?

It depends on your game. Does your DM enforce a disparity between Good and Evil, such that one act of Evil outweighs several Good deeds? Do they believe in a dualistic approach where good and evil are equal and opposite powers locked in a cosmic struggle? Or is it consequences that matter, not the specific actions. Outside of the IMO terrible fluff sections of Fiendish Codex and other books of its kind, the [Evil] descriptor on Summon Fiendish Centipede is about as meaningful as a [Fire] descriptor. Just as summoning a Small Fire Elemental doesn't make your alignment lowly sink toward Lawful Combustive, summoning a fiend doesn't make you [Evil] unless you do some independently evil action as a consequence or as part of the process. The [Evil] tag only matters for the purposes of spells like Detect Evil, Dispel Evil and Protection From Evil.


Nah, divine casters are RESTRICTED in the alignment of spells they can cast (cannot oppose their own or their deity's alignment).

This is specifically incorrect. A Cleric cannot cast a spell opposed to his own alignment or that of his/her deity (if applicable). Likewise with a Druid. But Paladins, Rangers, Divine Bards and Adepts have no such restrictions. Likewise, a Lawful Good Mystic Theurge could, assuming they knew the spell as a Wizard spell, cast Animate Dead without any particular difficulties.

[Cruiser1]

While looking at a summoner build, I remembered the issue that the summon spells take the alignment of the creature summoned, making demon- or devil-summoning an evil act regardless of intent or context. Since I'd like to avoid the character becoming evil, though, I think there's a possible workaround.
A better workaround is to use Shadow Conjuration to simulate Summon Monster, if you want to summon fiends. The casting will have all the descriptors of the Shadow Conjuration spell: It will be Illusion school, be a standard action casting time, and not be [Evil].

Normally equal evil and good actions even out at neutral. However, FC II has extra rules such that gaining 9 corruption points (e.g. by casting 9 [Evil] spells), gives you enough corruption (barring atonement) to guarantee your soul goes to Baator:

Any lawful character who dies with a corruption rating of 9 or higher goes to Baator, no matter how many orphans he rescued or minions of evil he vanquished in life.

[Chronos]

And while you can cleanse yourself of corruption points, doing so requires that you undo whatever the evil deed was. That's not going to be easy, for most [evil] spells.

(as a nitpick, the "9 corruption points sends you to Hell" thing only applies if you're lawful, but the point is still made)

[Âmesang]

By that time, though, you should be able to have all of Baator come to you. :smallamused:

[Andezzar]

Unless you are a divine caster, what do you care about alignment? Those two letters on the sheet do not force you to act in a certain way (unless they got there by a few special means like lycanthropy or the helm of opposite alignment). Even if your DM forces an alignment change for summoning evil creatures, no one is forcing you to start burning orphanages and doing other evil deeds. Just continue on as you have ever done. You can still help people without personal gain etc. The only difference that certain evil creatures, who will probably still oppose you, cannot use some of their abilities on you. So it is a win-win.

[daremetoidareyo]

Also, hellbred allows you to skirt this requirement.

Evil Exception (Ex): Regardless of alignment or class restric- tions, a hellbred can cast spells with the evil descriptor and never gains negative levels while wielding evil magic items, such as unholy weapons or demon armor. This ability does not shield a hellbred from losing access to class features if he violates a class’s code of conduct.

[Andezzar]

Malconvoker, too. It even allows good clerics to summon evil outsiders.

[Zanos]

A better workaround is to use Shadow Conjuration to simulate Summon Monster, if you want to summon fiends. The casting will have all the descriptors of the Shadow Conjuration spell: It will be Illusion school, be a standard action casting time, and not be [Evil].

Normally equal evil and good actions even out at neutral. However, FC II has extra rules such that gaining 9 corruption points (e.g. by casting 9 [Evil] spells), gives you enough corruption (barring atonement) to guarantee your soul goes to Baator:
Easily one of the dumbest rules I've ever read although i was previously aware of it. You could summon 9 angry badgers when you're low level than save the world from an incursion of pit fiends years later but you're still going to hell.

[the_david]

I don't think the core rules say anything about spells changing your alignment. If anything, motivation is much more important. You can summon all the celestials you want, but if you force them to burn down that orphanage you're evil. (Yes, that would make a great character concept.)

[Talakeal]

Going by core evil spells do not make you evil. Some of the later splatbooks added such a rule, but it is not the default assumption. It is not well thiught out and kind of weird, a lot of spells are evil for no good reason, and any rationale you can apply for making them evil doesnt apply to other spells with similar effects or power sources.

That said, D&D does not treat alignments equally. Good vs. evil is not a sliding scale so much as a measure of purity. It is far easier to become evil than to become good. You can become evil for arbitrary stupid reasons, but you cannot usually teturn to good without serious effort and commitment.

Why this is I have no idea, I suspect it has something to do with most DMs banning evil alignments and using the threat of having their PC being taken away to keep the players in line and ensuring they play nice.

[Darth Ultron]

If you are concerned about summoning monsters not of your alignment, then simply don't do it. There are, at least, a dozen monsters of every alignment. So just summon monsters that fit your alignment.

Keep in mind lots of elemental ones are neutral.

[Curmudgeon]

Going by core evil spells do not make you evil.
What's your source for that statement? Casting an [Evil] spell interacts with your alignment.

[Descriptor]

Appearing on the same line as the school and subschool, when applicable, is a descriptor that further categorizes the spell in some way. Some spells have more than one descriptor.

The descriptors are acid, air, chaotic, cold, darkness, death, earth, electricity, evil, fear, fire, force, good, language-dependent, lawful, light, mind-affecting, sonic, and water.

Most of these descriptors have no game effect by themselves, but they govern how the spell interacts with other spells, with special abilities, with unusual creatures, with alignment, and so on.

If your character acts in a way more appropriate to another alignment, the DM may decide that your character’s alignment has changed to match her actions.
Your DM can decide that you've cast enough [Evil] spells to shift your alignment in that direction. Later books just quantify that (1 Evil spell = 1 point of corruption per the table in Fiendish Codex II) so DM judgment isn't needed.

[morkendi]

That is why I like malconvoker so much. One on my favorite prc to play hands down. Don't have to worry about evil summons.

[SangoProduction]

I don't think the core rules say anything about spells changing your alignment. If anything, motivation is much more important. You can summon all the celestials you want, but if you force them to burn down that orphanage you're evil. (Yes, that would make a great character concept.)

lol. That's epic dude. I was needing a BBEG. Now he'll be a slave holder of permanently summoned celestials, and some dominated ones too.

[Crake]

lol. That's epic dude. I was needing a BBEG. Now he'll be a slave holder of permanently summoned celestials, and some dominated ones too.

Or you could just flip the switch on the angels themselves and make them bat****insane zealots. That orphanage is harboring pickpickets, thieves and liars (because kids do all those things), burn it to the ground!

[Talakeal]

What's your source for that statement? Casting an [Evil] spell interacts with your alignment.


Your DM can decide that you've cast enough [Evil] spells to shift your alignment in that direction. Later books just quantify that (1 Evil spell = 1 point of corruption per the table in Fiendish Codex II) so DM judgment isn't needed.

One could make that leap, but I don't see any support for it. It never says that it is an evil action or that it can change your alignment, it just lists "alignment" as one of the things it can effect, but never says how.

I could use the same (leap in) logic to say that casting enough [fire] spells will give me the [fire] subtype because it says "descriptors can interact with unusual creatures" or that casting enough [force] spells gives me immunity to force effects because "descriptors can interact with special abilities".

By itself that rule is meaningless without a more specific rule such as the one found in the cleric entry.

Also, note that it says that it has no game effects by itself, and I would certainly say that turning evil for simply casting the spell would certainly be a game effect.

[SangoProduction]

Or you could just flip the switch on the angels themselves and make them bat****insane zealots. That orphanage is harboring pickpickets, thieves and liars (because kids do all those things), burn it to the ground!

Eh...but to solve that problem, you have to slaughter a ton of creatures...or face off against a deity. Doesn't give that nice, "I killed the BBEG" feeling to it. Although I could see it being fun.

Perhaps I'll add it in as a side thing. "Sensing the corruption that's forming in their ranks, the angels turn more and more hostile to anything that's not Good." Something along those lines.

[Curmudgeon]

Also, note that it says that it has no game effects by itself, and I would certainly say that turning evil for simply casting the spell would certainly be a game effect.
Not quite right. It says most of these descriptors have no game effects. And for most characters, alignment itself has no game effect. Also I did quote the passage where the DM gets to decide your alignment based on your actions.

[SangoProduction]

Not quite right. It says most of these descriptors have no game effects. And for most characters, alignment itself has no game effect. Also I did quote the passage where the DM gets to decide your alignment based on your actions.

Actually, detect [alignment] and smite [alignment], as well as many other [alignment]-related effects, do have game effects, no matter your character.

[Talakeal]

Not quite right. It says most of these descriptors have no game effects. And for most characters, alignment itself has no game effect. Also I did quote the passage where the DM gets to decide your alignment based on your actions.

Yes, the DM wouldn't be "wrong" to decide to change your alignment based on casting spells. However, he also wouldn't be wrong to say that spell casting does not affect alignment because the core rules have no unambiguous statements one way or the other. The DM could also argue that using poison or using mind control or using fireballs change your alignment. Heck, the DM could rule that not sending your grandmother a card on her birthday is enough to change your alignment, the rules are silent about this in both directions.


I personally wouldn't enjoy playing in a game where I turn evil because I, say, cast Deathwatch as part of the triage procedure to decide who to heal first, or animated the corpse of an ancient hero to protect a town from ravaging marauders, or summoned a fiendish animal because of its immunity to fire and commanded it to drag survivors from a burning building. The DM is in their right to do this, but IMO it makes the game significantly less fun for everyone involved.

Likewise I would not enjoy a game where people atone for their misdeeds by repeatedly summoning celestial bees between adventures, but it would be preferable to the lop-sided view of good and evil presented in the BoED and BoVD.

[Andezzar]

But alignment is not the only thing that sets them off. Subtypes also trigger the effects of those abilities.

[Curmudgeon]

Actually, detect [alignment] and smite [alignment], as well as many other [alignment]-related effects, do have game effects, no matter your character.
If your character uses Undetectable Alignment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/undetectableAlignment.htm), maybe that "no matter" isn't so firm. There are also some wondrous items with similar function, like the Mask of Lies (Magic Item Compendium, page 115).

[SangoProduction]

If your character uses Undetectable Alignment (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/undetectableAlignment.htm), maybe that "no matter" isn't so firm. There are also some wondrous items with similar function, like the Mask of Lies (Magic Item Compendium, page 115).

Taking up gold or spells is still a game effect. So yes, it becomes even more firm.

[Taveena]

Not entirely related to the overall topic, but Create Deathless is a [Good] spell, and channeling Positive Energy is Always A Good Act.

So if you run around making holy zombies out of people, then enslaving them with Rebuke Deathless, THAT'S ENTIRELY FINE.

[Beheld]

The fullproof 100% success rate Beheld steps to Alignment being (slightly) less stupid:

1) Realize that the Evil Spell tag on a spell basically never makes any sense except on Blasphemy, and Unholy Blight. IE, spells that specifically effect people based on their alignment not being evil.
2) Realize that the designers actually meant the Evil tag to be on Deathknell, the spell that kills people for temporary power, not deathwatch, the spell that sees who is living and dead.
3) Realize you don't care about 2, because of 1.
4) Realize that casting evil spells should definitely not make you evil.
5) Rip out the 9 points to evil stupidity that is the rules in Fiendish Codex and burn those pages (in a safe outside fire pit that won't burn your house down).
6) Explain steps 1-5 to your DM.
7) Play games where summoning evil monsters to protect children and kittens is not an evil act, while fireballing to protect said children and kittens is neutral or good.

[SangoProduction]

Not entirely related to the overall topic, but Create Deathless is a [Good] spell, and channeling Positive Energy is Always A Good Act.

So if you run around making holy zombies out of people, then enslaving them with Rebuke Deathless, THAT'S ENTIRELY FINE.

Slavery doesn't even seem to be an evil act. So you'd actually be Good.

Even sentient elementals can be enslaved by making golems out of them at no alignment impact.

[Chronos]

daremetoidareyo, Hellbred can cast [evil] spells even if they normally couldn't (i.e., if they're a divine caster), but their ability does not shield them from any consequences of doing so. It's still an evil act for them, and still has the potential to shift their alignment, and if anything, Hellbred have more reason than most to worry about that.