The chaotic paladin

[Hunterx]

Ok I have been looking into,the chaotic paladin and because my DM is a bit of a clown and a rooster all at the same time he has decided that all Paladins will be lawful. So I have put some thought into this and come up with this. I am also trying to get ensure I have good saves so here we go.

Ranger 5 Holy Liberator 5 Edleen Ranger : greens inter 3 X

Stats will will be rolled

What I need help with is what race, to take and what should X be?

Thanks

Since all these classes give full BAB I will have full attacks not sure to go archery or two weapon fighting

[tiercel]

If you want a paladin-like prestige class that has nothing to do with Lawful per se, Pious Templar (Complete Divine) isn’t shabby. Full BAB, Paladin-like casting off the Paladin list at an accelerated enough pace, Mettle is very nice. The True Believer feat tax is a bit annoying unless you can access your deity’s relic(s).

If you like a Ranger base, being a Pious Templar of Ehlonna and snagging her Raptor Arrow relic isn’t shabby for an archer-“paladin.” (Ehlonna’s Seed Pouch is pretty nice but doesn’t come online until level 15.)

If you don’t mind playing an elf, Correlon Larethian’s Millenial Chainmail is quite nice as well (and Bow of the Wintermoon isn’t bad either) for someone (like a Pious Templar) taking True Believer anyway.

[flappeercraft]

Assuming 3.5, a lesser aasimar would be a good race. You also can't go wrong with human.

[Metahuman1]

A couple of Alternative Suggestions:


1: Play a Crusader from Tome of Battle. Holy Warrior with out alignment restrictions. And it can be made offense or defense oriented depending on what you want to do. Combo's well in multiclass with Bard if you build for it. And overall the class is better designed than the actual Paladin class anyway.

2: Play a Binder form Tome of Magic. There are several vestige's that give you the Paladin's signature ability's, and several more that supplement them so well that you can fairly easily build a better Paladin then the actual Paladin class.



Both are Tier 3.


Or,

3: Play a cleric of a concept, pick up a domain that gives extra turning as a feat and the planning domain, grab the true believer feat and persist spell/ Divine Metamagic Persist spell, along with Power Attack, Improved Initiative, and Quicken Spell, Divine Metamagic Quicken Spell, and Divine Metamagic Extend Spell.

Buy the crap out of reliquary Holy Symbols.

Now, use all those delightful Turn Undead Attempts to buff yourself up into the Stratosphere every day at the start of the day, and have a bunch of spells you can cast with free quicken on them on stand by to do cool stuff as a swift action while you mercilessly pummel enemy's with stats the Paladin can't touch.


It's a tier 1 option, but it does the job well, and it's a bit harder for the DM to mess with after the fact.

[Fizban]

If you want a paladin-like prestige class that has nothing to do with Lawful per se, Pious Templar (Complete Divine) isn’t shabby. Full BAB, Paladin-like casting off the Paladin list at an accelerated enough pace, Mettle is very nice. The True Believer feat tax is a bit annoying unless you can access your deity’s relic(s).
Holy Liberator does actually share the biggest part of that, though I didn't notice until I checked: it also uses the Paladin list. As terrible as it is, I do have to admit that HL gets a special mount, paladin spells, and divine grace, which is most of the stuff. That said, the Pious Templar is much more customizable with a Smite that works on anything and two Fighter feats, and more combat focused with Weapon Spec for your deity's weapon (which lets you go up to Weapon Mastery). Unless I really, really wanted a horse with a few extra HD, I'd probably go PT.

What really bugs me about Holy Liberator is how bizarrely delayed its features are. Celestial Companion I can kinda see: since you can technically enter the class one level earlier than Blackguard, the companion is delayed one level to match, not that either have much business delaying it that far when they're supposed to be "prestige paladins." But the only way you're maintaining BAB to enter at that level is if you started in Paladin to begin with thanks to the Sense Motive requirement, losing all your features and gaining no perks to replace them (unless you burn another feat to get it in-class somehow) aside from +2 caster level and fixing the prestige smite problem. Divine Grace however is pushed back two levels for no discernible reason even before the BAB+Sense Motive problem.

You're gonna need a solution for Sense Motive if you want into HL that fast. Your main goal seems to just be stacking cha to saves multiple times, which is something I wouldn't allow in the first place and not really a winning move on its own, either way the usual goal on save stacking builds is to also gain Evasion and Mettle. I assume the reason you've left HL 5 on there is to get the 0 3rd level spell slots, which is not much. If you're taking Eldeen Ranger you might as well finish the last two levels for the favored enemy and 3 points of DR. Neither TWF nor archery is going to be very good against anything but your favored enemies since your smite tiny, melee-only, and has to be declared before rolling so TWF only makes it worse. Not that you need optimized damage to play the game, but for someone stacking cha to saves multiple times, I would expect that you expect better performance.

[Hunterx]

Thanks for the ideas and trust me this was no were neer my first pick. I would live to play shifter Druid moonspeaker but the DM for some reason thinks shifters are OP and will not allow the race. But yet thing like Drow are on the table all be it with the LA and no buy out.

Since this DM does not play the game buy the rules that are written I have to find away to ensure I have fun first off second that I can out do what he is going to throw at us and keep the party alive.

Right now are party is 2 fighters....mine which focuses on field control buy tripping the second one which is useless to the point he may as well be dead a Druid that truly has no idea how powerful they can be, a thief focusing on subdue damage and a barbarian who has taken way to many levels in barbarian.

We have no arcane at all no undead turning which we have been fighting almost the whole time, along with Orc. Is it going to stay this way no no it will not we know that. This DM bounces around like a rubber ball. Refuses to look into other books because he is lazy or finest stuff way to strong because he is simple minded.

The ideas you guys have given me are good and thanks but I think I will have to go another way maybe. The Cha stacking to my saves yup that was one of the things I was looking for. Full base attack was another but I might have to give something up here. But I have a couple of ideas.

I may do the double animal companion. Druid+sorcerer ACF if the DM rules I can have natural bond on both of them

Of just Druid 5 natural bond focusing on the animal companion.

[haplot]

Does your dm let you use Unearthed Arcana book?

On page 53 is some variant paladin stuff, including chaotic versions.

Hope you get what you are looking for

[Hunterx]

He does except as stated in first post he said all Paladins have to be lawful so there r three types of Paladins in the world.

[Fizban]

Since this DM does not play the game buy the rules that are written I have to find away to ensure I have fun first off second that I can out do what he is going to throw at us and keep the party alive.

Right now are party is 2 fighters....mine which focuses on field control buy tripping the second one which is useless to the point he may as well be dead a Druid that truly has no idea how powerful they can be, a thief focusing on subdue damage and a barbarian who has taken way to many levels in barbarian.
So you don't respect the DM's authority over allowed game elements and see yourself as the savior of a party that doesn't know how to play the game. Maybe think about that for a moment.

[Hunterx]

Respect hell no, not when the guy swing back and forth on stuff, not when he brings real life stuff into the game, not when he will not follow the mechanics of the game the way they are written. The game is written a way to run smoothly and if followed it does exactly that but brining in real life stuff makes it hard to play because it does not mesh with the mechanics. Here is an example in the game if you have reach and you grapple someone and win he has stated since your arms are out ten feet a player can attack you without threatening you. That is not how the game is played. That takes away a total of two mechanic and one that is a good one in reach. Not allowing players to make char the way they see them by limiting books, or feats, races classes because he thinks they are not how a class would play them. Thinking that raising the dead as minions is evil. Not allowing skills to do what they are ment to do the way they are suppose to.

This is why for him there is no respect.

[Remuko]

Respect hell no, not when the guy swing back and forth on stuff, not when he brings real life stuff into the game, not when he will not follow the mechanics of the game the way they are written. The game is written a way to run smoothly and if followed it does exactly that but brining in real life stuff makes it hard to play because it does not mesh with the mechanics. Here is an example in the game if you have reach and you grapple someone and win he has stated since your arms are out ten feet a player can attack you without threatening you. That is not how the game is played. That takes away a total of two mechanic and one that is a good one in reach. Not allowing players to make char the way they see them by limiting books, or feats, races classes because he thinks they are not how a class would play them. Thinking that raising the dead as minions is evil. Not allowing skills to do what they are ment to do the way they are suppose to.

This is why for him there is no respect.

Then dont play with him. If you dont respect him as a DM and he does this sort of stuff, refuse to play without until/unless he stops.

[PrismCat21]

Respect hell no, not when the guy swing back and forth on stuff, not when he brings real life stuff into the game, not when he will not follow the mechanics of the game the way they are written. The game is written a way to run smoothly and if followed it does exactly that but brining in real life stuff makes it hard to play because it does not mesh with the mechanics. Here is an example in the game if you have reach and you grapple someone and win he has stated since your arms are out ten feet a player can attack you without threatening you. That is not how the game is played. That takes away a total of two mechanic and one that is a good one in reach. Not allowing players to make char the way they see them by limiting books, or feats, races classes because he thinks they are not how a class would play them. Thinking that raising the dead as minions is evil. Not allowing skills to do what they are ment to do the way they are suppose to.

This is why for him there is no respect.

Some of that is perfectly justifiable. Claiming the game will run smoothly if you simply follow RAW as straight up wrong though. RAW, especially in the core books, is some of the most broken and abusable stuff in the game. The reach part seems pretty wonky, but I can understand why someone would do that.

What sort of real life stuff are you talking about? Drama between people? Or that he just wants abilities to simulate how it might work in real life?

What kind of raise dead are you talking about? Raise Dead the spell that brings people back to life? Or making Undead?
If it's making Undead then yes, it's evil. Both Animate Dead and Create Undead have the Evil descriptor. It may not automatically make 'you' evil, but it's evil to cast them.

[Hunterx]

The grapple with reach and the char not being threatening the grappler.

[Fizban]

The grappling thing is likely because they don't realize that the grappling rules always cause you the grapplers to share their spaces. Monsters with Improved Grab pull the target into their space, while people that don't have that ability step forward to enter their target's space as part of the grapple action if they succeed. The rest is all pretty clear-cut though, so if they're making it different it's probably not a misunderstanding (or indeed, might be your misunderstanding, because Animate Dead is in fact Evil by RAW).

Remuko already supplied the followup: if you don't like the way this game is being run, you shouldn't be playing in it. You'll only cause grief, not only for yourself, but also for the rest of the table stuck with a player who clearly doesn't want to be in that game.

[Metahuman1]

If you mean spells like Raise Dead, Reincarnate, Resurrection, True Resurrection, then yeah, that's not the best thing.

If you mean things like animate dead, they are evil cause your making skeletons and zombies and what not.






The real life thing is concerning, are we talking interpersonal Drama ("Wait, why are all ten goblins only shooting at me with there opening salvo of arrows?!" DM: "Guess you should of though of that when you refused to let me get a ride to work with you this morning instead of paying for an Uber!") Or are we talking trying to make the game a simulation ("Well, normal humans can't pick up a horse, or jump thirty five feet, so the Barbarian obviously can't.")?



Can you clarify on those points which were looking at?

[redwizard007]

Thanks for the ideas and trust me this was no were neer my first pick. I would live to play shifter Druid moonspeaker but the DM for some reason thinks shifters are OP and will not allow the race. But yet thing like Drow are on the table all be it with the LA and no buy out.

Since this DM does not play the game buy the rules that are written I have to find away to ensure I have fun first off second that I can out do what he is going to throw at us and keep the party alive.

Right now are party is 2 fighters....mine which focuses on field control buy tripping the second one which is useless to the point he may as well be dead a Druid that truly has no idea how powerful they can be, a thief focusing on subdue damage and a barbarian who has taken way to many levels in barbarian.

We have no arcane at all no undead turning which we have been fighting almost the whole time, along with Orc. Is it going to stay this way no no it will not we know that. This DM bounces around like a rubber ball. Refuses to look into other books because he is lazy or finest stuff way to strong because he is simple minded.

The ideas you guys have given me are good and thanks but I think I will have to go another way maybe. The Cha stacking to my saves yup that was one of the things I was looking for. Full base attack was another but I might have to give something up here. But I have a couple of ideas.

I may do the double animal companion. Druid+sorcerer ACF if the DM rules I can have natural bond on both of them

Of just Druid 5 natural bond focusing on the animal companion.

Fella, you are at the wrong table.

Your friends are playing an unoptimized, fun, traditional game of D&D. You are trying to play Playground Rocket Tag. Those really aren't compatible. Scaling up your character to "keep the party alive" at a table of casual players is just going to make you look like a douche. Pick a class or two and stay with it, work within the limits everyone else is playing by, and stop whining like a baby that they don't play the way that you want to play.

[Hunterx]

The problem is if I keep it low key the DM brings in huge numbers of PCs which he does any ways.

The real thing is more along the lines of a human can not pick up a horse.

Trying to optimize the game not fully I want this fool of a DM to realize that he is doing stuff the wrong way and for him to open up to allow other books and stuff and to run the game the way the books are written.

Example our last game we played 2 Orc cleric almost took out 2 Druids a wizard and a fighter. The clerics were level 6 the four of us are level 5.

So he is either fluffing rolls to make them better.

[Falontani]

If there is truly a problem at the table then ask if you can try your hand at DMing. DM a couple of games, and ask your current DM for advice. This will allow you to get some insight on why he does what he does. It will also give him ideas on how other people run their tables. I have found in my personal experience when the majority of the group can DM and understands how others DM the game runs much more smoothly.
The other thing this can do is get the rest of the group interested at different DM styles, and reveal how players like to play their game. That way you will know more of if the other players at the table are deliberately playing weak characters, or if they do not know better.

Just one thing; if you do DM don't try to make it a "Taste your own medicine" as that could ruin the experience for everyone. Its a delicate bridge that if crossed correctly can make everyone happier.

[Hunterx]

I would make it a taste of his own medicine just so he can see what he is doing to the group and maybe he will smarten up. By. Do not think so

[Metahuman1]

The problem is if I keep it low key the DM brings in huge numbers of PCs which he does any ways.

The real thing is more along the lines of a human can not pick up a horse.

Trying to optimize the game not fully I want this fool of a DM to realize that he is doing stuff the wrong way and for him to open up to allow other books and stuff and to run the game the way the books are written.

Example our last game we played 2 Orc cleric almost took out 2 Druids a wizard and a fighter. The clerics were level 6 the four of us are level 5.

So he is either fluffing rolls to make them better.

Ok.


So, what I'm getting here is, he's imposing artificial limits for "Realism", limits the system doesn't support having there, and he's got a low op party and is taking advantage of that to run an incredibly railroaded game, were in you all have to do what every random NPC demands of you, cause some how there always better than you in a fight and can kill you if you don't.

That about sum it up?

[Hunterx]

Pretty close to it yup

[Metahuman1]

Ok, here is my advice. Offer to run a bit of a side game.

Let the other players meet cool NPC's who can "Teach" them to do cool stuff. (This is a way to expose them to stuff form other books. Spells, items, classes and subsystems like Tome of Battle or Psionics or Magic of Incarnum.) Have them run across monsters they maybe aren't expecting, because there not in the Core MM.


Let them do this for awhile, play with the new toys, have the experience of a game were they aren't being railroaded, then bring the game to a close.


Then, when they have had that, let them deal with being crap at the other DM's table for a couple of sessions. Once they feel frustrated, talk to them away from the DM, and see if they would all be on board with collectively having a word with the DM and saying "Hey, we want to be able to play competent hero's who can actually have agency and succeed on there own competence. We want to use some other books to do this, and we want you to ease up abit on the railroading."

Be polite, kind, civil, soft spoken, when you do this.


And then, see what happens. If he agrees, that's that. If he doesn't, see about finding a different DM.

[Justicar]

If your DM is going for pure crunch reasons for restricting paladin alignment, there is a real simple solution. Get Dragon Magazine #310. It has rules for paladin variants for every Good and Neutral alignment. You will have to get Dragon #312 for the Evil ones.

Chaotic Good Paladins are called Avengers (Gains Aura of Chaos, Detect Law, Smite Law, Lay on Hands, Slippery Mind, Turn Undead, Animal Minion, and Break Enchantment) and Chaotic Neutral Paladins are called Anarchs (Gains Aura of Chaos, Detect Law, Smite Law, Slippery Mind, Turn Construct, Special Mount, and Dispel Law). Don't know if any of these would fit your concepts though, but something to consider.

[Metahuman1]

He's already shown the DM in question variants form Unearthed Arcana. The DM has chosen to declare that doesn't matter, all Paladin's have to be LG, no exceptions.



He's also evidently chosen to inflict all manner of restrictions on what can be done with out magic, and he's got a set railroad that every random NPC can kill the party to enforce.

[Hunterx]

he knows about the other Paladins but still refuses them all paladins have to be lawful something LG, LN, LE this is his decree. The railroading comes from him making the adventures I think to big and then he brings in parties of NPCs to assist with dealing with the enemies. Of course these NPCs are higher levels then us so we can not take them out.

There are four of use that have run games I have tried a slow game with open books list as long as it was 3.5 and it was fairly good for what we did. I through in a few simple wrinkles like everyone has to have a profession. You did not have to keep putting ranks into it you only need one. Then you rolled starting gold and profession roll and address that income to your starting gold.

Then each game day you rolled profession to see how much you made on down time.

But the others are really starting to jump on him to about not liking char builds and stuf.

I made a replacement Druid that ride mount halfling sub levels and he flipped with the no saddle, lost his mind when I rolled a ride check of 40 for armour using mounted combat.

[Metahuman1]

As I said, best thing you can do is show the others other gaming with more freedom and options, not even a slow game, just a game were there's more mechanical freedom and more player agency, and then when the others are ready, discuss voting with your feet with them.


IF there all on board, IF, then tell the DM he needs to start making some adjustments, list what they are, and tell him if he's not prepared to both hear them and follow through on making them, your all going to walk.

[Hunterx]

It is an option for sure but so is smashing him over the head with a hammer, were the hammer might be the best option. But I will run it past the guys and see what they think.

[Metahuman1]

Start by running it to them as "Hey, I'm thinking of running a side game. Any takers for players?".

[Hunterx]

So the DM who is running game has no idea a how the Teri system is run and thinks fighters are T1 because of all their feat so I put forward the challenge Lv 20 fighter vs Lv 20 cleric now I do not know if I should crush him totally or give him a chance.

Considering everything a cleric can do. I could turn half celestial or fiendish fly up and start raining down summonings and let them do the dirty work. Or boost my attack up to just as high as a fighter with extra Str and HP while healing 2 HP per round and have damage reduction X

Since we both picked 2 book next to the Players handbook I picked complete divine and complete arcane he picked complete warrior and book of exalted deeds. Not sure which way he is goining here but maybe the VOP since he can not have magical weapons or armour. I do not have that issue I can make mine magical. If I want or like I said rain down monsters on his head.

But some spells out of those books that have no save and no SR would be fantastic.

I thought about going necromancy spells and negative energy and dropping his levels using split or double ray or spell which if he fails his save he loses a possible 16 levels in wich case I flatten him with a rock

[redwizard007]

Hunter, I am concerned. This degree of hostility does not seem healthy. It certainly isn't conductive to good role-play. Are there out of game issues that we can help you with?

[Hunterx]

Nope it is all about proving this crappy DM a couple of things. 1 start loosening up on what players can play open your mind just because you don't like does not mean it will not be fun for the player. 2 powerful builds can be made with the most minimum of boos so keeping the books closed is doing nothing for you. 3 you do not know everything about the game like you think you do and you are often wrong. 4 the Tier system is not wrong you just have got no clue. 5 just to put him in his place.

[DeTess]

Nope it is all about proving this crappy DM a couple of things. 1 start loosening up on what players can play open your mind just because you don't like does not mean it will not be fun for the player. 2 powerful builds can be made with the most minimum of boos so keeping the books closed is doing nothing for you. 3 you do not know everything about the game like you think you do and you are often wrong. 4 the Tier system is not wrong you just have got no clue. 5 just to put him in his place.

If this is the point you've reached, it's far better to just leave this game and set up your own. Nothing good (apart from a fleeting moment of satisfaction, maybe) will be gained from trying to 'put him in his place'.

[Shocksrivers]

Trying to optimize the game not fully I want this fool of a DM to realize that he is doing stuff the wrong way

I side with everyone that states that you are on the wrong table, but I would like to add: if the other players enjoy the game, the DM is not doing it wrong, he is just playing a different game. I currently have this problem the other way around as a DM with one player that is trying to optimize. He feels superior to the other players (we also have a severely unoptimized Druid). However, if you are to only one that plays that game, you should look into a different group.

[Psyren]

OP - in a game like the one you just described, I think the last thing you need is build advice. If you're not having fun with your GM's approach to the game, trying to end-run around it with a mish-mash of prestige classes is not the best solution; talking to them and reaching a compromise of some kind is.

As for the hammer thing... joking and tone can be hard to spot through a text-based medium, but it should go without saying that you shouldn't do that or anything close to it. (I wouldn't even joke about it honestly, as that has actually happened. (http://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=52528674&itype=cmsid))

[Kish]

, not when he will not follow the mechanics of the game the way they are written[...] Thinking that raising the dead as minions is evil.
I'm snipping these out just to point out the contradiction. The mechanics of the game say Animate Dead is evil, so you're complaining, not that he doesn't follow the letter of RAW, but that he house rules in ways you don't like instead of house ruling in ways you do like.

If you don't like his house rules and the places he doesn't house rule, you shouldn't play with him. Really.

[Hunterx]

I side with everyone that states that you are on the wrong table, but I would like to add: if the other players enjoy the game, the DM is not doing it wrong, he is just playing a different game. I currently have this problem the other way around as a DM with one player that is trying to optimize. He feels superior to the other players (we also have a severely unoptimized Druid). However, if you are to only one that plays that game, you should look into a different group.

They don't there is in game fighting about rules and actions all the time, plus this DM allows things like attacking around a corner of a door frame when the player is on the other side with a Melee weapons. I'm ok with some of your own rules fine but RAW states that that player has cover and you can not attack him. This is the kind of **** owe put up with all the time. Last gaming day there were 26 orcs 16 common ones not fighters 2 monks 2 clerics and 6 fighters . A party of 3 took out all of them the plus 2 Orc fighters before that fight. So a total of 28 3 level 5 char took out. 1 two weapon fighting fighter 2 Druid with no animal companions. There is no way in hell we should have survived none. But we did, he does this stuff all the time large groups and when the party is small because of life he willing other change them instead he will fluff rolls because he does not want to deal with bringing in another char. This is a issue in the largest of issues.

[Metahuman1]

I'm snipping these out just to point out the contradiction. The mechanics of the game say Animate Dead is evil, so you're complaining, not that he doesn't follow the letter of RAW, but that he house rules in ways you don't like instead of house ruling in ways you do like.

If you don't like his house rules and the places he doesn't house rule, you shouldn't play with him. Really.

Your assuming he means Animate Dead, and not Reincarnate, Raise Dead, Resurrection, True Resurrection.


And as has been pointed out, the DM isn't just keeping it low op, he's hurting player agency.

Maybe I'm sympathetic because I've had DM's who do that and use the fact that players are low op to get away with it before.





As far as it goes on the cleric.

1: Stack up Miss Chance against attacks were you can. That will make you MUCH harder to hit.

2: Yeah, pummeling him with flight plus High Level Summoning's for a first round is a good idea.


Give him another round after that to lay waste to him with no save no SR spells.

Maybe a third round, jack your strength bonus up as high as it will go with something like Shape Change + Righteous Might + Divine Power, and get that miss chance up to protect yourself, and then just pummel him in melee.

Put it on video so that if he deny's it later you can show everyone your right.







That all being said.


After this, you really, really should consider breaking away from this DM. Take other players with you who want to go. Your not compatible.

[Kish]

Your assuming he means Animate Dead, and not Reincarnate, Raise Dead, Resurrection, True Resurrection.

My what?

Grammar aside, no, treating "raising the dead as minions" as unambiguously referring to the creation of undead slaves (or at least formerly-dead slaves; Hunterx's claim of nonevil is actually worse in the unlikely but not linguistically impossible case where they're talking about resurrecting people and demanding they become "minions" in exchange for being alive again), not the restoration of other free-willed people to free life, is not an assumption. If you don't wish to acknowledge something as basic and obvious as that, we have nothing further to say to each other.

[Metahuman1]

Except he didn't say "Raise the dead as minions.". He said "Raise Dead Minions.".

In a party with 2 druids and no arcane casters.


Which one makes a bit more sense? Given that it's a GM who's constantly applying that guy at the gym fallacy anyway, so we know he doesn't care what the book says?

[Kish]

Except he didn't say "Raise the dead as minions."
...Didn't bother to read the quote in my post before you started arguing with it, hm?

(Not that the case you're arguing would be anything more than a goofy semantic dodge anyway, so...buh-bye.)

[Metahuman1]

What I'm pointing out is that your claiming there is this hugh contradiction, but it is within the realms of possibility that that's not the case, it's just a lousy DM.

[Hunterx]

This is why I say raise undead as minions is not evil even if it says evil as the spell. If you look at the dread necromancer or the bone night both can be neutral alignments and can raise the dead as minions. So even if the spell has the evil catigory on it it makes no sense why. This is just 2 examples.

[Kish]

This is why I say raise undead as minions is not evil even if it says evil as the spell. If you look at the dread necromancer or the bone night both can be neutral alignments and can raise the dead as minions. So even if the spell has the evil catigory on it it makes no sense why. This is just 2 examples.
So? The DM presumably thinks the changes he's making make more sense, too.

Look, you can either object to house rules qua house rules as your saying you find it preposterous to talk about respecting him because "he will not follow the mechanics of the game the way they are written" indicates, or you can complain about his failure to house rule things you find stupid away. Doing both at once just makes you a control freak; you don't want to run the game, but you want the game to be being run exactly as you would run it anyway, with the house rules you would implement and no others.

[PrismCat21]

*Barely readable complaining about RAW*

Creating and/or Animating Undead is Evil. End of story. This is hard RAW. If you want to change it, it would be a houserule. And since you keep complaining about your DM having houserules, you have absolutely no basis to complain about 'raising undead' being Evil.

So what if the spell is Evil? Any alignment can cast any aligned spell.
LG, NG, CG can all cast Evil spells.
LE, NE, CE can all cast Good spells.
The only restrictions are if your class specifically tells you that you can't cast spells opposed to your alignment, or in the description of specific spells.
Create Undead and Animate Dead can be cast by any alignment.

"This is why I say raise undead as minions is not evil even if it says evil as the spell."
It doesn't matter what you say. The spell is Evil. Your DM says it's evil. Your DM has the only say on if he wants to change it or not.

[Hunterx]

Creating and/or Animating Undead is Evil. End of story. This is hard RAW. If you want to change it, it would be a houserule. And since you keep complaining about your DM having houserules, you have absolutely no basis to complain about 'raising undead' being Evil.

So what if the spell is Evil? Any alignment can cast any aligned spell.
LG, NG, CG can all cast Evil spells.
LE, NE, CE can all cast Good spells.
The only restrictions are if your class specifically tells you that you can't cast spells opposed to your alignment, or in the description of specific spells.
Create Undead and Animate Dead can be cast by any alignment.

"This is why I say raise undead as minions is not evil even if it says evil as the spell."
It doesn't matter what you say. The spell is Evil. Your DM says it's evil. Your DM has the only say on if he wants to change it or not.

You explained it better then me. This is the exact case where he says if your good you can not cast evil spell so and vis versa. This takes away from builds people would like to try. Because if the party is mostly good they would stop you he says or kill you if your evil. This in turn brings in the agency character he likes to use instead of letting the players figure it out.

So thanks for the better explanation.

[Hunterx]

I have figured out how I'm going to crush him, in the first round once I have my turn I will quick rapid maximize summon 10 fiendish Rhinos and let them squish him. round since my rhinos can attack once they appear they will all charge attack him dealing 40D6+ 240 before critical hits. If he lives through that some how I will then summon a colossal celestial roc to take him really high and drop him. Splat and that will be the ball game. 1 maybe 2 rounds depending on how many rhinos hit.

[Metahuman1]

Ok, so, what the DM's doing is dictating that if you play good alignment, you automatically become physically incapable of casting spells with the evil descriptor, and then saying any good person who sees you try to do this anyway will try to kill you for it automatically.

In a world were every random PC can beat the party in a fight at all times.






Yeah, that's a house rule then after all, so, complaining about house rules is perfectly valid here.






Anyway, that's not a horrible plan. IF possible, prebuff on some stackable sources of Miss Chance so that he has to roll a crazy high percentage check to hit you. That way even if he win's initiative or pulls some other dirty trick he'd never allow in his campaign, he's likely to still not be able to take you out before you start clobbering him.

[PrismCat21]

You explained it better then me. This is the exact case where he says if your good you can not cast evil spell so and vis versa. This takes away from builds people would like to try. Because if the party is mostly good they would stop you he says or kill you if your evil. This in turn brings in the agency character he likes to use instead of letting the players figure it out.

So thanks for the better explanation.

Apparently you failed to read it fully.
You say that it should not be evil, but it is. RAW says it's evil. Your DM says it's evil. It's evil. that's all there is to it.

Casting the spell does not automatically make you evil. If you do not already possess an evil alignment, you become closer to possessing an evil alignment.
Casting an evil spell is an evil act. Period.
Enough evil acts will turn you evil. Period.

There is nothing wrong with a party of good aligned characters wanting to stop another character in the party from committing evil acts. How they go about it would be the only issue.

If your DM has a houserule that good aligned characters cannot cast evil spells, then good aligned characters cannot cast evil spells.

[Hunterx]

And this is the point where I say run the god damn game the way it is written. If you don't like the rules then don't DM and stop making up you own ****.

Having a few house rules that make sense is fine but when he has a Orc attack our fighter who is out a doorway with others standing there ans says he wraps the sword around the door frame to attack I miss and gives no penalty to do so that is a nope nope, when he says out right that some skills can fail on a natural 1 or pass on a natural 20 and the rules stat and very clearly that they can not that is a nope nope. It is this kind of stuff that drives me bananas because the rules a clear there is no gray area but yet because he does not want to do the work and in his confused little mind he thinks this is better for the game when it clearly is not.

Just like he is so confused about this little challenge. He has no idea that once I cast my first spell the challenge is all over but the crying that is him crying and me too from laughing so hard.

This is how it will go, my turn, cast time stop maximized gain 5 free rounds,
Second round cast quicken greater visage of the deity and fly up movement speed.
Third round fly up movement speed cast quickened gate (summon Pit fiend)
Summon maximized summon master 8 ( 5 fiendish TRex)
Fourth round fly up summon 2quick guargantuian fiendish scorpions
Fifth round fly up now X feet in the air
2 quickened summonings
Free action dispell time stop
Monsters appear in front of fighter...........fighter squish

[PrismCat21]

You have problems. You need to get help.
Taking your aggression out on other people is bad. It is bad for you. It is bad for them. You are not justified in treating people that way.


And this is the point where I say run the ~snip~ ~snip~ game the way it is written. If you don't like the rules then don't DM and stop making up you own ****.

Having a few house rules that make sense is fine

Once again, you cannot say the game has to be run by RAW, and then want house rules.
It's one or the other. Either the game is completely RAW, or the DM makes changes were the see fit.
Your DM has made changes, if he is a good DM he'll continually make changes as issues arise. The way to respond to changes you don't like is to respectfully discuss it with him. NOT demand things from him, call him names, negatively criticize, and seek to WIN against him.

If you can't play nice, don't play at all.

[Hunterx]

Call him names ? Well from the few bantering insults I have done such thing. What look like to me is a snowflake has entered the room and they just can't handle fact that the DM IS NOT A GOOD ONE IN THE FIRST PLACE. So with that out, the fact that he is the only one that wants to run them you would think he would be better well he I see not. His restriction on books is him being lazy. His insight onto thing and how that happen I see area king the realms of reality to fantasy and that is not how the game works. Having a few house rules is ok but only when a ruling from RAW is to outlandish. Other then that play it as it is.