You think Roy might end up cheating with Celia...

[mlsq42]

With Tsukiko? I mean, she really likes the undead, and Roy's shambling around the city as a golem now, and his charisma can't have gone down that much. It'd make for interesting arguments. "Seriously, I couldn't control my body!"

Eh, I'm probably just high on my cold medication.

*goes back to bed*

[Iuris]

Why would whatever a golem does or is done with a golem have anything to do with Roy? His will had nothing to do with it. It's like accusing someone of cheating on his wife when a dog humps his leg...

[Ancalagon]

a) A golem isn't an undead...
b) They are many, many apart.

[Teron]

The golem is a) not undead, but a construct, b) mindless, with a Charisma score of 1, c) lacking in relevant organs and the ability to feel physical stimuli, and d) in an entirely different city than Tsukiko.

[Laurentio II]

Is people here trying to rationalize a joke? Because you know, if you do, you kill the joke. And if you kill the joke, the joke can be animated.
Fear the undead joke!

[hewhosaysfish]

I mean, she really likes the undead, and Roy's shambling around a completely different city city as a golem now

Fixed that for you.


and his charisma can't have gone down that much.
buh?

[isamaru]

Fear the undead joke!
Turn undead joke! No, really, this made me laugh so hard I need to clean my screen now.

[DigoDragon]

What happens in Greysky STAYS in Greysky. :smallsmile:

[Tholok Razescar]

Bleh. I say, bang her when he's un-Golem-ized... It will be much better for him.

[Theodoriph]

Unfortunately he's a bone golem. That doesn't include certain fleshy parts. So he can't technically cheat on Celia.


This is of course disregarding the fact that he can't cheat on Celia anyway. Roy is not in his body. He is separated from his body. He is usually in Celestia (though now he is watching Haley and Celia). For him to cheat on Celia, he would need to be in control of his own body. Else, it's not really cheating.

If someone has sex with a corpse in real life, the corpse isn't cheating on its wife/girlfriend.


P.S. Technically the corpse wouldn't have a wife since that bond is broken at death, but you know what I mean. ::smallsmile:

[Tholok Razescar]

Unfortunately he's a bone golem. That doesn't include certain fleshy parts. So he can't technically cheat on Celia.


This is of course disregarding the fact that he can't cheat on Celia anyway. Roy is not in his body. He is separated from his body. He is usually in Celestia (though now he is watching Haley and Celia). For him to cheat on Celia, he would need to be in control of his own body. Else, it's not really cheating.

If someone has sex with a corpse in real life, the corpse isn't cheating on its wife/girlfriend.


P.S. Technically the corpse wouldn't have a wife since that bond is broken at death, but you know what I mean. ::smallsmile:

Roy's father made a really great joke about that. I just wish I could remember the exact wording.

[Threeshades]

Is people here trying to rationalize a joke? Because you know, if you do, you kill the joke. And if you kill the joke, the joke can be animated.
Fear the undead joke!

The joke was already undead to begin with. They just destroyed it by rationalising.

You know jokes sometimes just dont work because the prerequisites aren't given. IF roy was actually an undead in azure city, it would have worked. But he's a golem in greysky. So no working here. But since the dead joke has been made anyway, it was undead, undead need to be destroyed because theyre made by evil people for evil purposes. So rationalizing it was a good deed. So Ancalagon and Teron get karma points.

[Tholok Razescar]

The joke was already undead to begin with. They just destroyed it by rationalising.

You know jokes sometimes just dont work because the prerequisites aren't given. IF roy was actually an undead in azure city, it would have worked. But he's a golem in greysky. So no working here. But since the dead joke has been made anyway, it was undead, undead need to be destroyed because theyre made by evil people for evil purposes. So rationalizing it was a good deed. So Ancalagon and Teron get karma points.

... What, now?

[hamishspence]

Does this apply to people under influence of Dominate Person? If "cheating on somebody" is a betrayal, defined as evil in Vile Darkness, does doing it involuntarily count as an involuntary act of evil?

In 2nd ed and 3.0, and, arguably, 3.5, Paladins could fall, or clerics/druids lose their powers, for involuntary acts of evil.

Roy is, however, not a paladin, so it doesn't matter much. And his soul is not inside his body in this case, so again, nothing to get "taint of evil"

[Tholok Razescar]

[QUOTE=hamishspence;5158440]Does this apply to people under influence of Dominate Person? [QUOTE]

Let me answer this question with another question:
Guy has girlfriend.
Guy is raped by other girl.

Did the guy now cheat on his girlfriend?

Edit: You cencor *******, but not rape, Rich? I am apalled.

[Theodoriph]

[QUOTE=hamishspence;5158440]Does this apply to people under influence of Dominate Person? QUOTE]

Let me answer this question with another question:
Guy has girlfriend.
Guy is raped by other girl.

Did the guy now cheat on his girlfriend?

Edit: You cencor *******, but not rape, Rich? I am apalled.




Darn...ninja'd :smallfurious:


As an aside, I'd imagine if you submitted to the domination with a reasonable expectation of what was to follow, then it would definitely count as cheating. Just mentioning it because you know...there's always someone out there looking to exploit loopholes :smallbiggrin:

[Tholok Razescar]

[QUOTE=Tholok Razescar;5158444]




Darn...ninja'd :smallfurious:

*horribly garbled Japanese*

[hamishspence]

Tricky.

usually, being a direct victim of an action cannot count as committing that action. However, D&D rules do say that being magically compelled into committing actions "half-counts"

By "half-counts" I mean it would cause Paladin (or exalted character) to fall, but atoning would cost no XP. I'd also rule that the Fiendish Codex corruption rules only apply to voluntary acts.

So, no effect on the soul, no effect on whether the guy is morally guilty of the crime or not, merely loss of paladin powers, if he has them.

The rule may suck, but if you check 3.0 and 3.5 Atonement, and 2nd ed (and probably 1st ed) alignment rules, you will find that is how they handle it.

EDIT: Its annoying, especially for paladins, to find out they lose powers for acts committed under magical influence, but, rules in core books were written that way.

[Tholok Razescar]

Tricky.

usually, being a direct victim of an action cannot count as committing that action. However, D&D rules do say that being magically compelled into committing actions "half-counts"

By "half-counts" I mean it would cause Paladin (or exalted character) to fall, but atoning would cost no XP. I'd also rule that the Fiendish Codex corruption rules only apply to voluntary acts.

So, no effect on the soul, no effect on whether the guy is morally guilty of the crime or not, merely loss of paladin powers, if he has them.

The rule may suck, but if you check 3.0 and 3.5 Atonement, and 2nd ed (and probably 1st ed) alignment rules, you will find that is how they handle it.

EDIT: Its annoying, especially for paladins, to find out they lose powers for acts committed under magical influence, but, rules in core books were written that way.

Just imagine:
" Argh... My head. What'd I DO last night? All I remember is that caster hitting me with a spe- what in the Nine hells, where's my paladin armour?!"

[hamishspence]

Yup.

I have seen numerous people arguing either: "It isn't that way", Or, "It Shouldn't be that way", or "Its not that way in 3.5 cos in Paladin entry it says "Willfully"" (it said same in 3.0 and Atonement spell in both makes it clear involuntary acts may need atonement)

Unusual.

[AKA_Bait]

Does this apply to people under influence of Dominate Person?

Let me answer this question with another question:
Guy has girlfriend.
Guy is raped by other girl.

Did the guy now cheat on his girlfriend?

Well, for one thing, that's a bit difficult to set up, given typical human anatomy. Regardless, no, it wouldn't be cheating, it would be rape. I think a better analogy in this (silly) case would be to someone stealing my car. If someone stole my car and got into an accident, I didn't get into an accident. They did, in my car. Same with the theoretical case of something else using my body for some immoral purpose when I'm somehow not inhabiting it.


Edit: You cencor *******, but not rape, Rich? I am apalled.

There was an extended discussion of that issue here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93425)

[hamishspence]

with Dominate Person you're inhabiting it, but not in control. Mugger broke into car, hit you with paralysing agent, and you get to watch them wreaking havoc in it.

Whereas, if body is dead, soul is Out of Car.

Vampires, by Complete Divine, might fit first example: Soul is present in vampire body, malignant spirit controls it.

[AKA_Bait]

with Dominate Person you're inhabiting it, but not in control. Mugger broke into car, hit you with paralysing agent, and you get to watch them wreaking havoc in it.

Whereas, if body is dead, soul is Out of Car.

Vampires, by Complete Divine, might fit first example: Soul is present in vampire body, malignant spirit controls it.

True, I was relating it to the original example with the Bone Golem and Roy, where is is definatley 'out of car'. Both analogies make sense in their respective cases.

[hamishspence]

If Tsukiko casts Create Greater Undead, on killed golem, turning it into vampire spawn (not sure if it can manage vampire), would Roy's soul be dragged kicking and screaming out of the afterlife?

[RMS Oceanic]

How does he cheat with Celia when Celia's the one who he's in a relationship with? Cheating on her, I could understand...:smallwink:[/Grammar Police]

[AKA_Bait]

If Tsukiko casts Create Greater Undead, on killed golem, turning it into vampire spawn (not sure if it can manage vampire), would Roy's soul be dragged kicking and screaming out of the afterlife?

Humm... that's an interesting question. I guess it would be. Huh... I feel a plot hook for my own games coming on.

[hamishspence]

Last time I pointed out that the rules on involuntary acts of evil are consistant with mythological tales, especially Heracles, I was shouted down by people insisting the Oracle and the Furies are agents of Hera, Heracles was not morally guilty and shouldn't have had to do any atonement at all, and same should apply to paladins falling.

would you say that, while annoying, it is consistant?

[batsofchaos]

Guy has girlfriend.
Guy is raped by other girl.

Did the guy now cheat on his girlfriend?

Only if the guy is Josh Hartnett.

[AKA_Bait]

Last time I pointed out that the rules on involuntary acts of evil are consistant with mythological tales, especially Heracles, I was shouted down by people insisting the Oracle and the Furies are agents of Hera, Heracles was not morally guilty and shouldn't have had to do any atonement at all, and same should apply to paladins falling.

would you say that, while annoying, it is consistant?

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking here.

I assume you are referring to when Hercules loses his mind and slaughters his family. In D&D terms, were Herc a paladin (which he's not but meh) he would have fallen and had to atone with no xp cost by RAW. They were not voluntary actions but he took them. Seems pretty clear to me.

[FujinAkari]

Edit: You cencor *******, but not rape, Rich? I am apalled.

... Buh?

Hrmmm...

"You son of a rape!"

"You rape-head!"

... you know, I can't think of a single way to use that term as a swear... why would you possibly expect it to be censored?


How does he cheat with Celia when Celia's the one who he's in a relationship with? Cheating on her, I could understand...:smallwink:[/Grammar Police]

Clearly he is going to have V cast Dominate Person on her so he can do things with her when he isn't really with her... thus cheating on her with her :P

[hamishspence]

Seemed pretty clear to me too, but that didn't stop torrent of "Alignment doesn't work that way" posts.

Same when I said it hasn't changed between 3.0 and 3.5: involuntary acts still cause Falls. They say "It doesn't specify paladins" and "it says "Willfully" in the paladin entry". It said that in 3.0 too: atonement spell still overrides it: involuntary And willfully evil acts lead to Falls.

[AKA_Bait]

Seemed pretty clear to me too, but that didn't stop torrent of "Alignment doesn't work that way" posts.

Same when I said it hasn't changed between 3.0 and 3.5: involuntary acts still cause Falls. They say "It doesn't specify paladins" and "it says "Willfully" in the paladin entry". It said that in 3.0 too: atonement spell still overrides it: involuntary And willfully evil acts lead to Falls.

Meh. Let it go. This is a case where the rules do, at first glance seem to conflict and which go against our, or at least my, usual notions of moral responsibility. Were I designing the system Paladin's wouldn't fall for involuntary actions and they don't in games I run because of houserules. I didn't design the system though and what I prefer happens to not be RAW. People frequently get those two all mushed around, particularly when it comes to moral issues.

[hamishspence]

How about the secondary issue falling for acts paladin (or exalted guy) Does Not Know (or believe) Are Evil?

virtually a necessity for certain situations, otherwise paladin's beliefs override reality.

[AKA_Bait]

How about the secondary issue falling for acts paladin (or exalted guy) Does Not Know (or believe) Are Evil?

virtually a necessity for certain situations, otherwise paladin's beliefs override reality.

Honestly, at this point Hamish, if we want to keep discussing this we should go start a thread over in D20.

[hamishspence]

yes, getting back to subject: IMO Roy's body cannot be counted as cheating on Celia unless his soul is in body.

What about Roy's soul- visiting the Tavern of Infinite One-Night Stands? Eugene said "hey's its "till death do us part" once soul has left body I'm free to play the field."
Will Celia see it that way if Roy had done this?

[ChowGuy]

Fear the undead joke!
Argh no! Thread necromancy is bad enough!

[hamishspence]

Well, I liked the Undead Horse Trope. :smallbiggrin:

[AKA_Bait]

What about Roy's soul- visiting the Tavern of Infinite One-Night Stands? Eugene said "hey's its "till death do us part" once soul has left body I'm free to play the field."
Will Celia see it that way if Roy had done this?

I doubt she would see it that way. It's a volitional act. Also, Eugene and Roys mom both clearly had that understanding. Roy and Celia don't seem to.

I also doubt that Roy has visited the Tavern of Infinite One-Night Stands or would even if he was single in his own mind. Just doesn't seem his type of thing.

[Teron]

Well, for one thing, that's a bit difficult to set up, given typical human anatomy.
Not particularly. An erection can induced against a man's will, not to mention the various other sexual acts that qualify as rape (or equivalent crimes in some countries with different terminology).

[Scarlet Knight]

Wow. This gives a whole new meaning to Bone Golem....

[Greep]

Wow. This gives a whole new meaning to Bone Golem....

lol I was just about to say, "no he won't cheat on celia with tsukiko because now he will 'Finally get to bone his girlfriend' (hopefully without bigfoot intruding)"

[Jayabalard]

Is people here trying to rationalize a joke? Because you know, if you do, you kill the joke. And if you kill the joke, the joke can be animated.The "joke" did a good enough job killing itself...

[fangthane]

Some thoughts I had as I read through this thread...
1. Paladins do indeed fall for involuntary acts of evil, in my campaigns. After all, it's part of the trade-off for all the nice things (including will save bonuses to avoid exactly that) they get, relative to a basic fighter.
2. The enumeration of what makes a paladin fall is tricky, because some elements of subjective morality are effective, and others aren't, depending on the situation. Ultimately, it has to come down to common sense combined with DM fiat.
a) Can't recall which source book this was in, but there was something about how a paladin who attacks an enemy on an unstable mountainside and is completely unaware of the innocent village below threatened by a rockslide will not fall as a result of triggering such a rockslide. One who is aware of the risk to innocent life and proceeds anyway will.
b) A paladin who believes fervently in the goodness of his/her actions but is grossly mistaken will fall, regardless of their motivations or awareness; case in point is everyone's favourite whipping girl.
3. Apparently not everyone knows about the prostate, but Teron got to that before I could. :smallbiggrin:
4. The bone golem isn't Roy. In fact, being partially incorporated into the bone golem doesn't mean Roy can't be resurrected or true resurrected, either. If they have so much as a bone chip (depending on DM's interpretation of "a small amount"), he can be resurrected from that because the golem is a physical construct - which happens to incorporate most of Roy's bone matter - animated by a captive elemental spirit. For a True Res, they wouldn't even need the bone chip.

[Greep]

besides, much more likely is that celia will cheat on roy with elan ;) They're both flaky at times and celia doesn't know roy would know.

[tribble]

wait a second... this may be beating a dead horse, but I thought you got a will save when made to do something you would vehemently object to when under spells like domination. I am so confused:smallconfused:...

[Heroic]

Is people here trying to rationalize a joke? Because you know, if you do, you kill the joke. And if you kill the joke, the joke can be animated.
Fear the undead joke!

Can I actually sig that?

[hamishspence]

That book was Vile Darkness. While that example is correct, it also suggests poisoning a village full of what you believe to be evil people isn't evil (Contradicted later in Vile Darkness)

[Laurentio II]

Can I actually sig that?
Sure, you are welcomed.

[Samurai Jill]

With Tsukiko? I mean, she really likes the undead, and Roy's shambling around the city as a golem now, and his charisma can't have gone down that much. It'd make for interesting arguments. "Seriously, I couldn't control my body!"

Eh, I'm probably just high on my cold medication.

*goes back to bed*
That's probably for the best.


Paladins do indeed fall for involuntary acts of evil, in my campaigns... ...a paladin who attacks an enemy on an unstable mountainside and is completely unaware of the innocent village below threatened by a rockslide will not fall as a result of triggering such a rockslide.
Whoa whoa whoa whoa- how is this not an 'involuntary act of Evil?'

[hamishspence]

maybe because paladin didn't know there was a village. Some examples in Vile Darkness are a bit suspect in the light of later books.

Knowing the village was there, deciding your actions are certain not to trigger rockslide, and Being Wrong, means, effectively, you have been negligent. However since there was no intent to trigger, and you were doing your best not to trigger, it is, in a sense, involuntary.

by contrast, in a big fight with monsters, if a child of in invisible species wanders into fight, and you accidentally kill them, not knowing they existed, its and example of Not Reasonably Foreseeable.

[Samurai Jill]

Okay, fine- but I don't see how going into battle against an opponent with the ability to cast Dominate Person (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0516.html) who may or may not cast it, may or may not beat your saves, and may or may not command you to eat babies counts as 'reasonably forseeable' to the point where you would Fall for it.

The point is, it seems unfair to penalise the paladin for actions they could not possibly control and are hardly responsible for. Saying "They have high will saves to compensate" is nonsense- what if their opponent is, like, 15 levels higher than them (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0448.html), and can all-but effortlessly overcome their best saves- (which, incidentally, all come down to a dice roll regardless)? Does the fact your opponent is overwhelmingly powerful somehow make you even more responsible for your actions- you know, to compensate?

[hamishspence]

its not entirely clear why.

My best guess was, it was designed to keep powers out of hands of villains. One act, and villain no longer has access to paladin's smiting and healing powers.

[Samurai Jill]

I think this could be avoided simply by having the Dominate Person description specify an effective -10 penalty to all mental attributes (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0524.html). It's hard to explain otherwise.

[holywhippet]

If Tsukiko casts Create Greater Undead, on killed golem, turning it into vampire spawn (not sure if it can manage vampire), would Roy's soul be dragged kicking and screaming out of the afterlife?

That spell can only create shadows, wraiths, spectres and devourers: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/createGreaterUndead.htm

It can't work on the remains of the bone golem, the description for Create Undead says:


A clay pot filled with grave dirt and another filled with brackish water. The spell must be cast on a dead body. You must place a black onyx gem worth at least 50 gp per HD of the undead to be created into the mouth or eye socket of each corpse. The magic of the spell turns these gems into worthless shells.

The remains of a bone golem do not qualify as a dead body. Especially not after it has been beaten into submission.