Good aligned Eternal life?

[Mystic Muse]

Okay, is there any way to get eternal life and remain good short of becoming a God in D&D 3.5? Or at least Very long lived?

Also, Is there any way to get third level arcane spells which include haste without going through five ore more levels in an arcane spellcasting class? I don't expect a yes but I figured I'd ask.

[Eldariel]

Okay, is there any way to get eternal life and remain good short of becoming a God in D&D 3.5? Or at least Very long lived?

Deathless? Polymorph Any Object into Elan? Just Reincarnate every couple of hundred years? Live on a Timeless Plane (careful never to leave tho)? Become a Construct? Honestly, there's a billion means. Most of them do involve tons of powerful magic tho. Reincarnations or True Mind Switches are the most affordable. Magic Jar too, I guess.

Also, Is there any way to get third level arcane spells which include haste without going through five ore more levels in an arcane spellcasting class? I don't expect a yes but I figured I'd ask.

Well, (controlled) White Dragonspawn Loredrake Dragonwrought Kobold can get it at level 3 with buyoff. Probably not the answer you were looking for, but there you go. And yeah, there are others. Versatile Spellcaster on e.g. Beguiler, for one. Any Haste-casting capable class that knows their whole list, really.

[Claudius Maximus]

The Deathless from Eberron and BoED are pretty much good undead. I think there's a good lich in Monsters of Faerun or some other Forgotten Realms book.

There are a few ways to get haste. Clerics can get it via domain. Trapsmiths get it as a 1st level spell. If you're a spontaneous caster, Drakehelm it.

[Ranos]

Add warforged to the list above

[Glimbur]

Cloud Anchorite from It's Cold Outside lives forever. On the other hand, it's easiest to enter as a monk.

[Yukitsu]

Baelnorns are good aligned elven liches.

[jokey665]

Elan are the best ever~

[JeminiZero]

And yeah, there are others. Versatile Spellcaster on e.g. Beguiler, for one. Any Haste-casting capable class that knows their whole list, really.

If the DM rules that Versatile Spellcaster does not grant you knowledge of higher level spells, you can still cast it off runestaves. A Sorcerer with level 2 spells can therefore cast haste in a similiar manner.

If you use the White Dragonspawn Loredrake Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer as described above with Runestaves, you might even be able to pull it off at ECL 2: Sorcerer 1/LA 1.

[Mystic Muse]

Elan or Deathless might work.

I Highly doubt my DM would allow white Dragonspawn though.

[Dusk Eclipse]

In libris mortis (IIRC) there is a good lich, it is at LA 5, I suppose because it gives you turning immunity,

[Optimystik]

Immortality Handbook

You're welcome

[Lord Vukodlak]

I first must ask why would you want to be immortal?

For evil characters the answer is obvious they spent a lifetime building their evil empire and naturally they don't want to lose that to a silly little thing like death. Or for any number of other selfish reasons.

So on its own a quest for immortality is inherently selfish, unless you have some purpose or reason to live forever, beyond simply not wanting to die.

[olentu]

If the DM rules that Versatile Spellcaster does not grant you knowledge of higher level spells, you can still cast it off runestaves. A Sorcerer with level 2 spells can therefore cast haste in a similiar manner.

If you use the White Dragonspawn Loredrake Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer as described above with Runestaves, you might even be able to pull it off at ECL 2: Sorcerer 1/LA 1.

Well one would need to use a slot granting combination before using the runestaff.

[Ashiel]

I first must ask why would you want to be immortal?

For evil characters the answer is obvious they spent a lifetime building their evil empire and naturally they don't want to lose that to a silly little thing like death. Or for any number of other selfish reasons.

So on its own a quest for immortality is inherently selfish, unless you have some purpose or reason to live forever, beyond simply not wanting to die.

Someone has to spend a lifetime tearing down that evil empire right?

[Optimystik]

Generally, the motivations are:

Good: To protect something/remain vigilant against an omnipresent threat. Here immortality represents a sacrifice - the good character forgoes their eternal reward in the afterlife in order to uphold a duty.

Evil: To avoid karmic retribution for misdeeds, while seeking new heights of power. Here, immortality represents an attempt to cheat the cosmos.

Neutral: To perfect a skill, art form, or talent, free from the limitations of morality. Here, living forever is a way to maximize one's potential and discover the limits of possibility.

[Mystic Muse]

I like the looks of deathless but I don't really know how to apply it to a race. Do I get rid of the race's normal features and replace them with the Deathless's? Also, do the features of Deathless override the features of classes I'll be taking or do I only use whichever would be higher? so for example I was a deathless fighter, would I still only get half BAB? (I won't be using it for a fighter, this is just an example.)

[JeenLeen]

From my understanding, Deathless is just a good version of Undead, powered by positive energy instead of negative energy.

Another undead option:
The 3.0 book Ghostwalk (which I believe has an online update to 3.5) lets you be undead PCs of any alignment. I'm not sure how useful it compares to others for optimization, but a Ghostwalk PC could be a way to be eternal (though not alive) and good.

[Telonius]

Green Star Adept. But then you'd be a Green Star Adept for all eternity.

[Ganurath]

There isn't, because eventually you'll need to commit genocide against Maruts and that would be pretty evil.

[Mystic Muse]

Green Star Adept. But then you'd be a Green Star Adept for all eternity.

This character, if I ever play him that is, is already taking swiftblade.

I don't need MORE lost casting levels. Also, if I wanted the abilities of a green star adept I could just use a warforged.

[Tengu_temp]

So on its own a quest for immortality is inherently selfish, unless you have some purpose or reason to live forever, beyond simply not wanting to die.

How is it selfish, if you achieve immortality in a way that doesn't harm anyone? Good characters can do things for themselves too, you know, not just for the others.

There isn't, because eventually you'll need to commit genocide against Maruts and that would be pretty evil.

I'd say that killing Lawful Stupid creatures in self-defense doesn't count as evil.

[Analytica]

I am thinking Chameleon might get Haste at level 3. Is that true? Also, possibly Suel Arcanamach.

[Telonius]

I'm at a loss to remember what book this was in, but I vaguely remember seeing a feat for epic-leveled characters - something like "Eternal Champion" - where the character would no longer actually die, just keep getting reborn. (Maybe I'm thinking of something in 4e?) Anyway, there were a few other things right next to it that had similar effects.

[DragoonWraith]

I'm at a loss to remember what book this was in, but I vaguely remember seeing a feat for epic-leveled characters - something like "Eternal Champion" - where the character would no longer actually die, just keep getting reborn. (Maybe I'm thinking of something in 4e?) Anyway, there were a few other things right next to it that had similar effects.

There's a web enhancement with 3.5e versions of what 4e calls "Epic Destinies" or some such. Basically, taking one at 21 replaces your Epic Feats until 30. All of them involve some kind of immortality.

I like the looks of deathless but I don't really know how to apply it to a race. Do I get rid of the race's normal features and replace them with the Deathless's? Also, do the features of Deathless override the features of classes I'll be taking or do I only use whichever would be higher? so for example I was a deathless fighter, would I still only get half BAB? (I won't be using it for a fighter, this is just an example.)

Deathless is a type, not a race. What you're talking about are Deathless RHD, which you want to avoid. I'm pretty sure you'd have to homebrew a new race with the Deathless type...

[hamishspence]

How is it selfish, if you achieve immortality in a way that doesn't harm anyone? Good characters can do things for themselves too, you know, not just for the others.

Depends on how you define the word.

If you define "doing something selfish" as "doing something for the self"- yes, a Good character can do that.

If you define doing something selfish as "doing something that helps the self to the detriment of others" then no, a Good character can't generally do this. They might get away with it once in a while, but repeatedly behaving this way wouldn't fit with Good.

Some people say the word "selfish" contains this "to the detriment of others" within its concept- you can't do selfish things, or be a selfish person, and not be harming others.

Others prefer the older meaning - "anything that benefits the self"- with no requirement that it harm others.

In 2nd ed, Chaotic Good characters were described in the PHB as "selfish but good-hearted"- implying the latter meaning- a person who tends to do things for themselves (but with no "to the detriment of others" required).

[Tengu_temp]

"Doing something good for you, to the detriment of others" is the definition of selfish most people go with, and it's also the one I go with. Acts that do something good for you, but don't hurt others, aren't evil.

[hamishspence]

Of course, it's not a requirement that selfish be synonymous with Evil. The example given, of 2nd ed D&D CG characters being both "selfish" and "good-hearted" might fit.

[chiasaur11]

I'd say that killing Lawful Stupid creatures in self-defense doesn't count as evil.

Agreed.

Not your fault they can't take a hint. Besides, they'd eventually be killed by litches anyway.

[Tengu_temp]

Of course, it's not a requirement that selfish be synonymous with Evil. The example given, of 2nd ed D&D CG characters being both "selfish" and "good-hearted" might fit.

I'd say that's either because it used the other, non-malicious definition of selfish, or because AD&D's alignment table was freakin' crazy.

[hamishspence]

I suspect it was the non-malicious definition (which I generally prefer).

2nd ed did have some alignment description flaws (Neutral attacking whichever side (Good or Evil) is more powerful at the moment, Chaotic Neutral being just crazy).

The "non-malicious selfish" person would risk themselves for others, not because "it's right" but because they stand to gain from it- gain reputation, gain someone in their debt (thus, a favor can be called in when it's needed) and in general be a bit glory hungry, but still basically likely to help people a lot, even at cost to themselves.

Sounds like the way a lot of people play Good adventurers.