The "Sanctify the Wicked" spell...

[Alleran]

Can it be cast on, say, a Drow priestess, thereby turning them into a sanctified creature and also applying the sanctified template to them? Looking at the spell description, the target is "one evil creature" which a CE Drow Cleric of Lolth (for example) should qualify as.

Apologies if this sounds like a stupid question, but being able to redeem any evil creature (forcibly, at that) with Necromancy (which good characters supposedly avoid, according to the BoED, though it wouldn't be the only problem with it...) seems rather odd for a nominally "good" spell.

[TaintedLight]

Can it be cast on, say, a Drow priestess, thereby turning them into a sanctified creature and also applying the sanctified template to them? Looking at the spell description, the target is "one evil creature" which a CE Drow Cleric of Lolth (for example) should qualify as.

Apologies if this sounds like a stupid question, but being able to redeem any evil creature (forcibly, at that) with Necromancy (which good characters supposedly avoid, according to the BoED, though it wouldn't be the only problem with it...) seems rather odd for a nominally "good" spell.

I would tend to agree with you. Forcing one's morality on another is an inherently oppressive act, and oppression is the demesne of evil. However, it could be argued that the redemption of one creature, even by oppressive means, to prevent a greater evil would be a good act. I would not call it exalted, but it could be argued that it is good.

[ex cathedra]

Yes. It's a [Good] Mindrape, though it's not as versatile.

It doesn't make a lot of sense, no, from a purely Good standpoint, but D&D isn't known for how well it handles philosophy. I love the flavor on any sort of inquisitorial character, at least.

[Coidzor]

Can it be cast on, say, a Drow priestess, thereby turning them into a sanctified creature and also applying the sanctified template to them? Looking at the spell description, the target is "one evil creature" which a CE Drow Cleric of Lolth (for example) should qualify as.

Apologies if this sounds like a stupid question, but being able to redeem any evil creature (forcibly, at that) with Necromancy (which good characters supposedly avoid, according to the BoED, though it wouldn't be the only problem with it...) seems rather odd for a nominally "good" spell.

Any evil creature. Drow are creatures. If a drow is a cleric of Lolth, well, that drow's gonna be evil.

So, the drow becomes an ex-cleric of Lolth after being imprisoned in a gem for a year.

Sanctify the Wicked has, well, it has problems. Hence the nickname "Holy Mindrape," it has received in certain corners of the internet.

[BobVosh]

Any evil creature. Drow are creatures. If a drow is a cleric of Lolth, well, that drow's gonna be evil.

You can be a CN cleric of Lolth. Completely misses the point of it...but ya.

Also this has been discussed a lot before. Forced reeducation clockwork orange style? Very werid for a spell with a [Good] descriptor. However, there you have it.

[FMArthur]

I do think the idea of a reformed and Lawful Good Balor is kind of hilarious, though. Since it is a being of purest evil, it is conceptually confusing, but less morally questionable to use your most evil [Good] spell on them.

[Mando Knight]

I do think the idea of a reformed and Lawful Good Balor is kind of hilarious, though. Since it is a being of purest evil, it is conceptually confusing, but less morally questionable to use your most evil [Good] spell on them.

WotC had a Succubus Paladin in one of their articles...

[Jack_Simth]

I do think the idea of a reformed and Lawful Good Balor is kind of hilarious, though. Since it is a being of purest evil, it is conceptually confusing, but less morally questionable to use your most evil [Good] spell on them.

Catch:
It's not legal to apply the template to a Balor. Even though they're a legal target for the spell. Have fun sorting that one out at the gaming table.

As for the nickname... D&D uses a lot of shortcuts in their mechanics for ease-of-play. If it's worth the bother of casting Sanctify the Wicked on a thing, it's likely a villian under the DM's control. There's little, if anything, in the way of mechanics for putting someone into counseling (well, there is a set, but you have to look a fairly long time to find it), and even with those, there's the problem of 'they don't have a choice in the matter once you make the check, so it's brainwashing'. Now, if the DM simply sticks his tounge out at you and says 'nu-uh' when you've built a character around convincing people to convert to the side of good, you'll get upset. So there does need to be mechanics for it. Sure, they're not very good mechanics, but some form of it is needed. So the target gets a saving throw. If you ignore the fluff, then yeah, it's a rather Lawful Evil spell (forces compliance). If you do not ignore the fluff, it's a [Good] spell.

[Zaydos]

I always saw it as having the [Good] descriptor because it required you to channel holy energies. Unlike [Evil] descriptor spells casting a spell of the [Good] descriptor is not intrinsically a good-aligned act, only something that only good aligned clerics and druids can cast (strangely enough Favored Souls don't have such an alignment requirement).

Now as to why it's exalted... ... ... ... ... ... I can't answer.

Also can I get an atonement spell?

[RebelRogue]

"When a man cannot choose, he ceases to be a man".

Anthony Burgess would certainly not approve of this spell.

[WinWin]

Cast it on a mindflayer. They will starve to death.

[Juhn]

There was an Exalted mindflayer in BoED, so evidently it is possible in some fashion.

[WinWin]

Ring of sustenance. Actually in the statblock.

I was going to launch into an alignment tirade, but I thought better of it.

edit: I am sure I read something about the ring of Sustenenance. Need to get my eyes checked.

[hamishspence]

Oddly, there's an Exalted Mindflayer in the same book.

How she gets around the "must eat brain of an intelligent being at least once a month or they start starving" rule in Lords of Madness- I'm not sure- probably only eats non-humanoid villains, since she has a Vow of Nonviolence, but not a Vow of Peace or a Vow of Purity.

EDIT: Ninjaed.

And she doesn't have a ring of sustenance, but a ring of protection +4.

[Yuki Akuma]

*sigh*

Sanctify the Wicked is not Mind Rape.

The spell works on the basis that all creatures that aren't inherently [Evil] have at least some good in them, that there is a Perfect Argument to reform them and make them repent. It's the logical extension of Rosseau Was Right.

There's a reason it takes a year, while Mind Rape takes a few minutes.

[nyarlathotep]

One of the ways I've found to make the spell less morally nasty as the DM is say that after all of the year long contemplation and self contemplation the creature still has the option of refusing to reform. In essence the spell is then one long drawn out period allowing the creature one last chance to change its mind and be righteous. Mind you refusing to change its ways after being shown just how evil it is will likely turn a creature from evil to vile; meaning that the spellcaster just made things worse.

[hamishspence]

The spell works on the basis that all creatures that aren't inherently [Evil] have at least some good in them, that there is a Perfect Argument to reform them and make them repent. It's the logical extension of Rosseau Was Right.

There's a reason it takes a year, while Mind Rape takes a few minutes.

True. The main oddity, is that it changes the ethical alignment to that of the caster, as well- so a CE red dragon sanctified by a LG caster becomes LG.

Also- sometimes creatures with [Evil] subtype turn out to have good in them too. The most dramatic case being the cambion demons from Expedition to the Demonweb Pits- as much as 10% of them are Neutral or Good. This is suggested to be due to the fact that their planetouched mother (usually a tiefling) was nonevil- InTheBlood, so to speak.

[Juhn]

*sigh*

Sanctify the Wicked is not Mind Rape.

The spell works on the basis that all creatures that aren't inherently [Evil] have at least some good in them, that there is a Perfect Argument to reform them and make them repent. It's the logical extension of Rosseau Was Right.

There's a reason it takes a year, while Mind Rape takes a few minutes.

...There are people on this forum who actually took the time to read the spell description? My faith in humanity has been restored.

I've gotten so tired of the "Sanctify the Wicked is [Good] Mindrape lol" that I've just started ignoring it.

[Yuki Akuma]

True. The main oddity, is that it changes the ethical alignment to that of the caster, as well- so a CE red dragon sanctified by a LG caster becomes LG.

Also- sometimes creatures with [Evil] subtype turn out to have good in them too. The most dramatic case being the cambion demons from Expedition to the Demonweb Pits- as much as 10% of them are Neutral or Good. This is suggested to be due to the fact that their planetouched mother (usually a tiefling) was nonevil- InTheBlood, so to speak.

Obviously, the Perfect Argument, from a Lawful Good caster's point of view, would make someone Lawful Good.

Demons can be good - in fact there's an infinite number of Lawful Good succubi - but Sanctify The Wicked won't work. They have to realise they want to be good and repent on their own. Sanctify The Wicked is for mortals who need a little extra push in the right direction.

A Lawful Good succubus is still [Evil] and [Chaos], and nothing can possibly remove those impulses from her. She has to learn to control herself and do good even though her basic nature screams at her to stop. No argument is going to remove the fact that she is literally composed of Chaos and Evil.

...There are people on this forum who actually took the time to read the spell description? My faith in humanity has been restored.

I've gotten so tired of the "Sanctify the Wicked is [Good] Mindrape lol" that I've just started ignoring it.

If I'm restoring someone's faith in humanity, something has gone horribly wrong.

[hamishspence]

Are demons infinite in number, or do they just try and convince the rest of the planes that they are?

Demonomicon: Malcanthet in Dragon Magazine, does suggest that the existence of the few redeemed succubi is one of the few things that makes Malcanthet sad- and while she's fond even of succubi that seem to work against her interests, these are the few that "escape her fondness".

There's a ritual for adding alignment subtypes to PCs (and changing them) in Savage Species. If a demon were to submit to such a ritual, assuming it survived, it would no longer contain both [Chaos] and [Evil]- but it would still exist as a being- though not, technically, a demon.

So I think of subtypes as a big component of outsiders, but not absolutely vital to them- they can survive having their subtypes removed or changed.

[olentu]

Obviously, the Perfect Argument, from a Lawful Good caster's point of view, would make someone Lawful Good.

That just puts the spell back to forcing an alignment change on the target.

[Yuki Akuma]

That just puts the spell back to forcing an alignment change on the target.

How do you figure? What about convincing someone to give up Chaos is worse than convincing them to give up Evil?

[olentu]

How do you figure? What about convincing someone to give up Chaos is worse than convincing them to give up Evil?

Oh nothing is evil about using magic to change a creatures mind against their will. I mean the evilness of mind rape is presumably because of the descriptor rather then what the spell does. But it is still forcing an alignment change.

[Yuki Akuma]

Oh nothing is evil about using magic to change a creatures mind against their will. I mean the evilness of mind rape is presumably because of the descriptor rather then what the spell does. But it is still forcing an alignment change.

Did you miss my post earlier? Did you never read the spell description?

Mechanics are not the same as fluff.

[olentu]

Did you miss my post earlier? Did you never read the spell description?

Mechanics are not the same as fluff.

The fluff that was talking about good and not law and chaos.

[hamishspence]

There's at least one spell that's mindway between StW and Mindrape in capabilities- Programmed Amnesia, in Spell Compendium.

It doesn't have the [Evil] tag.

Main differences between it and Mindrape- It says 1 living creature, has a short range, takes 10 minutes to cast, and requires a material component worth 500 gp.

Mindrape says 1 creature, has a longer range, casts as a standard action, and requires no component.

[Randel]

I would argue that Sanctify the Wicked would be a 'good' spell, at least from the standpoint of a culture that most DnD games take place in.

If you Sanctified every evil creature in the world before killing them then their souls shouldn't go to the evil afterlife, that not only robs the infernal planes of more souls but it also means these souls go to a better and nicer plane.

Yes, I'm arguing that Sanctify the Wicked is a Good spell because it saves the subjects souls from eternal damnation. But it makes sense because in DnD, eternal damnation is a real thing. There really are demons and devils that toy with the souls of the wicked and want to corrupt people. Plus, it seems that the guys in charge of what is considered 'good' or 'evil' include the gods.

Not only would it be Good, it would also be Lawful... namely because it imposes itself on the individual to provide a benefit for society as a whole. A Good Empire that constantly tracks down those of evil alignment and turns them Good would be pretty lawful and good (although kind of oppressive).

It sounds like the sort of thing that would be a useful tool for Lawful Good types who value society and the greater cosmology than the individual. It would likely offend some neutral types and people of chaotic alignment for that same reason.

Empire of Good: We will send our forces across the whole world and capture those of Evil alignement, we shall not kill them but instead convert them to the side of good. Thus, fewer creatures will die as Evil beings and thus fewer souls will go to the evil afterlifes and infernal planes. The cosmos shall shift to the side of good. A future full of good people and with more power in the hands of the Good-aligned gods would be worth far more than the cost of free-will impsed on the evil.

People of neutral or chaotic persuasion: You're imposing your will upon others! If you carry out your plan then the whole world will be stuck underneith your prudish rule and knight-templar attitude!

Empire of Good: Did you not hear the part where we only capture evil creatures? And we don't kill them? And we turn them into good creatures so they go to heaven instead of burning in hell for eternity when they eventually die? We fail to see how the results of such actions could be considered 'evil' while the alternative to kill the wicked or let them continue as evil beings due to unwillingness to do what has to be done could be considered 'good'.

People of neutral or chaotic persuasion: But... its not nice.

Empire of Good: We never said that good was nice or that lawful actions were pleasant. If you are evil you will be Sanctified, if you oppose us you will be stopped, if you kill us then we shall go on to our heavenly reward in an afterlife that we helped to make. Resistance is futile, the triumph of Good is inevitable, repent all evil deeds or face the consequences.

[hamishspence]

Main problem with that is, rather than costing XP, it costs 1 level- which cannot be countered or avoided in any way. Plus, as a 9th level spell, not many will have access to it.

Chances are, the conventional Diplomacy method of redeeming villains (in the same book) will be more practiced.

[Juhn]

If I'm restoring someone's faith in humanity, something has gone horribly wrong.

That was an (apparently failed) attempt at facetious exaggeration. "Restored my faith in people's ability to comprehend the things they've supposedly read" would be more accurate.

Oh nothing is evil about using magic to change a creature's mind against their will.

It's a good thing that's not what happens when the spell is cast, then, isn't it?

[olentu]

It's a good thing that's not what happens when the spell is cast, then, isn't it?

I suppose then that all creatures want at all times equally to be chaotic, neutral, and lawful.