Ways to get both Vile and Exalted feats?

[Beni-Kujaku]

For a long time, I thought that Vasharans, from BoVD, were always counted as evil even when they weren't, and that they could get Vile feats while being Good. However, I recently reread BoVD and turned out it was just homebrew, and Vasharans actually just have a restriction of only being evil. That means they are purely inferior to humans, by the way, having an alignment restriction and less choice for their bonus feat.

So I was wondering, are there RAW ways to use both Exalted and Vile feats at the same time (I know you could just alternate between the two with Chameleon by killing babies, then taking a Vile feat, using it, then repent and save a village, take an Exalted feat, and when you need a Vile feat again, just kill another baby, but I would like to know if you could have both together)? Or to cast both Sanctified and Corrupt spells?

Thanks in advance

[liquidformat]

Hellbred (FCII) get an Evil Exception which should allow them to take vile feats while still being good.

[Lapak]

So I was wondering, are there RAW ways to use both Exalted and Vile feats at the same time (I know you could just alternate between the two with Chameleon by killing babies, then taking a Vile feat, using it, then repent and save a village, take an Exalted feat, and when you need a Vile feat again, just kill another baby, but I would like to know if you could have both together)?

I have no useful suggestions for you, but the idea of this being floated as an actual option gave me the sort of good, long laugh I was in need of today. A character who 'repents' with the full intent that if they have a pragmatic need a Vile feat they can just go a-murdering again has not, in fact, repented at all. I can't imagine that would actually fly in many campaigns. (Much less more than once!)

[Crake]

For a long time, I thought that Vasharans, from BoVD, were always counted as evil even when they weren't, and that they could get Vile feats while being Good. However, I recently reread BoVD and turned out it was just homebrew, and Vasharans actually just have a restriction of only being evil. That means they are purely inferior to humans, by the way, having an alignment restriction and less choice for their bonus feat.

So I was wondering, are there RAW ways to use both Exalted and Vile feats at the same time (I know you could just alternate between the two with Chameleon by killing babies, then taking a Vile feat, using it, then repent and save a village, take an Exalted feat, and when you need a Vile feat again, just kill another baby, but I would like to know if you could have both together)? Or to cast both Sanctified and Corrupt spells?

Thanks in advance

Perhaps you need to re-read the section on exalted feats "Only intelligent characters of good alignment and the highest moral standards can acquire exalted feats, and only as a gift from powerful agents of good—deities, celestials, or similar creatures." You need more than just a good alignment to select an exalted feat. Someone who flipflops alignments or uses vile feats (which are, by their very nature, inherently evil) does not qualify. Keep in mind also, that exalted feats also require DM permission by default, and typically require a ritual to acquire "In many cases, a ritual must be performed; often this simply amounts to a character swearing a sacred vow, for example, in the presence of a celestial being.", so you can't just trade an exalted feat in and out via chameleon.

You're essentially held to the same moral standards as a paladin just to be able to maintain the use of your exalted feats, including to the point where if you perform an evil act, you must go through a similar atonement process.

[liquidformat]

Perhaps you need to re-read the section on exalted feats "Only intelligent characters of good alignment and the highest moral standards can acquire exalted feats, and only as a gift from powerful agents of good—deities, celestials, or similar creatures." You need more than just a good alignment to select an exalted feat. Someone who flipflops alignments or uses vile feats (which are, by their very nature, inherently evil) does not qualify. Keep in mind also, that exalted feats also require DM permission by default, and typically require a ritual to acquire "In many cases, a ritual must be performed; often this simply amounts to a character swearing a sacred vow, for example, in the presence of a celestial being.", so you can't just trade an exalted feat in and out via chameleon.

You're essentially held to the same moral standards as a paladin just to be able to maintain the use of your exalted feats, including to the point where if you perform an evil act, you must go through a similar atonement process.

Still, I am pretty sure Hellbred can pull it off they can take vile feats as a paladin and I haven't seen anything saying they also can't take Exalted Feats.

[Crake]

Still, I am pretty sure Hellbred can pull it off they can take vile feats as a paladin and I haven't seen anything saying they also can't take Exalted Feats.

Care to explain how? Because I don't think evil exception works how you think it does. In any case, a hellbred is incapable of selecting exalted feats anyway, because they have Devil's favour, a devil-touched feat, and deviltouched feats specify "After selecting a devil-touched feat, you can no longer use or select exalted feats (see Book of Exalted Deeds)."

[Eldonauran]

Still, I am pretty sure Hellbred can pull it off they can take vile feats as a paladin and I haven't seen anything saying they also can't take Exalted Feats.

I'm fairly certain that what the Hellbred's can ignore are fairly specific and don't apply to feats. I believe they create exceptions to alignment based spells and whether or not they can wield unholy weapons without taking a negative level.

[Crake]

I'm fairly certain that what the Hellbred's can ignore are fairly specific and don't apply to feats. I believe they create exceptions to alignment based spells and whether or not they can wield unholy weapons without taking a negative level.

Yup, and while it says they can cast evil spells regardless of personal alignment, that doesn't change the fact that casting an evil spell is an evil act, so should they be a paladin doing that (not that the paladin spell list even has evil spells on it to cast in the first place), they're still breaking their code of conduct, which their ability explicitly doesn't protect them from.

[Fouredged Sword]

Yup, and while it says they can cast evil spells regardless of personal alignment, that doesn't change the fact that casting an evil spell is an evil act, so should they be a paladin doing that (not that the paladin spell list even has evil spells on it to cast in the first place), they're still breaking their code of conduct, which their ability explicitly doesn't protect them from.

Yes, because heaven help the world if there is a Paladin who wants to do the inherently evil act of..

checks notes...

Ahem, Instantly knowing the condition of everyone within a 30ft cone, determining who is living, dead, wounded, or undead.

Clearly the most vile of spells.

-------------

But seriously this. You are not going to be able to have both vile feats and exalted feats at the same time. There is a small chance that MAYBE you could have started out evil and take a few vile feats before redeeming yourself and getting an exalted feat, but that would be really really strange and few DMs would let it fly.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

PF has a few ways to become "unaligned" -- that is, you count as whatever alignment is most beneficial to you at all times. For instance, the oracle has a "curse" (actually a huge benefit) that does this. I don't think you can have both vile feats and exalted feats at the same time, however, because you generally lose exalted feats when you commit evil acts, and using a vile feat is almost certainly an evil act.

I suppose you could take Loyalty's Reward, from Kingdoms of Kalamar, and homebrew some stand-ins for the feats you want.

[edit] Perhaps become unaligned, then take Loyalty's Reward (Alignment Buffer): You may freely use exalted and vile feats without issue, so long as they don't affect your alignment.

[Eldonauran]

Yes, because heaven help the world if there is a Paladin who wants to do the inherently evil act of..

checks notes...

Ahem, Instantly knowing the condition of everyone within a 30ft cone, determining who is living, dead, wounded, or undead.

Clearly the most vile of spells.

Indeed. Which is why it doesn't appear on the Paladin spell list.

But, more seriously, you don't have to agree about the evilness of the spell, nor does the lore go into detail as to what forces the spell draws on in order to give you that information. It has the [Evil] tag, and in a Universe where such forces are objective realities, thus you have to take it at face value. Invent whatever reasons you wish to justify it as [Evil]. The universe doesn't care about hyperbolic language.

[Jowgen]

The Demonic Blood Infusion spell temporarily grants you the Evil subtype (or one could do the Savage Species ritual that does so permanently), so subjecting you to the "Any effect that depends on alignment affects a creature with this subtype as if the creature has an evil alignment" rule, meaning that existing feats can legally be Dark Chaos shuffled out for Vile feats on a character of the "highest moral standard".

Now obviously doing this is very much against the "highest moral standard", and since relying on a third party forcing this on you against your will is a bit cheap, my suggested fluff solution is to pull a reverse "All according to Keikaku". (TL Note: Keikaku means Plan)

You have an Exalted character with Exalted feats, lets call him Yagami... Tsuki?

Tsuki, usually a stallwart champion of JUSTICE, is turned proper Evil due to a helm of opposite alignment... or Evil Book... or something, forming a new identity. But Tsuki hasn't lost his Exalted feats yet due to not having "knowling and willingly committed an Evil act". Tsuki doesn't want to loose hisexalted powers, but now also crave awesome vile power, to become the God of the New World, or something.

So, Tsuki comes up with a plan (TL Note: Plan means Keikaku)

Tsuki goes and purchases scrolls of Simulcarum (other options might be better), Demonic Blood Infusion, Embrace/Shun the Dark Chaos, and Mindrape, then writes a letter what his temporary Evil alignment has him think of doing. Tsuki creates a Simulcarum of himself, lets call it Higuchi.

Tsuki tells Higuchi to knock him out so that he'll stay under for at least 12 hours and then read the letter. Through the letter, Higuchi is told to use the remaing scrolls in order in whatever way he thinks is best. As Higuchi has read our thoughts on what we were considering on doing, and shares all our qualities due to being a Simulcarum, we know that Higuchi will choose to exact the plan exactly.

Unconscious Tsuki is subject to Demonic Blood Infusion, gaining the Evil subtype, has his feats reshuffled into including Vile feats, and then last but not least is Mindraped into restoring his original alignment and forgetting everything that transpired since the alignment change. Over the next 12 hours, the duration of all the spells runs out (RIP Higuchi).

Tsuki wakes up, back to his former highly moral self, with no recollection of what happened since the alignment shifting effect. All he notices is that he now has these strange new supernatural powers in place of some old abilities. With both Vile and Exalted feats in hand, Tsuki goes on to do great JUSTICE.

[King of Nowhere]

Then again, if you start vile and then you actually repent - as in, for real, not with the idea of "just kill another baby if i need an evil alignment" - then you could have both vile and exhalted feats.
however, you would be unable to use most of your vile feats. but you should at least be able to use deformity feats, as even after redeeming yourself, you're still deformed.

Same if you start good and you fall later. in that case, i can't think of any exhalted feat you'd still be able to use

[Crake]

Then again, if you start vile and then you actually repent - as in, for real, not with the idea of "just kill another baby if i need an evil alignment" - then you could have both vile and exhalted feats.
however, you would be unable to use most of your vile feats. but you should at least be able to use deformity feats, as even after redeeming yourself, you're still deformed.

Same if you start good and you fall later. in that case, i can't think of any exhalted feat you'd still be able to use

Just the same as exalted feats require petition to a good patron, vile feats require petition to an evil patron: "Vile feats are granted to characters at the behest of a powerful evil agency—a god, a demon, or something similar." It's also worth noting that just like exalted feats, vile feats are supernatural in nature, and thus even the deformity feats aren't actually a result of a physical change, and their power is lost in an AMF. Likewise, the evil patron is capable of revoking the feat: "The patron creature may even (at the DM’s discretion) have the ability to revoke the feat should the character displease it." So basically, exalted and vile feats are mutually exclusive, even if you somehow manage to obtain both, you'll either lose the exalted feats for performing an evil act, or you'll lose the vile feats for turning away from your evil patron.

[smasher0404]

Just the same as exalted feats require petition to a good patron, vile feats require petition to an evil patron: "Vile feats are granted to characters at the behest of a powerful evil agency—a god, a demon, or something similar." It's also worth noting that just like exalted feats, vile feats are supernatural in nature, and thus even the deformity feats aren't actually a result of a physical change, and their power is lost in an AMF. Likewise, the evil patron is capable of revoking the feat: "The patron creature may even (at the DM’s discretion) have the ability to revoke the feat should the character displease it." So basically, exalted and vile feats are mutually exclusive, even if you somehow manage to obtain both, you'll either lose the exalted feats for performing an evil act, or you'll lose the vile feats for turning away from your evil patron.

Technically, there is no requirement that an evil patron revoke the feat from a good-aligned character. There are even RAW edge cases of good characters gaining their powers from the divine favor of an evil deity (the feat Heretic of the Faith in Powers of Faerun allows for Good clerics of Evil Deities by virtue of being only two steps away in terms of alignment).

[Crake]

Technically, there is no requirement that an evil patron revoke the feat from a good-aligned character. There are even RAW edge cases of good characters gaining their powers from the divine favor of an evil deity (the feat Heretic of the Faith in Powers of Faerun allows for Good clerics of Evil Deities by virtue of being only two steps away in terms of alignment).

Perhaps not, but the reverse doesn't stick quite so well. My point was that even deformity feats are not merely just a "i messed up my body, oh well, I still have those benefits even after becoming exalted good", and that the benefits are a supernatural, magical bonus ontop of said deformity. Utilizing this vile magical effect would be in direct violation of your exalted feats at that point.

[hamishspence]

Indeed. Which is why it doesn't appear on the Paladin spell list.

But, more seriously, you don't have to agree about the evilness of the spell, nor does the lore go into detail as to what forces the spell draws on in order to give you that information. It has the [Evil] tag, and in a Universe where such forces are objective realities, thus you have to take it at face value. Invent whatever reasons you wish to justify it as [Evil]. The universe doesn't care about hyperbolic language.

Or assume that it having the [Evil] tag was a bad call on Monte Cook's part during the 3.5 update, since it contradicted what other authors were working on at the same time (I blame him because he recommends changing it to have the [Evil] tag as early as BOVD, nearly a year before 3.5 came out.)

The "must be Good-aligned" Healer class in Miniatures Handbook has it, and more glaringly, the Exalted prestige class Slayer of Domiel has it. Both Miniatures Handbook and BoED were released very shortly after the 3.5 PHB.

[unseenmage]

The Feats In Magic Items sidebar in Arms and Equipment Guide should allow this to happen.

When asked if you have to meet the requisites a feat in an item to use it the precedents in the existing rules shrugged, looked sheepish, and contradicted themselves.

[Eldonauran]

Or assume that it having the [Evil] tag was a bad call on Monte Cook's part during the 3.5 update, since it contradicted what other authors were working on at the same time (I blame him because he recommends changing it to have the [Evil] tag as early as BOVD, nearly a year before 3.5 came out.)

Nah, I just look back a bit farther and see that the spell even had the [Evil] tag to it back in AD&D 2e, even if a select few deities offered it for non-evil purposes (setting specific). So, if you want to blame someone, you need to go a bit further back than Monte Cook.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Triage is obviously evil; didn't you know?

[Eldonauran]

Triage is obviously evil; didn't you know?

Only when you draw on the powers of [Evil] to help you do it

[hamishspence]

Nah, I just look back a bit farther and see that the spell even had the [Evil] tag to it back in AD&D 2e, even if a select few deities offered it for non-evil purposes (setting specific).

2e didn't have tags. It occasionally had things like "This spell is not good, and only evil spell casters use it regularly" - but that's not quite the same thing. The nearest equivalent to domains in 2e was Spheres - and there was no "Sphere of Evil".

When I google it, I can't even find a 2e spell with that name at that level. Maybe it was called something different?

Possibly Detect Living? It came from the "Sphere of Necromancy" and was 1st level. As far as I can tell though, there was nothing saying "casting this spell is an Evil Act" in 2e.

[Silly Name]

2e didn't have tags. It occasionally had things like "This spell is not good, and only evil spell casters use it regularly" - but that's not quite the same thing. The nearest equivalent to domains in 2e was Spheres - and there was no "Sphere of Evil".

When I google it, I can't even find a 2e spell with that name at that level. Maybe it was called something different?

Possibly Detect Living? It came from the "Sphere of Necromancy" and was 1st level. As far as I can tell though, there was nothing saying "casting this spell is an Evil Act" in 2e.

Weren't healing spells necromancy too, at some point prior to 3rd edition? Despite the common associations, not all necromancy spells are inherently evil.

[hamishspence]

Yup. However, while they were of the Necromancy school, they were of the Healing sphere.

Some spells were of multiple spheres. Regeneration, for example, was in the Necromantic sphere, but there was an option to move it to the Healing sphere.

The Restoration spell, for restoring drained levels, was in the Necromantic sphere and didn't even have an option to move it to the Healing sphere. So it's safe to say that there was no "all necromantic sphere spells are Evil" rule in 2e.

[Eldonauran]

2e didn't have tags. It occasionally had things like "This spell is not good, and only evil spell casters use it regularly" - but that's not quite the same thing. The nearest equivalent to domains in 2e was Spheres - and there was no "Sphere of Evil".

When I google it, I can't even find a 2e spell with that name at that level. Maybe it was called something different?

Possibly Detect Living? It came from the "Sphere of Necromancy" and was 1st level. As far as I can tell though, there was nothing saying "casting this spell is an Evil Act" in 2e.

Spheres/Domains, same concept. I didn't start D&D with 2e, so my terminology isn't entirely accurate when drawing from memory on the subject.

Hmm, it might well have been called something else, or similar. It was a Faerun book, as far as I recall. I'll see if I can locate the spell when I get home to my stack of AD&D 2e books.

[hamishspence]

We know in 3e that it was on the Planning domain spell list, which isn't exactly Evil-orientated, and that it was on the domain spell list for one of Dragon Magazine 355's Seven Saintly Domains (Generosity domain).

So even within 3e to 3.5e, it's clear that it wasn't generally seen as a evil spell by writers.

For another example:

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/divine/do...m#reposeDomain

Repose Domain
The Repose domain is similar to the Death domain, but is granted by good-aligned deities whose clerics are barred from casting evil spells.

Granted Power
The character may use a death touch once per day. The death touch is a spell-like ability that is a death effect. The character must succeed at a melee touch attack against a living creature (using the rules for touch spells). When the character touches, roll 1d6 per his or her cleric level. If the total at least equals the creature’s current hit points, it dies.

Repose Domain Spells
1: Deathwatch

[Eldonauran]

So even within 3e to 3.5e, it's clear that it wasn't generally seen as a evil spell by writers.

You and I reach very different conclusions about this. You see that the writers didn't see the spell as evil. I see that the writers made a limited exception for specific deities and domains, rather than invent an entirely new spell.

[hamishspence]

The spell did not have the [Evil] tag in 3.0.

So the narrative is

"Spell starts out in 3.0 as Not Evil,
:becomes strongly associated with Good (3.0 Manual of the Planes)
:continues as strongly associated with Good all the way to BOED and Miniatures Handbook,
:but Monte Cook decides around BOVD that it ought to be associated with Evil,
:And he changes it to Evil when 3.0 is replaced by 3.5,
:but doesn't tell the other 3.5 writers about it - hence it being treated as Not Evil by Miniatures Handbook & BOED".

I see that the writers made a limited exception for specific deities and domains, rather than invent an entirely new spell.

As it currently stands, by RAW, (using BOVD's 'casting a spell with the [evil] tag is an evil act' rule), any multiclass paladin/cleric who gets the spell on their cleric list and casts it for any reason, will lose their paladin powers. So will a multiclass paladin/healer. So will a Slayer of Domiel who casts it.

No "limited exception" in the rules. Which showcases how bad an idea giving it the [Evil] tag was.

[Railak]

Hellbred was going to be my main suggestion, but it was stated in the first reply. My second suggestion although is Pathfinder, is a mythic ability called Beyond Morality, you have no alignment, you can take any class regardless of alignment restrictions. Can even multiclass monk/bard. As long as you aren't completely going against a class's code, like murdering people for no reason as paladin, you're generally free from all alignment based constraints.

Mythic is roughly the same as epic level in 3.5, but it starts if and when the DM decides to put it in. And progression through it is more or less at the DM's discretion, it's not exp based.

[Batcathat]

Hellbred was going to be my main suggestion, but it was stated in the first reply. My second suggestion although is Pathfinder, is a mythic ability called Beyond Morality, you have no alignment, you can take any class regardless of alignment restrictions. Can even multiclass monk/bard. As long as you aren't completely going against a class's code, like murdering people for no reason as paladin, you're generally free from all alignment based constraints.

It feels like Crake's objection, about characters needing "the highest moral standards" would still be an issue though, since that's not really an alignment restriction.