I think you’re probably right, although Roy will still have misgivings, as will Roy’s Diva.
Deva.
How does negative energy translate to a change in moral values? Is it that the source of that negative energy is horrible (e.g. obtained from the draining of blood and sacrificing of kittens?) I guess what I’m asking is, within the rules of D&D, when a good-aligned character gets unwillingly vamped, why does their alignment turn evil? Wouldn’t you be more likely to have a conflicted being, torn between wanting to “live” and its former moral values?
Roy’s Diva gave him points for keeping the Belkster in check. He’d probably get major kudos for:
- Restricting a vampires urges and helping him get sustenance in a way that doesn’t kill people
- Working to get a vampire raised from the dead into his normal form.
In theory, undead are always, irrevocably evil, do to the nature of being raised from the dead. I think Burlew is going to play with that a bit.
Aka How Durkon got his groovy accent back.
Because Dracula. D&D vampires are very much in the classic mode. Being turned into a vampire makes you an evil, predatory monster because that’s how it worked in Bram Stoker’s novel.
There are some exceptions. Ghosts, for example, can be any alignment.
Technically, mindless undead used to be neutral (by 3.5 they’re NE, in 4 who cares)…but they still showed up under “detect evil” due to the negative-energy-is-evil thing.
(Interestingly, while checking this, I saw the undead type description explicitly allows true res to work on them, despite the spell description explicitly saying that it wont, until they’re destroyed. Go, go proofreaders!)
I hope his alliance with OOTS as a vampire is dealt with in some more depth than two panels; that seems a bit flip. Z’s death, though, hot damn again.
I’m confused. I thought evil spellcasters were harmed if heal was cast on them, not that they harmed anyone by casting heal.
Probably vampiric touch is not exactly healing…
Could be a rules interpretation. Good clerics can spontaneously cast cure spells, while evil ones spontaneously cast inflict spells. Durkon spontaneously cast without considering the ramifications of his alignment switch.
Prepare to be more confused. In strip 724, we see Malack healing Varsuvius. So evil undead clerics can heal the living good. Although he is using his staff, so maybe he had negative negative energy healing spells in there.
H’m. Level drain appears to be at will - maybe Durkon just isn’t experienced enough not to do it accidentally?
Pretty sure my explanation is right. Good clerics never prep the cure spells, since they’re available at will. Durkom tried to cast cure moderate wounds, which meant he was really saying, “turn one of my prepped second level spells into a spontaneous cast.” That didn’t work out the way he intended is all.
Evil clerics can prep cure spells, which is surely what Malack did.
That’s how I read it. Durkon didn’t think it through, and tried to spontaneously cast a Cure Moderate Wounds. It came out as an Inflict instead because he’s charged with negative energy now instead of positive. If he wants to cast Cures, he’ll have to start specifically preparing them, like Malack presumably did. He’s probably not in the habit of doing that, and he’s going to have fewer spell slots for other nifty stuff if he wants to supply healing for the Order in the future.
Actually, this sets up an interesting take on alignment. Durkon’s actions here appear to be good: he affirms his free will, he punishes people who are acting like dicks, he protects his friends, and he works to save the world.
But he still channels negative energy, because vampires are always evil.
So there’s some real tension here between essentialism (you are what you are) and existentialism (you are what you do). He may act in good ways at all times and remain evil because vampires are intrinsically creatures of evil.
Kind of cool.
Interestingly, Rich casually avoids saying that in this Word of God confirmation of your theory:
All vampire clerics, he says, not all evil clerics. Since vampires are powered by negative energy, it makes sense that they would channel it, even if they weren’t evil. I think he’s leaving that gap there on purpose. So, while Durkon may or may not really be evil now, Rich certainly is. 
Well, I think the fact that he said Cure means either he uses a previously prepared cure spell or, if there are none to be had, his ability to spontaneously convert spell slots doesn’t fire because it would make an inflict spell which he didn’t say.
But it was Funny.
First! I always wanted to be first!
ETA: Dammit. Not first.