Yes. And low-Will classes already have enough trouble making these saves without tacking a penalty on top - remember, a Ranger’s maximum save before ability scores is +6 at level 20. And +4 *(*make that +7 with the nigh-Standard issue Cloak of Resistance) *really *ain’t much when you’re facing an Epic level psion - psionics being broken as hell, they can raise the save DC of many of their spells even beyond the norm by overspending PPs.
Right, I meant (>.<) (as in, the visual effect of that psy surge on those who seem to have failed their saves the hardest, Roy and Haley. Who, coincidentally or not, also happen to be the ones with the worst Will saves in the party except for the Belkster.
It’s not just “not shown,” they are clearly both shown either holding their heads or simply with their hands raised to their ears, and are the only two making that very specific gesture.
I don’t think that’s necessarily meaningful. Elan and V have their back turned to the camera because they have Tarquin’s group surrounded, and somebody needs to be in the foreground. Similarly, I think the reason those two appear to be grabbing their ears is a function of the fact that there’s only so many ways you can show someone in pain from behind, particularly given the level of detail available in Rich’s artistic style.
In the previous strip, Laurin had Roy “locked down”, whatever that means – unable to fight back. Could that be what Laurin is doing to the whole group now?
Why not ? Now that he’s free from Malack’s control, he’s more or less the same stalwart and loyal dorf he always was, except with a slight case of heliophobia.
OK, so he’s an abominable albeit sexay mockery of the holy cycle of life, but that’s beyond his control, innit ? I suppose he could get himself staked then rez’d but eh. More pressing matters, and besides the vampiric perks are pretty damn useful. And D&D vampires don’t need to drink blood to survive (it’s just a thing they do to spawn progeny and be dicks, essentially), so as long as he doesn’t do it outside of regular combat, that’s no hit on his alignment either.
In D&D, evil isn’t an abstract philosophical idea to be debated: it’s part of the cosmology, something that physicists could study. Vampires are evil not because of what they do, but because of what they are.
Not necessarily - her and Tarquin’s goal was to assassinate Roy, not mix it up with the whole of OOTS. She immobilised him and lifted him up to Tarquin for a coup de grace. Had that worked she’d have opened another portal for her group to exit by, job done.
As it happens, not immobilising everybody now looks like a tactical error - but of the sort you might make if you were complacent about your opponents and trying to rush through a job as a quick favour rather than giving it your full attention.
[QUOTE=Kobal2]
(Yes, Durkon is technically a Good guy by character and morality, but as a vamp’ he’s Evil by his very nature. D&D can be dumb like that, don’t get me started).
[/QUOTE]
But **Miller **seemed to be saying that Count Durkon was now Evil even aside from his current forced alignment change courtesy of simple undeadity, so I was curious.
Why did Lucy Westerna start eating children as soon as she became a vampire? Why did Jesse try to kill his best friend, Xander, when he was turned? Why did David and his friends spend all their time eating the citizens of Santa Carla?
All Vampires Are Evil is the original vampire trope. There’re plenty of great stories that subvert this, but D&D generally plays it straight. OotS might be going a different route with it, but given that weve already seen that Durkon is channeling negative energy now (from his attempt to heal Roy) I rather doubt it. Apparently, being transformed into an unholy mockery of life that is literally powered by evil has some pretty profound effects on one’s conception of right and wrong.
Besides which, if the only effect of Durkon’s death scene is that he gets a bunch of superpowers, that’s really going to murder the drama of that scene.
If that were true, then why are there endless debates about it? Of course it remains an abstract idea.
True as far as the cosmology goes, not necessarily true in a particular context with individuals, and certainly not necessarily true in the OOTS universe. Consider, for example, Roy’s being questioned and debriefed about his actions, when trying to enter the Lawful Good afterlife, and nearly being tossed into the “neutral” afterlife because of the grey nature of some of his decision making.
If Roy is innately “good” because of merely who he is, then why the questioning about his actions?
Why would it be any different for a vampire, as opposed to human, PC?
True as a group, true for NPCs, not necessarily true within individual PCs, especially in the OOTS universe. The creation of undead is unquestionably an evil act. The pressures and desires which drive sapient undead come unquestionably from an evil source. But what an independent sapient entity with freewill does under those pressures has to be up the individual.
Was Drizzt Do’Urden evil because Drow are “always evil,” or good because, despite his upbringing and social conditioning, his actions were good in the world?
ETA: My prediction is that, despite all I wrote above, Durkon is now Evil, but that it will come out in unexpected ways.
I’m not really sure what you mean by this. What sort of evil is there outside of the alignment change? If you’re referring to the fact that Durkon has not yet committed any evil acts, sure, but that’s mostly down to a lack of opportunity thus far. Alignment isn’t meant to track your past actions, but to indicate your reaction to future events.
Also, word of god is that Durkon is Lawful Evil, and his lawfulness will motivate him to demonstrate loyalty to his group. This could mask evil intent for some time.
Well, there was Nale’s offer to help him slaughter his old teammates and make some new thralls out of them, which he rejected. I guess we’ll see how things progress.
However, there are definitely more abstract considerations of good and evil in OOTS, at least. I mean, for one thing, I’d rather have Belkar as a teammate than Miko, even though he’s Evil and she was Good. Belkar would perhaps feel some team loyalty, like he did when Roy wanted to abandon Elan back in Wooden Forest. Whereas Miko might decide I’m not holy enough and slay me at any time. Heck, she sliced me up with her katanas just for continuing to read a freakin’ book!
Drow aren’t “always evil”, they are “usually evil”. They are not creatures fuelled by anti-life like the Undead, or the anthropomorphic personifications of Evil like Outsiders. They are people.
The thing in D&D is that abstract ideas can also be people. “Marital infidelity” is an abstract idea. It’s also literally who Sabine is - she is, as she puts it, a physical embodiment of illicit sex.
The difference between Roy and Durkon is that Roy is a mortal. Mortals, for the most part, aren’t innately anything. Demons, angels, and undead, among other things, don’t necessarily work that way.
(Also, I kind of think Roy’s interview was mostly a formality. He’s going to the *Lawful *Good afterlife. Of course there’s an interview to get in.)
That presumes that Durkon has free will. (Well, it presumes that anyone has free will, but let’s not go there.) Sure, he’s not under Malack’s control anymore, but his body is still suffused with literal, non-abstract evil, and that’s corrupted him on an essential, moral level.
That’s the thing about alignment in D&D. “Evil” can mean the jerk in the office who loves to make things miserable for his co-workers. It can be the professional criminal who once killed a security guard while robbing a bank. It can be the serial killer stitching together a skin suit in his basement. Or it can be Satan himself.
In the context of the Forgotten Realms, the drow aren’t innately evil, but are the product of a brutal and vicious culture that ruthlessly programs them to be utterly evil, and is so efficient at it that virtually no one can survive it without becoming utterly depraved. But also in the context of the Forgotten Realms are demons, who are literally made out of evil. So “always evil” as a stat block entry has some elasticity to it.
Originally, in the first edition, Drow were always Chaotic Evil. I know it’s been updated in later editions following the creation of Drizz’t.
Making a vampire a PC changes everything in my opinion about their typical “always Chaotic Evil” status. Unless you want to deny your PC a choice in the character’s actions, that is, which is hardly fun.
Turning down an offer of help from Nale doesn’t necessarily mean Durkon’s alignment has changed, it just means that his Wisdom score hasn’t changed.
Yeah, if you read through some of the gaming articles Burlew has written on his website, he talks a lot about the difference between being good, and being likable. Miko was Lawful Good, but I suspect she had the charisma score of roadkill. She was unpleasant to be around. Tarquin has charisma out the wazoo, and he’s basically Hitler with dinosaurs.