PaleMasters

mgrjebbo · Post by **mgrjebbo** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 8:47 pm

Just had a thought about them, doesnt undead creature summoning and all the rest of the groovy abilitys of a palemaster seem evil? I just thought since everything about this class reaks of evil shouldnt being evil be a req for it? The reason i say this is as far as i can see the only melee character that has a chance against a 70 or higher ac which most PM builds have is someone with smite evil. a disturbing trend i have started seeing is true neutral PM builds? does this mean that melikki is their god and they belong in the circle?

just my 2 cents

Ryddwillow · Post by **Ryddwillow** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:35 pm

Why? Did you get beat down by one and you couldnt smite him?

P. Fricebottle · Post by **P. Fricebottle** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:34 am

Well, it does make sense. I mean, they're evil lords of the undead. I've never really heard of a good skeleton...

Saint_Saturn · Post by **Saint_Saturn** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:57 am

Personally, I agree with Mgrjebbo. Not because of the stastical bonuses vs. evil alignments, but for the roleplaying aspect. If you're going to focus your chosen class into one specific school of magic, and that magic happens to be the most evil of all, what with the whole animating corpses and skeletons and becoming a semi-skeleton yourself, i'd think your alignment should be pretty obvious..

IcemanXV · Post by **IcemanXV** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 1:39 am

I agree, palemasters should have, and always should be evil-aligned.

Their AC/immunity is sort of sick, but with every build, there's a counter-build.

Cthulhu Drega · Post by **Cthulhu Drega** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:22 am

IMO the reason they said Neutral to evil is the line of thinking "after we die our corpses are but meer shells discarded" with this in mind to the PM a corpse is nothing more than a tool or puppet there is no evil in using it for the PMs it is but a componet of a spell.

say resurection ( yes cleric i know) needed a frog or whatnot killed to cast is it a evil spell now? say it was to save a king or saint? is it evil? i say not it is meerly a requirement for a spell or effect nothing more.

just some devils advocate thinking for ya

IcemanXV · Post by **IcemanXV** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:39 am

Cleric argument is null since there can be any range of alignments for clerics. Different clerics would take different approaches to the frog issue, which is exactly what explains the separation of character alignments.

However with a PM, the simple act of becoming a palemaster is an evil deed, considering it is basically an arcane practitioner's path to becoming a lich. That right there simply implies a PM should be evil only.

The corpse argument I can see somewhat, but in the scope of DnD, the creation of the undead (deathly arts) is an evil process. NwN has limitations though, and it is theoretically possible to have a good aligned cleric summon undead, which is pretty much oxymoronic. So overall we just have to deal with what we are given.

Post by **Binkyuk** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 5:33 am

guns and spell schools aren't evil, people are evil.
just because you use evil means doesn't mean you can't be neutral (or even good) in your intentions. contrast with BG and Assassin that are evil in themselves, PM is only evil in his means.
it's already non-good to signify a good character wouldn't have anything to do with it. personally i think that's enough.