Lawful Good ethics question / summoning fodder

[Waverly]

No, No, I wasn't implying that you couldn't tell good from evil. BUT a when you summon a demon, you are not summoning a servant of some fallen angel and offending some primary diety. What you summon is just a creature (who happens to have evil alignment) from another plane. Since you summon it to do your bidding, there is nothing inherintly evil about it.

Summoning animals is more difficult. No, you don't create them- you can summon, transmute, project, etc. but no living creature in Faerun is capable of creating life. So do you call them to their certain doom? Looks like it- unless their ability to appear out of nothing makes them some form of spirit creature (as opposed to flesh.)

[T'lainya]

Interesting topic; my take on druids summoning animals is that it might be acceptable if defending a druid grove or forest. I'm not sure it's ethical if used as a barrier so your character can go tomb robbing or something similar for personal gain. BTW did anyone else have a similar ethical dilemma playing a good char. and trying to get the frost giant belt? My CG elf ranger passed up on it as being not in alignment or class. My neutral ft/mg however had no such problem.

[Drakron Du´Dark]

Well let me help you.
you are summoning creatures(no matter what they are) from the planes to the prime material plane (were you are) even if they die they return to were they come from. I am not sure if when they die in the prime if that death is permentent after all demons can only be killed on the lower plane.
About demons, well summoning a creature of evil to help a good party is not a evil act, besides the demon will not stay in the prime for long.And the clerics spells are given by the cleric god, so if its god have no problems with that, why sould the cleric have.

------------------
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not became a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss gazes into you..."
Friedrich Nietzsche

[Gruntboy]

Ain't no room for ethics in this game...

Hee hee! http://www.gamebanshee.com/ubb/wink.gif

[geh4th]

I guess my opinion is that the god likely WOULD have a problem with the summoning of demons, if of a good alignment. Just because the spell is on a universal list of cleric spells, regardless of alignment, does not mean that the god would consider it acceptable.

Again, an alternative would make sense, a servant OF the god, rather than an enemy.

Do I take it to mean that summoned animals come from one of the outer planes,as well? Kind of an "animal heaven?" If this were to be accepted, it would lead back to the "it's already dead, so what if it dies again defending me"? perspective.

------------------
"If you prefer, you could say EXPERT treasure hunter!"
--Gandalf the Grey, the Hobbit

[Drakron Du´Dark]

There is place on the planes called "happy hunting grounds" were there are a lot of Animals there, There are orc, goblins and others in there as well.what is on the Prime can also be found on the planes, but the "planar" orc is diferent of the "prime" orc, a planar creature can be summoned, a Prime Creature can not.
A "gate" spell in this game works different that the one in the PnP game, and its avaible to all types of clerics.
Besides the "cause critical wounds" can not be cast by Good Clerics in PnP but here it can.

------------------
"He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not became a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss gazes into you..."
Friedrich Nietzsche

[Waverly]

I like Drakron's 'happy hunting gounds' explaination. As for demons, I will stick to what I said above considering them creatures and not embodiments of evil. Keep in mind the cleric only has the powers bestowed on him by his god- so obviously there is no conflict there.

[Thomas]

My take on this.


As far as I know the "summon being" spells of Faerun actually teleports these beings to the casters location where they do his bidding IF this does not go completely against their own wishes.


I know that the PnP style varies a lot conserning this but it's my experience that the summoner have to somehow coax the summoned beings into doing what he or she wants. Hence Enchantment/charm spells are good follow up spells in order to make the summoned creature do something it really does not want to do.


In the computer game this coaxing would make the whole use of the spell impossible (imagine writing dialouge for each summoned monster) as well giving it a very low coolness factor.


My view is that using summoned creatures against a foe they can not hope to beat to be wicked. I am one of those people who actually bother to heal my summoned monsters or make them retreat our of battle. Can't help it. It's the strategist in me that continues to see these creatures as "reinforcement".


A desperate mage might go for a summoning spell in order to save his or her life by teleporting in some hapless beings in harms way. I assume that is why the BG spell only summons evil creatures and not any creature of the appropriate hitdice. I remember a PnP session when a highlevel summon monster spell summoned the only creature in the vicinity that fullfilled the HD requirement. This happened to be the Paladin in the party who was not to pleased to find himself teleported into the midst of the orcish tribal meeting.


I don't agree that a lawful good priest should not be able to summon undead or demons. I reason that the summoned undead are fallen creatures of law and good that the priest humbly asks to do battle for him. A long since dead paladin who once again hears the call to battle against evil might very well charge into impossible odds, both since he or she gets one more chance to purge the realm of evil and because by doing so help an important member of his church, thus it being the deties will. It's not that the dead has much to loose to fight for the living.


Summoned demons are snatched by a deties will and tossed into the world. By doing so most certainly disrupts what ever the wicked creature was doing and puts it into battle for one of the deties servants. If it defeats the enemies it may return to its home. If it dies then the world is all the better without it. The cleric who summons these creatures without due cause however should be the focus of divine wrath. But the game doesn't recognise unscripted Good/Evil actions and doesn't stop you from playing against your alignment.


A druid should not send in animals to be butchered but should most certainly call upon nature for help to deal with enemies that would shift the balance of the realm. Healing these animals and beings after their service is done should make a lot of sence to a druid.

[This message has been edited by Thomas (edited 01-22-2001).]

[hermetic]

At the risk of waxing philosophical, let me say that the whole alignment issue, which most normal pen&paper folk brutally ignore, is dealt with brilliantly in BG. The behavior of the characters, especially the peculiar behavior of Anomen, gave me some pretty deep insight on the alignments which i hadn't had in the past. This is mind: how many of the characters seem to exhibit their alignment's qualities? i.e. Did the good folks at Black Isle know their alignments? I think I've read here on these boards that Korgan should be Neutral Evil and I agree; CE is better off for total basket cases, as is Chaotic Neutral. I've always heard that CN should be the most difficult alignment to play and for Haer'Dalis and Jan, CN was a poor choice. But for Anomen, after his fallout with the Radiant Heart, CN fits beautifully. The choice of True Neutral for Yoshimo, in turn, was very good, and it should be the alignment for Jan & Haer'Dalis (even though this idiotic bard does act truly to his alignment if you have Aerie on board). Anyhoo, I've digressed, but my main point is that alignment is the most inconsistent feature of Dungeons & Dragons, and it's no different in this game. In fact, I think the BG games handle it better than most old school role players. The consistency of D&D in CRPG form is what made me abandon the monotony of dice-rolling many years ago.

[Krom]

Alignment should be used as a guide, not a collar. There is variance within each alignment as well. For example, would 2 paladins of 2 different faiths behave in the exact same way? No. They both are lawful good. They both do lawful good things. However, their solutions to problems and their character may be completely different.

As a DM, I always stress to players to play their character how they would play him/her. If a player crosses the line as far as alignment is concerned, then I would give a warning to that player. If it happens again, I usually (though it depends on the character involved) give a second warning. If it happens a 3rd time, I'll shift the alignment (usually by 1 shift: i.e. lawful - neutral) and impose any penalties that may occur.

In truth, there are very few instances in which a minor alignment change will affect the character involved (i.e. Paladin). In any event, it takes more than one instance (or poor judgement) on a character's part to constitute a permanent change in alignment. Mainly because you're completely changing the character's outlook on things.

[Mhr'djynn]

Some examples from the descriptions of spells:

Summon Nishruu - "the wizard calls a magical being of considerable power into existence ...there is no question as to the loyalty of the creature and it will not attack its summoner even though it would like nothing better."

-- so, it seems reasonable to me that, as Waverly said, "you can summon, transmute, project, etc. but no living creature in Faerun is capable of creating life," at least in this example, the fact seems to be that the wizard actually calls this being into existence, and that this being acts against its expressed will for the caster. Also interesting, at the end of the spell, it says "This creature will remain under the wizard's control until reduced to 0 hit points or ths spell duration expires." Doesn't say die, doesn't say utterly destroyed, so, maybe it is incapable of dying in a summoned state.

Invisible Stalker - "This spell summons an invisible stalker from the Elemental plane of Air. This 8 hd monster obeys and serves the spell caster in performing whatever tasks are set before it. Even if this means being sent to certain death. The creature remains under the casters control for 9 hours or until it is killed -- at which point it will return to its native plane, only slightly annoyed at having to serve a mortal."

-- So I take it that these creatures are summoned from another plane, can die in this plane, but will still return to their native plane unhappy but intact. So there is no real issue as to whether it is ethical to use them as fodder as they don't actually cease to exist permanently.

However, I still think that in the case of Druids, the summoning of animals (which apparently are real animals from the prime which simply come to the Druid's aid) should only be used in the direst of circumstances, as an abuse of this would directly go against the Druid's ethos regarding nature, regardless of alignment (except maybe a truly chaotic neutral or evil).

And as for playing out of alignment, I understand that BGII makes it easy to go against alignment, as it is in real life. I mean, everyone makes exceptions to thier rules based on need, experience, and other circumstances. Heh, there is no "Act-Utilitarian Good" alignment. Although maybe that is what most good-aligned people tend to play.


[This message has been edited by Mhr'djynn (edited 01-22-2001).]

[Gruntboy]

Either I'm shrinking or the posts are getting bigger around here. http://www.gamebanshee.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

[Rail]

Grunt, I don't think that's appropriate here. http://www.gamebanshee.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

Another question re: the summoning of undead. Has anyone tried to detect evil when your lawful good cleric summons skeletons? I don't think they are good (alignment wise), so I think the logic of having them summon such undead is indeed flawed. A skeletal paladin coming back to fight evil shouldn't radiate evil.

@Krom- I agree with you. Having been a DM for many years, I had a chart of all the alignments and would shift players slightly after each session, so they could see which direction they are drifring. If their behavior kept up as contrary to their alighment, they would eventually move from lawful to neutral, or evil to neutral. One decision did not decide a permenant alignment. In this game, it sometimes does. Unfortunate. And, there is no way back.

[samcu]

I think Deontology and Teleology are based on transactions/events, where there are 'exceptions-to-the-rule'.
Alignments are the generally ethical manners that average themselves out.

As for the animal/monster cruelty issue, since they don't really die but rather return to their planes. Therefore it will not kill them, but like playing with them or entertaining them. I guess under these assumptions, it is acceptable to summon them up.