[.86][suggestion] spells that don't match alignment

from Elemental Forums

The soul stealing spell that kills a friendly hero to steal a spell-book from him doesn't seem like something a good sovie would cast.

Paragon doesn't seem like something an evil sovie would cast.  Come on, sacrifice some of you vital stats to benefit a subordinate?  They'd kick you out of the villains guild.

It's ok in the beta, so everyone can cast everything no matter if they are good or evil, but I hope they clean this up before go-live.  Maybe neutrals could cast both.

 

I have a similar issue with the wildlands where the reward is to gain lots of hit-points, and lose ability to heal naturally, but only if you raze one of your cities.  Seen any good guys lately in a hurry to massacre civilians to turn themselves into an undead zombie ?

 

PS:  the forum spell-checker doesn't seem to like "undead".  Seems like they could use a little dictionary customization if they want to do fantasy games.

 

 

2,683 views 4 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

First of all, I think its your browser that does the spell-checking.

Second of all, I haven't read the book but I am assuming your idea of "good" and "evil" is just your opinion. I personally don't agree with your points, its fairly normal for an evil intellectual type to sit in the back and have his champion go around fighting (darth sidious and darth vader, for example).

I think they should focus on just adding spells, we can make a mod later to restrict to certain races later (though it might be tough with custom races). 

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top

Ok, I'm an idiot re spell-checking.

But there is a difference between having the minions doing you fighting for you, or even strengthening them so the can serve you better, vs weakening yourself personally to strengthen them.  Just doesn't fit the evil image.

And I still can't picture a "good" guy massacring a town to gain hit points.

Galactic Civilizations IV
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

Well then, just say no?

 

I guess its an interesting design philosophy whether or not to purposely include choices that the player will probably decline or ignore, but do you really want Stardock determining how you should play? Its up to you, thats part of the appeal of 4x games... the sandbox nature. 

I guess they could make every quest have a good option and and evil option like SWTOR, but personally i find that it somewhat detracts from the roleplaying when its so overt and contrived that every situation can resolve favorably for you.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

Is good and evil not determined by your actions (and the values and beliefs of the observer)? You aren't good because you are incapable of doing evil things, you're good because you choose not to do evil things. Get what I'm saying?

In other words, sovereigns are not inherently good or evil: if your "good" sovereign uses an "evil" spell, then they aren't good are they? They're evil because they do evil things. Of course, good and evil are extremely subjective: why can't an evil overlord transfer his powers to his loyal minions, letting them face the dangers while he sits safe on his throne? Conversely, why can't a good sovereign sacrifice one life in order to gain the power to save the lives of many (this is greyer but still extremely subjective, depending on whether you believe in "the greater good")?