Is it wrong to bane necromancy?

J

James Trotta

Mentor
Diversity Committee
As I work toward creating a magic item that will help me battle undead, I'm faced with the thought that by baning a necromantic spell I am actually aiding the foul magic's corruption of the earth. How many of you feel that baning necromancy is wrong in some way?

Sparktet Bone Littlebeard
 
Normally dhe person or t'ing casting dhe necromancy at you eez healed by dhe necromancy. Een some cases in which dhe attacker eez say, an adventurer or somesuch dhat eez clearly metabolic wit'out a reverse lifeforce ritual or whate'er, dhen I see nye problem wit' dhis. You are nye creating a new necromantic spell by sending dhe same one back at dhe person who casted it.

Jus' my two copper,

Fortune And Love Find You Where'er,

~Marcena Cenkraea "The Dove" Idumea Dagon
 
From what I've seen of bane and reflecting energies, such magics create a new spell with the charm as its source - like when one reflects mystical force and the original caster is now bound. I wouldn't find it hard to believe that such charms doubled the amount of chaos energy in the equation.

More to the point, by using such charms, you are investing magical portions of Fortannis into creating items which affect and handle chaos. That is, you are devoting and focusing components into resisting, holding, redirecting, and expelling chaos magics. That residue of constantly handling such energies has to add up at some point.


Master Dramthin Hartsboon
Simple Keeper of the Tainted Grove
 
It could be argued that by baning a necromantic energy you are choosing to allow that energy to persist rather than cloaking or shielding it so that it dissipates. Is allowing chaos energy to exist (or persist) similar in nature to evoking it in the first place?

I would say better to Cloak the energy and be done with it.
 
But in dhe event dhat he has a bane necromancy magic t'ing, eez eet wrong to use it? I do nye t'ink so. I t'ink dhat banes and reflects merely direct dhe power toward dhe person who casted it wit'out doubling dhe amount of energy, in dhis case, chaotic energy.
 
I would argue that the energy is not doubled, just recycled.

However, I would argue that since the person who Banes or Reflects a Dominate or Prison (for example) is now the controller of that effect that a person who Banes or Reflects a necromantic spell or effect is now the owner of that spell. But, I would also argue that Bane and Reflect is not the same as casting the spell since you are not generating the spell or effect in the first place. Therefore, I believe that it is morally acceptable to Bane or Reflect a necromantic spell or effect.

Alavatar Peece
Red Wizard of the Crossroads
 
(shrug)

I would say by choosing to create and/or use a bane necromancy item or ritual you are choosing to utilize necromantic energy but not to be the origination of those energies. Its the choice between "using" Chaos energy (by Baning or Reflecting it) or "destroying" it (such as with a Cloak or Spell Shield) I can't see how the energy is transmuted or changed in any way- its still Chaos. Also I don't see how "doubling" the energy would be considered important-- isn't any Chaos energy illegal? Whether it causes light or massive damage (or healing to undead) seems moot. Just because you didn't send back MORE energy shouldn't negate the fact that you did, in fact, control necromantic energy.
 
Bane Necromancy and Reflect Magic are not necromantic, though. They merely redirect the energy off of the intended target back to the caster. The person Baning or Reflecting the magic has no control over it's effect, they are merely protecting themselves. For instance, would it be more morally appropriate to conciously receive a Necromantic effect instead of using a Bane Necromancy magic item? The energy is eventually destroyed once the spell finds a target in a few seconds, so it is not like Necromancy is persisting as opposed to a Necromantic potion or magic item is a persisting energy.

Also, if Baning and Reflecting Necromancy is considered morally unacceptable then a Reflect Magic, which is a dumb defense, could instigate a lot of problems. Everyone who has a Reflect Magic active while fighting beings throwing Necromancy would be in danger of violating their morals or ethics just by receiving a necromantic spell.

Alavatar Peece
Red Wizard of the Crossroads
 
Perhaps baning or reflecting magic of a necromantic nature should be considered morally "touchy ground".

After all there are easier protectives, such as spell shield, which will stop the effect without re-using the energy. Also creating a Bane Necromancy ritual is a conscious choice to focus on Chaos magic. Using a Reflect Magic isn't conscious but someone should be aware that they may Reflect something unsavory and accept the risks.

If a Bane or Reflect is all you have to save yourself then you have a choice to make I would argue. Creating a Cloak ritual is no more difficult than a Bane ritual and Spell Shield is actually a lower circle spell than Reflect Magic and very easy to acquire. They're your protectives and your choice to use them- you should be responsible for the after effects they produce. In the end if you can justify it to yourself and reconcile it with the law you can do as you wish.
 
Maybe instead of asking on dhe public forum, jus' reconcile eet in advance wit' your own local gov'ment. Sounds like avoiding a fight 'tween adventuers eef you ask me.
 
Quinn said:
(shrug)

I would say by choosing to create and/or use a bane necromancy item or ritual you are choosing to utilize necromantic energy but not to be the origination of those energies. Its the choice between "using" Chaos energy (by Baning or Reflecting it) or "destroying" it (such as with a Cloak or Spell Shield) I can't see how the energy is transmuted or changed in any way- its still Chaos. Also I don't see how "doubling" the energy would be considered important-- isn't any Chaos energy illegal? Whether it causes light or massive damage (or healing to undead) seems moot. Just because you didn't send back MORE energy shouldn't negate the fact that you did, in fact, control necromantic energy.
Click to expand...

When you make the item it does NOT use nercomancy.

I don't know about you but cloaks and banes are great at allowing me to survive. Also there are several non-undead that cast necro and are hurt by it.

Finaly, by baining necro you are not breaking the law.
 
It doesn't use Necromancy, no, but a cloak or bane will CONTROL Necromancy either by absorbing/shattering the energy or reflecting it back at who cast it. I did not claim that they were against the law- they are not that is obvious to any idiot. I suggested that the use to which they are put should give people pause. Manipulating Chaotic energy in any fashion, even simply to redirect it, would be villainous by some people's interpretations.

If your only concern is saving your life, as I said, there are many alternatives (including CLOAKS) which do NOT redirect the Necromantic energy but will still spare you from its effects. Why should it be more morally acceptable to return Necromancy on a caster than to cast it yourself? How does that in any way make you a better person than the one who used it in the first place? I'm not saying someone who casts Necromancy shouldn't suffer for it- far from it. I'm saying that there are other ways to fight them than resorting to manipulating Chaos Magic in any form other than to terminate it.

And finally no one said that Bane Necromancy was against the law. Nor is creating a Bane Necromancy ritual. If the wording of the "law" is all you use to determine your moral standing I pity you. As I said if you can justify it to yourself morally (which, obviously you can) by all means justify it for yourself. I've given my opinion based on my own moral compass and the teachings of my people as an Earth Ritualist and Healer, not on what will gain me the most power.
 
True, Spell Shield is easier to cast and it does stop the effect. But, if a person already has a Reflect Magic active I would not advocate burning the Reflect Magic and casting a Spell Shield if combat ensues where Necromantic Spells are being cast. This is similar to a Biata or Mystic Wood Elf around Command effects. I doubt a Biata or Mystic Wood Elf would remove their Reflect Magic protection if a creature is using Magic Dominate or Command spells.

Ritual Scrolls are not always easy to come by. Sometimes a person has to use what is available, which may be Bane Ritual Scrolls. And sometimes the ritual effects available are not chosen by the owner of the item, for instance when a magic item is found with Bane Necromancy. The Bane found on an item is not necromantic in nature and despite the choice to use this the person executing a Bane Necromancy is not furthering the cause of Necromancy, nor innately advocating the use of Necromancy. It is merely an "incase it happens" effect, much like Spell Shield, Cloak, and Reflect and is therefore legal and morally acceptable.

Some people may have a more rigid morality system concerning items that deal with Earth and Necromancy; i.e. in which anything that allows Necromancy to potentially harm something is bad. But, for the most part, Bane Necromancy is considered to be as acceptable as a Reflect Magic.

Regards,
Alavatar Peece
Red Wizard of the Crossroads
 
It seem to ol' Raif dat deh question should'na be "Is it..." but "Do you think it's..." 'cause unless it be a law somewhere den it's just opinion all aroun'. My opinion? Save deh Banes fo' Bindin' and Curses and use deh Cloaks fo' Chaos jus' to be sure.
 
I believe Quinn (is that your name?) has hit upon the main crux of the argument. We could spend any number of aeons discussing what the meta-magical and energetic consequences are or might be, and only truly inspired or accomplished Formal Magicians would really be able to answer that question. However, what she brought up is the question, "Regardless of whether there is more Chaos being created, is it right to use Chaos in any manner?"

Even if you didn't cast the spell yourself, you are still consciously using the powers of Chaos to harm another creature. That is, you are actually benefitting from Chaos and its effects. Sure, it's a protective, but by using such a Bane you are still affecting another with the horrors of Chaos and, thus, propagating the system. Truthfully, it seems to me, if we take it as premise that Chaos in every form is always destructive, wouldn't a Bane vs Chaos charm be just as bad?

If we are to allow Bane charms, which refocus Chaos magics, why not allow other charms which cast Chaos? In neither case would the bearer of the charm actually be casting Chaos, they would merely be releasing energies within the charm cast by another. It seems to me, though they are not exactly the same, the line seems mostly semantic.

And though Red Wizard Peece speaks honestly that one cannot choose what one finds, one can certainly choose not to use such tainted items. After all, though one is not casting Chaos, one is, by omission, allowing it to hurt people.


Master Dramthin Hartsboon
Simple Keeper of the Tainted Grove
 
Elegantly stated Master Hartsboon.

And yes, my name is Quinn. I'm so used to being in my own lands that I sometimes forget in the wider world I'm anonymous. Also, among my people, Quinn is a male name. :)

~Quinn d'Earahah
 
I think everyone here is overthinking the issue. I hate necromancy, true. However, the summoning up of the energies up, twisting and defiling the earth is what is the damaging, immoral and evil part. once the spell is cast, the damage has been already done, where the spell ends up is irrelavant. Think of a bane ritual as a big trampoline and the nec spell as a water baloon. You toss the baloon at me, I hold up my trampoline, you get wet. It's as simple as that. I didn't go get a new baloon, or new water. Infact, i believe that in returning the spell upon a lich or vampire, or one of the many other necro resisant creatures, the spell has no effect, therefore negating any further damage it could have caused. If your really that worried about what happens to a nec spell or any spell after its cast and where the energies end up, wouldn't you then also suggest that it would be wrong to dodge or phase such a spell and let it fly off to who knows where?
 
Quinn said:
It doesn't use Necromancy, no, but a cloak or bane will CONTROL Necromancy either by absorbing/shattering the energy or reflecting it back at who cast it. I did not claim that they were against the law- they are not that is obvious to any idiot. I suggested that the use to which they are put should give people pause. Manipulating Chaotic energy in any fashion, even simply to redirect it, would be villainous by some people's interpretations.

If your only concern is saving your life, as I said, there are many alternatives (including CLOAKS) which do NOT redirect the Necromantic energy but will still spare you from its effects. Why should it be more morally acceptable to return Necromancy on a caster than to cast it yourself? How does that in any way make you a better person than the one who used it in the first place? I'm not saying someone who casts Necromancy shouldn't suffer for it- far from it. I'm saying that there are other ways to fight them than resorting to manipulating Chaos Magic in any form other than to terminate it.

And finally no one said that Bane Necromancy was against the law. Nor is creating a Bane Necromancy ritual. If the wording of the "law" is all you use to determine your moral standing I pity you. As I said if you can justify it to yourself morally (which, obviously you can) by all means justify it for yourself. I've given my opinion based on my own moral compass and the teachings of my people as an Earth Ritualist and Healer, not on what will gain me the most power.
Click to expand...

I understand your look on the matter and respect it, but while your morals about the subject might cause you to suck up the spell instead of send it back, that causes you to take the effect and then have to waist resources to remove it. Lets use a cause mort as our example. Now you have lost precious health, causing a cure mort to reverse those effects. Now there is one less cure mort to be used, when instead a bane would save that, ever important earth spell.
Take a look at what Red said. I agree that a bane does not cause duplicate spell to be created, it just send the original back to the caster. In face it probably causes them to no longer cast that spell, for fear that it might be baned again. Confusion is a great tactic that many adventurer forget to use. As a matter of fact my team, the Black Forest used such tactics to defeat the dragon that was in Vandalar during the cold season.

I am in no need of your pity.....I am far past that believe me.
 
What really amazes me is that one would even take the risk. The most common First Offense punishment for casting a single Chaotic spell is death, the second often being execution unto dissolution. Many in the dreamscape have been threatened with torture, death, even Obliteration for speaking about Chaos. In a world where Chaos is such a vile taboo that asking after it marks ones as outcast and blasphemer, there are those here speaking about its use in combat and brushing aside truly compelling questions about the very nature of these everyday charms. If even the slightest possibility exists that Bane magics further increase Chaos, why in the Great Dragon's name would we even chance it when Cloak charms and other protectives are as prolific, if not more so?

Frankly, I am surprised there has not a general outcry from the hunter population to investigate this question. Redcloud, you raise another very interesting question, what does happen to Chaotic energy which miss their intended target? I would certainly be interested in listening to anyone well versed on the topic.

Quinn d'Earahah - I do apologize if my error slighted you. My birth tongue was not common, and the elven scholars who trained me adopted the female pronoun as gender neutral and primary, as a matter of course, due to the Matriarchal nature of their society. I hope you can accept my apology, for your words have been most insightful herein.


Master Dramthin Hartsboon
Simple Keeper of the Tainted Grove
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top