The nature of evil - and the paladins detect evil ability

[Ramblinwomble]

I was going to reply to Vahene's post in J4's paladin's detect evil thread -

On one hand you can't just kill a character if you are 'good' if you detect them to be evil (sorta negates any RP there..)..

but I decided that this would derail that thread so hence this thread. Please don't confuse what I'm about to type with my views of right and wrong in the real world.

Now, my interpretation, as a Player in Dasaria, has always been that Evil and Good are very real black and white forces. Everyone knows Nergal is evil, he exists to do evil. Utu is good, he exists to do good, and oppose evil.

Evil exists to do murder, rapine, drown kittens, lie on tax returns, and crush Good for all eternity.

Good exists to help old halfling grannies across busy streets, protect the weak, and defeat evil for all eternity.

For this reason I have always tended to class most of my characters as neutral something. They may tend to do right, or wrong, but they are not actively working to promote Good or Evil.

If I put good, or evil, onto my character sheet then I am making a commitment to oppose the other force whenever it rears it's head (or tentacles). As living people in Dasaria my characters have perfect examples of what it is they are required to do to be "good", or "evil", because the Gods exist and they'll even tell you sometimes if you're confused.

Some of my good characters are not the swords out, heads off, sort of good characters. There are, after all, many ways to oppose evil. But at the end of the day if it came down to the simple choice of one of them going into a fight, knowing they'd lose, to oppose an act of evil, or walking away, they would fight. If they didn't then I'd be asking for an alignment shift - they had the chance to make a stand and they backed down, their convictions where not up to the challenge, and they can join the great unwashed mass of neutrality.

Paladins are, in my opinion, an even more extreme example. They are the living champions of good. Living, breathing, representatives of the Higher powers and they have a divinely given mandate to oppose evil, it is what they are there to do, social nicieties be damned. Turn it on the head for Blackguards.

Vahene is right, from a fun point of view it would not be good to have PC paladins roaming the land killing everyone who detected as evil. But on the other hand a Paladin who is in the presence of evil is required to do something about it, because that's their reason for existance. And if, in their judgement, words are not going to stop this agent of evil, then hacking time it better be.

From a RP point of view, if I'm playing the evil character, I'll hope for a little verbal sparing first, but I'll expect the holy advenger to come out unless I had a compelling argument for it not to.

So, if I was the Paladin at the door and the approaching Baron detected as evil I might not hack his head off straight away, but there would be at the very least a "Get back spawn of evil!" - always a winner at social gatherings.
On the road to Dasar, if I was in a hurry to save some worthy old halfling grandma, I'd probably be drawing my blade at about the "spawn of" point of the exchange. Evil is just that, evil. Paladins stop evil. Dead evil people, mostly, don't do evil anymore (leave Malestrom out of this, he's not been people for some time ).

I'm interested in other people's interpretations on the D&D alignment system - especially as it relates to good and evil in Dasaria.

[DM Chicken Little]

If there was only good and evil...i would agree. However the forces of Chaos, Law, and neutrality exist.

If a paladin walks into Daris, and suddenly detects evil and kills citizens...he is no longer lawful. That act is more chaotic, and puts his faith into jeopardy. What if lawful good characters were partying with known EOS members? That doesnt follow the law or the laws of most good gods...

The same has been with chaotic evil characters, in the past some who have started to follow the law, and gave to charity were hit with an alignment shift.

Lawful evil, neutral evil, and chaotic evil are all very different things....I personally dont feel that many players follow alignment at all, you would be amazed at how many only choose alignments for class selections and that is it. Those things are noticed by the DMs, and it does effect aspects of game play.

I think a vigilante redboot could be lawful evil...one who upholds the law till it no longer does the job. (think Batman here folks)

A fallen druid who kills those who threaten the balance while placing his own soul into risk is a good example of Neutral Evil.

Chaotic Evil is easily the corrupt politician who does everything in his power to make his town look good, while gaining fortune for himself is just another example of how evil has many faces.

Good based players are some of the hardest to RP....evil is everywhere, good isnt.

Come on, Robin Hood would have been chaotic good in my book...however im sure those he stole from saw him as the problem of the lands...

Very well played evil is just as rare as a real paladin.

[El Pantezo]

Meh, I find good to be a lot easier to play. With a hardcore evil caharacter you have to find that balance between being actively evil (not just forever stuck in that making passive agressive threats and dark plotting and using far too many elipsises) and saving your ass (Not getting rushed by a dozen paladins) That's off topic though.

Anyways, evil isn't all about actively trying to kill everyone good. Only the most extreme cases of evil are like that (Think demons and high ranking black guards) More commonly evil is just that bitter angry neighbor who steals people's gardening tools and never gives them back. Of course someone who's evil in an adventuring game is going to be a bit more diabolical than that, but it's not all rape pillage and murder 24/7. You don't have to actively hunt down good people just because you're evil. Typically evil people are just the type who will take opportunities to better themselves (In terms of power or wealth and such.) regardless of morals. They'd be the type to make a bet with some drunk farmer that the farmer obviously couldn't afford or win, and then take all the farmer's property when he can't pay up.

[lankycheese]

I agree with you RW pretty much 100% on the whole the good vs evil thing. They are two very different sides in my opinion. But with regards to your views and lawful vs chaos CL, seems we share different views.

To me lawful does not mean follows the law. It means that he will plan things out, think things through, and usually he will follow some sort of code of conduct, ie the laws of the land, but not always the case. A lawful evil villain to me, is not necessarily your run of the mill sneaky bad guy who follows the law so you cant kill me bla bla bla.... It's your diabolical master mind, evil to the bone, but lawful in that he will actually plan things rather then run recklessly into the slaughter, but he may still not follow the law, Varanites I would think are lawful evil, as are a number of other EOS evil characters around the place. Monks must be lawful as only a lawful personality could commit to the disipline that is required for a monk.

And again chaotic does not mean they don't follow the law, it just simply means they are quite reckless and spontanious, following their insticnts more then anything. They can still follow the law of the land, thats the reason why we have quite a few chaotic redboots. There is no way IMO that there could be a lawful evil redboot. He could be chaotic good and kill recklessly, but at the end of the day, good and evil are two very different sides in a never ending war.

With regards to Paladins, they themselves are not required to follow the law of the land all the time, if their holy duties require them to go beyond it. Many times the laws of Dasaria have protected drow and Nergalites and other evil beings, you would be a bad paladin to stand idle by with all of this. Luckily though most of the laws of Dasaria fit into a Paladins code of conduct, but Til will not hesitate to spill blood in town if it is required, but of course he will accept the consiquences of doing such actions.

I think of lawful as the opposite of chaotic really, someone that will think things through and plan, to me that is what lawful is. And also in my opinion, Batman is lawful good

[DM Chicken Little]

I dont know...

Ive looked at alignments, and there are more evil Redboots than good some days...and to use your example...not all Nergalites are evil.

Those are the results of IC actions by the leaders and players of those factions.

Ive long acted as a Dm that a Paladin who doesnt follow laws...will receive alignment hits...if not finding a redboot guard putting them under arrest.

[Redder]

I always thought the difference betwen Lawful and Chaotic was:

Lawful has a purpose, is organised, has a plan and will follow that plan to the end.

Chaotic will do things on a whim, flip a coin, has no formal plan and generally fails to follow things through.

What the "Laws of the land" are didn't really have anything to do with it.

Also, Evil comes in many facets - from a corrupt politician to someone that will simply kill you on sight.

As does good. A good person may give to charity, while another good person may not. Just because they dont give to a charity doesn't make them evil or neutral, just not as good as that dedicated Paladin.

However, both Paladins and BlackGuards are the epitomy of either side. A true Paladin will uphold all that is "good" - laws are not always good and thus a Paladin may break the "law of the land" if it means he is upholding the "good" such as beating up that evil Drow in the village - even when the village laws clearly states no violence within the village. The BlackGuard has a similar "zone", yet the BlackGuard will oppose all that is "good" and probably just about all that is evil as well. The BlackGuard is usually the one to kill on sight and not always by his own hand - as you see that Vrok rush over and start attacking you for no reason other than to hear you scream.

There are many facets that situations will bring to a character and you would generall choose to do - what you think your character would react like. I will involve myself in a battle I know I cannot win because my character would react that way - happened last night too

I think the strangest part is I like to be defeated, I wont make it easy and I do sometimes win a battle, but I am at my best when I get defeated by someone, I like them a whole lot more and puts a smile on my face.

[lankycheese]

Ive long acted as a Dm that a Paladin who doesnt follow laws...will receive alignment hits...if not finding a redboot guard putting them under arrest.

They should be arrested yes, but that alligment hit might not always be called for. Now I prefer banter of course to a straight out fight, but sometimes the banter leads to a great duel between the two. I've gotten into some fights with Nergalites in the village, and of course I started it, I've yet to be arrested for it, but I would have been if a redboot had been around. But that does not warrent an alligment hit. Nergal is Marduk's nemisis, why would Marduk strip Til of his powers for fighting his enemies followers? If anything I should get the alligment hit if I let them go without any banter! A paladin will follow the fight against evil more so then any law.

[El Pantezo]

A paladin is not bound by the laws of mortals. No master but god. His religious beliefs come first, the laws of the city come second. If there's a nergalite necromancer in the village, he may very well kill it, that does not make him chaotic in any way though. He was fulfilling his duty as a paladin. Should he be chaotic because he constantly plays his role, regardless of where he is? Would a less chaotic paladin be one who constantly changes his role depending on the situation? No, breaking Dasarian law has nothing to do with lawful/chaotic, and I'd be pissed if I played a paladin and killed an evil-doer and town and got a chaotic hit because of it. Now if I then resisted arrest to save my own skin, sure, that would be chaotic.

EDIT: Oh yea, I wasn't sure how to say this earlier, but it came to me: Evil is not defined as a desire to do something immoral, but a willingness to. Like an assassin, he doesn't necessarily like killing people, but he'll do it for money.

[Oosey]

I'm 100% with Cheese on this, except.. Batman is Neutral Good

I think the main problem has arisen from the stupid defination of alignments... Lawful can be easily confused with Law Abding, in the alignments, I believe a much better way of describing it would be.. "Order"
I'm sure there's a good guide out there... i'm gunna go find it.

[Oosey]

Alignments

Good Vs. Evil
Most people understand this axis quite well. Think of this as the morals of the character. Will this character consider killing and steeling a bad thing to avoid or as things to embrace to reach their goal? Someone who is neutral will see a balance between these two. A neutral char may consider the death of an innocent as OK if it brings a greater good, it balances out as it were.

Lawful Vs. Chaos
Many people misunderstand Lawful and think it means 'follows the law'. In fact, Orderly would be a better word, IMHO. Think of it as the opposite of chaotic. A lawful char will plan things out and follow their plan to the letter. A chaotic char will make snap decisions and do things on-the-fly. Monks are limited to lawful alignment, they must have discipline to control their energy (ki). Bards must be chaotic so they can follow their heart and seek adventure for the sake of adventure.

The Alignments
Here some examples of the alignments. I started with the descriptions found at Shaderaven's Neverwinter Nights Guides and edited some of them. His site has a lot of good information for creating a new character.

Lawful Good (LG): The "Crusader"
LG characters act in the best interest of society. They have an ideal that they follow and will die to defend it. Although many people would say that LG will uphold the law of the land, this is not always the case. What if the law goes against the teachings of their god? Did they make an oath to do the opposite? As a resent example, think about all of the paladins who had sworn to serve the king and when the king was found, he was evil! They cannot back away from their oath and they cannot serve evil. This is a very common problem for the LG class.

Neutral Good (NG): The "Benefactor"
NG characters are people of good nature who recognize the importance of laws but don't feel as though they have to be beholden to them.

Chaotic Good (CG): The "Rebel"
CG characters are good people who believe that it is freedom of action and purity of cause that a character should be driven by, not by laws or edicts from authorities.

Lawful Neutral (LN): The "Judge"
LN characters are not swayed by emotion (for good or evil) but judge all things equal and seek order and organization. They may uphold the laws of the land, but only if they are not seen as 'wrong' by being too good or too evil.

Neutral (N): The "Undecided" or the "Balance Seekers"
The N character does what they feel best on either a personal level or seeks true balance amongst the powers of good and evil, law and chaos. They are not selfish but rather focused on issues beyond those of normal society. They have also been described as philosophers.

Chaotic Neutral (CN): The "Free Spirit"
CN characters are usually driven by whim and passion. While they ignore laws they are not driven to ensure the freedom of others like the CG character.

Lawful Evil (LE): The "Dominator"
LE characters follow a strict code of conduct and the laws of their order and leadership, but without mercy or compassion. Power rules and the weak deserve their fate. This is one alignment that is often misunderstood. A LE character might not uphold the laws of the land. Instead, they have plan and organize what evil they want. Again, think 'orderly', not 'law abiding'.

Neutral Evil (NE): The "Malefactor"
NE characters do whatever they can get away with but doesn't feel compelled to fight against law or order. They are more interested in their own selfish needs.

Chaotic Evil (CE): The Destroyer"
CE characters do whatever their greed, fury, and desire for destroy carries them to. They despise law, order, and the expected. Unpredictable and unorganized, they delight in chaos

nuff said

[lankycheese]

Very well said, or quoted Oose ^^

Lawful Evil (LE): The "Dominator"
LE characters follow a strict code of conduct and the laws of their order and leadership, but without mercy or compassion. Power rules and the weak deserve their fate. This is one alignment that is often misunderstood. A LE character might not uphold the laws of the land. Instead, they have plan and organize what evil they want. Again, think 'orderly', not 'law abiding'.

This is my favourite, as I think a true Lawful Evil villain is something we don't see much of.

[Boon]

Hmmm....I can't totally agree, sorry. Yes, I agree what a paladin is, but I can't see any justification why they should just go around killing everyone they detect as evil. Now they would never associate with evil or party with it, but just to go around and kill someone they detected as evil is just not right. Would a paladin just kill a defensless old man, just because they detected him as evil? How about a woman, who killed her husband for his inheritence? Now if the old man turned out to be a Lich and the woman a witch...then hell yeah, hack away. But how is a paladin suppose to know? They only detect evil, not see past the disguise.

I don't know, I've never really played a Paladin, though I have thought about it.

Oh and since there are different gods, I would imagine some paladins would be slightly different from others.

Here's an interesting article on paladins.

[lankycheese]

Well that was one hell of an article, I will definatly be incorporating some of those points into my play. And with regards to killing evil on site, no I don't think a paladin should do that all the time, banter is much more fun to do

I reserve the right to always break into an argument with anyone who is evil, and if things progress then yes a fight will be had. The best fight I ever had was with Vick Kelter, Asuraman, and Bili on the outskirts of the farm lands, we spent like an hour bantering each other before we even drew our swords.

But also there are different levels of evil, if you read the players handbook they describe different magnitudes of taint on a creature.

How about a woman, who killed her husband for his inheritence?

That woman would probably have only a small amount of taint, but if it was something like a lich, that contains a damn crap load, that's kill on site. Some common sense will have to be used with this new ability as people will have to judge for themselves the how evil said person is.

And banter, banter is always good, no matter how evil they are ^^

[Astamyre]

Personaly as i see it the Lawful - Chaotic strain is one of the hardest to realy understand to its fullest.

While good-evil strain is alot easier.

As I see it lawful and chaotic are a bit different to most and similare as well.

Lawful - Honesty (you mostly dont lie and you keep your word once given), Discipline (you have a path or code of conduct that you can adhere to), you generaly keep to traditions, and typicaly respect lawmakers and enforces.
These are the main aspects I see, I dont realy see them as planers but they are likely to plan roles and positions alot more than chaotics.

Chaotic - Untrustworthy (you will lie and break your word on a whim), you tend to go with the flow while it suits you and against it when that suits you aswell. They generaly only follow thier own concience assuming they even have one.
Chaotics dont generaly like Authoritave figures, it restricts their life more than they like. I dont realy ever see them making plans since they are likely to change them on a whim.


Paladins though for me are about Good, and lawfulness as I see it, which generaly falls into the Justice catogory, not justice based around laws but justice in its core meaning.

[Ramblinwomble]

Thanks Boon interesting article

Hmmm....I can't totally agree, sorry. Yes, I agree what a paladin is, but I can't see any justification why they should just go around killing everyone they detect as evil. Now they would never associate with evil or party with it, but just to go around and kill someone they detected as evil is just not right.

You're right, it's socially inappropriate to kill people. Let me spin this a little though.

You are, for arguments sake, a Paladin. You meet an old man and, as you shake his hand, you know beyond any doubt, (because you are infallible in this regard), that the person you have just met is evil.

Not occassionally rude, or petty, or subject to poor hygene, or short changing their customers. They are evil, they exist to further the goals of evil either through lawful, neutral or chaotic means.

You know they are evil. They will do wrong and cause harm to other people in some way. It is their nature and you know this infallibly.

What do you do?