Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Quasqueton" data-source="post: 1555038" data-attributes="member: 3854">First off, this reply is not exhaustive. I don't have time to address each and every point you make, so I'll just hit some highlights.Re: strawman arguments:Who on "my side" of this debate has said this? Where have I, or anyone on "my side" of this debate, said this? Evil can be subtle. What does "low-key" mean if different than subtle? And if by "commonplace" you mean. . .*Note: my answers below are all within the context of D&D alignments.*If this was an adult regularly doing similarly humilating acts against adults = Evil. Should be punished. But a child is a different and complicated debate. Can we agree to keep alignment debates regarding children a seperate topic?Slavery = Evil. Should be punished.If this is standard operating procedure for the professor, and is meant specifically and only to break the child(ren) and keep them effectively enslaved = Evil. Should be punished.This threatens to break the forum rules. I'll skip this.Yep. Evil (when considered in a vacuum, without context -- for instance "destroying" a tyrant is different than "destroying" a common farmer living on the other side of the fence).Actually, let's use the more specific term: murdering people. Using "killing" in this context is like saying "carnivore" instead of "cannibal".Assuming the actions you described above were the regular modus operandi for each, and not just a "phase" or the result of one-time poor decision making: If the paladin met the bully, the brothel owner, and the teacher in your above examples in the Forest of No Context, they would detect as Evil. But a foolish, youthful cruelty is not grounds for the evil alignment. A regretted, ill-conceived action is not grounds for the evil alignment. But a pattern of acquiring slaves through deceipt and coersion is grounds for the evil alignment.Note, though, that if the paladin met the above examples in context, he could and should choose to act within civil laws for punishment, not summary execution.It all comes down to: do you consider a schoolyard bully as Evil? A slaver? A cruel professor? If so, then they get the Evil alignment, and are target's for a paladin's smite. If you consider their actions as not rising to the description of Evil, then give them the Neutral alignment, and they won't be detected by a paladin.The biggest problem with paladins vs. Evil seems to be that many DMs will give the Evil alignment to someone not really deserving of it. And then they punish the paladin for acting on the false alignment.DM: "He was only stealing for food because he was starving."Player: "So why did he detect as Evil?"DM: "Because stealing is Evil."QuasquetonP.S. I probably won't be able to respond to any response to this till next week.</blockquote>

Verification