Helm of Opposite Alignment ... Think "A Clockwork Orange"

[Celebrim]

Certainly. Suppose that the purpose of the Helm is strictly to protect society from Evil men, and has nothing to do with justice; what would you do to them before they were Helmed to claim that justice had been done?

The pronoun 'you' here is a little bit confusing. I'm not entirely sure if you were addressing me specificly, asking me for a normative judgement, or if you wanted to continue a discussion of what a speculated society might do. I hope it is the latter, because I don't have a Helm of Alignment changing, much less a sufficient supply of them to set up a criminal justice system that depended on them.

100 lashes for rape and then Helming? 200 lashes for murder and then Helming? The post-Helm prisoner would know that the punishment was done to an Evil man, and that he is now a Good man...

I think that there is alot to that actually. I would speculate that for a variaty of reasons, a society employing the Helm would want to create a ritual through which a person passed and ritually died and was reborn. For the reasons I listed above, if that ritual had a criminal justice purpose, it would probably be a good idea of that ritual was painful. Likely such a ritual would be combined with some ritual healing/cleansing. I can very much see the penalty for capital crimes like murder or rape being lashed to the point of unconsciousness, then magically healed, ritually cleansed, and a helm of opposite alignment put on your head.

There are real world parallels that should occur to the reader, but I can't discuss them here.

So what would you do to him to avenge the victims? Since that's what you're talking about.

Again, with the 'you'. I'm not sure what I would do is relevant, but in asking myself what a victim might see as proper restitution I suspect that there would need to be a 'blood for blood' rule in cases of violent crime. Generally, 'good' societies strongly take into consideration the desire of the victim to apply a penalty, and then cap that desire for vengeance with some maximum penalty allowable under the law, say "Eye for an eye, and tooth for a tooth."

This problem only exists with the premisies that people don't regard having their free will ripped from them as a cost...

Even the most libertarian society would probably acceed to the convicted's wish to have the helm applied, but the most libertarian would probably be afraid to apply it without consent. In fact, requesting to have the helm applied would probably be seen as sufficient proof that the person was redeemed, although the danger here would seem to me that if they request to have it applied they may no longer need it and in which case it would do more harm than good. Presumably, a truly evil person would no more consent to having the helm applied than a truly good one would.

I imagine societies would differ in how much duress they could put a person under to get that consent though. Some societies would tend to say that the act was more important than the convicted's belief, and sense this was manifestedly for the good of everyone including the convicted, you could apply a great deal of stress to get the consent. Other societies would say that if the person repented/converted/requested to be helmed under duress, it wouldn't count - and in fact it worse than didn't count since it made the whole process dishonest.

If they are incarcerated for the normal length of their sentence, found to be incorrigible, Helmed and then released, would this problem still exist?

Probably not. The main thing is that the society has to see that the debt that the criminal owes is paid, and that the magistrates to which they've entrusted thier dispute will take it seriously. How much dept society would believe the convicted owed would depend on the society. One problem is that in the extreme case, a society wouldn't even consider the option of a Helm of Opposite alignment because they would believe that the person now owed his life and nothing less would do. The B5 option mentioned earlier might allow an escape clause here, in that there might be a particular serving order which the Helmed would have to enter into - thereby paying off the debt by spending thier whole life serving others.

If you assume that the environment has more effect upon the individual than the individual has upon the environment he places himself in, your potential problem has merit.

Frankly, I'm not sure what I assume. However, I do know that different cultures place different emphasis on the nature vs. nurture divide. I don't know which answer is correct. I do know that some societies are going to say that humans at least are not intrinsicly good or evil, and that they are the product of thier environment. If that is the correct answer, then the helm of opposite alignment is only a temporary solution. And, if it is only believed to be a temporary solution in even a few cases, then its going to present big problems to a societies legal system because it violates the contract between the society and the law that the law will take disputes seriously and act to protect society.

 

[Felix]

Another thought to follow up on the idea that the victims might not be satisfied with the criminal being Helmed and then released:

The victims are satisfied by what they think has happened to the criminal. If they attend a public execution and see the [Major Image] criminal hanged, then they're going to be satisfied that justice has been served.

So this Helm need not be public. It doesn't even need to be known outside of a few key people. Celebrim suggests that criminals may not view Helming as a deterrent. If we assume that's true, then this would mean that advertising Helming as a punishment wouldn't add value, but it doesn't mean that Helming wouldn't do the job it was otherwise meant to do.

So how would you protect a Helmed criminal in the ways that the English government doesn't protect Alex in A Clockwork Orange? Make the world think he's dead? Baleful Polymorph (post Helming, so hopefully willingly) him into another person or another race? Ship him off to another town, city, or continent?

How would the government hide its use of the Helm from parties that didn't like this sort of free-will tampering? Have an small group (Sector 7?) that knows about it?

Or perhaps there really is only the one warden who wants his wards to turn to redemption, but is tired of the institutionalization of all the prisoners; so he brings a few key ringleaders in for questioning and they all mysteriously leave with new outlooks on life while retaining command of their gangs.

[second glass of whisky... going to stop typing now ]

 

[Kaodi]

I think that forcibly changing someone's very alignment could be considered an evil act. There is even precedent for this idea in Eberron, where the Church of the Silver Flame decided that even good strains of lycanthropes had to be put down, because unnaturally manipulating the soul was just wrong, and that is in a world where to the best of everyones knowledge, the same terrible fate awaits you after death, good or evil, lawful or chaotic, unless you (as a character) subscribe to the noble souls joining the Flame idea.

 

[Baron Opal]

If they attend a public execution and see the [illusionary] criminal hanged, then they're going to be satisfied that justice has been served.

So this Helm need not be public. It doesn't even need to be known outside of a few key people.

Ah. So not A Clockwork Orange but rather La Femme Nikita..?

 

[Felix]

Ah. So not A Clockwork Orange but rather La Femme Nikita..?

Thinking out loud, that was. When you get down to it, what is the fundamental difference between advertising it and not?

 

[taferial]

Just to add my thoughts to an intresting thread...

Prety much evryone has had a base thought at one time or another, the urge to harm in some way an object of frustraition/ anger/ fear and so on, the diference is most of us dont act on these impulses.

Likewise, as gm's and players, we have all planed out revenge plots and macivelian plans to entertain and amuse. We dont, however, enact them in the real world to see if we are as clever as we think we are.

The people heading into incarceration (in this example at least) have had these thoughts and impulses and have acted on them.

If you reverse these individuals alignment, arnt you more likely to end up with people willing to enact hidious things in the name of good instead?

The chaotic evil mastermind with a passion for torture would most likely become the lawful good member of the secret police with the absolute conviction that pain is a soul cleanser and the only way to guarantee someones guilt or innocence.

The lawful evil assassin becomes the Chaotic good vigilantie, stalking the streets strikeing down whoever is breaking the law without thought to scale. An assassin deals with absolutes, theres unlikely to be any diference in his/ her opinion between a shoplifter and a murderer.

This is just my opinion of course, but this type of re-habilitation wont stop these characters commiting atrocities, but just change their reasons for them.

As a GM I have used this type of idea to create some truely nasty villians, villians who are so fanatical about the greater good that it clouds their judgement and poisions their actions.

As a player ive made some realy fun characters that have suprised me and have shown better character development and better rounded personalities than the more traditional characters I have made.

Obviously, all this is coloured by my own world wiew, so I give you some other peoples examples - The Stainless steel rat (and wife), Dexter the serial killer forensics guy, Snake Pliskin, robocop two (and one kinda), thinking about it, the list of reformed vilians into anti heros is kinda extensive.

 

[green slime]

As, IMO, the suggested use to force people to comply with society, rather than through redemption by free choice and working to be a better person, causes the said society to be an Evil one.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

If you reverse these individuals alignment, arnt you more likely to end up with people willing to enact hidious things in the name of good instead?

The chaotic evil mastermind with a passion for torture would most likely become the lawful good member of the secret police with the absolute conviction that pain is a soul cleanser and the only way to guarantee someones guilt or innocence.

No. Allignment is not just a matter of taking sides, it reflects your view of other people's humanity and your desire to cause pain. It is not criminals vs law enforcers or pro society vs anti society.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

As, IMO, the suggested use to force people to comply with society, rather than through redemption by free choice and working to be a better person, causes the said society to be an Evil one.

Sounds pretty hard core Chaotic rather than worrying about Good. LN society could easily use such a tactic, imo.

With the earlier La Femme Nikita example, btw, there's also the consideration that it doesn't have to be involuntary. I mean, it's a pretty standard trope used in that movie and for example Going Postal by Pratchett. "You've been executed. You are dead. But you have one single chance right now to choose a new life instead."

 

[Baron Opal]

Thinking out loud, that was. When you get down to it, what is the fundamental difference between advertising it and not?

The difference is whether or not you are prepared to take responsibility for your actions. In the first movie, the scientists have to answer for what they did. In the second, the Organization continues blissfully along.