Paladinbot

[AGGEMAM]

Also remember that being evil in it self isn't a crime.

Basically if a Paladin would go around detecting and smiting on sight. What he really does is murdering people who think differently than he does. That doesn't seem neither lawful nor good to me.

 

[dcollins]

Probably, why most people don't play paladins. You people are taliking about taking away the paladin's chief offensive ability. Do you simarly crack down on a barbarians rage or a fighters feats?

Yes, absolutely, if they too walk into town and start indiscriminately hacking down townsfolk without warning.

 

[Geoff Watson]

Have you guys read the alignment descriptions in the PHB?

Evil is not 'a bit dodgy', evil is for murderers and oppressors. Do your towns really have that many murderers, torturers, devil-worshippers, etc? How do the towns survive without wiping themselves out?

If the DM is having NPCs that detect as evil but aren't really evil, that's unfair on the paladin.

Just smiting evil on sight is dumb and reckless, but isn't cause for a paladin to lose her abilities.

Geoff.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Probably, why most people don't play paladins. You people are taliking about taking away the paladin's chief offensive ability. Do you simarly crack down on a barbarians rage or a fighters feats?

I play a paladin and I have no idea what you are talking about. Smite Evil is an offensive ability. Killing anything slightly evil without resorting to a moment's thought is just makes the archetype into a farce.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Have you guys read the alignment descriptions in the PHB?

Evil is not 'a bit dodgy', evil is for murderers and oppressors. Do your towns really have that many murderers, torturers, devil-worshippers, etc? How do the towns survive without wiping themselves out?

If the DM is having NPCs that detect as evil but aren't really evil, that's unfair on the paladin.

Just smiting evil on sight is dumb and reckless, but isn't cause for a paladin to lose her abilities.

Let's actually take a look, shall we? PHB, page 104: "Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others.

A murderer is (almost) certain to deserve death. An oppressor of others probably does, but conceivably may not. Someone who hurts others might deserve to die. But then again he may not.

Let me ask you: Is killing someone who might deserve to live and might deserve to die, you really do not know, a Good, Neutral, or Evil act?

It is certainly not Good. It is at best Neutral and may well be Evil. By the book, Piratecat is exactly right. You make a habit of killing every ping on your radar and you will eventually have commited an evil act. Then bye-bye, paladinhood.

 

[Len]

Evil is not 'a bit dodgy', evil is for murderers and oppressors. Do your towns really have that many murderers, torturers, devil-worshippers, etc? How do the towns survive without wiping themselves out?

Wait a minute, mere thievery isn't evil? Wow, that's great news for my neutral rogue!

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

How does Las Vegas survive?

Remember the casino owner in Ocean's Eleven? He may or may not be a murderer but I don't think it's stretching the PHB description to call him evil. Even so, he's a respected member of the Las Vegas community in the movie and I'm quite certain that the town would side with him against any paladinbot who walked up to him, detected evil, and decided to smite him on the floor of his casino.

How about the ordinary Germans who supported the Nazi party in WWII? How about those who informed on their neighbors in order to avenge some petty slight or seize some perceived gain? Sounds evil to me. Yet they're neither murderers nor oppressors.

How about guards who are on the take? They imprison the innocent for personal gain and betray their duty by letting the guilty go free for gain as well. Evil? Sure sounds like it. (However the traditional punishment is lashes and expulsion from the guard as often as it is death).

How about the businessman who figures that polluting the water table with carcinogens isn't that big a deal? After all, it's not like he's (directly) killing anyone (right away).

How about the Baker from Sagiro's campaign who takes legal action to shut down the PCs' soup kitchen at any costs so that the poor people have to buy their food from him? Sounds evil to me.

How about Fagan from Oliver Twist?

How about Moliere's Tartuffe? There are plenty of cads like him in the world (though most are less successful).

How about the drunk who beats his wife? Sounds evil to me.

Evil is a lot more common and has a lot more common expressions than you seem to realize--even PHB evil. Evil also doesn't keep people from being nice. The casino owner in Ocean's Eleven was nice. King Louis from The Man in the Iron Mask is nice (at least to those of similar social standing). Plenty of Nazis--even SS members--were nice people who would have been fine company at a dinner party and were upstanding members of society. Being nice, presentable, or even a pillar of society doesn't prevent one from being evil.

Historically, most societies have recognized that fact and have attempted to structure themselves so that evil people find it in their best interest to support the society and act in ways that benefit it. And in that bargain, society has an interest in protecting its evil members as well as its good ones.

Have you guys read the alignment descriptions in the PHB?

Evil is not 'a bit dodgy', evil is for murderers and oppressors. Do your towns really have that many murderers, torturers, devil-worshippers, etc? How do the towns survive without wiping themselves out?

If the DM is having NPCs that detect as evil but aren't really evil, that's unfair on the paladin.

Just smiting evil on sight is dumb and reckless, but isn't cause for a paladin to lose her abilities.

Geoff.

 

[dcollins]

Have you guys read the alignment descriptions in the PHB?

Evil is not 'a bit dodgy', evil is for murderers and oppressors. Do your towns really have that many murderers, torturers, devil-worshippers, etc? How do the towns survive without wiping themselves out?

Have you read the alignment descriptions in the PHB? For example:

Lawful Evil, "Dominator"... He is loath to break laws or promises... Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains. The scheming baron who expands his power and exploits his people is lawful evil...

Lawful evil is sometimes called "diabolical" because devils are the epitome of lawful evil.

Thus we see the following:
- An evil person can be a key member of how a community runs.
- An evil person may have principles that they stick to.
- Devil-worshippers are only the most extreme end of the continuum of evil.

Also, the DMG section on "Generating Towns" has some interesting cases. Fully 36% (over 1/3) of communities have an evil power center for the community (mostly LE). There's an example of a large city with LE, LG, and CE characters all interacting over the governing of the city. Clearly a significant proportion of any population must count as evil: thieves, cheats, batterers, con men, dishonest merchants, cruel headmasters, corrupt prison guards, criminals, pimps, etc.

Interestingly, I just heard a military officer this week asserting that it was common knowledge that 5-6% of the population at large is some form of sociopath. Could it ever be allowable for an individual to walk into a community and start indiscrimately massacring 5-6% of its population without ramifications?

Geez, I've been sucked into an alignment debate, thought I knew better.

 

[shilsen]

Nicely said, Elder-Basilisk

Evil is a lot more common and has a lot more common expressions than you seem to realize--even PHB evil. Evil also doesn't keep people from being nice. The casino owner in Ocean's Eleven was nice. King Louis from The Man in the Iron Mask is nice (at least to those of similar social standing). Plenty of Nazis--even SS members--were nice people who would have been fine company at a dinner party and were upstanding members of society. Being nice, presentable, or even a pillar of society doesn't prevent one from being evil.

This is why I always find it silly when people complain about D&D forcing them to play simplistic black-and-white morality games. As written, the PHB alignment system actually lends itself to a great deal of ambiguity. Just as you mentioned, actually having a way to objectively detect alignment just underlines the ubiquity and complexity of evil. Demons and devils aren't scary. The guy who loves his wife and kids, pays his taxes, is kind to animals, and just happens to be really, really good at his job, which happens to be inserting hot pokers under the fingernails of people whom the government really doesn't like, is the truly scary type.

Historically, most societies have recognized that fact and have attempted to structure themselves so that evil people find it in their best interest to support the society and act in ways that benefit it. And in that bargain, society has an interest in protecting its evil members as well as its good ones.

Bingo! Despite me making sure to provide detailed handouts about how alignments work, my players took a while to get out of the simplistic mindset and realize that going up to people and saying "That guy is eeeeevil" didn't help make a legal case. I think the fact that they ended up working for an elven council consisting primarily of good and neutral people, but which also included a couple who were evil and known by everyone to be so, finally brought it home.

 

[Bauglir]

(Maybe you're kidding, but...) I don't see anyone talking about "taking away" detect evil. Are you suggesting taking away the "lawful" part of the paladin's code of conduct? And yes, I would expect similar treatment for a barbarian or fighter who uses his abilities against random commoners.

This does raise an interesting point all the same. If the Detect Evil ability flags someone as evil, but the nature of evil is ambiguous, then it wouldn't seem to have much use since you wouldn't really have learned anything. I could see the ability being relegated to 'evil radar' for dungeons, which is imo the cheesiest use of all.

What about Detect Good? Do you think that has similar ambiguities to work with?