Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Particle_Man" data-source="post: 3202806" data-attributes="member: 892">If that is the interpretation of &quot;Detect Evil&quot; then that would simply be a case where &quot;Detect Evil&quot; registers occasional &quot;false positives&quot; - beings that are neither evil in alignment nor [evil] in sub-type (in this case, the mummies and ghosts that are not evil in alignment).&nbsp; Since most undead are in fact evil in alignment (though not usually [evil] by sub-type) this doesn't come up too often, but clerics might realize that if the ghost of &quot;Sir Lancelot, holiest of holy dudes&quot; detects *both* as good with a detect good spell *and* as evil with a detect evil spell, then something is obviously wrong with at least one of those spells.The alternative is that you have to invent a *third* type of evil (separate from both alignment and subtype) that is operationally defined as &quot;whatever my detect evil spell says is evil&quot;.&nbsp; I can see why paladins would care about evil the alignment.&nbsp; But why would they care about a differing definition of evil, if it can be applied to good-aligned creatures?&nbsp; (Note: these definitions adjectival and thus are about nouns (creatures, objects); I leave discussion of evil actions for a different place).My original point can be equally made with &quot;Holy Smite&quot;, which affects evil creatures and neutral creatures, but not good creatures, so that the occasional good mummy and more common good ghost would be immune to holy smite.&nbsp; (Also, Holy Aura and Holy Word).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Particle_Man, post: 3202806, member: 892"] If that is the interpretation of "Detect Evil" then that would simply be a case where "Detect Evil" registers occasional "false positives" - beings that are neither evil in alignment nor [evil] in sub-type (in this case, the mummies and ghosts that are not evil in alignment). Since most undead are in fact evil in alignment (though not usually [evil] by sub-type) this doesn't come up too often, but clerics might realize that if the ghost of "Sir Lancelot, holiest of holy dudes" detects *both* as good with a detect good spell *and* as evil with a detect evil spell, then something is obviously wrong with at least one of those spells. The alternative is that you have to invent a *third* type of evil (separate from both alignment and subtype) that is operationally defined as "whatever my detect evil spell says is evil". I can see why paladins would care about evil the alignment. But why would they care about a differing definition of evil, if it can be applied to good-aligned creatures? (Note: these definitions adjectival and thus are about nouns (creatures, objects); I leave discussion of evil actions for a different place). My original point can be equally made with "Holy Smite", which affects evil creatures and neutral creatures, but not good creatures, so that the occasional good mummy and more common good ghost would be immune to holy smite. (Also, Holy Aura and Holy Word). [/QUOTE]

Verification