Thoughts about the nature of evil

[Gothmog]

Here are some specifics on that paladin situation I posted earlier:

Both paladins are in service to a god of justice and law, and they act much like a secular police force in my world. Where the paladin differ is in their belief about how justice should be implemented. The NPC paladin is very conservative in his beliefs- he believes the law is the law no matter what, and ANY infraction of the law must be punished. He really is concerned with the wellfare of people as well- twice in the campaign he has nearly sacrificed his own life to safegaurd innocent lives, and he routinely offers freely of his own wealth, resources, and time for the betterment of people.

The PC paladin also strongly believes in the law, and is a compassionate man as well. He is just as sacrificing towards helping others as the NPC, but where they differ is in their approach towards how justice should be handled. Where the NPC believes that "God will sort them out", the PC paladin often tries to determine motvie before he metes out justice. If he feels the action was warranted, he might not punish the crime, but instead tries to help the person understand what he did was wrong, and tries to rehabilitate them. Example- in one adventure, the daughter of a merchant had been run over and severly injured by a joyriding careless nobleman. The noble was intoxicated at the time, and didn't remember the incident, so when the merchant came to him and asked for his aid in making sure his daughter recieved aid, he refused. Desperate, the merchant blackmailed the noble with some false info until he paid the merchant's fee so the merchant could pay for his daughter's medical recovery. The PC managed to prevent the nobleman from double-crossing the merchant and having him imprisoned, while at the same time helping the merchant's child. The PC also used a rare potent one-shot healing magic item to restore the little girl's health. The NPC paladin would have likely arrested the merchant on ground of extortion and blackmail of a noble, which would have been punished very harshly, and the girl would have been fatherless. The NPC would likely have helped heal the little girl with his own funds, but the fact remains she would have lost a parent.

The initial disagreements between the two men were mostly over implementation of justice, but recently it has escalated to a higher level. In some recent adventures, the PCs in my campaign had to make a tough moral decision, and in order to insure the wellfare of many people, they willingly worked with infernal forces to right a wrong priests of the PCs own church did a long time ago. When the NPC met the PC paladin again, he detected some demonic taint on him, and was concerned that he might be selling out to diabolic powers. The NPC then rationalized that the lax attitude of the PC towards criminals might in fact be due to his desire to work with them to cause havoc and damage to society. The NPC has not declared a witch hunt against the PC yet, but he is watching him like a hawk, and tries to discredit him when possible. The NPC is truly worried that the PC is a serious danger, but he doesn't have proof yet that he can have him tried for. The PC, on the other hand, had to make a tough moral decision- and he probably chose the right thing to do since it would save many lives, but at the possible cost of his honor and reputation in his church.

So, are both of these guys LG?

 

[Umbran]

Evil is about the ends, Good is about the means.

Then what are Law and Chaos about? Is not the ultimate in Law a rigorous coding of what means are allowed?

Personally, I've always veiwed it as Good and Evil are about morals. Chaos and Law are about ethics. The first are about what you accomplish, the second about how you accomplish them.

 

[Marcolino]

Here are some specifics on that paladin situation I posted earlier:

...they willingly worked with infernal forces to right a wrong priests of the PCs own church did a long time ago. When the NPC met the PC paladin again, he detected some demonic taint on him, and was concerned that he might be selling out to diabolic powers.... The PC, on the other hand, had to make a tough moral decision- and he probably chose the right thing to do since it would save many lives, but at the possible cost of his honor and reputation in his church.

So, are both of these guys LG?

Both LG? I would say yes. However, I want to point out one thing:

From the SRD
[A] paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters.

The actions of the PC jeopardize his paladinhood. Of course, that's a strict interpretation of the rules as presented in the SRD.

 

[Drawmack]

Interesting Thread. Here's my take.

First I believe that Good-Evil/Law-Chaos and Neutrality need very broad definitions.

Good - Concern for others.
Evil - Concern for self.
Law - Concern for Procedure.
Chaos - Lack of concern for procedure.
Neutral - Concern for the moment.

Alignment is more the driving force in ones life then it is the conscious effort of the character. When you are given too much change in the store do you give it back or not? Either way you probably don't think about it, unless you're neutral then you have to figure out the best course of action at this particular point in time.

A good character does not, necessarilly, run around doing acts because they are good but rather good is the general governing force in their life. If put into a situation where two reactions are possible, helping another or not helping another, they will usually help the other person. On the other hand an evil character would not help the other.

On the token of law and chaos it is more a concern with the order of things. If there is a judicial system the lawful character will make use of it where as the chaotic character will not. However it is much more subversive then that. It is a belief in the natural order of things as well. A chaotic person is just as likely to break the laws of nature and they are the laws of man.

With all this taken into account here is how I portray evil IMC.

An evil character, that the PCs take note of, will always have some sort of plan. The ends of this plan will always be the betterment, or self-perceived betterment, of the evil character in one way or another. However, he will use whatever means necessar to achieve those ends. I could have an NPC wizard who is throughouly evil but needs certain artifacts to accomplish his goals. This wizard acts like a grandfathrly mentor to the party and gets them to do his dirty work for them. His true nature will be revealed eventually. Thereby truly evil is more sociopathic then anything else.

However, just because someone is a villian does not mean that they are evil. It is possible to have a LG villian as well. Say, for example, you have a LG Cleric of the God of Righteousness. The church of Righteousness believes in clensing by blood, which amounts to nothing more then blood letting. If this Cleric is performing these ceremonies but he keeps getting more and more unrighteous people so he rationalizes that larger cuts for larger sins are in order and there is nothing about this in the writs of the church. Now an inordinate amount of his followers begin to die. The PCs take up the fight to stop him, which makes him the villian, but he is not evil.

Let's say that you have a human party and they stumble into a part of the world where the humans and the dwarves have been at war for centuries. They are captured and tortured by the dwarves to get information the dwarves believe they have. Does this make the dwarves evil?

In summation, evil IMC is the act of working for the betterment of self with a disregard for the effects on others.

 

[Prince Atom]

In the last game I played in, our paladin was detecting evil from up the corridor. We came around a corner and ran into some Bugbears, who aggressed at us (though not very much, because we had surprise; they growled, was all). So the party commenced to slaughter them, and didn't even give them a chance after the psion whipped out his Mind Blast. So, no explanations, no questions, not even time to really attack us -- they just jumped to a conclusion. The paladin sensed evil, and so the first things we run into must be evil. Right?

When I protested the merciless slaughter of the bugbears (which I'm not even sure was legal; I thought they were stunned, not helpless), the entire party rebuked my arguments by saying "These guys detected as evil. In this game, to be evil you must have done evil. Thus we are justified in killing them because they deserve punishment." So we killed all but one, whom we questioned and whom the paladin managed to convert to worshipping Bahamut.

I don't think what the paladin did was very lawful. He didn't hold court, he didn't ask for witnesses, he didn't even ask for a defense. He just passed judgement like Judge Dredd, and bloodied his hands. I'd say (were I DM) that would be Chaotic at best, and I have stripped a paladin of his status for doing just such a thing as killing helpless folk.

So I'm not comfortable with "Evil is as Evil does." I don't think mortals should detect as any strong alignment, no matter what alignment they may have, unless they have some metaphysical connection to an outsider or force. Outsiders and Undead, now, are definitely strongly aligned. The rest of the world is just trying to make a living and advance its goals.

A few of my definitions of alignments are as follows:

Lawful Good -- You try your best to watch out for the weak and oppressed. Laws exist to prevent anarchy, and you must follow every one of them as best you can, or have a really good explanation. Mercy is a good thing, and should be practiced at all times.

Lawful Neutral -- Laws exist to prevent anarchy, and they have been handed down by an authority. It is not in your power to defy that authority. The universe is highly ordered; you can influence your peers or underlings, but your superiors don't have to listen to you. The Law must be followed to the fullest extent, and only the duly appointed authorities may interpret the law, pass judgement, and execute that judgement. Mercy must be provided in the laws to apply.

Lawful Evil -- Laws exist to prevent anarchy, and though they have been handed down to you, you are free to use them to further your own objectives. You can use other people, or other people can use you. You can exploit, twist, redefine, and generally bend laws to do anything you want, and only a higher authority can call you on it. So it's good to cultivate ties to those above you. Mercy is for the weak; leave no enemy behind you.

(This is already long enough without six other definitions)

TWK

 

[Sammael99]

thus endeth the rant.

Nice.

The tricky question my players have not yet asked is this : would a redeemed demon or devil register as evil ?

I'll let you guys debate

 

[CleverName]

Evil

In my game alignment is pretty much a role-playing aid.

It only comes into play for character classes in which a higher power has selected the character - not vice-versa. (For example paladins and blackguards vs. say clerics or rangers)

In that case, the "taint" of otherwordly evil or good, makes the character stand out on detects, etc.

We came up with what we call the "always" rule. IF the class/monster, etc. mentions the world "always" in the alignment description, then it triggers the spell effect..

Yes this means that protections and detects are very weak - they are almost never used - but, especially as the chracters begin to take on critters like demons, etc. They are still useful.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

The tricky question my players have not yet asked is this : would a redeemed demon or devil register as evil ?

Demons and such are unable to reform in my campeigns. They are created from the divine essence of evil, and would be incapable of considering redemption.

FD

 

[Glamdring]

I'd say the most recent example of evil I've used is found in the lower lair of the Blood Elder (a male human vampire wizard/blood magus/cleric of Loviater). In one of his lower sanctums he keeps a long hall of rusted, bloody chains hanging from the ceiling, each one ending in a wicked hook (like Hellraiser, I suppose). This ghastly hall's floor is sloped to allow blood to trickle down from tortured, maimed, and flayed victims hanging from these chains to pour down and collect in a massive blood pool used by the Elder. There are several smaller cells branching away from this main hall, and these individual cells are where the serious torture takes place.

In one of these cells there is a nude human female strung up in the air and spread eagle, the awful hooks snagged through her hands and feet, with another two yanking her up by the flesh of her ruined back. Her eyes have been gouged out, and her once long blonde hair has been ripped out of her scalp. She is kept conscious by her kyton torturers, and the wounds, slashes, lacerations, and burns riddling her body hardly allow anyone to recognize her as anything resembling a human female. She is insane with pain. She cannot see, or communicate in any fashion other than by her mindless moaning and wailing.

This woman was once the consort of a powerful conjurer, Madrasker, of the Arcane Brotherhood of Luskan. When he found out she was being wildly and sexually unfaithful to him, his rage was controlled, to a point. Madraskar summoned the services of the kytons in order to teach this frolicking harlot a lesson she would absolutely never forget, a lesson that would result in her untimate demise by the most horrendous means available to those of the Nine Hells. The kytons truly delight in their near-genius means of unconventional torture. Her torment has been going on for well over a year, and Madraskar makes it a point to drop by her bloody cell of chains once a month to insure her punishment continues painfully uninterrupted.

Should my PCs attempt to free this woman (I haven't given her a name, since the PCs will not have any means to learn it), they could heal her wounds, but it would take powerful magic to return her sanity to her. Even so, should this happen, Madraskar will surely teleport to the scene within a few short rounds, draped in defensive magic, a wand in each hand, ready to add to the chains any bothersome pests who would would think to end the torture of a woman who so richly deserves it. The PCs will, of course, have to contend with the Blood Elder himself, who considers Madraskar a tolerable ally at best.

This is typically as evil as I get with my games. With my current vampire campaign, I've already turned two PCs into vampires, and I don't plan on stopping there. I can be a meanie behind my DM screen. I think I'll drag out my Blood Elder angle for as long as I can.

 

[Henry]

So, are both of these guys LG?

In my opinion, both are probably still LG at this time, but:

The Player is on the verge of stepping into Neutral Good, because Law/Chaos are more about ends and means than Good and Evil are. Any Paladin willing to work with infernals even to save lives is very much in danger of losing his status.

The NPC is on the cusp of Lawful neutral. As soon as he lets the law take precedence over the individual at all costs, then the Law matters more than public weal.

In 1st edition, we used to call this "Lawful Good, but with X Tendencies."

Your PC was probably the more solidly Lawful Good of the two, UNTIL he consorted with demonic beings to save others. It's good that he saved lives, but having the good weigh out your obligations to your calling smacks of neutral or chaotic good. (However, chaotic would be far too extreme for one instance - we are talking if he were to do it at the drop of a hat.)

Just my take on it.