Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Heritage 01-23-05, 05:49 PM	I'm starting up a new Eberron campaign with some of my gaming buddies, when one of them brought up a good point. He's playing a neutral good changeling cleric of the Silver Flame (I know it sounds crazy, but we're both psyched by the challenge :D) who is trying to fight the corruption within his beloved church. He asked me "Why don't people just cast detect evil on the high priests to weed them out?" At first I suggested that it might be considered 'bad form' to detect evil on your superiors in a lawful good church, but that didn't account for higher ranking cleric detecting it. We're going to try something radical, and I want to see what people think. A. All alignment detecting spells still detect outsiders, undead, spell effects and magic items. B. Holy/unholy places are detectable. C. Here's the kicker: no spell can penetrate a living soul, as they are too complicated and variable to be pinned down. The only exceptions to this are paladins and blackguards, who read powerfully due to their taking the power of good or evil inside themselves. If we go this way, the issues of trust and mistrust become much more profound - lies and truth can still be detected, but both good and evil people lie for a variety of reasons. So what do people think? And sorry if someone already brought this up; I'm not here a lot. :P
Edymnion 01-23-05, 06:02 PM	Just because someone detects as evil is not proof that they ever did anything wrong. You can be evil, and still do nothing but good your entire life. You could personally think that everyone but you needs to die, you could want to torture fuzzy little kittens all night long, and beat up little old ladies every second of your life, and you would detect as evil. But if you're too much of a coward to ever really do it, you've done nothing wrong. Just running around with the Evil Radar to see who blips is not going to help anyone do anything. Its like putting someone in a lie detector test and asking them "Have you ever considered killing someone?", and if they say yes, you throw them in prison for attempted murder. Or if they say no, you know its a lie (EVERYBODY has thought about killing someone, to some degree, sometime in their lives), and being thrown in jail for it. They didn't actually do anything, but you're punishing them for thinking about it. Does alignment exist in Eberron? Yes. Is there anything fundamentally differant about how alignment works in Eberron versus how it works in any other settings? Yes, clerics don't have to be the same alignment as their religion, thats it. You can have evil people doing good, or good people doing evil in any setting. Alignment is a thermometer, not a straightjacket. Eberron just makes this point a little more clear than other settings, and runs with it. Just because someone is evil doesn't mean they don't have your best interests, and the best intrests of the religion, in mind. They could be detecting as Evil simply because they've had to do dispicable things to keep the Silver Flame safe (the old "Would you sell your soul to the Devil to save the world?" question). As for lying, you already hit that one. Good and Evil both lie. Lying is a Chaotic act, it has nothing at all to do with Good or Evil. Just because you know the high priest is lying through his teeth to you, you don't know why. Maybe he's trying to protect you, or that he's trying to protect someone else. Just because you lie does not mean that you are being harmful. Detect Evil is nothing more than an indicator. It is not proof of wrongful deeds. Plus, the social order of the CotSF is very heirarchial. You don't question your superiors, you follow the orders of the church. Running around casting Detect Evil on your superiors would likely be tantemount to Blasphamy.
Just another user 01-23-05, 06:33 PM	I agree with Edyminion, plus IIRC a cleric's aura (and I think it extend even to adepts, expert, etc. anyone that is a priest of a religion) give the alignement of his god/religion, so even if he is evil a priest of the silver flame would be detected as lawful good. But personally I prefer the 2ed AD&D version of the spell, that didn't give out creature alignement, except in the most estreme cases like high level dark priests/necromancer or creatures sopranaturally evil like vampires, demons, etc.
MarkB 01-23-05, 07:38 PM	I agree with Edyminion, plus IIRC a cleric's aura (and I think it extend even to adepts, expert, etc. anyone that is a priest of a religion) give the alignement of his god/religion, so even if he is evil a priest of the silver flame would be detected as lawful good. That's correct, certainly for Clerics, and I'd tend to extend it to all priests of a particular religion. Aura (Ex): A cleric of a chaotic, evil, good, or lawful deity has a particularly powerful aura corresponding to the deity’s alignment (see the detect evil spell for details). Clerics who don’t worship a specific deity but choose the Chaotic, Evil, Good, or Lawful domain have a similarly powerful aura of the corresponding alignment.
Lujayne34 01-23-05, 07:48 PM	If a cleric etc of a religion always gives the aura of his religion and not his own personal code of morality then what good is the paladin's ability of detect evil? Should he not then be given another type of ability instead to compensate for this? The denial of this ability to the paladin takes away one of his tools by which he pursues his path. It is almost like saying that a character who is a ranger cannont use his tracking feat. The tracking feat is what helps to define what a ranger is and does. So also does the ability of detect evil for paladins.
The White Sorcerer 01-23-05, 08:03 PM	If a cleric etc of a religion always gives the aura of his religion and not his own personal code of morality then what good is the paladin's ability of detect evil? Detecting other evil-aligned creatures? Clerics of good religions aren't the only beings in the world, ya know. What good is a ranger's Track feat against a flying foe?
Edymnion 01-23-05, 08:24 PM	If a cleric etc of a religion always gives the aura of his religion and not his own personal code of morality then what good is the paladin's ability of detect evil? Should he not then be given another type of ability instead to compensate for this? The denial of this ability to the paladin takes away one of his tools by which he pursues his path. It is almost like saying that a character who is a ranger cannont use his tracking feat. The tracking feat is what helps to define what a ranger is and does. So also does the ability of detect evil for paladins.Um, what are you talking about? A Paladin is supposed to be out crusading for their religion, fighting it's wars, and winning converts. They're not supposed to be purging their own church!
Ch@pel 01-23-05, 09:10 PM	Just in case the original poster cares, there were a whole bunch of new detect spells in a Dragon magazine a while ago, created specifically to allow for ambiguity in alignment. I think it was issue #111, but I'm probably wrong. If you're interested, post back and I'll do a more thorough check.
Greyman 01-24-05, 08:14 AM	I agree with Edyminion, plus IIRC a cleric's aura (and I think it extend even to adepts, expert, etc. anyone that is a priest of a religion) give the alignment of his god/religion, so even if he is evil a priest of the silver flame would be detected as lawful good.Close. It's true but not the entire truth. An evil cleric of a lawful good deity/crede would detect strongly to detect law and detect good spells, but also detect weakly to detect evil as any Evil Creature would. Having an alignment aura from one source does not preclude having a conflicting one. Sources include: alignment of cleric's deity or crede, alignment subtypes, spells and effects with alignment descriptors affecting the character, magic items with alignment descriptors worn or held by the character, et cetera, as well as personal alignment.
JBW 01-24-05, 08:30 AM	You could personally think that everyone but you needs to die, you could want to torture fuzzy little kittens all night long, and beat up little old ladies every second of your life, and you would detect as evil. But if you're too much of a coward to ever really do it, you've done nothing wrong. I disagree with the idea that alignment is based solely upon intent. If you have evil intentions but do not perform evil actions, then you are neutral. Likewise, good intentions alone do not make you good - you're still neutral unless you perform good deeds. Basing alignment off of intent alone would result in too many characters having radical alignment shifts, and the system is too simple to account for complex morality. If you tie a person's good and evil deeds into the system, there is a much more accurate basis for measurement. Yes, this does result in a great deal of neutral-aligned people in the world, but the alignment of humans is noted as generally being neutral, so it works out well enough. Jay
fizzbang 01-24-05, 12:47 PM	I disagree with the idea that alignment is based solely upon intent. If you have evil intentions but do not perform evil actions, then you are neutral. Likewise, good intentions alone do not make you good - you're still neutral unless you perform good deeds. You can certainly run it as such in your game, but this is the expressed attitude of Keith Baker, and the attitude of the way the setting is designed. So it's useful to keep it in mind, even if you don't agree. Now, personally, I was a bit disappointed that they kept alignment in Eberron at all, what witht he focus on intrigue and uncertainty and complexity of character. I would have been happier with allegences or the like from d20 Modern, or just none at all. But that's just my opinion. I think Heritage's modified version of the Detect spells should work quite well. I also think that they aren't strictly necessary, considering how many Eberron elements are designed so that a person who would detect as Evil is still doing things that are Good overall (albeit in an "ends justify the means" fashion). Furthermore, for purging the Church, the character will have to walk a tough line. Are you purging it of people who aren't faithful, or are you purging it of people who don't live up to your definition of Good? A priest that's ruthless in their eradication of any evil may be ten times more faithful to the Church of the Silver Flame than a good priest who's having trouble coming to grips with the horrors he saw in the war. And there are very few people indeed who can truly live up to a strict paladin's interpretation of "Good". In fact, a paladin that's too righteous about purging the Church might just find himself doing a fair amount of evil due to overzealousness. And if he listens to the wrong inspirational voice, he might just become a Blackguard of the Dark Flame without even knowing it....
Heritage 01-27-05, 02:26 AM	Just running around with the Evil Radar to see who blips is not going to help anyone do anything. This may in fact be true, but coming from more traditional D&D settings, this is going to be a bit of an adjustment, because every D&D player I've ever played with has used detect evil as 'evil-dar', since most evil NPCs are the dangerous/guilty ones in most scenarios. I've seen many paladins enter a bar and sort of 'sweep it' with a 'scan', looking for the troublemakers; obviously an almost science fiction-like use of a divine gift, but modern-minded players often think that way. Originally Posted by 3.5 SRD Aura (Ex): A cleric of a chaotic, evil, good, or lawful deity has a particularly powerful aura corresponding to the deity’s alignment (see the detect evil spell for details). Clerics who don’t worship a specific deity but choose the Chaotic, Evil, Good, or Lawful domain have a similarly powerful aura of the corresponding alignment. I was not aware of that rule, but would discuss the specifics of implimentation with my players - we may or may not use our modified rule, based on this 'new' information. Just in case the original poster cares, there were a whole bunch of new detect spells in a Dragon magazine a while ago, created specifically to allow for ambiguity in alignment. I think it was issue #111, but I'm probably wrong. If you're interested, post back and I'll do a more thorough check. I would be very interested in the article, and would appreciate the issue number. Furthermore, for purging the Church, the character will have to walk a tough line. Are you purging it of people who aren't faithful, or are you purging it of people who don't live up to your definition of Good? A priest that's ruthless in their eradication of any evil may be ten times more faithful to the Church of the Silver Flame than a good priest who's having trouble coming to grips with the horrors he saw in the war. And there are very few people indeed who can truly live up to a strict paladin's interpretation of "Good". I don't think he plans on 'purging' the Church, but he is concerned and is poking his nose around a bit, and the Church elders are watching him closely. However this is all backstory, as we've only played one session so far, and doubtless things will become more clear and more muddied as things continue.
Uller999 01-27-05, 04:32 AM	[QUOTE=fizzbang] Now, personally, I was a bit disappointed that they kept alignment in Eberron at all, what witht he focus on intrigue and uncertainty and complexity of character. I would have been happier with allegences or the like from d20 Modern, or just none at all. But that's just my opinion. I think Heritage's modified version of the Detect spells should work quite well. I also think that they aren't strictly necessary, considering how many Eberron elements are designed so that a person who would detect as Evil is still doing things that are Good overall (albeit in an "ends justify the means" fashion). QUOTE] I'm pretty sure the only reason the kepy alignment was so to not have to much about with the massive amounts of spells in the PHB which are reliant in some capacity on alignment. Eberron has probably the most lax alignment of any campaign setting I've seen but when you compare the way alliegances are structured from the get go in Modern well the game is designed around that where as D&D is designed around alignment. It sucks I know but thats the way it is. So IMHO thats why I think alignment was kept and it's also implied by the extent to which alignment was made ambiguous in Eberron.
Just another user 01-27-05, 08:45 AM	Alignemnt in Eberron is still useful to deal with thing like demons and undead an such, for most the rest you can easily ignore it.
Edymnion 01-27-05, 11:24 AM	I disagree with the idea that alignment is based solely upon intent. If you have evil intentions but do not perform evil actions, then you are neutral. Likewise, good intentions alone do not make you good - you're still neutral unless you perform good deeds.If you read the default alignment rules in the PHB, it has quite clear descriptions on what alignment is (which most people apparently do not read based on how they post). Good: Respect for life, self sacrifice for others, promoting the general wellbeing. Evil: No respect for life, no qualms on harming others to achieve your goals, only care about yourself. If you don't care who you hurt, and you don't see any problems with hurting people to get what you want, then you are Evil in D&D. Overt actions play no part in this. Alignment is a thermometer, it is the in-game mechanic that guages a character's view of the world. Yes, you can get radical changes in alignment, because alignment is not a straight jacket and does not dictate how you act, not in Eberron, not in Greyhawk. If you start becoming more selfish and callous, you can easily move from Good to Evil. However, it has to be a fundamental change in how your character views the world. The Lawful Good paladin that goes on a killing spree and slaughters an entire town of babies does NOT undergo an alignment shift just for that one action. If they still see the rules of right and wrong, and regret having to do it, but they think it was necissary, they will lose their Paladinhood for breaking their oaths, but the would not become Chaotic Evil or anything like that. Thinking Evil and Acting good is not the definition of Neutral, its not even close. Someone who thinks Evil *IS* Evil. Someone who does Good is *NOT* Good. Hitlor did very good things for the Germans, and the Americans did horribly evil things to Japan in WWII. That doesn't make Hitlor Good and America Evil.This may in fact be true, but coming from more traditional D&D settings, this is going to be a bit of an adjustment, because every D&D player I've ever played with has used detect evil as 'evil-dar', since most evil NPCs are the dangerous/guilty ones in most scenarios. I've seen many paladins enter a bar and sort of 'sweep it' with a 'scan', looking for the troublemakers; obviously an almost science fiction-like use of a divine gift, but modern-minded players often think that way.Thats fine, its what my Paladin does as well. But just knowing that someone could potentially be a problem is still no excuse to take any overt action against them. Especially in Eberron.
Blizzard_Bobsan 01-27-05, 11:57 AM	In my campaign the use of "detect evil" spell or spell-like ability is often received as a direct insult against the target. Someone may argue that it isn't obvious that the Paladin is using his "detect evil radar", but the use of a spell-like ability still provokes AOO (even if it doesn't have verbal and somatic components), so it involves concentration (and colorful description, at least in my games). Every NPC that sees one of the heroes concentrating on him with no apparent reason will probably take it personally (in a wide-magic world you probably wouldn't like strange people casting spells on you).
N'wah 01-27-05, 12:02 PM	The Dragon article mentioned before is titled "See No Evil"- it's on page 68 of Dragon # 323. Yes, I do have a lot of time on my hands, why do you ask? ;)
Sharn Inquisitor 01-27-05, 01:29 PM	I did read all the messages, but couldn't an evil cleric have a magical item that distorts, or prevents alignment detection. If I were a hight ranking priest I'd sure have an amulet of whatever of undetectable alignment. Plus, evil in Eberron doesn't mean (like Edymnion said) that you act on your general thoughts and feelings. A LE person can be selfish and cruel in their methods/intentions but still be completely self-sacrificing for the nation that they serve...I think King Kaius of Karrnath is a prime example.
jonthegm 01-27-05, 01:50 PM	I did read all the messages, but couldn't an evil cleric have a magical item that distorts, or prevents alignment detection. If I were a hight ranking priest I'd sure have an amulet of whatever of undetectable alignment. Plus, evil in Eberron doesn't mean (like Edymnion said) that you act on your general thoughts and feelings. A LE person can be selfish and cruel in their methods/intentions but still be completely self-sacrificing for the nation that they serve...I think King Kaius of Karrnath is a prime example. Undetectable Alignment Abjuration Level: Brd 1, Clr 2, Pal 2 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Target: One creature or object Duration: 24 hours Saving Throw: Will negates (object) Spell Resistance: Yes (object) An undetectable alignment spell conceals the alignment of an object or a creature from all forms of divination. ... Yeah, pretty much all bards (especially gnomish spies, and 3rd+ level clerics are gonna be pretty tough to pin down...)
Sharn Inquisitor 01-27-05, 01:55 PM	Now we're talking...A spell that low level, there's no way my PC's are going to be running detect alignments on any shady powerful NPCs. They're gonna have to work for the answers and role-play.
JBW 01-27-05, 01:56 PM	If you don't care who you hurt, and you don't see any problems with hurting people to get what you want, then you are Evil in D&D. Overt actions play no part in this. So, Edy, you can do all manner of evil things, but so long as you "see problems with what you're doing and feel bad about it" you're still Good? If your answer is yes, then it's obvious that we may never agree on this subject, but let's give it a try... Consider Alignment (Good or Evil) to be like a disease. There are symptoms (those things we cannot see or measure, such as fatigue and nausea) and signs (quantifiable properties that we can see and measure, such as fever and vomiting). Alignment should be tied to both symptoms (motive and feelings) and signs (actions). To do otherwise is to take Alignment into a completely metagame realm where it's only purpose is to determine "how characters are affected by certain spells/effects and what DR they might overcome). In that case, you might as well make alignments a combination of ABC and XYZ. So my alignment is AY meaning that I can cast spells of A but not C, and I'm equally influenced by X and Z. Boy, wouldn't that be great... :rolleyes: OK, let's get back to the discussion. Someone who thinks Evil *IS* Evil. Someone who does Good is *NOT* Good. Hitlor did very good things for the Germans, and the Americans did horribly evil things to Japan in WWII. That doesn't make Hitlor Good and America Evil. OK, examining the Hitler argument - because he is seen as "Good" to a minority, and the America argument - because they are seen as "Evil" to much of the world, we have to ask if our judgements are on their thinking or on their actions. I would propose that you are in fact absolutely mistaken that we condemn or support either of the above two for their thoughts (if a country can even have thoughts). Instead, views of Good and Evil are placed in the actions taken. Many of Hitler's ideas were made for the betterment of the German people - making them "Good" ideas - but the actions taken can be certainly seen as Evil. Likewise, many actions taken by the USA are seen as "Good" but the selfish motivations of US leaders and the commonly held disregard for the wellbeing of others that initiatied those actions is "Evil" through and through. I still contend that judgements must be made on actions more than thought. Your examples are not the best - the subject of Hitler is too "emotionally charged" for most to have any kind of menaingful discussions about the man, and "America" is not really Good or Evil because those qualities can only be assigned to an intellignet entity - a better choice would have been an American leader, such as Joseph McCarthy (a man with Good intentions that took Evil actions and is largely considered to be Evil by those that would assign him a D&D alignment). Besides, hasn't Hellcow noted that a Silver Flame priest that took extreme measures (read: Evil actions) in the name of the faith (read: Good thoughts) could very easily end up in the Lawful Evil category? Doesn't this say that his actions affect his Alignment at least as much as his intent? I have to go to work now, but I'd love to continue this discussion later. Jay
Sharn Inquisitor 01-27-05, 02:04 PM	This is why alignment stinks.
Euangelion 01-27-05, 02:14 PM	This is why D&D is a fantasy game. I for one would greatly appreciate the ability to have a general sense of the moral outlook of the people around me in real life. "Sure, they seem nice, but they register as evil so I'll keep a close eye on them and my back!" or "I'm not sure about why they keep doing that, but they register as good, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now." Alignment is a necessary part of the game, a little tricky to be sure, but it's not supposed to be real. Eberron's take on it is a little closer to the reality of everyday life, but Eberron is still a fantasy setting.
motorfirebox 01-27-05, 02:53 PM	alignment in Eberron has less to do with intent than action. if a person has good intentions (say, financing an orphanage) but they go about completing it through evil acts (diverting funds earmarked for another orphanage, for instance), then they're evil, and a Detect Evil will mark them as such. if you discover the person's evil activities, you can call them on it and probably get them kicked out of the church or at least reprimanded. but simply casting Detect Evil isn't enough for a conviction.
Edymnion 01-27-05, 05:06 PM	alignment in Eberron has less to do with intent than action. if a person has good intentions (say, financing an orphanage) but they go about completing it through evil acts (diverting funds earmarked for another orphanage, for instance), then they're evil, and a Detect Evil will mark them as such. if you discover the person's evil activities, you can call them on it and probably get them kicked out of the church or at least reprimanded. but simply casting Detect Evil isn't enough for a conviction.Intentions are not the same as the way you think. You can intend to do good. You can do the good acts. But if your idea on how to do the good deed is to flay people alive, then you are not valuing life, self sacrifice, and all that rot. The Evil Silver Flame clerics are not evil because of what they did, they are evil for why they did it. Sure, the overall end was a good one, but they thought that the ends justified the means, so they had no qualms about doing horrible things to people. If someone does nothing but evil every day, but spends every night sobbing themselves to sleep and being horrified about the things they have to do? Yeah, I'd say they would still have a Good alignment. They do evil because they have no choice. If they did have a viable choice, and still chose to do evil, then they would be Evil themselves. The thing with all of this though is that it is difficult to do Evil and not have it infect you. Evil is easy, Evil is convenient. Good people that do Evil become desensetised to it, and start thinking its an okay thing to do. Being Good is harder, self sacrifice not being something that is a default condition to someone, its something that has to be learned and practiced. So yes, I do believe that in D&D, the reasons behind why a character does something is more important than the act itself. For example, in D&D, the act of killing is not Good or Evil, its Neutral. The REASON why you kill, THAT is Good or Evil.
Okami 01-27-05, 05:06 PM	I have found the grey zone approach to alignment to be a cue for the players to really define the ethics of their character. While there are D&D standards for using the Evil-dar approach they certainly do not mesh well with the ideology of Eberron. I have also found that if I simply classify their alignment to the black and white standards then the PCs find themselves in the awckward position of being surrounded by people who, until the end of the war, felt it was ok to dehumanize and kill people of the neighboring nations simply because their leader quested for a bigger piece of the pie. There is so much hatred and ambiguous evil in the air that it should be difficult to be a paladin or equal figure of good in this world without being overwhelmed at the condition of the rest of society. If you can see the intentions of vengeful people everywhere you turn I would think after a while you would try to stop looking in an attempt to preserve your belief in the general good of society. Accepting that everyone you see has to some extent had to accept death and other atrocities of war in order to preserve their place in society. A good character should look for ways of redeeming the darkness rather than wishing for more smites a day. If detect evil is merely a tool for whether they can add extra damage rather than to aid the attempt to redeem the evil then the concept of a "Good" character is not being understood. Being Lawful Good does not mean you can join a paladin attack squad and start swinging away at anything you believe to be evil. Eberron makes good example of this in the aftermath of the Flame's crusade against shifters. There is a delicate balance between belief and zealotry, where the cryptic ramblings of a little girl are the only words of what you belive to be a god. From this lack of divine grace and intervention in the affairs of the devoted it stands to reason that once a believer came to realize they were working for a corrupt organization the most dangerous and detrimental thing they could do to themselves and the church they love is to strike out the corruption. The people are not emotionally prepared to see their church crumble. A person who upholds the concept of good would hopefully have the wisdom to understand that having the church as an icon of good is one of the few things bringing hope to the people of Khorvaire. The Flame itself has not struck down nor commanded the faithful on the corruption of its own ranks. There are two ways of seeing this- -one is that the Flame is not the icon of capital G Good the faithful believe it to be and sees how the corruption is a means of self preservation for a relatively non contested power organization or that it understands the do-gooder Paladin who would choose to cleanse the ranks of hidden evil is much akin to the dog who catches and kills a squirrel to bring back to it's master. It thinks it is doing good because it has done something which we, being all powerful and benevolent, will praise it for. The dog cannot see the redemptive qualities of the squirrel just as your righteous good character cannot see the potential for redemption in what it views as evil. The Church revolves around purification and belief in the power of good. To an outsider kicking them out would seem the most logical action, but to a dedicated Flamer rehabilitation would serve the church's maessage. To end this poor poor rant I seem to have trailed off onto, using the black and white alignment system really cheapens some of the better aspects of the world. If you are going to use alignment make it worth it instead of making it into a generic "bleh, you're evil so I kill you" smite fest. Make them ask questions.
Naudachu 01-27-05, 06:05 PM	This is a realy interesting discussion. One that we probably owe to Eberron. Alignment is one of those things that gets easily overlooked, often the last thing you fill out on your character sheet. We're probably all guilty of resorting to metagame thinking on this at one time or another. Originally posted by Edymnion Good: Respect for life, self sacrifice for others, promoting the general wellbeing. Evil: No respect for life, no qualms on harming others to achieve your goals, only care about yourself. The problem here is the priests of the Silver Flame seem to cross borders here. They have "no qualms on harming others to achieve your goals" and feel they are "promoting the general wellbeing." There are three great categories here, though. On the surface they seem tightly woven together, but like the example above they can be distinct and separate. Respect for life, self-centered vs. self-sacrifice, need to spread positive or negative energy. Originally posted by motorfirebox if a person has good intentions (say, financing an orphanage) but they go about completing it through evil acts (diverting funds earmarked for another orphanage, for instance), then they're evil, and a Detect Evil will mark them as such. Intent and actions. Good people can momentarily give in to evil impulses. We all have evil impulses, some less than others. IMHO the more you give in, the more evil inclinations you have and therefore are more likely to commit evil acts. If we all have evil impulses (except Paladins?), then evil can to a certain extent be measured by actions. Its the reason why you don't act that measures evil. If you're wishing someone harm or even coveting a neighbors wife :D , but don't act on it only because of some law or fear of consequences then this is "evil." If you genuinely believe its wrong and wish the thoughts would go away, then good for you...that's "good." I'm inclined to go with points of evil or goodness that slides you along a scale. My problem is, can you slide into neutrality? What is neutrality? Lack of a moral compass? If you don't know what you're doing is evil, is it evil? They say serial killers have a warped perception of reality. They were never taught good and evil. I've heard if you don't learn this before a certain age, then you'll never be able to comprehend the difference. I don't know how true this is, but it brings up an interesting point. The PHB has two definitions for True Neutral. Undecided and decidedly neutral. Undecided in that you realize helping one person may hurt another. You're still trying to pin down what good/evil is. You do what's good for yourself and the people you know. Becoming good is through self-sacrifice. Evil through acting selfishly. A decidedly neutral person has a respect for life, so much so, that he/she feels it should be left untampered. A hands off approach, taking life as it comes. Well, I don't think I've cracked the nut, but its food for thought. And I think I've spewed enough ;) .
okaynowa 01-28-05, 03:26 AM	I tend to like Heritage's proposed modifications for his campaign. At my house, we use pretty similar guidelines-- detect evil is generally a tool for detecting supernatural threats like outsiders and undead, not for seeing into hearts and minds. A mundane person won't register as evil unless they're profoundly committed to it (evil cleric, diabolic mage, etc) or presently engaged in evil activity (murder in progress, torture). This interpretation limits the paladin's ability to uncover evil before it strikes, but in return I'm fairly generous when it comes to exposing urgent situations. The paladin can't automatically identify the evil changeling spy on the council, but he can tell that somebody here has an imp for a familiar, or that heinous acts are going on in the basement. Basically, in our campaign detect evil works like Spidey Sense. It's a dramatic device, intended to tell the paladin where he needs to be (or needs to avoid). Rare is our mage or cleric who spends a spell slot on it. Even before Eberron came out our group has tended to play mixed alignment parties in ambiguous alignment settings. As a result, the players know they can't make assumptions about NPCs they meet, and that "the guy was evil and deserved it" doesn't hold up in court.
Dracoulis The Phyrexian 01-28-05, 03:38 AM	Do note that Detect spells can even mess up with certain outsiders, as well. If you've got an alignment subtype, you'll count as having that alignment, in addition to whatever you'd normally count as. Thus, for example, let's say that we take a Planetar (Angel, Good) who, for some reason, has fallen, and become very evil. You pop a Detect Good on him, and he's still Good! However, hit a Detect Evil on him, and he'll be Evil, too! How does one answer that?
JBW 01-28-05, 07:42 AM	You pop a Detect Good on him, and he's still Good! However, hit a Detect Evil on him, and he'll be Evil, too! How does one answer that? Trick question; no one uses Detect Good. ;) Jay
kisama 01-28-05, 10:53 AM	Coming from the standpoint of playing a paladin in Eberron I like the original poster's ideas as well. Due to the bluring in Eberron good and evil can be interpreted in so many ways (as seen in this discussion and many other like it). I disagree a great deal with the idea that your thoughts dictate your alignment. Actions speak louder than words, you might have fantasies about killing your neighbour because you hate the guy but thinking something and actually performing the act are two different things. How the heck can any DM preside over such things as Smite Evil properly when Good and Evil are no longer as distinct as they once were? For example, say a good priest who orders the erradication of all Lycanthropes. Would you be able to use smite evil on him? If no, why not? Ordering the genocide of a race is certainly not good. However the priest might think that lycanthropes have no souls and in his system of belief the soul is the mark of true sentience, so lycanthropes are not sentient and thus are not afforded the same respect as humans and other beings. So to him their destruction is no more offensive than say stepping on a bug, and in preventing the spread of the disease he is preventing other sentient beings from losing their souls which is the greatest good he could ever hope to accomplish in his lifetime. Is this priest good? My answer is yes, his convictions and intentions are good. I might disagree with them but I am not in a position to say or prove my convictions are any better than his. The priest could be right about lycanthropy and I could be wrong. So would a paladin be able to use Smite Evil on such a priest? On one hand, if the paladin is from the same system of belief, then you could say no, the smite evil would not work. On the other hand if the Paladin comes from a system of belief where all forms of life are sacred, then the priest who ordered the genocide of the lycanthropes is evil according to that belief and the paladin would be able to use smite evil on that priest. This is certainly not how Smite Evil was supposed to work. The problem is this is the downside to blurring alignments in a game where a lot of the mechanics were originally founded off the alignment system to begin with. Things break. If we play the game in this manner we have an issue. Paladins would be able to detect evil and smite evil according to their belief system, which is bad because smite evil is about bannishing evil in it's purest form. Evil which was originally easily defined by the alignment system. Now we have paladins running around using smite evil on beings they may deem as evil rather than beings who are truely evil. This is not good because it is borrowing from a few prestige classes (like the new ones in the Complete Adventurer book). I like the original poster's idea because it gives paladins back their thunder in Eberron. They have a clear purpose once more and it's easily defined and there's no ambiguity in how they can use their powers.
Takasi 01-28-05, 12:20 PM	Looking at the meta game, a player with a paladin character needs detect evil in order to decide if they should use their smite ability. If detect evil is limited to a personal detection spell then no one could prove to society that one person was good or evil; it would be entirely subjective. However, in a world where you have zones of truth for law wouldn't it be more logical to have some type of detect evil artifact? I would suspect that a church that's so zealous that they'd wipe out all lycanthropes would surely purge themselves of anyone who shows up as evil. If there is corruption in the Church then it must happen after this test, or perhaps there is a way to shield yourself from it as jonthegm described.
motorfirebox 01-28-05, 12:44 PM	If someone does nothing but evil every day, but spends every night sobbing themselves to sleep and being horrified about the things they have to do? Yeah, I'd say they would still have a Good alignment. i think that's too broad an example to say for sure; there are too many different shades of grey that could be brought out by the different circumstances that could create a situation like that. if it's, say, a paladin during the purge? yeah, i can see that. if it's some guy who kills blond girls because the voices tell him they're secretly squirrel-demons from the deepest levels of heck? i'm not gonna call that guy "good".
Brastan 01-28-05, 02:08 PM	Great discussion. I will defiantly be needing this as I have cleric in my next campaign. So far the discussion has been on Good vs Evil. It is very important to a Paladin for detecting and smiting. Now assume that this church purifying Paladin has discovered an Evil church official what is he going to do? By most reasoning he should smite the evil no mater what. He might be able to conduct such actions on lower members of the hierarchy. However an Evil cleric would be likely to protect his evil followers in the local church and would order the Paladin to stop. Turning your detect evil on your superior could get you striped of you status in the church. With Non-Detectable Alignment active how would know? I guess you could smite him and see if it hurts but thats not very honorable or trustworthy. Ah neutral, the gray in system. This is the alignment for moral ambiguity, were actions and intent don't always mesh. I would think that anytime you have a conflict between action and intent you find neutrality. The Paladin who slaughters an orphanage for the greater good could easily slide to Neutral Good if the continue. By defying the written or unwritten rule that you don't kill children in order to save hundreds more you slip from what it means to be Lawful Neutral. The intent dictates the static element in the shift while the action indicates the variable. A Paladin who is intent on upholding the 'laws' of the Silver Flame but commits an evil act could, after repeatedly doing so, shift to Lawful Neutral. The views of the church become more important then the dignity of others. This how I reconcile intent and action. To maintain the extremes of Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil your intent and actions must match, most of the time(say 90% at least). A neutral party needs to match intent and action as well but to the same degree(say 70%). For alignment tracking I like the point based system they have in Never Winter Nights. 100 = good on good vs evil, 100 = lawful on law vs chaos. Every time you commit an act that violates an aspect of your alignment you lose 1, 2, or 3 points off the appropriate axes. For performing an act that corresponds to your alignment you get back a similar number of points. 100 Good 66 Neutral 33 Evil 100 Lawful 66 Neutral 33 Chaotic This lets you gage how Evil someone is. I don't suggest any rules or this that have game play implications. I merely suggest it as a way to help track and see how Good your character is. Or how Evil you villain is.
Edymnion 01-28-05, 04:35 PM	Now assume that this church purifying Paladin has discovered an Evil church official what is he going to do? By most reasoning he should smite the evil no mater what.No, he should not. Smiting something just because it bings on the Evil-dar is itself an evil act. You have smited someone that, as far as you know, has never done an evil or hurtful act in his life to another living soul. Maybe he's evil because he likes to kill fluffy little kittens and pop little girl's balloons. Thats no ground for a smiting, and there would be terrible consequences for that kind of shortsightedness in my games. What are they supposed to do if a higher up bings on the Evil-dar? Duh, they should start trying to find PROOF. Think of this in game terms. Bob the High Cleric, who has done many works of great good for the church is laying dead on the floor, and Fred the new hotshot Paladin is standing over him with a bloody sword. Who are you going to believe? That the priest you've known for years was an evil bastard that deserved to die, or that the "paladin" just committed cold blooded murder? No, you find proof that the cleric has done something wrong. You build up your case, and you present it the guy over the cleric's head. You convince him that something is wrong, and needs to be done, and let them handle it. You do NOT take action into your own hands. To use a real life example. You just got a job a week ago. You think that your manager, who has worked there for years is skimming money out of the till. Do you: A) Walk in and shoot him, and tell the police he was stealing from the till, but only you knew it. B) Go to the owner and say "My manager is stealing out of the till, I demand you fire him immediantly!", when you've only been there a week and he's been a trusted employee for years. or C) Observe him, try to catch him on film doing it, and then present the evidence to the owner or the police only after you have enough to prove your case? Same in game. Just because YOU think somebody is evil is no excuse to take justice into your own hands. You don't know WHY he's evil, you don't know whats going on, it isn't your job to go around smiting people.
Takasi 01-28-05, 04:58 PM	Edymnion, if a paladin is in a fight with someone and they detect that that person is evil then they should use their smite ability. I mean, why not? They're already in a fight right? :)
Dracoulis The Phyrexian 01-28-05, 08:44 PM	Trick question; no one uses Detect Good. ;) Jay I... er... um... nuts. Fine, change 'Planetar' to 'Succubus', and swap all instances of Good/Evil! The point stands! I mean, it's not unpossible for a Succubus to become halfway decent, right?
motorfirebox 01-29-05, 12:00 AM	takasi, that's a different question from whether or not the paladin should attack the evil cleric in the first place. if the paladin finds himself in combat with the cleric, of course he should use his smite evil ability. but that doesn't mean he should walk up and smite the cleric out of the blue just because the cleric pings as evil.
Greyman 01-29-05, 12:13 AM	What are they supposed to do if a higher up bings on the Evil-dar? Duh, they should start trying to find PROOF. Think of this in game terms. Bob the High Cleric, who has done many works of great good for the church is laying dead on the floor, and Fred the new hotshot Paladin is standing over him with a bloody sword. Who are you going to believe? That the priest you've known for years was an evil bastard that deserved to die, or that the "paladin" just committed cold blooded murder?Especially when the faint evil aura from the Bob's alignment fades rather quickly while the strong good aura from Bob's faith in the Silver Flame lingers on for quite a while.Trick question; no one uses Detect Good. Blackguards frequently do but Paladins can't, and vice versa. Detect alignment spells aren't on their lists and they have only one detect alignment spelllike ability.
Greyman 01-29-05, 12:20 AM	Same in game. Just because YOU think somebody is evil is no excuse to take justice into your own hands. You don't know WHY he's evil, you don't know whats going on, it isn't your job to go around smiting people.Also, without observation or proof you don't know if he's actually evil - or if the aura is eminating from a spell cast on him, or an item he's been tricked into carrying, or what not.
Marshall Stone 01-29-05, 01:56 AM	First "Alignment Ambguity" in Eberron simply means that the traditional assigned alignments that are "standard" in AD&D are not standard in Eberron. So it's possible to have a good aligned Red Dragon, whereas "normally" Red Dragons are evil. I believe Edymninon explained it in a previous post. It doesn't mean you can be Lawful Good, commit Evil - whatever is considered Evil in your game - over and over again and still be Lawful Good. By the same token it doesn't mean you can be Chaotic Evil, and do good acts without end and still be Chaotic Evil. Second, I would like to know what is Detect Evil detecting? The ability as described in PHB states, "You can sense the presence of Evil." The problem with that statement is that Evil is not "presence-able". Evil is the omission of a due good. Evil is the LACK of good. Evil is a negative quality/quantity. It's like saying, "How big is that whole?" or like how Darkness is simply the complete absence of any Light. You can't collect Darkness but you can generate Light. Thus no one has an Evil Impulse, they have a momentary weakness to omit a due good. In the real world: Lying - telling an untruth with the intent to decieve, is always evil; though not necessarily harmful, you can lie to protect someone. Why? Because when you lie the Due good you are omitting is the RIGHT of the asker to know the truth, IF in fact the asker has that right. In a just court of good conscience, The Court has the Right to know the Truth, and if you don't give it you're commiting an evil act. However in the mockery of a court, one that is not Just or that lacks good conscience, you need not answer any question, let alone answer it truthfully. Killing - the taking of another's life, is only evil if the act was done without good cause and good conscience. The CotSF wants to stop the spread of Lycanthrope because it "shackles/sickens/etc." one's soul. A good cause. So they go about killing EVERY were-creature, regardless of whether are not it's good aligned, how old it is, or even if it's ever committed an evil act. BAD conscience. Anytime any member of the CotSF killed indiscriminately like that, they committed murder - the taking of a life without due cause or justice. And a Paladin that did it, I would say would have to Atone for it or loose his paladin status. But he wouldn't instantly become Evil. Only if he continued to do it would, over time, he become Evil. But, that's the real world. In the game, Evil is simply a game mechanic, and again like Edymnion posted, a thermometer not a straightjacket. Since the very premise of what Evil is in the AD&D game is wrong from what Evil actually is in the real world, IMHO, you're best recourse is to talk with your GM and make sure you know what he is going to call Evil and what he isn't. You may want to ask such questions as: Do my intentions constitute as Evil? or Do my actions, alone, constitute my character becoming EVil? The scale idea that Brastan proposed is a good one. As for using Detect Evil to Detect those Clerics that are Evil? Two things: 1) as the rules state, and as others have mentioned, A Clerics detectable alignment depends on the Alignment of the Deity he worships. 2) Okay, let's say you do detect Evil in a cleric of the Silver Flame. That still doesn't give you the right to simply go up and kill him. You don't know what evil the cleric is guilty of and until you do you can't just eliminate him, that's bad conscience.
Arcane Guyver 01-29-05, 02:36 AM	If you're really concerned about church corruption, there's the Church Inquisitor PrC (Complete Divine) that seems perfect for the job of seperating the wheat from the chaff.
Ramses III 01-29-05, 02:36 AM	Evil is NOT the absence of good. Evil is very specifically malevolent. It is placing yourself above others, even if this brings harm to those others. If I have no good intentions in my heart, and I never do a good deed in my life, I am by default neutral. I will only be evil if I disregard the lives of others and place myself above them, causing them harm in the process. Also, a couple of minor actions here or there don't sway the balance. If I pulled a cat's tail on Tuesday that doesn't make me evil -- but if I pull the tail of every cat I see, then yes, I'm probably evil. Intent vs. action is a tricky deal. I think action reflects more on alignment than intent does -- for instance, in the extreme example presented of killing a town full of babies for the greater good -- let's say that one of the babies is prophecied to be the reincarnation of a balor, but we don't know which one -- the character who takes this action has just committed an irrevocable evil. Regardless of the intent behind it, the character has murdered innocents. Not only does this character lose his benefits if a paladin, but as the DM in this instance I am watching the player very closely for how he roleplays his character's emotional reaction to his actions. He is at best sliding into neutrality -- that if he shows true remorse AND tries to make amends -- and if not, he is evil. I don't necessarily tell the player this, but spells and supernatural effects affect him as an evil character.
Heritage 01-29-05, 04:20 AM	I'm really glad that this thread has lead to so much interesting discussion! I'm embarressed to admit I missed the reference to auras in the cleric description - no doubt this would be the primary way for a lawful evil cleric of the Silver Flame to go undetected in Eberron. However, there is still much for us to discuss in our own game group, and here in the thread. I don't think most corrupted clerics would use any kind of spells to avoid detection because they don't think of themeselves as being evil, so they don't have anything to hide. And don't all the spells confirm what they already know, that they are good, pure servants who must occasionally soil their hands in the pursuit of the greater good? ;)
Blizzard_Bobsan 01-29-05, 05:08 AM	I'm really glad that this thread has lead to so much interesting discussion! I'm embarressed to admit I missed the reference to auras in the cleric description - no doubt this would be the primary way for a lawful evil cleric of the Silver Flame to go undetected in Eberron. However, there is still much for us to discuss in our own game group, and here in the thread. I don't think most corrupted clerics would use any kind of spells to avoid detection because they don't think of themeselves as being evil, so they don't have anything to hide. And don't all the spells confirm what they already know, that they are good, pure servants who must occasionally soil their hands in the pursuit of the greater good? ;) I think that strictly by the rules the "detect evil" spell will still detect them, and "detect good" will detect them with a stronger aura.
JBW 01-29-05, 12:27 PM	You do NOT take action into your own hands. I ever there was a statement that goes against everything RPGs are meant for, this would have to be it. In every RPG I have ever seen, PCs DO "take action into your own hands" (I don't like the way that line is written, but it follows the quote, so give me a break). That becomes the entire point of being the protagonists in an evolving storyline. You certainly face the consequences for any actions taken, but - especially within Eberron - if the PCs don't take action, then who will? Jay
JBW 01-29-05, 12:42 PM	Smiting something just because it bings on the Evil-dar is itself an evil act. You have smited someone that, as far as you know, has never done an evil or hurtful act in his life to another living soul. Maybe he's evil because he likes to kill fluffy little kittens and pop little girl's balloons. Thats no ground for a smiting, and there would be terrible consequences for that kind of shortsightedness in my games. Sorry, but Detect Evil only register Evil acts, not silly crap, and not simply "bad thoughts" - if you Detect Evil, you can certainly go ahead and Smite...but it may not be the best option. In many cases, the Paladin would serve the forces of Good better by attempting to redeem the evil character. Smiting should be saved for those beyond redemption and as a last resort when other approaches have failed. I think that the perceived "shortsightedness" is in your attempt to impose too many restrictions on what is intended to be a powerful ability. ]Bob the High Cleric, who has done many works of great good for the church is laying dead on the floor, and Fred the new hotshot Paladin is standing over him with a bloody sword. Who are you going to believe? That the priest you've known for years was an evil bastard that deserved to die, or that the "paladin" just committed cold blooded murder? I would tend to believe the Paladin so long as he could demonstrate that he still possesses his powers. Check the RAW since you want this "in game terms". BTW, Edy, I do find it interesting that you only mention actions including the good deeds of the cleric and the paladin's smiting. I thought you were the big proponent of "thoughts not actions make the alignment". It would seem that since the judgements are bewing made on actions, the clerivc must have had a number of eveil deeds that had been hidden - until the paladin sniffed them out. Jay
Edymnion 01-29-05, 02:55 PM	Sorry, but Detect Evil only register Evil acts, not silly crap, and not simply "bad thoughts" - if you Detect Evil, you can certainly go ahead and Smite...but it may not be the best option. In many cases, the Paladin would serve the forces of Good better by attempting to redeem the evil character. Smiting should be saved for those beyond redemption and as a last resort when other approaches have failed.No, Detect Evil detects anyone with the Evil alignment. It doesn't matter how or why they have it, they will register. You can be Evil without ever committing an Evil act. I think that the perceived "shortsightedness" is in your attempt to impose too many restrictions on what is intended to be a powerful ability.Powerful ability, Detect Evil? How so? In any game thats more than just hack and slash, Detect Evil is by no means going to be a death sentance for anyone that bings on the Evil-dar. The only real power it has is to tell you who you can use a Smite on without wasting it. And it still has that full effect in Eberron. Gotta say that, if you've been running around saying anyone that detects as Evil *IS* evil and decides to die or be sent to "reformation camp", then IMO, you've been playing the game wrong...I would tend to believe the Paladin so long as he could demonstrate that he still possesses his powers. Check the RAW since you want this "in game terms".And just how would he do that? A Cleric/Paladin could break Paladin vows all day long and still be able to duplicate a Lay on Hands with a simple Cure Light Wounds and some roleplaying.BTW, Edy, I do find it interesting that you only mention actions including the good deeds of the cleric and the paladin's smiting. I thought you were the big proponent of "thoughts not actions make the alignment". Thats the point. The cleric that does good things does not have to be a Good person, and the paladin that did something evil does not have to be an Evil person.It would seem that since the judgements are bewing made on actions, the clerivc must have had a number of eveil deeds that had been hidden - until the paladin sniffed them out.Of course judgements are going to be made on actions, thats the only thing we as people can see. No one has their alignment pinned to their shirts, you just have to guess at it as best you can by observing their actions. But just like serial killers walk in public every day without anyone ever knowing it, you can't tell who is really good and who is really evil just by watching them for a short time. To use a real world example of this, History Channel did a thing on a man that tried to assassinate Nixon. He plotted it all out, he made audio tape recordings of what he was going to do, whole nine yards. He was going to hijack an airliner and crash it into the white house. Now, accourding to your stance, this man who had not done anything evil before this was not evil. He would not be evil until he actually hijacked the plane and killed everybody. I am arguing that he, in game terms, became Evil the moment he began to seriously plan the event out. No overt actions, but when he made the decision he was going to assassinate the president by killing a plane full of people, that he willingly crossed the line. And it was ENTIRELY in his head at that point. So it is entirely in the mind and the way you think. Just because you haven't gotten around to committing the Evil act you have planned does not mean you are going to walk around radiating a Good aura.
Arcane Guyver 01-29-05, 05:59 PM	Edit: dumb post, please move on :embarrass
Marshall Stone 01-29-05, 07:38 PM	Evil is NOT the absence of good. Evil is very specifically malevolent. It is placing yourself above others, even if this brings harm to those others. If I have no good intentions in my heart, and I never do a good deed in my life, I am by default neutral. I will only be evil if I disregard the lives of others and place myself above them, causing them harm in the process. Also, a couple of minor actions here or there don't sway the balance. If I pulled a cat's tail on Tuesday that doesn't make me evil -- but if I pull the tail of every cat I see, then yes, I'm probably evil. 1st - I am corrected. Let me rephrase, in Real life Evil is a label used by humans to identify immoral acts. Evil defined is the absence of a Due good. 2nd - But this is just a game. The alignment system is a Game Mechanic that obviously can not be applied to real life. However, useing the definitions of Good, Evil, Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral as provided in the PHB, then I'm inclined to agree with you on what makes one's game character Good, Neutral, Evil.
Greyman 01-30-05, 01:28 AM	I ever there was a statement that goes against everything RPGs are meant for, this would have to be it. In every RPG I have ever seen, PCs DO "take action into your own hands" (I don't like the way that line is written, but it follows the quote, so give me a break). That becomes the entire point of being the protagonists in an evolving storyline. You certainly face the consequences for any actions taken, but - especially within Eberron - if the PCs don't take action, then who will?Yes, Jay, but there is a difference between "take matters into your own hands and uncover enough evidence to expose Bob's corruption" and "take matters into your own hands and murder Bob on the spot." Edymnion was not suggesting that the PCs should do nothing, just that a vigilante attack was not an appropriate action for a paladin to take in that situation.
nyysjan 01-30-05, 02:14 AM	Yes, Jay, but there is a difference between "take matters into your own hands and uncover enough evidence to expose Bob's corruption" and "take matters into your own hands and murder Bob on the spot." Edymnion was not suggesting that the PCs should do nothing, just that a vigilante attack was not an appropriate action for a paladin to take in that situation. and anyway it would be chaotic act and paladins must be lawfull
JBW 01-30-05, 11:58 AM	and anyway it would be chaotic act and paladins must be lawfull As Edy will point out, it's OK as long as you feel real bad and cry about it afterwards... Atonement can work wonders for those occasions where the "spirit" of Good is more important than the "letter" of Law. Jay
Edymnion 01-30-05, 12:40 PM	As Edy will point out, it's OK as long as you feel real bad and cry about it afterwards... Atonement can work wonders for those occasions where the "spirit" of Good is more important than the "letter" of Law. JayExcept that, don't forget, the Paladin has his Code to follow, and he can violate that code and lose his powers doing things that are neither good, evil, lawful, or chaotic, or any of the above (poison use, for example). Plus, one of the requirements for Atonement is that the person be truely sorry for it. If you're using Atonement as a get out of jail free card, it will stop working for you.
Greyman 01-30-05, 11:43 PM	I would tend to believe the Paladin so long as he could demonstrate that he still possesses his powers. Check the RAW since you want this "in game terms".... and what if, after having attacked and killed Bob, a legitimate member of the church's authority, for no better reason than that he had a faint evil aura, Fred was not able to demonstrate those abilities any longer?
JBW 01-30-05, 11:58 PM	... and what if, after having attacked and killed Bob, a legitimate member of the church's authority, for no better reason than that he had a faint evil aura, Fred, the ex-paladin, was not able to demonstrate those abilities any longer? Use some "Greymatter" and figure it out for yourself. My post stated my response based upon the outcome set up by the scenario used to describe a test of thre alignment system. I'm not going to play "what if" just so you and Edy can try to salavage a lost point. Jay
Greyman 01-31-05, 01:38 AM	rhetorical question n. A question to which no answer is expected, often used for rhetorical effect.
Ramses III 02-01-05, 12:59 AM	Use some "Greymatter" and figure it out for yourself. My post stated my response based upon the outcome set up by the scenario used to describe a test of thre alignment system. I'm not going to play "what if" just so you and Edy can try to salavage a lost point. Jay If the paladin killed the cleric for no other reason than because the cleric had a faint evil aura, the paladin has just committed murder. Murder is an evil act. There is no "lost point" here; Greyman is on the money.
Brastan 02-01-05, 03:00 AM	Now assume that this church purifying Paladin has discovered an Evil church official what is he going to do? By most reasoning he should smite the evil no mater what. Guess I should have stated the other line reasoning. Because the Church is going to wail on your dumb paladin ass and throw you out or worse! Now in most settings(Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms) evil clerics are truly evil and again by most conventions should be put to the sword. The absence of Good is Neutral not Evil. If your Evil priest are not being Evil then they should be Neutral. This could be as simple as stealing from or extorting the faithful. A Paladin's level of response is entirely proportional to evil being done. In the case of the extorter he would likely attempt to prove the theft is taking place and then attempt to return ill-gotten funds. His ability to Detect Evil alerts him to the suspicious situation. Were others would never question what's happening the Paladin has the motivation to look deeper. Even in Eberron Evil is Evil. Bad motives, bad actions. Although most are disguised as something other than what they are. Intent and Action must go hand in hand. An accidental evil act by a good character might see them slip to Neutral if they don't try and make amends. The main thing about Eberron is that things are not what they seem. In Greyhawk you would not see LE or NE priest of a LG deity. They would just be pretending. In Eberron you can have a Lawful Evil priest who is dedicated to the church but robs his faithful blind because he believes the church needs the money more then they do. A Paladin would object to this practice and see to it that it is stopped, by force of arms only if absolutely necessary. The Paladins Code of conduct limits so killing a covertly evil or a misguided evil priest is out of the question. Just because his "Evil'dar pings" is not a good excuse now and has never been a good excuse before. The Detection of Evil is usually the catalyst for an investigation that, in past settings, resulted in a combat confrontation with the evil person. In Eberron this investigation could end in philosophical debate about the nature of Evil. (Use this thread as a reference for arguments ;) ) Eberron does not give evil NPCs the excuse to be evil in name and be neutral in action. (I suddenly realize I've been thinking of Merrix to kindly. I need to run him with more Evil and selfishness in his actions.) They need to do something evil, even slapping kids that don't deserve it could count.
JBW 02-01-05, 07:55 AM	There is no "lost point" here; Greyman is on the money. The "point" refers to the earlier discussion. Greyman has attempted to create a counterpoint that is ouside the bounds of the limited example used in that discussion. If that is your definition of "on the money", then don't take up gambling. Eberron does not give evil NPCs the excuse to be evil in name and be neutral in action. Well said. I tried to say the same thing several posts ago and got jumped on by the Whiners' Guild. I hope you fare better. Jay
Edymnion 02-01-05, 09:50 AM	and got jumped on by the Whiners' Guild.So anyone that doesn't agree with you 100% is a card carrying whiner? Come on man, there's no excuse to go around calling people names just because they don't see the game the same way you do. Thats just plain old trolling/baiting.
JBW 02-01-05, 10:15 AM	So anyone that doesn't agree with you 100% is a card carrying whiner? The Whiners' Guild issues cards? Jay
nyysjan 02-02-05, 02:05 AM	The Whiners' Guild issues cards? Jay where can we get those