Paladin, detect evil, insane

[Lurker]

All of this paladin talk has gotten me thinking. Plus I was working today with a couple of cadets that have true mental issues.

My twisted little mind put the 2 together … My idea/question is how does a paladin’s detect evil ping on someone insane that has done evil things? Yes, his actions would be evil, but he doesn’t comprehend it as evil or mean it as evil… his mind just doesn’t work that way.

Of course, someone like Jeffery Dahmer I’d argue would ping evil, but what about someone not at that end of the spectrum ?

[Treebore]

Easily 99% of all "mentally ill" people know what they are doing is wrong, they simply do not care, or feel that they cannot help themselves. It is actually very rare to find someone so mentally ill that they do not know what they are doing is considered wrong. Still, "realistically" I'd say having the more severe forms of mental illness going hand in hand with "evil" acts would be appropriate. Then you have to ask yourself, can you "cure" an evil person by casting Heal on them, which I recall as curing all insanities, etc...?

[Captain_K]

Evil is as Evil does... plus would it not also be relative to the LG detector.. culture and norms aside, the LG Paladin and his or her gods are simply looking for their opposite, so mentally challenged or not, if they are opposite in belief, action, thought, "soul" then I think they would register as being on the other end of the spectrum regardless of how or why they do that. Same I thinks for having a charmed or compelled person do something evil.. they were compelled to do something evil, but they still did it and still must atone.

[serleran]

Insanity is not evil. Classically, when a character with an alignment restriction is forced to do something under the effects of insanity (whether a spell or other condition), they do not lose their class abilities... provided they properly atone for the actions they did commit, whenever it is possible.

Otherwise, every fighter with PTSD would flag as evil when shellshock (and more) kick in, including paladins. Nearly every intelligent being on the planet would, at some point, register as evil.

That is simply not the intent.

[mbeacom]

I think it would detect evil regardless. I don't think Detect Evil is based on intent. Hitler probably thought he was attaining a greater good by exterminating millions of Jews. And he was clearly insane. Yet he would have been off the chart evil. If a mother went crazy and thought her infant carried the soul of a demon so she murdered it the spell would detect her evil act. I don't think Detect Evil has all this moral relativism wrapped up in it or cares how the person "feels" or what they "think" they were doing. For me, it's super simple. Is this person engaging in evil actions? If the answer is yes, then it will ping. There is a potential for some confused readings maybe, but it won't miss evil. And Evil is evil despite intent by the perpetrator. In our modern society, there is some gray area about legal responsibility for ones actions, but that doesn't belong in a Detect Evil spell because that is a construct we've created such that we all admit evil occurred, but we just don't hold the person criminally responsible. We will often have them committed or some other action taken to prevent further evil acts.

[Rigon]

I think it would detect evil regardless. I don't think Detect Evil is based on intent. Hitler probably thought he was attaining a greater good by exterminating millions of Jews. And he was clearly insane. Yet he would have been off the chart evil. If a mother went crazy and thought her infant carried the soul of a demon so she murdered it the spell would detect her evil act. I don't think Detect Evil has all this moral relativism wrapped up in it or cares how the person "feels" or what they "think" they were doing. For me, it's super simple. Is this person engaging in evil actions? If the answer is yes, then it will ping. There is a potential for some confused readings maybe, but it won't miss evil. And Evil is evil despite intent by the perpetrator. In our modern society, there is some gray area about legal responsibility for ones actions, but that doesn't belong in a Detect Evil spell because that is a construct we've created such that we all admit evil occurred, but we just don't hold the person criminally responsible. We will often have them committed or some other action taken to prevent further evil acts.

But you have to define evil. Were the Aztecs evil? They practiced human sacrifice. By any standards, that's an evil act, but to them, they were saving their culture by offering the sacrifice. So, a paladin in the of the Aztec religion, would not think anything of sacrificing a human prisoner to his gods. Would he lose his paladin abilities? I'd say no, as he was following his religious and cultural strictures.

R-

[Arduin]

I think it would detect evil regardless. I don't think Detect Evil is based on intent. Hitler probably thought he was attaining a greater good by exterminating millions of Jews. And he was clearly insane. Yet he would have been off the chart evil. If a mother went crazy and thought her infant carried the soul of a demon so she murdered it the spell would detect her evil act. I don't think Detect Evil has all this moral relativism wrapped up in it or cares how the person "feels" or what they "think" they were doing. For me, it's super simple. Is this person engaging in evil actions? If the answer is yes, then it will ping. There is a potential for some confused readings maybe, but it won't miss evil. And Evil is evil despite intent by the perpetrator. In our modern society, there is some gray area about legal responsibility for ones actions, but that doesn't belong in a Detect Evil spell because that is a construct we've created such that we all admit evil occurred, but we just don't hold the person criminally responsible. We will often have them committed or some other action taken to prevent further evil acts.

But you have to define evil. Were the Aztecs evil? They practiced human sacrifice. By any standards, that's an evil act, but to them, they were saving their culture by offering the sacrifice. So, a paladin in the of the Aztec religion, would not think anything of sacrificing a human prisoner to his gods. Would he lose his paladin abilities? I'd say no, as he was following his religious and cultural strictures.

R-

In C&C, if I remember correctly, there is no moral relativism. Orcs are evil because they are/do. Not because of what THEY believe is evil...

In C&C Evil IS defined in the RAW as: "Good implies altruism, respect for life and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others. Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil implies hurting, oppressing, killing others and selfishness."

So, per RAW Aztecs (in the main) were of Evil alignment. Probably L.E.

[mbeacom]

I think it would detect evil regardless. I don't think Detect Evil is based on intent. Hitler probably thought he was attaining a greater good by exterminating millions of Jews. And he was clearly insane. Yet he would have been off the chart evil. If a mother went crazy and thought her infant carried the soul of a demon so she murdered it the spell would detect her evil act. I don't think Detect Evil has all this moral relativism wrapped up in it or cares how the person "feels" or what they "think" they were doing. For me, it's super simple. Is this person engaging in evil actions? If the answer is yes, then it will ping. There is a potential for some confused readings maybe, but it won't miss evil. And Evil is evil despite intent by the perpetrator. In our modern society, there is some gray area about legal responsibility for ones actions, but that doesn't belong in a Detect Evil spell because that is a construct we've created such that we all admit evil occurred, but we just don't hold the person criminally responsible. We will often have them committed or some other action taken to prevent further evil acts.

But you have to define evil. Were the Aztecs evil? They practiced human sacrifice. By any standards, that's an evil act, but to them, they were saving their culture by offering the sacrifice. So, a paladin in the of the Aztec religion, would not think anything of sacrificing a human prisoner to his gods. Would he lose his paladin abilities? I'd say no, as he was following his religious and cultural strictures.

R-

Yep. Human sacrifice is evil. Not particularly confusing as far as I'm concerned. That guy in Temple of Doom ripping peoples hearts out? Evil? Yep. Although, he, like the Aztecs probably thought he was "saving" something really important. But, in other news, Paladins would not and could not exist in an Aztec like society as I understand both.

If "following religious and cultural strictures" is all that is required to be a Paladin, than Paladin has no meaning. It just means someone devoted to a religion, any religion. Which is kind of absurd, at least in a wold with detect evil as a core ability. Otherwise, the spell would be called "Detect stuff opposite our religion". In such a world, you'd have "paladins" detecting people who protect the innocent because their religion requires sacrificing virgins or something. No, that just gets too crazy and relativist for a fantasy world IMO. The real world has already gone insane in that regard. I don't need to bring that nonsense into my fantasy worlds.

[Lurker]

Good points

In general, I do believe in absolutes - good & evil acts are good evil regardless of the cultural norms.

Also, sadly, I have had -luckily none this cycle - cadets that truly do not have a 'mental stop sign' to say this is a wrong act ...

Part of me says yes they pop hot as evil ...

However, to make it interesting - game wise - could the insanity 'mask' the evil ... make it harder for a paladin to see it or see how evil he truly is ...

[mbeacom]

Good points

In general, I do believe in absolutes - good & evil acts are good evil regardless of the cultural norms.

Also, sadly, I have had -luckily none this cycle - cadets that truly do not have a 'mental stop sign' to say this is a wrong act ...

Part of me says yes they pop hot as evil ...

However, to make it interesting - game wise - could the insanity 'mask' the evil ... make it harder for a paladin to see it or see how evil he truly is ...

Here, too. Your question, and the answers got me to thinking. How granular is Detect Evil? Just what kind of information does it pass on to the "caster"? Is it a binary yes or no? Is it a feeling? A tingle or "bzzzzt!" sensation? Point being does it impart intent? Might a paladin know that a person commits evil acts but unintentionally in some way? I honestly believe these questions tend to spoil the game concept but some people might like to explore this kind of thing.

As has been said. Evil isn't relative. It's a real and actual thing we've experienced as humans and have sought to understand and explain. It's not purely a construct such that if you simply change your point of view, it isn't evil anymore. The evil didn't change. You did. And it didn't need our definition of it to exist. It already existed before any definitions sought to contain it.

With regard to its use by Paladins, I'm honestly more interested in the opposite idea from what was portrayed here. Instead of the confusion of a person who engages in evil acts, but doesn't understand them to be evil, I'm interested in how people view the spell/ability when used on people who are/have evil/malice in their hearts but DO NOT act on it. Would the paladin detect evil in any different way if someone wanted an innocent dead, or a person tortured, wished them dead, etc, but never could or would act on it?

[Treebore]

I do think evil is relative. If you have a group of people that follow a set of rules/laws/beliefs that says it is fine and good to have slaves, or to kill people for a variety of reasons such as poor eye sight, eating certain foods on a forbidden day, or having certain markings on your body, then according to that group of people they are good, even "holy". Now another group looks at what the first group does, and thinks slavery is wrong, that it is evil, and thinks that the long list of reasons group 1 has for killing people is stupid and evil. So group 2 thinks group 1 is thoroughly evil. Group 1, being the righteous/holy people that they are will think group 2 is evil simply because they have a different set of beliefs than their own. So good and evil is definitely relative, depending on the perspective and belief's of one group against another.

Which group is correct? Whichever one is able to kill off or enslave the other.

Sure, we can pretend our own perspective defines the rest of the world, and for the individual, it does. Is it for a whole Society? Depends. Do you agree with death penalties for certain crimes? There is a group of people out there who will call you evil for it. Others will agree with you, others will be somewhere between the two extremes. So how much of the over all society actually "sees" evil the same way you do?

Now in RPG's, we are provided with a guideline as to what is good and evil and chaotic and lawful via the alignment system. So for the purposes of playing this RPG, those are the guidelines we are expected to go by. So for this RPG, we define good and evil, etc... IAW with the rules we are given. That is the perspective we are given to determine what is "relative" to being good or evil.

[Arduin]

Here, too. Your question, and the answers got me to thinking. How granular is Detect Evil? Just what kind of information does it pass on to the "caster"?

See the spell of the same for that info.

[serleran]

Applying real world morality to the game leads to some interesting conundrums. However, it is fairly obvious that detect evil, and the paladin class in general, is entirely Biblical and "Christian." I put that in quotes because there is a lot of potential for Judaism, too, but I don't want to start a heated debate so those who know should already know what I mean.

[Arduin]

Applying real world morality to the game leads to some interesting conundrums. However, it is fairly obvious that detect evil, and the paladin class in general, is entirely Biblical and "Christian."

That has been my take on the class since AD&D. The Carolingian paladins such as found in The Song of Roland being good examples.

[mbeacom]

Here, too. Your question, and the answers got me to thinking. How granular is Detect Evil? Just what kind of information does it pass on to the "caster"?

See the spell of the same for that info.

Sorry to confuse you. The spell is pretty vague with much open to interpretation. I'm curious what people think about it in relation to things mentioned in this thread. I probably should have made that more clear.

[Treebore]

Applying real world morality to the game leads to some interesting conundrums. However, it is fairly obvious that detect evil, and the paladin class in general, is entirely Biblical and "Christian." I put that in quotes because there is a lot of potential for Judaism, too, but I don't want to start a heated debate so those who know should already know what I mean.

I get it. After all, what religion was I referencing with the slavery and killing...

[Lurker]

...

With regard to its use by Paladins, I'm honestly more interested in the opposite idea from what was portrayed here. Instead of the confusion of a person who engages in evil acts, but doesn't understand them to be evil, I'm interested in how people view the spell/ability when used on people who are/have evil/malice in their hearts but DO NOT act on it. Would the paladin detect evil in any different way if someone wanted an innocent dead, or a person tortured, wished them dead, etc, but never could or would act on it?

Ohhhhhh I like that. I hadn't thought to chase that rabbit .

In the right game, with the right DM/group, that could be some good role playing opportunities.

Especially if you put a layer of 'corruption' into the alignment system.

As for what info a paladin gets from detect evil, I've always given a "fuzzy level" of evil. A demon/devil/undead etc pops HOT, Jack the Ripper is just slightly a step below that, etc etc etc. I know it may not be BTB, but other DMs I've gamed with even recently do similar and it works well.

Rgr on real world religion/view opening a can of worm. It would be great to discuss with an adult beverage or 2 amoungst friend, but could easily get out of hand here.

As for Paladins being Christian/Crusader/Carolingian I agree. However, back in the day a friend of mine played a Persian paladin - pre Muslim setting. It was surprisingly well done and fit despite the 'Christian' flavor of a Paladin.

[Arduin]

Sorry to confuse you. The spell is pretty vague with much open to interpretation.

Reread the spell. It is specific as to what it gives you. 3 levels of strength, exact sensation when detecting. Not vague at all.

[Arduin]

With regard to its use by Paladins, I'm honestly more interested in the opposite idea from what was portrayed here. Instead of the confusion of a person who engages in evil acts, but doesn't understand them to be evil, I'm interested in how people view the spell/ability when used on people who are/have evil/malice in their hearts but DO NOT act on it.

They ONLY detect if the person's alignment is Evil. NOT if particular thoughts are evil or what ever. It isn't "Detect thoughts".

[mbeacom]

Sorry to confuse you. The spell is pretty vague with much open to interpretation.

Reread the spell. It is specific as to what it gives you. 3 levels of strength, exact sensation when detecting. Not vague at all.

So according to the not-open-to-interpretation RAW, under what circumstances would the strength of aura be faint and what circumstances would it be strong?

[mbeacom]

With regard to its use by Paladins, I'm honestly more interested in the opposite idea from what was portrayed here. Instead of the confusion of a person who engages in evil acts, but doesn't understand them to be evil, I'm interested in how people view the spell/ability when used on people who are/have evil/malice in their hearts but DO NOT act on it.

They ONLY detect if the person's alignment is Evil. NOT if particular thoughts are evil or what ever. It isn't "Detect thoughts".

That's kind of the point of this thread right? That's what I thought we were discussing. Can thoughts alone make you evil? Is it enough? Or are our thoughts and desires completely irrelevant to our alignment? Do only actions matter? Some guy who smiled in his heart when he heard that Hitler was burning jews, a guy who never could have stopped it but never would have because it made him happy. Is this guy evil? Would he trigger the aura even though he never took action? Would it be faint or strong aura? What if he would have helped had he been there but he just never was? Faint or strong? Nothing? Someone who hates black people with all his soul, but is nervous and doesn't have the will to act on his feelings. Faint or strong? Nothing? I know you love your RAW (and I do too!) but I'm not sure the answer is there for you to recite. Feel free to state opinions. There's nothing to fear. I'd rather hear your thoughts anyway. I can read the books on my own.

[mbeacom]

...

With regard to its use by Paladins, I'm honestly more interested in the opposite idea from what was portrayed here. Instead of the confusion of a person who engages in evil acts, but doesn't understand them to be evil, I'm interested in how people view the spell/ability when used on people who are/have evil/malice in their hearts but DO NOT act on it. Would the paladin detect evil in any different way if someone wanted an innocent dead, or a person tortured, wished them dead, etc, but never could or would act on it?

Ohhhhhh I like that. I hadn't thought to chase that rabbit .

In the right game, with the right DM/group, that could be some good role playing opportunities.

Especially if you put a layer of 'corruption' into the alignment system.

As for what info a paladin gets from detect evil, I've always given a "fuzzy level" of evil. A demon/devil/undead etc pops HOT, Jack the Ripper is just slightly a step below that, etc etc etc. I know it may not be BTB, but other DMs I've gamed with even recently do similar and it works well.

Rgr on real world religion/view opening a can of worm. It would be great to discuss with an adult beverage or 2 amoungst friend, but could easily get out of hand here.

As for Paladins being Christian/Crusader/Carolingian I agree. However, back in the day a friend of mine played a Persian paladin - pre Muslim setting. It was surprisingly well done and fit despite the 'Christian' flavor of a Paladin.

That makes sense to me, since btb, the auras are pretty vague. I mean there's nothing between faint and strong and there's zero guidance or even a basic example as to when you'd use one over the other. So, other than supernatural there's only 2 levels of evil? That seems very open to interpretation. People would be forced to decide all the middle stuff and call it faint or strong. And if your players world views were different like we're seeing in this thread(something you think is slightly evil, they might think is significantly evil, or perhaps you think actions matter in determining alignment but someone else thinks intent is more important), could get messy. Your way sounds good, you can get more granular and give the players some actual feedback based on their views. And I agree, the beverages would be nice. This thread has seemed confusing for some. If we were discussing in person, I think it would be more clear.

[Arduin]

Sorry to confuse you. The spell is pretty vague with much open to interpretation.

Reread the spell. It is specific as to what it gives you. 3 levels of strength, exact sensation when detecting. Not vague at all.

So according to the not-open-to-interpretation RAW, under what circumstances would the strength of aura be faint and what circumstances would it be strong?

I have NO idea why you think that something is not up to interpretation by a GM (I'll let you thrash that one out by your self). The str of the aura would be coupled with the power of the creature as determined/adjudicated by the GM...

[Arduin]

Can thoughts alone make you evil? Is it enough?

Reread the C&C definition I posted earlier in thread. The question is answered there as to what makes one a certain alignment (good or evil is what I posted).

[Lurker]

That's kind of the point of this thread right? That's what I thought we were discussing. Can thoughts alone make you evil? Is it enough? Or are our thoughts and desires completely irrelevant to our alignment? Do only actions matter? Some guy who smiled in his heart when he heard that Hitler was burning jews, a guy who never could have stopped it but never would have because it made him happy. Is this guy evil? Would he trigger the aura even though he never took action? Would it be faint or strong aura? What if he would have helped had he been there but he just never was? Faint or strong? Nothing? Someone who hates black people with all his soul, but is nervous and doesn't have the will to act on his feelings. Faint or strong? Nothing? I know you love your RAW (and I do too!) but I'm not sure the answer is there for you to recite. Feel free to state opinions. There's nothing to fear. I'd rather hear your thoughts anyway. I can read the books on my own.

Again, great rabbit to chase.

Though btb implies action in the alignment write up. I would argue that thoughts & desires are just as important as actions. Evil, good it all starts in the heart (desire) and then is put into action. I'd argue that the paladin (or the spell) would read that intent/desire with or without the action.

One of the 'best' evil bad guys a GM put me up against (back in the day) was a 'weaker' deviless that tempted a duke, corrupted his court, etc etc etc. She even had my paladin go up against a demoness to kill her (thus strengthening the deviless' power in the area). All of this without the deviless 'doing' anything actively.

[Tadhg]

It's my opinion that ~ thoughts, what's in the heart, insanity, actions, what's in the backpack, etc. mean nothing!

The spell only detects evil alignment. That is all!

[Arduin]

I would argue that thoughts & desires are just as important as actions.

Um, so I murder 3 babies and have wonderful thoughts about 6. So I'm of good alignment.

[mbeacom]

Sorry to confuse you. The spell is pretty vague with much open to interpretation.

Reread the spell. It is specific as to what it gives you. 3 levels of strength, exact sensation when detecting. Not vague at all.

So according to the not-open-to-interpretation RAW, under what circumstances would the strength of aura be faint and what circumstances would it be strong?

I have NO idea why you think that something is not up to interpretation by a GM (I'll let you thrash that one out by your self). The str of the aura would be coupled with the power of the creature as determined/adjudicated by the GM...

Um, mostly because when I made that assertion you said I was wrong? I said it was vague, which means ambiguous and synonymous with "open to interpretation" by the GM. You countered that that was wrong and that I should reread it because it was "not vague at all", but rather "specific". If it's specific, then why would interpretation be needed? Specific means clearly defined in precise detail. It doesn't mean open to interpretation. At least not in English. Would you say it is clearly defined and specific or that it's open to interpretation?

So you're saying the strength of the aura is based on the power of the creature, NOT the nature or intensity of the evil? It doesn't say that, but let's say you're interpretation is right. How powerful does the creature need to be to get the "strong" aura? 3HD? 12HD? It's not particularly specific in this case. So if its a huge dragon that's just a wee little bit evil but probably won't bother you, the aura would be strong? But if it's a goblin who wants to gut you where you stand as soon as your back is turned, then the aura will be faint? I suppose that might be what they intended but it's not clear that is the case IMO.

[mbeacom]

Can thoughts alone make you evil? Is it enough?

Reread the C&C definition I posted earlier in thread. The question is answered there as to what makes one a certain alignment (good or evil is what I posted).

According to that definition, then yes, ones thoughts do impact alignment. Nice catch.