Detect Good/Evil Discussion

[Vichtor]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html

Yeah....that pretty much sums it up for me. Carry on!

[Eternal Serf]

Thanks Vichtor, I needed that.

[GodBeastX]

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0202.html

http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0208.html

Yeah....that pretty much sums it up for me. Carry on!

Hahahahah

[Warfire]

That was made of win.

[undeadsteak]

"Ma'am he's dying!"

"And this is my problem because..."

HMMMM! WONDER WHAT ALIGNMENT SHE IS!?

As stated early, a neutral person would most likely stand aside if they don't know them. Why help somone bleeding to death? Somone might have tried to kill the person and if you help them, theres a good chance that person attempting murder will come after you. And yay for OotS.

[GodBeastX]

I can see we'll have alot of alignment shifts. Watching someone bleed to death and suffer and been hard core about it is evil. Sorry guys.

[Scourn]

Watching them bleed, yes if you know them or not. Not stopping for them if you dont know them would still be neutral. If you know them though/ is a friend should help them. Think one of the best examples ive seen of neutral is Myr coming to the hills, seeing two dead bodies and thinking nothing of it and went to cook his meat to sell.

[GodBeastX]

Jesus says your evil for not stopping, Jesus wins.

I quote the story of the Good Samaritan.

I'd give evil points if some guy was bleeding and asked for help "Heeelp... Mee..." and you just look at him and walk by uncaring.

[GodBeastX]

Here's a good way to test if something is an evil act.

Can a paladin do it and still be considered a paladin? Paladin can't leave someone to die that way, so it's obviously evil.

[Kendaric]

Here's a good way to test if something is an evil act.

Can a paladin do it and still be considered a paladin? Paladin can't leave someone to die that way, so it's obviously evil.

I'm not so sure about it...

a paladin, being the epitome of goodness, is considered to uphold the highest ideals. Thus things that are morally questionable would be totally unacceptable to do as a paladin, normal persons however would not follow such strict codes of conduct.

Like I said before, it should be handeled on a case by case basis not being generalized in most situations. There are of course acts that are invariably evil, such as torture, murder, etc. and such acts would rightfully earn someone alignment shifts towards evil.

Racial prejudice would also play a part in this. While an elf following Corellon Larethian would probably aid humans, halflings, gnomes & even dwarves, would he consider aiding a half-orc (especially one he doesn't know) or even worse a drow?

[Kaybrie]

Here's a good way to test if something is an evil act.

Can a paladin do it and still be considered a paladin? Paladin can't leave someone to die that way, so it's obviously evil.

Eh, people don't get alignment shifts for doing an act of indifference, and a paladin can leave someone to die if it isn't in their gods code to help people. A paladin of St. Cuthbert for example is a crusader, smite all beat the crap out of his enemies type, not help the needy. I mean, yeah it would be really good of him to go and help some guy who's bleeding to death, but he won't lose his powers or status for just walking by.

In order to actually be considered doing an evil act, you have to do something, a lack of action just shows indifference and thereby neutrality. (Shift towards neutral = no shift.) Though much of this simply depends on ones perspective on alignment... Just figured I'd drop off my opinion with an attached quote, as what Godbeast said was what sparked my interest in this little 'debate.'

[The Fantasian]

Eh, people don't get alignment shifts for doing an act of indifference, and a paladin can leave someone to die if it isn't in their gods code to help people. A paladin of St. Cuthbert for example is a crusader, smite all beat the crap out of his enemies type, not help the needy. I mean, yeah it would be really good of him to go and help some guy who's bleeding to death, but he won't lose his powers or status for just walking by.

In order to actually be considered doing an evil act, you have to do something, a lack of action just shows indifference and thereby neutrality. (Shift towards neutral = no shift.)

I'd have to disagree with that quote. Being inactive towards somethings can be just as evil as doing the action yourself. If your aid can save a person, a village or the world and you refuse to assist is that not just as evil?

"Give me your gold or I'll kill this innocent hostage." Isn't that a simple inaction that can get someone killed? Although his god may be the god of justice or battle, he is still supposed to be the epitomy of all that is good and lawful no matter who he worships.

[Kaybrie]

"Give me your gold or I'll kill this innocent hostage." Isn't that a simple inaction that can get someone killed? Although his god may be the god of justice or battle, he is still supposed to be the epitomy of all that is good and lawful no matter who he worships.

Alright, re-reading the PHB the above example is only an extreme case for PALADINS' specifically... But that's only because of their special rule (Code of Conduct). If you read through the alignments section it quite clearly lays it down plain and simple that to be good or evil you have to actively be pursuing either path. Turning a blind eye, not carring, or being indifferent is inherently neutral, which is by definition not good or evil. If you walk up and help the person, you're good, if you walk up and cut their throat, you're evil, if you just don't care you'd be neutral.

In other news; this is a discussion about alignments as laid down in the rules of the game, not about what is or isn't good, in this case I'm afraid that not giving a damn, by DnD's standards, is neutral.

Wait my bad, this is a discussion about detect evil/good.

[The Fantasian]

Alright, re-reading the PHB the above example is only an extreme case for PALADINS' specifically... But that's only because of their special rule (Code of Conduct). If you read through the alignments section it quite clearly lays it down plain and simple that to be good or evil you have to actively be pursuing either path. Turning a blind eye, not carring, or being indifferent is inherently neutral, which is by definition not good or evil. If you walk up and help the person, you're good, if you walk up and cut their throat, you're evil, if you just don't care you'd be neutral.

I would say any good alignment would be forced into action in someway, and perhaps any lawful alignment as well depending on the laws. I can see your point that a True Neutral person could get away with inactivity as they are undecided. Also as you said this is a matter of different person's interpretation of the alignments....So do you detect evil if you are inactive? LOL

[Aux]

Just to throw a bit more to the melting pot... the church of Helm has clerics of all lawful alignments, yet also has paladins. 'I' want to be there when one of their paladins casts Detect Evil on the congregation.. heh..
I think Detect Good/Evil should be used as and when a character can and wants to, surely then the character will rp it in a suitable way .
I see the alignment rating as a way of measuring someones morals and 'soul'... much like a barometer, doesnt have to be rp'ed about in a black/white "OMFG You are evils stay back cos i is teh paladin, they evil evryone they evil!" way.