|
Exact.
The chart on page 266 of the core rulebook indicates what you detect with the spell corresponding to the "Aligned" aura detected.
In the case of a Cleric or Paladin, it is the deity which is "aligned" and thus taken into account (in addition to any other category the character would be part of).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Exact.
The chart on page 266 of the core rulebook indicates what you detect with the spell corresponding to the "Aligned" aura detected.
In the case of a Cleric or Paladin, it is the deity which is "aligned" and thus taken into account (in addition to any other category the character would be part of).
Okay. This gives rise to another question.
Asmodeus(LE) has several LN clerics. By the above, their aura would still be LE.
What happens when a Paladin Smites them?
Exact.
The chart on page 266 of the core rulebook indicates what you detect with the spell corresponding to the "Aligned" aura detected.
In the case of a Cleric or Paladin, it is the deity which is "aligned" and thus taken into account (in addition to any other category the character would be part of).
Okay. This gives rise to another question.
Asmodeus(LE) has several LN clerics. By the above, their aura would still be LE.
What happens when a Paladin Smites them?
You're overthinking this. A cleric's aura calls oit that it matches the character's god. Smite Evil specifically calls out creatures that ARE evil. In effect, the paladin wastes a smite.
And let me apologize in advance If that sounds overly snippy. On phone, so tgping is difficult and best kept short. xD
And let me apologize in advance If that sounds overly snippy. On phone, so tgping is difficult and best kept short. xD
No problem.
This is a weird special case where a character can register as Evil without actually being evil.
And let me apologize in advance If that sounds overly snippy. On phone, so tgping is difficult and best kept short. xDNo problem.
This is a weird special case where a character can register as Evil without actually being evil.
Yeah, I can see why it could engender a double-take or two. When you think about it, though, it's a vwry good reason for evil powers to accwpt neutral agents
With paladins a real and present threat, it goves evil somethomg of an upper-hand. Trick the paladin into making a snap assumption, and he squanders aome of hos resources. Evem at hogh lwvwla whwn the pally can smite everytime he ao much as sneezes, one smite wasted isone smite less the pally has to ise against more powerful - but more vulnerable - foes.And likewise, the same basoc peinciple applies when you take into account that good deities can also have neutral clerics. Same thing, but witj antipaladins and their detect/smite good.
And let me apologize in advance If that sounds overly snippy. On phone, so tgping is difficult and best kept short. xDNo problem.
This is a weird special case where a character can register as Evil without actually being evil.
Yeah, I can see why it could engender a double-take or two. When you think about it, though, it's a vwry good reason for evil powers to accwpt neutral agents
With paladins a real and present threat, it goves evil somethomg of an upper-hand. Trick the paladin into making a snap assumption, and he squanders aome of hos resources. Evem at hogh lwvwla whwn the pally can smite everytime he ao much as sneezes, one smite wasted isone smite less the pally has to ise against more powerful - but more vulnerable - foes.And likewise, the same basoc peinciple applies when you take into account that good deities can also have neutral clerics. Same thing, but witj antipaladins and their detect/smite good.
This very reason is why in home games I replace detect evil with detect alignment for paladins, because I think that is silly as s#$*. Alternatively, clerics must match the alighment of their god, which thematically also makes a lot of sense to me.
It's weird how the LN cleric of Asmodeus (The BBEG!) has more in common, alignment wise, with a LG Paladin than with a CE Blackguard.
She says "try being me!"
I would much rather have the LN cleric of the LE god radiate as L. That's the part of his god that he embodies as a cleric.
I would much rather have the LN cleric of the LE god radiate as L. That's the part of his god that he embodies as a cleric.
This would also be acceptable, you only radiate an aura that matches the part of your God's alignment that you possess. I like that so much I'm going to change the house rule I had previously written that a cleric's alignment must match their god (to avoid the above silly scenario's mentioned).
While you're entitled to chanhe the game to fit whatever makss it more fun for you and your players, certainly, I'm not sure why the RAW acenarioa are silly. Care to elaborate?
While you're entitled to chanhe the game to fit whatever makss it more fun for you and your players, certainly, I'm not sure why the RAW acenarioa are silly. Care to elaborate?
I just personally think it's silly that a Lawful Neutral cleric of a Lawful Evil deity detects as evil. It's basically a paladin trap and I really don't care for it. Paladins already have enough issues, no reason to make it more difficult than it has to be.
While you're entitled to chanhe the game to fit whatever makss it more fun for you and your players, certainly, I'm not sure why the RAW acenarioa are silly. Care to elaborate?I just personally think it's silly that a Lawful Neutral cleric of a Lawful Evil deity detects as evil. It's basically a paladin trap and I really don't care for it. Paladins already have enough issues, no reason to make it more difficult than it has to be.
But remember. That Lawful Neutral cleric, is spending at least one hour a day... Praying to that Lawful Evil deity for spell power.
Without that lawful evil deity, your lawful neutral cleric would not receive: Spells, Channels, Domains or Domains ability.
Your Lawful Neutral cleric, Tapped an Evil power source, and those he radiates evil himself.
Which is why Cleric & Paladin, have there own entry on the detection table, listed separately, from other normal creatures.
Got to admit, that's an interesting point. The paladin uses Detect Evil on the LN cleric of a LE god, and gets a positive result. Since the cleric's power is almost entirely derived from an Evil source, even though the paladin's Smite won't function, is it "wrong" for him to do something about the cleric (kill, arrest, whatever)? My initial thought is that he would be morally in the right.
Just to note, I'd appreciate if this particular line of thinking absolutely avoided any hypotheticals regarding creatures with the [Evil] subtype.
Got to admit, that's an interesting point. The paladin uses Detect Evil on the LN cleric of a LE god, and gets a positive result. Since the cleric's power is almost entirely derived from an Evil source, even though the paladin's Smite won't function, is it "wrong" for him to do something about the cleric (kill, arrest, whatever)? My initial thought is that he would be morally in the right.
Just to note, I'd appreciate if this particular line of thinking absolutely avoided any hypotheticals regarding creatures with the [Evil] subtype.
That would be purely up to your GM. I personally would say that smiting (not literally) the cleric back to the nine hells would be perfectly acceptable. Cavorting with evil enough to get spells from it is a good enough reason for the paladin to kill him.
Got to admit, that's an interesting point. The paladin uses Detect Evil on the LN cleric of a LE god, and gets a positive result. Since the cleric's power is almost entirely derived from an Evil source, even though the paladin's Smite won't function, is it "wrong" for him to do something about the cleric (kill, arrest, whatever)? My initial thought is that he would be morally in the right.
Just to note, I'd appreciate if this particular line of thinking absolutely avoided any hypotheticals regarding creatures with the [Evil] subtype.
EDIT: Typed all this on phone, liable to be full of typos.
Not necessarily. Remember, someone or something being evil is not in and of itself something that the paladin is always able to act upon. It is also not jusfification for unprovoked assault or murder, which is a crime in nearly every civilized society. Take, for example, an instance where a CN cleric of a CE deity that has become the town mmayor. The palaxin cannot simply attack him for the sake of being evil, nof without putting his lawful alignment in nealordy. That goes behond the bounds of heroics that a remost are likely neutral at worsttate of mind would draw, and treads into anarchy and vigilantism.
Especially when you take into account that just because someone in a position of power is evil, doesn't mean he's used evil means tl attsin his status or resources. Our CN cleric could well hsve won sn election fair and swuare, which means that nk w a paladin agressing against him must concontend with the fact that he's going to come into conflict with the local guardsmen. The gjardsmen aren't necessarily evil either, even though tbeir leader worships an evil power - most likelyneutral at worst, and some may even be good. Is the paladin still I the "moral right" if he strikes out at these men and women for doing tbeir duty?
Lastly, there's an intended character concepg behind a cleric whoee alignment doesn't exactly mstch that of his god. The character shares enough gener symlsthy towards the tenets of tbat pos er's faith ti draw inspirstion from it, without necessarily agreeing with every little idea.Think the verg same reason that Christians can be divided among catholics, protestants, lutherans, LDS, etc, to use a real world example.
To give you a more in-game example, say you have LE Deity A. The tenents of A's faith stipulate that only the strong deserve. If you want something, be strong enough to take it. Be strong enough afterwards to keep it. The weak exist for one reason alone - to serve the will and whims of those more powerful than yourself.
Now assume LN cleric B is drawn to the idea of the strong ruling over the weak. But because he lacks an evil alignment, it's not about the strong "deserving to rule over the weak" and it's not about the weak "deserving what they get." For bim, the strong sbould rule over fhe weak becauese only theg have the power fo do so. Fhe sfrong have the abilify fo act, therefore they have the responsibility to do so since the weak are neither smart enough, fast enough, or tough enough to act on their own behalf.
Becauese he bas to traffick with a darker force to live this pbilosophy by example, he radistes its toucb. Be must constantlg cong end not only with maintaining his own identity in the face of this dangerous tight rope walk, btut also the misconceotions of thise foolish enough to act on knee-jerk reactions before gathering intelligence.