Undead alignment question

[English Language]

So from what I can gather, officially any and all undead are always 100% evil all the time.

So what would happen if a Lich put a Helmet of Opposite Alignment on? Would that mean we have a good undead by the official rules?

I'm curious because from what I've read, Paizo seemed really buckling down on making sure Undead are always Evil.

[ShoulderPatch]

Undead are immune to all mind affecting effects, etc. Don't have time to look up the exact wording at the moment but that is probably a barrier to the HoOA.

[Dafydd]

While undead are all evil, this is something you can hand wave as a GM. I have a vampire who is the second in command to the big bad evil guy, but is not herself Evil (neither is the BBEG, but that is a different story).

Otherwise, yeah all undead are evil. A paladin can, with almost no second guessing, smite something they think is undead and the ability not be wasted.

[Rynjin]

Undead are Always Evil.

Except when they're not.

Pathfinder! Pinnacle of Consistency!

[Avoron]

We would, in fact, have good undead in this case. RAW, the helm is not a mind-affecting effect.

It could also do other interesting things, such as create a lawful/good animated object.

[PathlessBeth]

When you take one internally inconsistent game element that the author(s) didn't bother thinking out,
and combine it with another internally inconsistent game element that the author(s) didn't bother thinking out,
you get a lot of nonsense. Neither of the game elements you are asking about are meant to make sense, they are meant to make it easier to play a very specific sort of game without thinking very hard about it.

[Milo v3]

There are undead that aren't evil such as ghosts, also there is no rule at all saying undead don't change alignment from their actions like every other sentient creature (though, skeletons and zombies are annoying stuck with neutral evil because of their mindless-ness).

[Lemmy]

Uh...

Nope. Hiding thread.