So, if a character does something evil because they are under a mind controlling spell that makes them do it (such as a bad guy casting dominate on someone and making them murder an innocent person) does it count as an evil act on their part? I would certainly say no since they didn't do it under their own free will (or whatever you want to call it). I find enchantment spells in general to be morally sketchy, although that's probably the subject for another thread.
The atonement spell says that if you do an act against your alignment while under compulsion, the spell is free, while if you did it under your own will, it costs you.
So that strongly implies that even acts under something like a dominate person 'counts'.
Of course any question of alignment and how much a given act will effect you ends up being a GM call.
If it helps though, with something like a dominate you would get a second chance, at a bonus to resist, so in a sense it is your 'failure' that allowed the evil to happen. Secondly, you are aware and suffer the trauma (think of it as damage to your soul) even though you weren't under you own control which of course can effect you in all sort of ways.
Looking at the atonement spell. that does seem to be the case. However, I must admit it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I mean think about it this way: pushing someone so they fall over is usually considered assault. However, if you get pushed back so you run into someone and they fall over is it your fault? Of course not. How is this any different?
Believing it is unfair is a very metagame concept. Do your characters feel that many if not all their actions are controlled by dice rolls? They are going to see failing a will roll as a failure of their own will, an act of their own weakness. They are going seek Atonement. Making this atonement free is potentially rather meta, but a being as powerful as a god or perhaps the mysterious cosmos might well just assume a certain amount of weakness in their mortal followers and cut them some slack.
Since free will doesn’t exist, of course actions compelled by a spell count against you. “You” didn’t decide to do those things when you were Dominated, but you didn’t “decide” to do those things when you weren’t, either. Morality in a Pathfinder is just score keeping to measure the output of a complex system.
I can understand it. Think of it as a measure that you know you did it, even if under control, you witnessed your hands do the evil act, and it produces a block. It won't ever produce an alignment change, but Evil in Pathfinder is a tangible force, a very real force that can leave a mark even on a being that unwillingly brushed it.
Think of it as it's Evil Paint, your hands brushed it, getting the Evil Paint on it, and you need the Soap of Atonement to wash it off.
I guess I can see this. It's like with the apocalypse locusts: they have a breath attack that causes a person to be "branded" with evil, and need an atonement spell if they are good or lawful members of a divine class. Not because being breathed on is somehow an evil act, but rather due to the breath "marking" you somehow.
Actually paladins don’t fall when mind controlled to commit an evil act. You become an ex-paladin under one of three circumstances. The first is if your alignment changes to something besides lawful good. Second is if they willfully commit and evil act. And finally if they break the paladins code.
A paladin would not need an Atonement spell if they committed the evil act due to being forced by magic, because they would not be an ex-paladin. They would need it if they changed alignment or broke the code.
The argument that being mind controlled to do an evil act changes your aligment based on the atonement spell is false. That would seem to me to indicate that being mind controlled to do an evil act does not in fact change your alignment. If that was the case then the wording on ex-paladins would not be necessary because he would have fallen for changing alignment.
Believing it is unfair is a very metagame concept. Do your characters feel that many if not all their actions are controlled by dice rolls? They are going to see failing a will roll as a failure of their own will, an act of their own weakness. They are going seek Atonement. Making this atonement free is potentially rather meta, but a being as powerful as a god or perhaps the mysterious cosmos might well just assume a certain amount of weakness in their mortal followers and cut them some slack.
Outside of classes which depend on their alignment for power, most people are going to ignore any infractions of their alignment.
In general an act, even an incredibly evil act, done while under the control of someone else probably doesn't leave a significant tinge on most people to actually change their alignment.
I personally see this as only relevant to divine spell casters.
Which is honestly why I just think it's BS to have it happen at all.
You can feel bad that "you did it" while being mind controlled, but it doesn't actually change your alignment, IMO.
Outside of classes which depend on their alignment for power, most people are going to ignore any infractions of their alignment.
I'm not sure I buy that. In the real world, there are many people that concern themselves with redemption and repentance without the stick of loosing tangible magical powers.
It is quite possible to believe that you should behave in a certain way, and feel bad and try to make up for it when you fail to do so, even if the failures are relatively minor.
This isn't the real world.
Alignment is tangible. You can actually know if you're still good.
And as I said, it doesn't mean they wont feel bad or regret what happened, but there are plenty of people, I think, that wouldn't beat themselves up over something they were magically compelled to do and couldn't control.
Also, I think the fact that they feel bad about it would mean that they haven't changed alignment.
The comparison to real life really doesn't work when alignment is objective.
I wouldnt go with this. Mostly because it is weird to me really.
The reason for this is that i dont think alignment is a logical decision on the PCs part, it is something they are, therefore, if the evil guys keeps making the good guy do evil things and this turns the good guy to evil, said now evil character wont see any reason to ask for atonement, he is evil now, he was corrupted, why would he ask for forgivness? Why would he even care about the same gods? His entire world view has changed beyond that.
Ofc, the player out of the game would still go and wish to recover his PC anyway, but it is weird to me, so it is easier to just close it off from the get go.
And, honestly, i wouldnt want to use dominate to take a PCs away from the player for a long period of time, while i can totally see PCs using this on NPCs to turn them. Since i dont favor unequal trade of blows from the PC side to the NPC one, i wouldnt want this in place either.