a paladin is by default a lawful good character, and she detests evil. of course, other characters can be LG as well, but i'm taking the pally as an example as this started because of kiya's pally/thief char. a pally can understand evil, but that doesn't necessarily mean she was once evil or associated with evil creatures. she doesn't need to be; her powers are granted to her by her faith. iirc, in icewind dale ii and temple of elemental evil, the pally can detect or sense evil. and that leads to interesting dialogue options, and often, to fights.
I see. A paladin has God's grace of being able to detect evil forces. It's very hard to traslate such accurate empaty into real world terms. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> While she can detect evil, does she understand it? I suppose a lot of evil is quite simple: "Ha ha, I killed you!" But what drives evil? What inspires evil?
*** NEVERWINTER NIGHTS SPOILER WARNING ***Do you remember the Red Mage from
Shadows of Undrentide? He want's to set up a magic shop in Hilltop. He is classified as an evil being because he supports slave labour. Yet upon speaking with him, he is otherwise a decent person and business man. Upon speaking with his slave, you find that he is happier than he was when he was starving in the desert. Exploiting people is cruel and evil. But he saved them from starvation, so should the paladin judge him harshly?
*** END SPOILER ***in diablo ii (i know this isn't d&d, but just to broaden the example), the pally is the best fighter against undead creatures. scepter-class weapons,most often used by pallies, deal extra damage to the undead. plus, the pally has several weapons against the undead at her disposal: holy bolt & fist of the heavens. one aura, sanctuary, repulses the undead. as the d2 manual says, pallies are "effective against the undead as they know many holy incantations against these creatures". bottomline, pallies do not have to be the walking dead to understand them.
I see your point. Though there's little to understand in the undead, having minimal mental capacity.
I think there's a different between understanding how to defeat someone, understanding why they need defeating, and understanding why they'd put themselves in such a position in the first place. I believe that a paladin is unlikely to understand the last point. Motives are often complex and come from a lifetime of experience. Often it's not just as simple as money or a cheating lover. Evil comes from deeper within.
as for a rogue who becomes a police officer,i think he would be more of a chaotic good character to me. i know he's there for a lawful purpose, but what's to stop him from going over to the dark side again? it's in his character to be, well ummm, "roguish". and that is why i find it hard to reconcile his character to that of a lawful good paladin. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
True, not much would stop him, except perhaps a watchful paladin. In which case he would still be chaotic; to selfishly look after himself, he must assist the law.
What would stop him is not wanting to go back. If you believe in what you are doing, then why would you leave? A chaotic character probably could join law enforcement and leave just as easily. A chaotic rogue who joins then becomes lawful wouldn't leave, at least not to return to crime.
Aligment is a representation of the actions you would take and your mental state, and not so much the actions you have taken. In D&D, you can shift your alignment throughout time, but any outragous actions, such as a paladin slaying fellow men, will be severely repremanded by the DM. If the paladin had dormant murderous tendancies, I doubt that she would have had the self-discipline to become a paladin in the first place.
