|
I have just become aware of the changes to Detect Evil (the spell). Specifically the change to the aura power of aligned creatures of 5 HD or less. This change now renders the spell useless in detecting evil in creatures of 5 HD or less, as they have no discernible aura. You used to register a faint aura with 10 HD or less. Why the change?
Seeing as how the vast majority of classed NPCs and many of the enemy combatants, the kinds one is most likely to encounter (especially early on), are usually below this 5 HD threshold, this seems a drastic re-working of the spell. With perhaps unintended consequences?
The most relevant example being the fact that you give Paladins the ability to Detect Evil at will at first level, but make it virtually useless until he starts regularly encountering 5 HD opponents. Seeing as his ability to Smite Evil is largely dependent upon his ability to tell real evil, with a capitol E, from those others who are just behaving badly, it becomes a double hit.
I'm curious to hear other thoughts on this before I house rule it back to the 3.5 version of the spell in my home game.
Cheers!
|
My take is that at lower levels it was incredibly hard to work an Evil NPC in the story with the old Detect Evil around. No matter how good his Disguise/Bluff/Cover Story were, a lvl 1 spell would paint him as a big "HIT ME" target.
Now he gets tagged around lvl 5, by which time both PCs have other ways of magically finding out what's up, and NPCs have other ways to cover their alignment (nondetection etc.)
It is cheesy and lame for anyone to be able to discern your character's alignment. Paladins that run around detecting evil everywhere and smiting whatever pings need their character sheets torn up. It's a crutch.
The only thing it prevents you from detecting is low level NPCs since undead and evil outsiders still ping evil. How about instead of worrying about whether they are evil or not, you work with the people and roleplay stuff :)
|
Huh, never knew it gave faint readings in 3.5. Explains why the DM was sighing over the fact that none of the three paladins in our game used it on any of the murder suspects.
I figure it was changed to prevent the party from using it to solve the mystery of who the bad guy is. If the villian is the only one that pings evil, the characters are going to decide he's the one without a lot of trouble.
|
|
My take is that at lower levels it was incredibly hard to work an Evil NPC in the story with the old Detect Evil around. No matter how good his Disguise/Bluff/Cover Story were, a lvl 1 spell would paint him as a big "HIT ME" target.
Now he gets tagged around lvl 5, by which time both PCs have other ways of magically finding out what's up, and NPCs have other ways to cover their alignment (nondetection etc.)
Not entirely discountable... but as you admit it just postpones the problem, so the core issue remains the same IMO.
I would also submit that if your story depends on the evil fellow to keep his alignment a secret for the sake of the story, make him neutral instead of evil. Heck, make him a good behaving badly for a real loop. And failing that a magic item that foils alignment detection or daily castings of the spell undetectable alignment should resolve this concern.
Cheers
|
|
My take is that at lower levels it was incredibly hard to work an Evil NPC in the story with the old Detect Evil around. No matter how good his Disguise/Bluff/Cover Story were, a lvl 1 spell would paint him as a big "HIT ME" target.
Now he gets tagged around lvl 5, by which time both PCs have other ways of magically finding out what's up, and NPCs have other ways to cover their alignment (nondetection etc.)
Not entirely discountable... but as you admit it just postpones the problem, so the core issue remains the same IMO.
I would also submit that if your story depends on the evil fellow to keep his alignment a secret for the sake of the story, make him neutral instead of evil. Heck, make him a good behaving badly for a real loop. And failing that a magic item that foils alignment detection or daily castings of the spell undetectable alignment should resolve this concern.
Cheers
It postpones the problem until the point where you can achieve the same effect using other means. Such as Discern Lies or Scry. Heck, it still kicks in earlier than both of those.
DM handweaves are not always feasible. I want a cold-blooded, sadistic CE killer who plays a charming young village fellow. And I don't want to have myself project an Abjuration aura from undetectable alignment, because, duh, how many charming young farmboys walk around with abjuration magic on ? So, I pump my Bluff and Disguise and come up with all kinds of smart tricks and then a Paladin/Cleric walks by and bat guano hits the fan, literally.
|
|
It is cheesy and lame for anyone to be able to discern your character's alignment. Paladins that run around detecting evil everywhere and smiting whatever pings need their character sheets torn up. It's a crutch.
The only thing it prevents you from detecting is low level NPCs since undead and evil outsiders still ping evil. How about instead of worrying about whether they are evil or not, you work with the people and roleplay stuff :)
I take exception to your assumption regarding the people I play with and how we play. :/
Does it become less cheesy and lame at level 5?
The spell does not reveal your alignment. Only if evil is a portion of it. That leaves the majority of the alignments unscathed.
Might I also point out that alignments consist of 2 axis. It is one thing to know that someone/thing is evil, it is entirely another thing to prove it. I would submit in our groups obviously limited ability to role play, LAWFUL good paladins who run around smiting everything that "pings" evil end up in trouble of their own. It is entirely dependent upon your game world's design whether the paladin's ability to detect evil is sufficient "proof" of someone's "evil". (See the endless debates regarding evil intent verus alignment)
Used properly, I would humbly submit, detect evil adds to the role playing possibilities as opposed to diminishes it. What better catalyst than knowing someone is evil but being prevented from acting by, you know, being a law abiding citizen?
|
|
It postpones the problem until the point where you can achieve the same effect using other means. Such as Discern Lies or Scry. Heck, it still kicks in earlier than both of those.DM handweaves are not always feasible. I want a cold-blooded, sadistic CE killer who plays a charming young village fellow. And I don't want to have myself project an Abjuration aura from undetectable alignment, because, duh, how many charming young farmboys walk around with abjuration magic on ? So, I pump my Bluff and Disguise and come up with all kinds of smart tricks and then a Paladin/Cleric walks by and bat guano hits the fan, literally.
Like I said, not entirely discountable...but.
Your plans are still endangered by the mere existence of your antagonist within the story. Any interaction with your CE charming farm boy in disguise, is still risking his discovery. Someone who optimizes his Sense Motive skill to ridiculous levels, for instance, is still likely to bring down the charade. Add to that the savvy player will most likely guess that the charming and seemingly harmless farm boy who keeps interjecting himself into the story is very likely to be something other than advertised. So we are back to start then, yes?
|
|
Not really. A chance of PC with paranoid optimized Sense Motive is lower than having a Cleric/Paladin/Somebody with UMD. A scenario designer cannot cover all fronts, true, but having a major and popular trope trump-able so easily isn't fun.
Great example of the problem: Saul Vancaserkin from PF7 Shadow in the Sky.
Speak with Dead is also guilty to a degree, because it kills many "whodunnit" murder mysteries dead (cheap pun intended) in their tracks from the start.
Looking for the murderer.
There are three suspects, detect evil.
Suspect #2 detects as evil and is killed. Case solved.
Except it wasn't, because while suspect #2 was in fact evil (he enjoyed putting baby goblins on pikes while they were still alive and kicking during the last goblin cleansing), he was not actually the murderer due to his lawful nature (he had ethical reasons for not killing the victim). Instead it was suspect #3, who is CN, and killed the victim in a momentary fit of rage (moving towards CE, but not quite there yet).
Not really. A chance of PC with paranoid optimized Sense Motive is lower than having a Cleric/Paladin/Somebody with UMD. A scenario designer cannot cover all fronts, true, but having a major and popular trope trump-able so easily isn't fun.
Great example of the problem: Saul Vancaserkin from PF7 Shadow in the Sky.
Speak with Dead is also guilty to a degree, because it kills many "whodunnit" murder mysteries dead (cheap pun intended) in their tracks from the start.
I am actually reading a trash FR novel where a character uses a poison called brainburn that prevents speak with dead from working on the corpse.
|
|
Looking for the murderer.
There are three suspects, detect evil.
Suspect #2 detects as evil and is killed. Case solved.
Except it wasn't, because while suspect #2 was in fact evil (he enjoyed putting baby goblins on pikes while they were still alive and kicking during the last goblin cleansing), he was not actually the murderer due to his lawful nature (he had ethical reasons for not killing the victim). Instead it was suspect #3, who is CN, and killed the victim in a momentary fit of rage (moving towards CE, but not quite there yet).
Make everyone evil (the jailer, the guards, the mayor, the judge and half the towns people) and you still have a mystery to solve! ;)
|
Make everyone evil (the jailer, the guards, the mayor, the judge and half the towns people) and you still have a mystery to solve! ;)
Except for the fact that at this point the pally would get paranoid and either just start killing everything that moves, or he would walk out on the situation entirely.
I play it like this. Paladin casts Detect Evil on a CE 1st level bandit this is what happens;
1st Round: Presence or absence of evil.
Bandit is evil so this fact is revealed. Note that this section of Detect Evil very specifically does not mention auras whereas the rest of it does.
2nd Round: Number of evil auras (creatures, objects, or spells) in the area and the power of the most potent evil aura present.
The bandit is too low level to have an evil aura so one is not detected.
3rd Round: The power and location of each aura. If an aura is outside your line of sight, then you discern its direction but not its exact location.
The location of the evil alignment and power are not revealed since the creature does not have an aura. Only that there is evil somewhere within your 60ft cone.
The presence of evil has been revealed by the first round. If you're confidant that everyone in your party is good or neutral then the bandit must be the source. Depending on the situation this could have a variety of ramifications. In a city with a court of law the paladin might be tried guilty of murder for lobbing off the fellows head with no physical proof of crime.
Your mileage my very, but this is how I read it and play.
|
|
Unless I'm mistaken, evil clerics and outsiders still register as evil even if they are lower than 5 HD. This makes the paladin's ability useful, but in a more narrow set of circumstances. I think the change is fine.
If my pally is facing off against an evil outsider, I usually don't worry about using detect evil before I lay down a smite. :)
|
|
I've houseruled magical traps being hidden from divination magic myself.Sounds logical. That covers one... ;)
Couldn't you change it to Detect Magic Items and be done with it? :)
No, because I still let it detect other enchantments, just not traps and illusions. You know, things that are supposed to be hidden. :3
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Well, I've never seen a player use it, so I forget it exists. XDI've houseruled magical traps being hidden from divination magic myself.Except for find traps, I hope? Cuz that would just be mean.
It's an insight bonus, which means it stacks with all kinds of crap. A multi-classed rogue/cleric with some eyes of the eagle can pretty much find any trap without trying.
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Unless I'm mistaken, evil clerics and outsiders still register as evil even if they are lower than 5 HD. This makes the paladin's ability useful, but in a more narrow set of circumstances. I think the change is fine.If my pally is facing off against an evil outsider, I usually don't worry about using detect evil before I lay down a smite. :)
Well, if it's an obvious outsider, of course not. What if it's in the form of a human, though? These things happen.
Unless they never remember about them. Then it's awesome when they are hit by a portcullis for 6d6 damage pinning the fighter to the ground while the party is attacked by a quickling rogue.
Well, if it's an obvious outsider, of course not. What if it's in the form of a human, though? These things happen.Unless I'm mistaken, evil clerics and outsiders still register as evil even if they are lower than 5 HD. This makes the paladin's ability useful, but in a more narrow set of circumstances. I think the change is fine.If my pally is facing off against an evil outsider, I usually don't worry about using detect evil before I lay down a smite. :)
Or a CN Wizard under an illusion? Or a Summoner's Eidolon? Got the paladin in my game to blow a smite on the CN Summoner's Eidolon cause it looked like a green dragon.
Checking the RAW, it also appears that if a Neutral cleric of 5th level cast Animate Dead, while it would still technically be an Evil spell, the amount of Evil it would radiate would be so slight as to be undetectable. The undead themselves would be detectable, but not any spell or magic item that created them if it was cast at 5th level or below.
But the other solution is to let the paladins go ahead and detect evil all they want and enforce random demographics such that a third of everyone they meet will be Evil, and all the successful merchants and moneylenders will detect as that, or at best Neutral.
Go smite a few of those evil moneylenders and watch as your church's credit approval ratings plummet. A loan to build that new cathedral? Surely you jest.
The presence of evil has been revealed by the first round. If you're confidant that everyone in your party is good or neutral then the bandit must be the source. Depending on the situation this could have a variety of ramifications. In a city with a court of law the paladin might be tried guilty of murder for lobbing off the fellows head with no physical proof of crime.
Your mileage my very, but this is how I read it and play.
Which would work, except for this:
A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.
Having said that, I think detecting evil to find the murder is beyond silly, since having an evil nature and being guilty are completely different things.
Plus, clerics and outsiders radiate evil regardless of level, so the "core" of things is handled without having every villager's alignment kicked forward so the paladin can just wander about killing things.
The presence of evil has been revealed by the first round. If you're confidant that everyone in your party is good or neutral then the bandit must be the source. Depending on the situation this could have a variety of ramifications. In a city with a court of law the paladin might be tried guilty of murder for lobbing off the fellows head with no physical proof of crime.
Your mileage my very, but this is how I read it and play.
Which would work, except for this:
A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds. While focusing on one individual or object, the paladin does not detect evil in any other object or individual within range.Having said that, I think detecting evil to find the murder is beyond silly, since having an evil nature and being guilty are completely different things.
Well I was quoting the Detect Evil spell itself. What you just posted about paladin's just means that they will be able to tell if a specific individual or object is evil. Note that it determines "if it is evil" and if so "learning the strength of its aura." If there is no aura you'll still be able to tell if they are evil.
My take is that at lower levels it was incredibly hard to work an Evil NPC in the story with the old Detect Evil around. No matter how good his Disguise/Bluff/Cover Story were, a lvl 1 spell would paint him as a big "HIT ME" target.
Back in 3.5e, the way I dealt with this was by overloading paladins with red herrings.
Since a human can be of any alignment, there was roughly a 1/3 chance that a given person would be evil. Or lawful, whatever. Especially since we had fairly gritty cities, where lots of people were routinely evil.
So a paladin would aim his evil radar at a line of commoners, and a dozen or so of them would pop up as evil. Not the "sacrificing virgins to demons" sort of evil, but "cheats his neighbors" sort of evil. Most of these guys had nothing to do with the plot, and paladins can't walk around slaughtering people randomly.
It's still useful, but is another information source, not a auto-target function.
|
Guess I haven't read the Pathfinder version. And maybe I'm just remembering how virtually everyone I've ever played with has house-ruled it, but doesn't Detect Evil detect evil INTENT?
A CE wizard who's sitting in a tavern and is only thinking about the food he's waiting on shouldn't scream EVIL, in my opinion, no matter what his level.
Likewise, a 1st level commoner that is LG, and is trying to poison a well in Cheliax (because all Cheliaxians are evil devil-worshipers) SHOULD set off a Detect Evil.
It was a game mechanics change to deal with a RP issue.
The issue can you willy nilly kill NPCs for being evil.
It works better as detecting evil intent, is a person thinking about acting in an evil way...
So evil people can have no evil intent and good persons can have brief thoughts of doing an evil act.
Think starving child considering theft of food....Detecting intent helps only knowing who to watch, not who to kill. Once the individual takes an action the paladin can make the correct RPing choice to deal with the situation.
for example stopping the child from the theft and buying his food, possibly be-freinding the child.....I would have a paladin fall for killing a CE NPC that never acted upon his evil impulses or evil ideas even if he had more than 5 levels.....
IMO
It was an PR problem and now it is a mechanic problem b/c designers tried to fix the RP problem with a mechanic solution!
I disagree. Some Paladins in my game are perfectly fine with killing someone for being evil. Others are more likely to try some other approach. THAT is the roleplaying choice. Your solution actually eliminates the roleplaying choice, and requires that characters follow a formula of your design.
And a child does not have evil intent when she decides to steal food because she is starving. Civilized laws even take that into account: You can borrow your neighbor's hose without asking if your house is on fire. Considering an act without considering the circumstances will not allow you to determine whether the act is evil. Circumstances matter. Which leads back to the oft-cited example: Is killing a person evil? I hope not because a Paladin would cease being a Paladin right after her first kill.
Anyway, if you want to solve a crime, you have to act like a detective. They care about means, motive, and opportunity. Crime becomes trickier to solve if you can't figure one of these out. Once the crime is solved, then you consider whether the accused is guilty. For serious crimes, like murder, the prosecution has to show the accused had the proper state of mind and actually did the deed. The proper state of mind to be guilty of murder means you wanted to kill the victim (or acted in such a manner that their death was no surprise) and you know killing is wrong. In D&D the way to show that you know killing is wrong is by looking at INT (3+ means you can have an alignment). IRL (and in my games, but not in D&D games in general), it is a little trickier because of the potential for insanity.
A Paladin who is acting as judge, jury, and executioner can Detect Evil. If the target is Evil, that means they would kill for fun or profit, which means they have the state of mind to commit murder. Then the Paladin needs to figure out whether the target did the crime and they can fulfill the role of judge and jury. The executioner bit is pretty easy. Some Paladins might take this role of judge, jury, and executioner very seriously and not Detect/Smite. Others might focus more on the getting rid of evil aspect of their duties and don't bother with figuring out whether an evil being committed some particular crime. Still others might feel the need to do a little detective work to figure out the means, motive, and opportunity, make the case persuasively before the proper authorities, and then hand the criminal over. I imagine low-INT Paladins would tend more toward Detect/Smite because they would get confused by the fancy legal talk. As the INT goes up, the Paladin would probably be motivated to figure out root causes, convince the populace by not being secretive (detect evil is not public info), and try to set up a system that enables everyone to act like a Paladin even if they can't detect evil. However, these roleplaying options are best left in the hands of the player.
I didn't realize the change had been made to Detect Evil. I had a house rule that worked similarly. I use Evil tendencies to mean that a creature is willing to kill for profit, but not willing to kill for no profit (e.g., for fun). Evil tendencies don't ping the Detect-Evil-o-meter. I think the effect was probably quite similar to the new rules for Detect Evil because the impact was primarily at low levels. High level adventures frequently have epic evil. However, assassins are better at all levels, since they normally kill for profit. (In my game, the major assassin guild frowns on true evil and cull their own herd if they find that one of the assassins starts to like killing a little too much.)
That made Detect Evil much less useful, but when it pinged, the Paladin knew a Smite was justified.
I respectfully submit that these "Paladins" should long ago have gotten the smack-down from their god.
I disagree. Some Paladins in my game are perfectly fine with killing someone for being evil.
You mean the god that is in a war against demons? The god who needs their LG paladins to fight unwaveringly against these demons (including that CE guy he smited for no other reason than he was CE, who is now a Dretch) when the paladins pass from this life to the next? I respectfully submit that your god doesn't have much foresight. My game world actually makes sense.
So what did the CE 5th level NPC do to deserve his fate of death at the Paladins hands? If that NPC had never committed an evil act?
If he'd never committed an evil act, then the NPC isn't evil (unless he's an outsider or undead). Evil is more than an 'E' on the ol' character sheet. Now, to be fair, I also subscribe to the idea that if the paladin detects evil and finds this guy to be evil and all he's doing is walking home from the tavern, the paladin doesn't have justification for slaughtering him. Whatever happened to things like redemption, or tracking him back to a greater source of evil?
So what did the CE 5th level NPC do to deserve his fate of death at the Paladins hands? If that NPC had never committed an evil act?
How would he be CE if he has never done anything evil?
Neutral (N) is the default. If you have "never" done anything evil, then your alignment cannot be any more evil than the default. I dunno, I guess some real-world religions claim that we're all born evil and have to follow certain religious dogma to become non-evil, but that isn't the D&D/Pathfinder model.
So, if that NPC has never committed an evil act, he would not be CE. In which case the answer is: "He doesn't deserve death at the paladin's hands because he is not CE. And because he is not CE, he won't be detected as 'evil' by the paladin."
You mean the god that is in a war against demons? The god who needs their LG paladins to fight unwaveringly against these demons (including that CE guy he smited for no other reason than he was CE, who is now a Dretch) when the paladins pass from this life to the next? I respectfully submit that your god doesn't have much foresight. My game world actually makes sense.I respectfully submit that these "Paladins" should long ago have gotten the smack-down from their god.
I disagree. Some Paladins in my game are perfectly fine with killing someone for being evil.
All smiting (based on nothing more than a hinting that the guy leans toward evil) and not so much mercy, or even justice, isn't the paladin code. It's not even lawful good, being lawful neutral at best, maybe. And likely straight up neutral or worse unless the long-established law of the land prohibits any detectable taint of evil upon a soul, on pain of immediate death, no process, no appeal. Even then it isn't good, just lawful. Slaughtering non-hostiles is an evil act, no matter the non-hostile. What about surrender? Or repentance?
So the deity is at war against demons. Did the paladin attack a demon? Nope, just some guy who registered as mildly evil. Devils hate demons too (and so do other demons) - doesn't make their champions "paladins".