| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I just noticed that we've (the members of my play group) probably been using DETECT EVIL wrong in previous games. It was just pointed out to me elsewhere on the forums that, except for clerics, paladins, and outsiders, characters of 5 HD or lower (such as most basic goblins, gnolls, and orcs) simply don't detect as anything at all. They don't even register. They are simply too weak to be picked up.
Check out the detect evil spell to see for yourself. It doesn't work on just anyone. Only powerful individuals such as adventurers or truly evil bad guys register (and even then, if they aren't divine, they might not register as being all that powerful). Gone are the days where you find out if your 1st-level commoner shopkeeper is trustworthy! (Well, I guess you could make a DC 20 Sense Motive check.)
***
Is this really the case though?
DigMarx seems to think not:
zurai that guy would never show up to a detect in pathfinder.You seem very adamant about this, yet parsing both Detect Evil and the Paladin's ability does not support this claim (unless there's some errata or official ruling that I'm not aware of, which is absolutely possible).
From Detect Evil:
"...You can sense the presence of evil. The amount of information revealed depends on how long you study a particular area or subject.1st Round: Presence or absence of evil.
2nd Round: Number of evil auras (creatures, objects, or spells) in the area and the power of the most potent evil aura present..."From Paladin:
"...At will, a paladin can use detect evil, as the spell. 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..."Non-undead/outsiders under 5 HD ping evil "passively", those over 5 HD radiate it, as I read it. Again, I could be missing something.
Zo
...and...
You defeated you own argument DigMarx. Let's parce the ability and spell as you suggest..."1st Round: Presence or absence of evil.
2nd Round: Number of evil auras (creatures, objects, or spells) in the area and the power of the most potent evil aura present..."
"...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..."If the creature has no aura, at the end of one to three rounds (with the spell) or a move action (paladin class ability) you learn that there is no aura to detect.
And I reiterate: auras never enter into it. First round is all about the presence or absence of evil, my good man, not presence or absence of evil auras. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the bolded paladin text, since the information revealed per round in detect spells is cumulative.
Per my reading, the vanilla Detect Evil spell doesn't allow you to pinpoint evil aligned non-undead/outsiders under 5 HD in your 60' cone, but you do DETECT that there is something evil in your focal area. Just like Detect Magic on the first round. In the subsequent rounds you can hone in on the source of evil, if there are auras present.
Zo
I wanted to make this into a new thread as it would have been lost to the void due to the old thread's rapid pace of expansion.
My question is, who do the rules support? Does Detect Evil actually NOT detect evil unless something is powerful enough? Or am I simply over thinking it and DigMarx is correct in his interpretation? I wanted to get some second opinions and see if we couldn't get down to the bottom of this (in both RAW and RAI).
The spell detects evil auras.
Look at the second round effect, "Number of evil auras"
Player: I cast detect evil, do I detect any evil?
DM: Yes
Player: Ok, how many evil auras do I detect the next round?
DM: None
Player: WTF?
As a side note
Detect Good
School divination; Level cleric 1
This spell functions like detect evil, except that it detects the auras of good creatures, clerics or paladins of good deities, good spells, and good magic items, and you are vulnerable to an overwhelming good aura if you are evil.
I think it should read :
presence or absence of evil auras.
I simply think it wasnt meant to be detected by the spell, not even in a roundabout way. copy paste oversight prolly.
My advice: Don't get lost in semantics.
Since the spell doesn't consider you to have an evil aura if you have less than 5 HD, it is sensible to say that it doesn't detect you at all.
One of the better changes in Pathfinder in my opinion: No more detect evil crutch.
Ultimately, its a level 1 spell. And while it shares the same first word as detect magic or detect poison, that does not mean it has to operate exactly the same.
My guess is the intent is that evil (or good, chaos, law, etc) is an intangible thing unless it comes from a powerful source, and is thus tangible. Unless a creature has built up a strong "tangible" evil, the spell simply fails to pinpoint it. It may register it in the area of the spell (round 1), but without a stronger signal, it can't pinpoint it or measure it. (round 2 and 3).
I see this as a good thing. Even in a world that has Absolute Evil and Good, there are still grey areas. Killing an intruder in your home to defend your family? Killing enemy soldiers in a war? There should not be blanket statements for the "evil"ness of these sort of actions, as that merely imposes limits on the variety of stories and encounters that could be told. Perhaps the man who killed to defend his family felt an indescribable high as he took the intruders life, and now his thoughts are consumed with the desire to feel that again. Maybe the war veteran was stripped of his rank for war crimes, but he carries the secret that what he did saved hundreds of lives, and the lives that were lost ended painlessly and humanely.
Also, while it isn't explicitly stated in the spell's rules, there isn't any reason why exceptions couldn't exist. A 3rd level commoner sociopath who enjoys killing and torturing homeless might actually register as a "faint" aura.
Everyone has evil thoughts, its simply that most fail to act upon them. Same with good, lawful, or chaotic thoughts. You could give your hamburger or a five dollar bill to the shabby looking man on the corner with the sign, but you don't. You could walk out of the doctors office with that magazine that interested you, but you don't. You could choke the life out of that steryotypical pajama-wearing, neckbearded, unwashed basement dweller at the FLGS, but you don't. You could take out your cellphone and make a police report on the vandal you just saw smash in a building's window, but you don't. The reasons don't matter.
Most of humanity (and humanlike races) are neutral, because when faced with an ethical choice, they simply don't. It takes effort to act upon ethical choices. It takes very little to simply ignore them.
So Detect Evil has a lot of "interference" to sort through. In any given crowd, there may be a "technically" evil thought going on, in an otherwise normal and peace loving person. It should take something stronger, a tangible resonance of a combination of evil long considered and evil often commited to give off an aura reading. Unless you are looking at something like an evil cleric or a demon, in which case you are basically looking at EVIL in the shape of a human (or something else).
My advice: Don't get lost in semantics.
Since the spell doesn't consider you to have an evil aura if you have less than 5 HD, it is sensible to say that it doesn't detect you at all.
One of the better changes in Pathfinder in my opinion: No more detect evil crutch.
+1
It should take something stronger, a tangible resonance of a combination of evil long considered and evil often commited to give off an aura reading. Unless you are looking at something like an evil cleric or a demon, in which case you are basically looking at EVIL in the shape of a human (or something else).
This is the way I see it too.
Look at Detect Poison. Will it detect rubbing alcohol? Rubbing alcohol is toxic and can kill you and make you go blind. Can it detect potable alcohol? That is also toxic, but not fatal in moderation, but can kill you straight out if you drink too much. What about water? If you drink enough water, you can cause a condition which kills you.
If the party monk has a deathly peanut allergy, will Detect Poison let him detect the peanut the emperor has stealthily hidden in his chow mein?
If the party monk has a deathly peanut allergy, will Detect Poison let him detect the peanut the emperor has stealthily hidden in his chow mein?
It depends on whether I'm using absolute alignments or subjective alignments. If humanoids are objectively evil based on their acts and intentions in a campaign, then the peanuts are not poison. If one is evil based on the subjective perception of the perceiver, then the peanuts are a kind of poison.
I applaud you: peanuts are an excellent alignment analogy.
My advice: Don't get lost in semantics.
Since the spell doesn't consider you to have an evil aura if you have less than 5 HD, it is sensible to say that it doesn't detect you at all.
One of the better changes in Pathfinder in my opinion: No more detect evil crutch.
+1
Remember tho, creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
I personally think only a paladin can truly detect evil straight from level 1 because he targets his detect evil on creatures instead of areas.
A cleric casting detect evil into a crowd of goblins knows that there is evil present, but doesn't see the auras.
A paladin casting detect evil in the same way gets the same information as the cleric, but then he can go back and specifically target each goblin. When he does so, he gets information regarding 3 rounds of study, including presence or absence of evil. Since this is a single-target effect, he can essentially hit each member of the crowd one-by-one, detecting the presence or absence of evil in each single crowd member until he finds out which specific crowd members are evil (the presence and absence of evil) and which are not.
Which is how it should be.
I personally think only a paladin can truly detect evil straight from level 1 because he targets his detect evil on creatures instead of areas.
A cleric casting detect evil into a crowd of goblins knows that there is evil present, but doesn't see the auras.
A paladin casting detect evil in the same way gets the same information as the cleric, but then he can go back and specifically target each goblin. When he does so, he gets information regarding 3 rounds of study, including presence or absence of evil. Since this is a single-target effect, he can essentially hit each member of the crowd one-by-one, detecting the presence or absence of evil in each single crowd member until he finds out which specific crowd members are evil (the presence and absence of evil) and which are not.
Which is how it should be.
If you use the spell and concentrate for 3 rounds, you wouldn't pick up anything from an evil weak creature.
Why would using the paladin ability (which is single target and much quicker, but otherwise works the same as the spell) allow one to detect evil in weak creatures?
As far as I can tell, like the spell, it wouldn't detect anything at all.
My advice: Don't get lost in semantics.
Since the spell doesn't consider you to have an evil aura if you have less than 5 HD, it is sensible to say that it doesn't detect you at all.
One of the better changes in Pathfinder in my opinion: No more detect evil crutch.
+1
Remember tho, creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
That doesnt change anything at all, a creature with less than 5HD still wont have an aura, imo it is more of a safeguard for neutral aligned creature commiting the occasional heinous act and then donating to the local orphanage to balance out =p
Then again, what happens if a non-evil outsider has evil thoughts.. does it immediately gain a stronger aura just because it is an outsider ?
I'd treat the 'aligned outsider' entry in the table aligned = evil for purpose of detect evil so it would register as a human of the appropriate HD.
|
I like that it only detects "significant" auras. Anything that helps to depolarize the old alignment issues feels like an improvement. It also helps to remove the background "noise" of whole populations showing up as evil/good etc. It shows who the movers and shakers are.
It could also be used as a badge of honor or status. When you have an aura you show you are someone significant. Though the inverse is that disguises etc, wont help most PCs evade detection by a common first level spell. Though true neutral is a stealth alignment - it allows you to evade detection or appear as a low level commoner.
As a side issue it is a meta-game level indicator. It can give you strong indicators of what a creature is and its CR - even if you fail your knowledge check. If a first level paladin detects evil and sees no obvious religious trappings, then it strongly suggests this is the BBEG encounter, detect two evil auras then run away.
I note for errata that level 5 is _both_ not detectable and faint.
My advice: Don't get lost in semantics.
Since the spell doesn't consider you to have an evil aura if you have less than 5 HD, it is sensible to say that it doesn't detect you at all.
One of the better changes in Pathfinder in my opinion: No more detect evil crutch.
+1
Remember tho, creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
+2
I always thought using magic to detect mundane evil ruined the game a bit.But then I work on a sliding scale for alignment. Most humanoids hover around neutral with leanings towards a specific alignment.
It takes an outsider or a life time of dedication to be fully a single unwavering alignment.
That doesnt change anything at all, a creature with less than 5HD still wont have an aura, imo it is more of a safeguard for neutral aligned creature commiting the occasional heinous act and then donating to the local orphanage to balance out =p
I read that as DETONATED an orphanage. I laughed out loud.
|
|
That doesnt change anything at all, a creature with less than 5HD still wont have an aura, imo it is more of a safeguard for neutral aligned creature commiting the occasional heinous act and then donating to the local orphanage to balance out =pI read that as DETONATED an orphanage. I laughed out loud.
It was self-defence!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was self-defence!That doesnt change anything at all, a creature with less than 5HD still wont have an aura, imo it is more of a safeguard for neutral aligned creature commiting the occasional heinous act and then donating to the local orphanage to balance out =pI read that as DETONATED an orphanage. I laughed out loud.
"I have a deadly orphan allergy, it was them or me"
so a third lvl evil cleric steals three babies and sacrifices them to his evil god and a detect evil does not pin point him, because based on his lvl he doesn't have a strong enough evil aura?
I have a problem with that, guess I have to house rule it
so a third lvl evil cleric steals three babies and sacrifices them to his evil god and a detect evil does not pin point him, because based on his lvl he doesn't have a strong enough evil aura?
I have a problem with that, guess I have to house rule it
Actually, since he's a cleric, he'll show up. It's a problem when you're not dealing with outsiders, paladins, and clerics, but your Cl3 will be detectable.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you are
so a third lvl evil cleric steals three babies and sacrifices them to his evil god and a detect evil does not pin point him, because based on his lvl he doesn't have a strong enough evil aura?
I have a problem with that, guess I have to house rule it
Close. Certain creatures and characters (such as clerics, paladins, outsiders, and undead) have much more powerful auras than most and can be detected at earlier levels.
Joe, a 4th-level fighter, has no aura despite being a formidable foe.
Bill, a 10th-level fighter, has only a faint aura despite being a renowned hero.
Crosby, a 3rd-level cleric of evil, has a moderate aura because he sacrifices babies.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you are
RAW, it is, for better or worse. But I agree with your sentiment. Maybe make a ruling that after committing acts of evil nature someone's evil aura can be stronger for a period of time, using the lingering aura table?
Thanks, but I really don't need a table, if the creature is over 5th lvl it will work, if under, I will just decide based on the creature or NPC if I as the DM think they have a strong enough evil aura to be detected
I personally think only a paladin can truly detect evil straight from level 1 because he targets his detect evil on creatures instead of areas.
A cleric casting detect evil into a crowd of goblins knows that there is evil present, but doesn't see the auras.
A paladin casting detect evil in the same way gets the same information as the cleric, but then he can go back and specifically target each goblin. When he does so, he gets information regarding 3 rounds of study, including presence or absence of evil. Since this is a single-target effect, he can essentially hit each member of the crowd one-by-one, detecting the presence or absence of evil in each single crowd member until he finds out which specific crowd members are evil (the presence and absence of evil) and which are not.
Which is how it should be.
If you use the spell and concentrate for 3 rounds, you wouldn't pick up anything from an evil weak creature.
Why would using the paladin ability (which is single target and much quicker, but otherwise works the same as the spell) allow one to detect evil in weak creatures?
As far as I can tell, like the spell, it wouldn't detect anything at all.
Because of this:
1st Round: Presence or absence of evil.
The paladin can focus his Detect Evil on one subject. He gets all of the info from a 3-round study, including the info from a 1st round study. Since it's focused on one subject and completely omits the background noise, a paladin can tell if a specific subject is evil because he detects the presence of absence of evil in a specific subject. He doesn't detect their aura. Just the presence of absence of evil.
That's how I read that.
Otherwise, level 1-5 paladins are pretty much SOL against any evil creature they meet because now their smite is a roulette. They should be able to reliably use their class abilities from level one. Otherwise, it's like giving a rogue sneak attack at 1st level but not the ability to flank until 6th level.
The paladin can focus his Detect Evil on one subject. He gets all of the info from a 3-round study, including the info from a 1st round study. Since it's focused on one subject and completely omits the background noise, a paladin can tell if a specific subject is evil because he detects the presence of absence of evil in a specific subject. He doesn't detect their aura. Just the presence of absence of evil.
That's how I read that.
Otherwise, level 1-5 paladins are pretty much SOL against any evil creature they meet because now their smite is a roulette. They should be able to reliably use their class abilities from level one. Otherwise, it's like giving a rogue sneak attack at 1st level but not the ability to flank until 6th level.
Except undead, clerics, and outsiders still have auras under level 5.
Not to mention that there are still plenty of way to figure out someone is evil besides detect evil.
Party Leader: Hey, guy we have to that level 4 fighter over there from sacraficing those children to his god of evil and darkness...
Paladin: I am not sure he is evil, he has no AURA!!!!!!
Worse, you have higher level characters who have may have suddenly just "seen the wickedness" and become Evil but have never actively done anything Evil shining out as great beacons of Evil because they're high level.
And then there's the problem when you've got neutral clerics of evil gods showing up as beacons of Evil even if the cleric is serving them in their neutral aspect. I mean, you've got Moe, God of Baby Sacrifice and Nachos and your cleric is busy doing the "and nachos" part of the equation and Moe is perfectly fine with it because he has other clerics seeing to his baby sacrifice fix, and their nachos suck whereas this particular cleric makes killer nachos. The paladin still gets to smite this cleric?
Yes, the "and nachos" is silly, but look at it this way: "and the harvest," "and the sea," "and commerce," "and knowledge."
If you're going with a limited pantheon, you are likely going to have only one harvest god and only one evil god, and if you're in an area with corn and cheese, that means you've got Moe, God of Baby Sacrifice and Nachos, or more elaborately Moekatatlique, God of Evil and the Harvest. The corn harvest is an important thing to people and the nachos are beloved festival food, and if you don't sacrifice babies this year, Moe will be irked and say "No nachos for you! Have some famine instead!"
Then let's say you have some cleric of Moe who makes the killer nachos and has also figured out that if you also sacrifice copious amounts of tequila and have lots of naked dancing girls, you can get Moe so drunk that he won't notice if you sacrifice a corn husk doll in place of an actual baby and will bless the harvest anyway. This cleric is still a shining beacon of Evil?
By the way, if the paladin sez, "But just worship some other god of the harvest!" he's an idiot. Moe has a rock solid grip on the harvest and he's the only harvest god in town. Remember that time when Demeter went on strike? Yeah, like that. The ancient Greek gods had to deal with it and they couldn't just text Isis or Tonantzin the Aztec corn goddess and get them to pick up the slack. We're dealing with a limited pantheon here and Moe is the god of the harvest and he's a jerk.
Personally, I'd have to say that the cleric with the nachos, the tequila and the sacrificial corn-husk dolly is more good than your average paladin, because he's snookering his evil god rather than going down the easy red road paved with dead babies.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you are
Be prepared to house-rule things then. Doing it like this was easier than to say "come up with an aura strength for each PC, NPC and other critter in the game world based on how much evil they're doing". There's is no mechanic for different "strengths" of evil.
Should the spell show someone who is merely without compassion but never really has done any active wrong? Never broke a law, never hurt a person, he's just a selfish bastard.
The main reason this change was made, or so I think, was to defeat the old "detect-evil-kill" routine bad paladin players would constantly pull.
That's how I read that.
Read my first post in this thread again.
Otherwise, level 1-5 paladins are pretty much SOL against any evil creature they meet because now their smite is a roulette. They should be able to reliably use their class abilities from level one.
Who says? Where in the rule does it specify that players can leave their brain in the umbrella stand when they get in? Sometimes, things aren't all figured out for you: Not all enemies are devils or guys with big red pentacles around their neck, spewing profanities and "evil will rule" slogans. Sometimes you have to use your knowledge of human nature.
Those paladins are holy champions! If the forces of law and order want unthinking evil-killing-machines, let them buy a batch of inevitables, tip up their tank with holy water, and press the GO button.
If you use the spell and concentrate for 3 rounds, you wouldn't pick up anything from an evil weak creature.
Why would using the paladin ability (which is single target and much quicker, but otherwise works the same as the spell) allow one to detect evil in weak creatures?
As far as I can tell, like the spell, it wouldn't detect anything at all.
I would agree. Besides, your paladin is meant to be smiting seriously bad evil, not people who forgot to do their tax returns or who stole their neighbour's cow. If you ARE a serial killer, you've probably accumulated enough XP to be a high enough level to detect, the way I figure it. A human has to work pretty hard to be really evil or really good, the way I see it, even if they have always had that inclination.
so a third lvl evil cleric steals three babies and sacrifices them to his evil god and a detect evil does not pin point him, because based on his lvl he doesn't have a strong enough evil aura?
I have a problem with that, guess I have to house rule it
Close. Certain creatures and characters (such as clerics, paladins, outsiders, and undead) have much more powerful auras than most and can be detected at earlier levels.
Joe, a 4th-level fighter, has no aura despite being a formidable foe.
Bill, a 10th-level fighter, has only a faint aura despite being a renowned hero.
Crosby, a 3rd-level cleric of evil, has a moderate aura because he sacrifices babies.
Don't forget that the cleric/paladin picks up the aura of their deity too, not their own. So, a LN cleric of a LE deity would have an evil aura as well.
I would agree. Besides, your paladin is meant to be smiting seriously bad evil, not people who forgot to do their tax returns or who stole their neighbour's cow. If you ARE a serial killer, you've probably accumulated enough XP to be a high enough level to detect, the way I figure it. A human has to work pretty hard to be really evil or really good, the way I see it, even if they have always had that inclination.If you use the spell and concentrate for 3 rounds, you wouldn't pick up anything from an evil weak creature.
Why would using the paladin ability (which is single target and much quicker, but otherwise works the same as the spell) allow one to detect evil in weak creatures?
As far as I can tell, like the spell, it wouldn't detect anything at all.
Abadar begs to differ with you! :)
And then there's the problem when you've got neutral clerics of evil gods showing up as beacons of Evil even if the cleric is serving them in their neutral aspect. I mean, you've got Moe, God of Baby Sacrifice and Nachos and your cleric is busy doing the "and nachos" part of the equation and Moe is perfectly fine with it because he has other clerics seeing to his baby sacrifice fix, and their nachos suck whereas this particular cleric makes killer nachos. The paladin still gets to smite this cleric?
Great post, except for the last sentence of the quoted paragraph. The Cleric serves an evil god, and thus has an evil aura. If his actual alignment is Neutral though, then Smite Evil won't work on him. Which will lead to some surprised Paladins in some cases, yes.
This is a great thread by the way. I just started playing an Inquisitor, which has Detect Any-Alignment-One-At-a-Time, and I hadn't picked up on this nuance. Of course, if you cycle through all four Detect spells on someone and still pick up nothing it means either the target is less than 5HD, or has Undetectable Alignment up. Which means it's time to go back to the old-school methods...
Don't forget that the cleric/paladin picks up the aura of their deity too, not their own. So, a LN cleric of a LE deity would have an evil aura as well.
I did not know that.
Don't forget that the cleric/paladin picks up the aura of their deity too, not their own. So, a LN cleric of a LE deity would have an evil aura as well.I did not know that.
For a reference see the Aura class feature of the cleric (pg 39 Core Rulebook). And I was wrong about the paladin. They just have an aura of good, so a paladin of Abadar would still have a good aura.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you are
Actually, in the world of D&D, it kind of is. If you go back to my previous post regarding ethical choice taking effort, and that most people simply abstain from making those choices, and thus making that effort, then that leads us to an interesting conclusion of logic.
If making ethical choices takes effort, then that usually means they carry some form of risk, challenge, or stress. Which are the three components that generally form an encounter. So acting on an ethical choice is similar to an encounter. Encounters give you XP. Enough XP gives you levels.
This makes sense to me. A person who actually does as their concience or moral code tells them, even if it puts them at risk, makes their life more difficult, or just adds a little stress to their day, is still very much a person who is vested in the world around them and growing as a person due to that investment.
How much "ethical XP" does stealing a candybar or doing community service give? Probably very very little. But those are things of relatively low "ethical CR". What about stealing a car? Donating your entire tax refund to charity when you could use it to pay off some of your own debts? Taking two years off work to travel Europe? These are bigger, and thus give bigger "rewards".
We know that something like this happens in life in general, otherwise there would be no 2nd level commoners or experts (warriors and aristocrats can get XP from tours of duty and honor duels).
Still, the things I have mentioned are all things that happen fairly "normally". Even a car theif is capable of operating in normal society (if he's smart and careful). A two year vacation doesn't radically alter your entire life from that point on, although it will influence it.
But what about the person who doesn't steal cars, he steals government secrets? Instead of a trip to Europe, you swear off "normal" society and become an off-the-grid hermit? Instead of donating taxes to charity, you quit your day job and do community service works, living from the kindness of others or a small budget you set aside for bare minimum living expenses. And, for the example of evil, what if you stopped merely assaulting people who offend you, and start killing them?
Your life is now radically different from the social "norm", either by choice or consequence of choice. Consequently, the challenges you face have risen, and you are gaining much more "ethical XP". But these people are the exceptions rather than the rule. These are the lvl3 fighter who detects as evil, because he SACRIFICES BABIES TO A DARK GOD, rather than simply "working for cultists and not asking questions I'm pretty sure I know the answer to but the paycheck is good so I'm going to keep my mouth shut and my head down".
|
I don't know, I like the idea of detect evil, particularily with paladins, picking up the abstract presence of evil, even if not the individuals or their aura.
A certain hero walks into a bar in the darker side of town. There is nobody that would have an aura:
"A den of stinking evil. Cover your nose, Boo!"
Detect evil would be kind of like the hairs raise on the back of your neck raising. You can smell it, maybe even taste it, but you can't place it. All you know is that there is evil afoot and you'd better keep your sword loose in its scabbard, and you coin purse tight to your person.
This way, it prevents evil=smite now, but still allows a nice atmosphere to be set and lets the user know that there is something up.
LOL,
I really do love playing with Paladins and their at-will detect evil. :)
I had a Paladin player in my game awhile back (we're on break, he still has a Paladin). They are in a city, being treated like honored guests. The governer of the city invites them to dinner. The paladin of course starts doing 'Detect Evil' during dinner. He picks up a very strong taint of evil. The Paladin blinks and starts focusing on everyone at the table, one at a time, trying to figure out which one it is. He makes an obnoxious spectacle of himself, staring at each guest in turn (most of whom were very powerful people). And... nothing. Not a single evil. Finally, he turns to look at the adolescent son of the governor, thinking, oh man, it's the 12yo son of the governor who's super evil!
Nothing, no evil on the kid at all. Next he stares at the guards standing against the walls, nothing. Then each of the servers in turn, and again nothing. By this point, the other characters are elbowing him under the table and hissing at him to behave under their breaths. :)
The Paladin is going nuts, and then starts sulking since he can detect evil but can't find it!
He figured it out during the 5th course (of 7). There had been 10 evil ninja's hiding in range of his detect evil, but not in sight. They all used their abilities to phase through the wall and attack. :) Drove him nuts though, and left everyone thinking he was nuts. They still do, since he didn't want to explain he had a hint there was going to be an ambush and he didn't warn the governor. ;)
I don't know, I like the idea of detect evil, particularily with paladins, picking up the abstract presence of evil, even if not the individuals or their aura.
A certain hero walks into a bar in the darker side of town. There is nobody that would have an aura:
"A den of stinking evil. Cover your nose, Boo!"
Detect evil would be kind of like the hairs raise on the back of your neck raising. You can smell it, maybe even taste it, but you can't place it. All you know is that there is evil afoot and you'd better keep your sword loose in its scabbard, and you coin purse tight to your person.This way, it prevents evil=smite now, but still allows a nice atmosphere to be set and lets the user know that there is something up.
I've done this before in my games as well. It's even covered under the rules. The Desecrate and Unhallow spell makes an area steeped in evil and/or negative energy. That's just a quick way of doing what sentient beings can do with activities over time.
I don't know, I like the idea of detect evil, particularily with paladins, picking up the abstract presence of evil, even if not the individuals or their aura.
A certain hero walks into a bar in the darker side of town. There is nobody that would have an aura:
"A den of stinking evil. Cover your nose, Boo!"
Detect evil would be kind of like the hairs raise on the back of your neck raising. You can smell it, maybe even taste it, but you can't place it. All you know is that there is evil afoot and you'd better keep your sword loose in its scabbard, and you coin purse tight to your person.This way, it prevents evil=smite now, but still allows a nice atmosphere to be set and lets the user know that there is something up.
I agree. The smite-o-matic paladin was not much fun to game with.
On the other hand, Ravenloft and Heroes of Horror had some good ideas on creating 'sinkholes' where places had seen so many evil deeds the place had become evil.
So the best way to be a spy is to hit level 5 and stop gaining experience. After you hit level 6, you take a big hit in your power of infiltration.
Nah. I read it as the spell works the same way it always did. If someone is evil, or has an actively evil intent, he can be detected by the spell. So he's less than level 5? His aura has no power. He still shows up.
|
|
So the best way to be a spy is to hit level 5 and stop gaining experience. After you hit level 6, you take a big hit in your power of infiltration.
Nah. I read it as the spell works the same way it always did. If someone is evil, or has an actively evil intent, he can be detected by the spell. So he's less than level 5? His aura has no power. He still shows up.
Well, I wouldn't even go that far. Detect evil would, at best, allow you to sense an evil presence, just not determine where it's coming from. It'd be like standing in a crowd and someone farts. You know someone farted, and that it wasn't you, but you don't know who. I suppose you could conclude figure out that it was him if you two are the only ones around, but that still leaves out the possibility that an invisible evil might be lurking.
I've posted this before elsewhere, but there's something to think about under Legend Lore.
As a rule of thumb, characters who are 11th level and higher are “legendary,” as are the sorts of creatures they contend with, the major magic items they wield, and the places where they perform their key deeds.
So a fifth or sixth level character is halfway to being legendary. My guess is that's why the Detect Evil doesn't work that well on the lowbies.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you are
geez, read up ppl. I'll say it again:creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you aregeez, read up ppl. I'll say it again:creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
Wow, you could then use Suggestion or Mass Suggestion on folk to "Think wicked wicked thoughts!" and if you got someone of sufficiently high level to do this, you could make all the low level paladins take bonk.
Hah! If it's against their nature they get 2 saves, the 2nd at +2, but yeah, that's a hilarious way to screw with Pallys.
OK but I would have the same issue if a 3rd lvl fighter did it, or just killed the babies for the fun of it. To me how evil you are is not a function of what level you aregeez, read up ppl. I'll say it again:creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.
I think it is funny that the JB felt the need to add that language, though I know it was used in previous editions. Evil means you are willing to kill innocent beings for fun or profit. Evil intent means... you are willing to kill innocent beings for fun or profit. If you have that intent, you are evil. If "evil intent" is just "I want to get back at that person for what he did," it seems like a paladin would show up as evil when he kicks in a door to kill a person that he knows murdered someone.
The level restriction to detect an evil aura is also kind of lame, IMO. Evil is evil. If this is clarified to mean that you cannot detect evil in a level 1 commoner, I'll just house rule. It's quite a bit different than the question of whether alcohol or peanuts show up as poison, even though they are in some cases, because a peanut *can* be a poison, but an evil person is always evil even if one of his friends thinks it is fine to murder loud children.
That said, I think the proper interpretation of the spell is that you cannot detect evil in low level non-clerics.
To have evil intent is to intend to do evil. You're actively thinking about it.
For example, if a 1st lvl Commoner is aiming a bow and arrow at the Mayor from their attic in an assassination attempt, he's intending to do evil.
As a side note, if the above mentioned Paladin is intending to kill the goblin children, and someone was casting Detect Evil on him, he'd come up as evil.
To have evil intent is to intend to do evil. You're actively thinking about it.
For example, if a 1st lvl Commoner is aiming a bow and arrow at the Mayor from their attic in an assassination attempt, he's intending to do evil.
As a side note, if the above mentioned Paladin is intending to kill the goblin children, and someone was casting Detect Evil on him, he'd come up as evil.
The commoner's intent is determinative. If the commoner wants to assassinate the mayor because the mayor is evil, the commoner might be good. And the intent when killing the mayor, if the commoner is good, would presumably be to protect innocent lives, which is not evil intent, either.
The issue with the goblin children is whether they are evil children. Nevertheless, if only an evil person would kill goblin children (your implication), presumably because the goblin children are not evil, then any person who would kill the goblin children would both be evil and have evil intent (though a neutral person could presumably callously leave them in their cages without evil intent).