I’ve seen more than one mage use a “detect” spell in place of common sense. The classic example is the “can I smite it?” paladin. This guy looks at an NPC, asks, “Is it evil?” and then swings for the fences. Never mind that the poor decapitated schmo was the king’s royal vizier.
Same deal with magic detection and magic items. Doing a quick scan of the room is a good idea, but there are too many lead-lined caskets in the world to make detect magic a good replacement for an old fashioned Perception check.
I've got a longer write-up on the subject below this comic, but I'm curious how you guys deal with this. Is there a good way in nudge players away from using magic as a crutch? Or is this a self-correcting problem in practice?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
well, to start with, detecting evil on royal official is incredibly rude and likely to impact your standing with the court, but killing an official, regardless of his alignment is making you into a public enemy, expect high level paladins and adventurers to try to ingratiate themselves by presenting the king with your heads... no matter if you're good and thte paladins can't smite you, you're criminals and random killers... of course, I don't favor the murderhobo ethos when I master.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I always keep in mind a fairly overlooked part of the detect spells: "Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell." Same for the other alignment detectors.
And then there's the spell Magic Aura for Detect Magic. Nondetection for both. Mislead. Basically, these spells can be fooled. The information you receive from them can be manipulated.
That evil vizier they just killed? He was lawful good and trying to counter the influence of the power hungry prince who's secretly pledged himself to Asmodeus. Mislead spell.
A person who's appearance screams "thug" runs past the PCs in a street, holding a suspicious package. PCs intervene, detecting the package as magical, and attempt to identify the item within, which appears to be an ordinary wineskin. Meanwhile, during the 3+ rounds that they (and likely any local guardsmen) have their attention focused, other crimes are comitted (pickpocketing the PCs, sneaking into the guardpost to liberate a comrade/confiscated illegal goods, etc). Magic Aura.
PCs tasked with guarding a person or site in the city see many people pass the location. One of them (a washerwoman, beggar, town guardsman, prostitute) is more than they seem, via nondetection, magic aura, glamoured armor, and a hat of disguise.
Finally, PCs scanning the tavern/townsquare/street with detect evil note a man who registers as evil. The man stares at another man some distance away. The first man is a grieving father fantasizing about revenge, the other a deceitful and murderous pimp with enough connections to avoid reprisal.
And of course all of this is disregarding the inherent limits of the spells, and the social ramifications of openly and blatantly using them. Best case scenario, its the equivalent of someone walking up to you and running a metal detector over you. If the person wears a symbol of a lawful diety, or the badge of the town guard, it will likely be tolerated, but overall its an invasion of privacy few will appreciate because of the possibility of misunderstandings as listed above. And that is assuming its known that the spell being cast is simply a detect spell, and not charm, suggestion, bestow curse, contagion, or any other hostile or harmful spell that has no obvious effects (like fireball).
tldr: If the spells (and their counterspells) are run correctly on a mechanical and in-game social level, its self correcting. In my experience of course.
|
One thing that I have done with great success is to change "Detect Evil" to "Detect Enemy of my God".
So, a cleric of Shelyn might detect somebody who is guilty of nothing more than carelessly destroying a painting as "evil", a cleric of Gorum might detect the Golarion equivalent of Ghandi as "evil", etc.
It made Detect Evil a significant data point but nothing more than that. It tended to focus PC attention on the bad guys to SOME extent (which is generally a good idea if one wants the game to proceed at a reasonable pace) but forced them to find other means to verify and confirm their suspicions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always keep in mind a fairly overlooked part of the detect spells: "Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell." Same for the other alignment detectors.
...
That evil vizier they just killed? He was lawful good and trying to counter the influence of the power hungry prince who's secretly pledged himself to Asmodeus. Mislead spell.
...
Finally, PCs scanning the tavern/townsquare/street with detect evil note a man who registers as evil. The man stares at another man some distance away. The first man is a grieving father fantasizing about revenge, the other a deceitful and murderous pimp with enough connections to avoid reprisal.
Keep in mind that this is actively evil intent and not evil thoughts as per spell description.
Man fantasizes about revenge killing? Does not detect evil.
Man is about to stab someone in kidney out of revenge? Detects evil.
Vizier wants to stop evil king? Does not detect evil.
Vizier is about to poison king? Detects evil.
Also, remember the HD limit for Faint, Moderate, and Strong auras (especially for normals like those mentioned above, who must be 5 HD to register "faint", 11 HD to register "moderate", and 26 HD to register "strong". If some schmoe is registering Moderately Evil, then something is likely awry.
Killing someone that detects as evil if you're a paladin in my games wont necessarily be a problem with your deity or endanger your powers as a paladin (except for deities which prefer redemption), but just because it's not evil to kill an evil person, doesn't mean that you can choose to do it without repercussion.
Killing someone that has committed no crime (that you can prove) would be murder under the law, even if you god doesn't mind. Even in a case of killing someone for being evil who is a merchant that has cheated everyone and used allowed debt which they then used to seize belongs when they couldn't pay. Things of that nature. It's evil, but the lawful punishment probably isn't capital. So again the paladin would find themselves on the opposite side of the law (of the country).
And if you do so long enough, you might find yourself not being lawful enough, but that's another discussion.
Anyways, I have in my house rules written that basically any character that has powers which are supplied by alignment or deities, that the characters are warned in game if an action they are about to take would cause problems with their alignment/deity. Pretty much like the phylactery of faithfulness.
Because playes and GMs don't necessarily have the same ideas about alignment or morality. So I can tell them, in my world, that X would count as a transgression and they can choose to proceed with the action and deal with the consequences, or choose with something more in line with how I (as the GM) view things.
I handle the situations realistically.
Using detect evil/magic is a spell or spell-like ability. Using it has visible effects and traces, and most people are not going to appreciate a spell being cast near them, or on them, when they don't have access to spellcraft and can't identify intent. So, at the very least this is going to put people on guard.
In addition, there are social implications to using scry and die, or detect and smite, tactics. And very likely will bring down the hammer of law once authority figures are made aware. Since most players are not 'extensions' of the existing law system and have authority to hand out justice with evidence/trial, they will incur all manner of trouble for acting outside their authority.
This is why my very evil high level cleric started casting undetectable alignment on himself as a daily buff spell. It's not like anyone bothers to cast multiple detect X alignment ever bothers to confirm the results with other detection spells. It meant talking was always an option.
So, yeah if players are being incredibly reliant on detection spells use it against them. Magic aura is also a fun spell since you can make worthless trash look like it's magic.
Who has the smites to burn on smiting anything and everything that detects as evil? Time for the boss fight? Good thing I used my smites on those evil minions we fought on our way in here. Not having a 15 minute work day should be a huge deterrent to this kind of behavior.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm torn between liking that rule, and thinking it devalues said phylactery of faithfulness. At any rate, especially if a paladin is involved, I recommend a session 0 just for shared expectations.
The phylactery of faithfulness deserves to be devalued. It shouldn't exist.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Show me a paladin who automatically attacks anything and everything she detects as evil, and I'll show you an ex-paladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel this is only an issue when it comes up spontaneously in play. If you consider the problem from a world-building perspective, and look at the social interactions that would follow from it, then the problem largely goes away. Although it's a bit simplified (there are plenty of nuances you can introduce here) we can essentially break it down into two possibilities:
1) Being evil isn't a crime
In this case, the presence of an evil aura is not in and of itself actionable. It might be cause for concern and scrutiny, but taking violent action on this basis alone is unjustified. Any paladin who attacks solely based on an evil aura and nothing else will fall. This makes detect evil a useful tool, but not an open license for violence. Be clear with the player at the outset so they know an evil aura is not an invitation to attack.
It's a good idea to include the occasional red herrings if you're going down this road; NPC's who just happen to be evil, but aren't villains or antagonists. If the only time players ever see an evil aura is when dealing with demons or maniacal wizards bent on world domination, then that's going to set their standards for what evil means. You need to throw some more mundane evil in there to counterbalance it; the landlord who throws impoverished families out on the streets, the flagrantly racist guard who persecutes the local halflings, the guy whose business venture looks an awful lot like extortion, etc. All of them technically within the bounds of the law and civil society, but behaving in extremely unethical manners that fall into outright evil territory.
2) Being evil is a crime
The alternative case is that an evil aura, in and of itself, makes you a social pariah and potentially liable to be attacked. This actually has profound implications for the game world. The very existence of Paladins would mean that evil characters of 5th level and higher would be heavily persecuted in such societies. Those with the means to do so would be guaranteed to have magical protection against alignment detection, and those who who lack the means would be pushed to the fringes of society. As such, detect evil simply shouldn't give useful results in a social situation; an evil aura is a giant "smite me" sign in such a world, and very few people would be dumb enough to give a paladin such an invitation (and those who are won't last long anyways).
This particularly lenient approach to Paladins could have serious implications to world-building. While by their nature paladins are never going to get along with evil-aligned people and organizations, such heavy-handed behavior could well alienate neutral-aligned characters. Paladins attacking targets based solely on their aura is going to be make them look like dangerous extremists to those who don't necessarily have a strong preference on that alignment axis. That greatly changes the role of paladins in the game world, and could potentially undermine the PR for good-aligned religions in general.
2) Being evil is a crime
The nation of Hermea in Golarion is a perfect example of this kind of society. It's ruled by a Gold dragon that has a zero tolerance policy for evil. it's both a wonderful and terrible place to be depending on your alignment.
Except in the most extreme theocracies (Istar, I'm looking at you) being evil isn't actually a crime. As I pointed out in a thread about if a paladin should fall because he saved a cleric of Asmodeus from being lynched, the cleric was both Evil under a detection spell and innocent of any crime, so entitled to the paladin's protection. If you base your killings on Detect Evil, pretty soon you'll start detecting yourself in the mirror.
Which Istar are you referring to, and where is it stated that her theocratic government make being evil a crime?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dragonlance Campaign Setting, city of Istar in the Age of Might. Outlawed evil gods, then outlawed neutral gods, then in the final weeks of its existence, declared evil thought the same as evil deeds, to the point one cleric was about to arrest a young boy because he wished his mother would die.
And then the gods dropped a freaking mountain on the continent, slaughtering countless innocents. Who's evil now? : P
Fair point, that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And then the gods dropped a freaking mountain on the continent, slaughtering countless innocents. Who's evil now? : P
Technically? Some of the gods that helped drop the mountain on the countless innocents. The City of Ishtar managed to purge all (or nearly) of the 'Evil' from the land. But if you meant 'evil' as how we judge morality in real life ... No comment.
well, you can try and smite Takhisis, that should be fun too.
i used the rule "can't use magic as deviance in a court" to pull down the murder-hobo\paladins in my game.
basically it goes like this: to punish someone you need a crime, being evil is not one, and you have to have solid non-magical proof for any crime to be judged.
as the magical evidence can be just a magical frame. (alter memory,alibi the list go on). saying 'my magic says he's guilty' has no merit in any lawful court as the other side can bring spell casters of his own to 'prove' that he is not guilty. (there are spells that make you seem like a different alignment and such).
Terry Pratchett had this done in his diskworld books, the head of the city police wouldn't use any help from wizards to solve crimes, saying they just might as well magic the people to be good and such.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ehhh...I wouldn't say that you can't have evidence that is magical, but things like "Well when I used detect evil..." is on the level of saying "Well, I just knew". You can't prove to others that the person was evil or that they had committed a crime.
Detect evil wouldn't count as proof because you can't share it with anyone, aside from telling them you did so. Testimony is used in courtrooms, but usually needs other corroborating evidence of wrong doing, otherwise it tends to be insufficient on its own.
In a world of magic, testimony is even less like to be accepted due to magic being used to influence memory, or outright force people to lie.
I’ve seen more than one mage use a “detect” spell in place of common sense. The classic example is the “can I smite it?” paladin. This guy looks at an NPC, asks, “Is it evil?” and then swings for the fences. Never mind that the poor decapitated schmo was the king’s royal vizier.
Same deal with magic detection and magic items. Doing a quick scan of the room is a good idea, but there are too many lead-lined caskets in the world to make detect magic a good replacement for an old fashioned Perception check.
I've got a longer write-up on the subject below this comic, but I'm curious how you guys deal with this. Is there a good way in nudge players away from using magic as a crutch? Or is this a self-correcting problem in practice?
I'm curious - your 'longer write-up' is 4 paragraphs long, a single paragraph longer than what you're already written. Why not just post the whole thing and invite discussion on it?
I'm curious - your 'longer write-up' is 4 paragraphs long, a single paragraph longer than what you're already written. Why not just post the whole thing and invite discussion on it?
I worry about eyes glazing over when I post anything longer than a few paragraphs. It's the whold TLDR thing, you know? I try to keep things as pithy as possible when I'm starting a discussion topic.
This is a case of'"A must have item". A phylactery of faithfulness.
It tells you if a considered action could annoy your deity.
Great idea, Detect Lead. First round, it tells you if there is lead in front of you. Second round, it tells you what or who has the lead. Third round, it tells you the location and shape of the lead, such as bullets or a lead lined box.
I read the rest of the topic and I stand by my first statement.
The spell may need some suggestions though.
Ehhh...I wouldn't say that you can't have evidence that is magical, but things like "Well when I used detect evil..." is on the level of saying "Well, I just knew". You can't prove to others that the person was evil or that they had committed a crime.
Detect evil wouldn't count as proof because you can't share it with anyone, aside from telling them you did so. Testimony is used in courtrooms, but usually needs other corroborating evidence of wrong doing, otherwise it tends to be insufficient on its own.
In a world of magic, testimony is even less like to be accepted due to magic being used to influence memory, or outright force people to lie.
I wonder if you could have some kind of magical barrister group that specializes in this? Maybe an appointed Magician Litigational who double-checks all magical findings, and is himself subject to review from a larger body of lawyer mages?
I wonder if you could have some kind of magical barrister group that specializes in this? Maybe an appointed Magician Litigational who double-checks all magical findings, and is himself subject to review from a larger body of lawyer mages?
Hmm, excessive bureaucracy. Seems legit. Worked in the past with little chance of corruption. I vote no. The moment you get beings involved that have ways of 'verifying' things that are not accessible to public review (meaning, non-magical methods to verify their findings) is the moment you start setting up agencies that have very little culpability when things eventually do become corrupt.
Then again, there is no perfect method of ruling that is free from risks of corruption.
I disagree in that. Galt is a very chaotic nation, but has plenty of trials. They're just rigged.
Yeah, there tends to be a pattern there ... Hmm, no one likes the rules until they work in their benefit, even if the rules are designed for everything to be as fair as possible. No matter, no worries. "I got no chains, to hold me down..."
Killing the person that detected as evil seems like it is destroying your own evidence.
the only thing that normal people can see is that you cast some spell, then you randomly killed a guy. They don't necessarily know what spell you cast, and they certainly don't share in the results of the detect spell- all they know is that you screamed "he's evil" before swinging your sword around.
And once the guy is dead? Well, I don't think he detects evil anymore after that. So no one else can check out whether you are right or not. So even in a paladin organization, this could be troublesome.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes you can see evil and be like "ok that's good to smite." An ogre eating a leg, for example.
Counterpoint: Maybe that leg needed eatin'.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes you can see evil and be like "ok that's good to smite." An ogre eating a leg, for example.Counterpoint: Maybe that leg needed eatin'.
"It detected as neutral delicious, and I am chaotic hungry"
Counterpoint the second: is the ogre actually guilty of anything? If you're in Irrisan, that ogre may have more rights than the paladin, and, while selfish, may not have done anything warranting legal action.
As far as I am concerned, a Paladin being the witness of an evil action is a call to respond. Maybe not with dealing of death, but in a manner to bring justice. If the local laws prevent justice (because they are evil and allow evil things) that just means we are to act outside the bounds of the local law. Lawful does not mean we obey unjust laws. It just means we are more careful and selective about how and when we deliver the smite to the evil creature. Later in the back alley, after dark, where no guards can witness the smiting.
Paladins bring justice, righteously and to protect the innocent. If evil laws get in the way, you cut through them.
This is when the more sophisticated PF2 paladin code comes in handy.
You must respect the lawful authority of the legitimate ruler or leadership in whichever land you may be, following their laws unless they violate a higher tenet.
Cheating, I know. Whatcha gonna do about it, smite me?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is when the more sophisticated PF2 paladin code comes in handy.
You must respect the lawful authority of the legitimate ruler or leadership in whichever land you may be, following their laws unless they violate a higher tenet.Cheating, I know. Whatcha gonna do about it, smite me?
Oh, Paizo. Did you really think you can stop paladin code threads with that bit of textual spackle? Bwahahahahaaaaa!
Which ignores that the code requires the paladin to respect legitimate authority. Has the definition of legitimate been changed to mean that which the paladin agrees with?
Respecting legitimate authority has everything to do with acknowledging that the laws and authority figures in the land ARE the authority in the land. They are to be treated with respect. But that does not absolve you of your OATH or your CODE. If you witness an evil act against an innocent, you are honor bound to seek justice. If justice is not possible within the laws of the land, YOU STILL SEEK JUSTICE.
The infernal prosecution rests. *Bows to the judge*
The Paladin remains silent, eyes staring at the infernal prosecutor in defiance. One does not negotiate with Evil and there exists room in the Code for the occasional ‘chaotic’ act when required, especially in these times when the ‘lawful evil’ thinks they have you on lock down. There was no witness to his act of justice, save for the gods themselves. He wasn't an amateur.
Well, it's a long standing fact that Evil authorities are never regarded as 'legitimate' by paladins... then again, antipaladins respect no authorities at all
in 40some years of roleplaying game practice. FInd me any paladin of Iomedae who recognizes the legitimacy of the current Chelaxian gummint... I'm not even sure Abadarites do.