PDA

View Full Version : Detect Evil - How should it work?



Maquise
2010-08-18, 04:28 PM
I've always wondered how the Detect Evil spell should work. I've heard it said that it isn't an alignment scanner. This I agree with, however, I'm not sure what would be detected. A fiend? A necromancer? A corrupt noble?
(I can safely say a fiend; my point is, where does the line end?)

Greenish
2010-08-18, 04:37 PM
Everyone who has an aura of evil (as the class feature for a handful of classes) or evil subtype and all undead (except Deathless, I guess).

137beth
2010-08-18, 04:40 PM
(except Deathless, I guess).
Deathless are not undead.

Greenish
2010-08-18, 04:43 PM
Deathless are not undead.Right-o. Just like ravages aren't diseases.

Ernir
2010-08-18, 04:45 PM
I've always wondered how the Detect Evil spell should work. I've heard it said that it isn't an alignment scanner. This I agree with, however, I'm not sure what would be detected. A fiend? A necromancer? A corrupt noble?
(I can safely say a fiend; my point is, where does the line end?)

Uh, any creature with an Evil alignment pings on Detect Evil. It may not tell you whether the person pings as evil because said person likes to drink the blood or babies for breakfast or because they don't feel bad enough when they jump a queue, but I'd call it a perfectly serviceable alignment scanner.

Now, that's as written. How it should be - I say that depends wholly on the type of game you're playing. If it's a game of "let's find who the cultist is", Detect Evil as a real yes/no might make it less fun. If it's a game of "kick in door and smite the goblins", I don't think there's anything wrong with using Detect Evil as written.

A houserule in a few of the RL games I play in is to ignore the first line of the Detect Evil table. As in, Detect Evil detects undead, evil outsiders, evil magic items, and those who actually have an Aura of Evil class feature. The corrupt noble who is just ordinarily evil wouldn't ping.

Tetrasodium
2010-08-18, 04:49 PM
there are also a lot of effects and relatively easily available spells & items that will block detect evil. Ring of mindshielding/nondetection (one or both) and the spell used in crafting it come to mind. With the way it often gets used as an "evil, kill it!" scanner, I don't think it's all that implausible that anyone of means would take the steps to block the spell.

dsmiles
2010-08-18, 05:42 PM
How should detect evil work?

In my book, the paladin ability of detect evil should be titled more like detect evil intent. This is the way I run it as a DM. Ivan the Terrible is sitting at a bar, with no current evil intentions, he just wants another beer (no ping). Joe Schmoe the dirt farmer wants to upgrade to cow farmer, by stealing his neighbor's best cows, and is willing to do nearly anything to get them (PING!).

The detect evil spell, on the other hand (also the way I run it as a DM), can detect anything with an "evil aura." Evil clerics of evil deities, evil paladins (tyranny and slaughter), evil outsiders, free-willed undead, and basically anything with evil intentions.

This is just the way I run it.

FMArthur
2010-08-18, 07:32 PM
I just make it detect Evil auras and otherwise give a +1 to Sense Motive for every two Paladin levels. I don't want to promote inter-party conflict or slow down the game explaining morality to someone who may or may not actually understand anyway with the actual rules printed.

Starbuck_II
2010-08-18, 07:58 PM
I run it like the spell says it should be run.
It detects evil auras on creatures, spells, and magic items.

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.

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.

So three rounds to be sure evil is there and where.


Clerics have own rating (pallys/blackguards are same as Cleric for Aura)
Evil Outsiders have own rating. Evil Non-Clericy have own rating.
Undead (good or evil) have own rating. As do magic items/spell.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectevil.htm

PId6
2010-08-18, 08:40 PM
Right-o. Just like ravages aren't diseases.
No, more like how afflictions aren't diseases and ravages aren't poisons. :smalltongue:

Greenish
2010-08-18, 08:44 PM
No, more like how afflictions aren't diseases and ravages aren't poisons. :smalltongue:You can't blame me! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilCannotComprehendGood)

Lord Vampyre
2010-08-18, 08:45 PM
You know, when I've got a player who likes to use detect evil alot, I tend to eventually throw them into Ravenloft. Generally they either fall from grace, go insane, or both (more often than not its both).

I always feel completely justified in nerfing Detect Evil in Ravenloft.

devinkowalczyk
2010-08-18, 08:46 PM
There is a chart that explains it when you look it up in the 3.5 spells area in the phb

Sir_Elderberry
2010-08-18, 09:12 PM
I think the best way to make Detect Evil work is to either make "evil" far more difficult to get, or far easier.

If neutrality is the default, and being "evil" requires actual evil bad enough that physics sits up and takes notice, then the judge who takes bribes is probably not evil. Evil requires a little metaphysical extra--either you have to willingly align yourself with the Forces of Evil to a large degree, or you have to be made of Evil (undead, fiends, etc), or your mortal acts had better be pretty damn bad. This makes "using detect evil as a killing radar" more viable. It will very rarely work, but your players might find it dramatic when it does ping.

If neutrality is no more common than other alignments, then "evil" could be rampant. Most "evil" people probably don't even realize they are. They're a little callous, prone to violence if chaotic, enjoying power a little too much if lawful, but in their day to day lives? You wouldn't notice most of them. This makes "using detect evil as a killing radar" absolutely useless. That ping means absolutely nothing.

true_shinken
2010-08-18, 09:26 PM
Right-o. Just like ravages aren't diseases.
But they are not. They are poisons.

Lysander
2010-08-18, 10:47 PM
I think the best way to make Detect Evil work is to either make "evil" far more difficult to get, or far easier.

If neutrality is the default, and being "evil" requires actual evil bad enough that physics sits up and takes notice, then the judge who takes bribes is probably not evil. Evil requires a little metaphysical extra--either you have to willingly align yourself with the Forces of Evil to a large degree, or you have to be made of Evil (undead, fiends, etc), or your mortal acts had better be pretty damn bad. This makes "using detect evil as a killing radar" more viable. It will very rarely work, but your players might find it dramatic when it does ping.

If neutrality is no more common than other alignments, then "evil" could be rampant. Most "evil" people probably don't even realize they are. They're a little callous, prone to violence if chaotic, enjoying power a little too much if lawful, but in their day to day lives? You wouldn't notice most of them. This makes "using detect evil as a killing radar" absolutely useless. That ping means absolutely nothing.

Just redefine the spell as "Detect Jerks". This covers a wide range from everyday annoying jerks, to world eating epic demon jerks.

W3bDragon
2010-08-19, 02:13 AM
In my book, the paladin ability of detect evil should be titled more like detect evil intent. This is the way I run it as a DM. Ivan the Terrible is sitting at a bar, with no current evil intentions, he just wants another beer (no ping). Joe Schmoe the dirt farmer wants to upgrade to cow farmer, by stealing his neighbor's best cows, and is willing to do nearly anything to get them (PING!).

That's the way it was with paladins in 2nd Ed AD&D and I always felt that it was much better than giving them detect evil in 3.5. However, as annoying as it might be to have a spell that detects any evil people, especially in wrecking low level mystery/whodunit campaigns, the real problem is if someone has this on all the time. I'm currently DMing a 3.5 game with a warlock PC and I'm finding the constant detect magic/detect invisibility to be rather annoying. Not overly powerful or anything, just disruptive whenever any magic or invisibility is being used as a plot device (which is fairly often).

So I guess the spell can work the way it normally would. Its just that having it on all the time is where it can get people into "he's evil! Kill!" mood.

I also second Starbuck_II on running it by the book. Make it round by round. If anything breaks the caster's concentration, they have to start over. Once I had constant Detect Magic in my game, I stopped treating it as Arcane Sight as I normally do in other games.

Ravens_cry
2010-08-19, 02:29 AM
On the subject of undead and detect evil, I had an idea for unintelligent undead alignment in that instead of being Evil, it would instead reflect the alignment of the one controlling them and if nobody, would revert to True Neutral.
Thoughts?

hamishspence
2010-08-19, 02:49 AM
If neutrality is no more common than other alignments, then "evil" could be rampant. Most "evil" people probably don't even realize they are. They're a little callous, prone to violence if chaotic, enjoying power a little too much if lawful, but in their day to day lives? You wouldn't notice most of them. This makes "using detect evil as a killing radar" absolutely useless. That ping means absolutely nothing.

Eberron actually suggests this as standard. And Faerun (Champions of Ruin) also mentions that many evil characters aren't aware that they are evil, or don't see themselves as evil.


Just redefine the spell as "Detect Jerks". This covers a wide range from everyday annoying jerks, to world eating epic demon jerks.

In Quintessenial Paladin 2, this is called the "Evil Evil Everywhere" variant- and assumes that roughly 1/3 of the human population are evil.

It's also worth remembering that the spell can produce an false evil reading on the following creatures: Clerics of Evil gods, even if the clerics are Neutral, Undead (even if they are Neutral, like Revenants, or Good, like archliches) and anything with the [Evil] subtype, even if it isn't actually evil.

dsmiles
2010-08-19, 04:33 AM
On the subject of undead and detect evil, I had an idea for unintelligent undead alignment in that instead of being Evil, it would instead reflect the alignment of the one controlling them and if nobody, would revert to True Neutral.
Thoughts?
I think we're covering that in another thread. You know, the whole Mindless Undead: Are They Evil? debate

Edhelras
2010-08-19, 05:07 AM
Clerics have own rating (pallys/blackguards are same as Cleric for Aura)
Evil Outsiders have own rating. Evil Non-Clericy have own rating.
Undead (good or evil) have own rating. As do magic items/spell.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectevil.htm

I was uncertain about this: Is the power of the Paladin's aura equal to his Paladin level (just like the Cleric) or is it based on his Hit dice/levels, just like any other good character?

For instance, a lvl 4 Cleric has a Moderate aura, even though he has only 4 Hit dice/levels. But a lvl 4 Fighter (who is good, for instance) has an Aura power of 4, which places him in the Faint aura group. The row in the table that describes the Clerics' special aura power doesn't mention Paladins.
Personally, I would expect Paladins to have the same aura strength as Clerics, but the text in the SRD isn't entirely clear about this:


The power of a paladin’s aura of good (see the detect good spell) is equal to her paladin level.

Because, if you follow me, the actual numerical aura power you use to determine whether an aura is faint, moderate or strong etc in the Table - that number is different depending on whether you are an evil/good creature or whether you're a Cleric. And the table doesn't explicitly state that Paladins are to be calculated as if they were clerics.

To me, Paladins are shining beacons of Good and Law, and even though the Clerics have a much strong and impressive connection to their deity, I find it reasonable that Paladins should radiate Good and Law just as strongly as Clerics do.

As for the Detect Evil ability: I'm not sure whether being able to detect evil INTENT is reasonable or useful. I mean, how many of us don't have evil intent at some time or the other? Being able to detect evil INTENT would be equivalent to mind reading, and possibly be even more powerful than the RAW version of that ability.
I find it quite reasonable that a character who is to that degree dedicated to Good and Law, as the Paladin is, can react almost physically to beings of Evil. We have to remember here that the alignment/morality system in DnD is quite different than in the Real world: Much less shady, much more inherent to you.

In RL, it's just plain stupid to believe that some people are inherently evil or good. That's just a lack of empathy and insight, and an expression of self-righteousness that is in itself somewhat evil. Everybody in the entire world are neutral or whatever, tags like Good or Evil cannot be applied to individual humans. Even for the prototypes, like Hitler or Mother Theresa, you could make very good arguments to nuance that categorization. Good or Evil in RL is always a question of what is your position relative to that person. Admittedly, very few people have been in the relative position as to view Hitler as anything but Evil, but still that doesn't make him objectively Evil. As for Mother Theresa, Gandhi and all the other icons of goodness in the world, there is a steady stream of biographers who are eager to show us that even these saints had their dark sides.

In DnD, it's much simpler. Entire races are designated as "always Chaotic Evil" or "usually Lawful Evil". This allows us to venture out battling orcs and goblins, without worrying too much whether any of them were in fact innocent. If you really were to bring real-life nuances into DnD, you would end up with an extremely role-play heavy, combat-light version of it. Unless you choose to make your character an open egocentric, non-empathic madman ignoring even the thought that his actions may have any moral aspects.

This is why I always emphasize that the basic rulebooks state that the evil alignments are usually reserved for the monster races/hostile NPCs. If we shall have any slaying and blasting and slaughtering and still have fun, we need a way to easily divide creatures into "us" or "them". And if we are playing to feel good and have a nice time, we need to define ourselves as the "good guys", and our victims as "evil". This doesn't make sense, but it helps us have fun and get the game going.

hamishspence
2010-08-19, 05:12 AM
I was uncertain about this: Is the power of the Paladin's aura equal to his Paladin level (just like the Cleric) or is it based on his Hit dice/levels, just like any other good character?

For instance, a lvl 4 Cleric has a Moderate aura, even though he has only 4 Hit dice/levels. But a lvl 4 Fighter (who is good, for instance) has an Aura power of 4, which places him in the Faint aura group. The row in the table that describes the Clerics' special aura power doesn't mention Paladins.
Personally, I would expect Paladins to have the same aura strength as Clerics, but the text in the SRD isn't entirely clear about this:

It does say "other classes may also have an aura strength equal to class level"

The others are all given as "Hit Dice" rather than class level.

And for paladins, it says "equal to paladin level"
(For blackguards, it's "equal to blackguard level + cleric level (if any)).



In DnD, it's much simpler. Entire races are designated as "always Chaotic Evil" or "usually Lawful Evil". This allows us to venture out battling orcs and goblins, without worrying too much whether any of them were in fact innocent. If you really were to bring real-life nuances into DnD, you would end up with an extremely role-play heavy, combat-light version of it. Unless you choose to make your character an open egocentric, non-empathic madman ignoring even the thought that his actions may have any moral aspects.

In 3.0/3.5, it tends to be "usually" and "often" and some books (either MM4 or MM5 for orcs) make it clear that the most common exceptions are (in the case of orcs) not NE, but CN.

BoED, and Eberron, bring a lot of real life nuances into D&D. Some people think they are the better for it.

Edhelras
2010-08-19, 06:16 AM
It does say "other classes may also have an aura strength equal to class level"

The others are all given as "Hit Dice" rather than class level.

And for paladins, it says "equal to paladin level"
(For blackguards, it's "equal to blackguard level + cleric level (if any))..

All right, I guess it's so. Would've been easier for me to understand if they had said that "as for clerics" when describing the Paladin's aura.


In 3.0/3.5, it tends to be "usually" and "often" and some books (either MM4 or MM5 for orcs) make it clear that the most common exceptions are (in the case of orcs) not NE, but CN.

BoED, and Eberron, bring a lot of real life nuances into D&D. Some people think they are the better for it.

By all means, nothing wrong with non-evil monsters and NPCs. But to me there is a fundamental mis-understanding among many gamers: How can you unite your wish for a "realistic" alignment system (lots of nuances and ambiguity) with your wish to hacking&slashing adventurer-style through session after session, barely with any appropriate regret or angst, barely with any consequences other than the occasional prison-time to practice your escape routine?

And for all those (I admit I don't think very highly of them for that aspect, although they're fine gentlemen in any other aspect) who pride themselves of "playing evil" and how good they are at it: I congratulate those few who do that convincingly, but more often I feel they're just being plain chaotic and undecided on the good-evil axis: They do what they feel is cool or appropriate, they like to be the "evil mastermind" (yeah, really Nale-ish), but neither they nor the DM nor the NPCs will really take the consequences. The whole game is about the players behind the PCs having fun, and if consequence comes in the way of that, it must be suspended.
Personally, I think that most "evil" players are simply regarding the Good-Evil axis entirely, which is of course OK if they're having a good time. But then it's kind of strange to still be using good-evil descriptors in class requirements, spells and other combat stuff.
I like the alignment system very much, to let myself make-believe that I'm Good and they're Evil, to escape from the greyness of everyday life.

Phew. Well, the relevance to the topic is that I think one has to accept that "Good" and "Evil" are something like physical properties to creatures, that they don't necessarily make "sense" (no more than being able blind someone simply by say out loud "BLIND!") and that in a world were usually "we" are Good and "they" are Evil, it's appropriate that the most eager ones on the Good and Evil side can "detect" these properties as per the spells/abilities.

hamishspence
2010-08-19, 06:24 AM
D&D doesn't follow physics exactly anyway. Instead of real elements, according to DMG, everything is made up of positive and negative energy, earth, air, fire, and water.

PHB calls Good and Evil (and possibly Law and Chaos) the "forces that define the cosmos"- so, if we see them as forces, or energies, then it may make sense for someone (like an LN cleric of an LE god) to "detect as evil" even though they aren't- because they are imbued with "the Force that is Evil" and their actual alignment is their moral outlook, whereas the alignment they detect as, is limited by this Force.

People say things like "it's immoral for a deity to take away your powers for committing an evil act, when that evil act was necessary to save many people"- the point is, that it's not primarily the deity that takes away your powers. Especially if you have no deity.

By committing the act, you are automatically "de-attuning" yourself from the force that grants you the powers- that force is often not sentient, like "Good" and has no choice in the matter.

Shademan
2010-08-19, 06:36 AM
D&D doesn't follow physics exactly anyway. Instead of real elements, according to DMG, everything is made up of positive and negative energy, earth, air, fire, and water.

PHB calls Good and Evil (and possibly Law and Chaos) the "forces that define the cosmos"- so, if we see them as forces, or energies, then it may make sense for someone (like an LN cleric of an LE god) to "detect as evil" even though they aren't- because they are imbued with "the Force that is Evil" and their actual alignment is their moral outlook, whereas the alignment they detect as, is limited by this Force.

People say things like "it's immoral for a deity to take away your powers for committing an evil act, when that evil act was necessary to save many people"- the point is, that it's not primarily the deity that takes away your powers. Especially if you have no deity.

By committing the act, you are automatically "de-attuning" yourself from the force that grants you the powers- that force is often not sentient, like "Good" and has no choice in the matter.

that...made alot of sense.:smallconfused: bravo.

Edhelras
2010-08-19, 06:38 AM
PHB calls Good and Evil (and possibly Law and Chaos) the "forces that define the cosmos"- so, if we see them as forces, or energies, then it may make sense for someone (like an LN cleric of an LE god) to "detect as evil" even though they aren't- because they are imbued with "the Force that is Evil" and their actual alignment is their moral outlook, whereas the alignment they detect as, is limited by this Force.

If you're a LN cleric of a LE god - I would assume then that you're particularly dedicated to the "Lawful" aspects of that god or theology, and that the good-evil axis isn't that important to you. You have no strong desire to be goody-goody, whereas you don't share your deity's (or fellow clergymen's) tendence to do evil acts.

For instance if you're a LN Cleric of Bane: You may believe strongly in the need for firmness and strict rules, a strict hierarchy, to keep order in society, everyone should know his place, follow the chain of command. You accept freely that violence may be needed to keep order, but you don't relish in it, and you're not particularly prone to doing evil acts yourself. You might even show kindness, if it is appropriate and within the rules of law.

Yet, you should still be tainted by the fact that you follow an Evil deity, since indeed the power of your aura stems from your connection with that deity.

hamishspence
2010-08-19, 06:39 AM
that...made alot of sense.:smallconfused: bravo.

I like thinking about alignment in general, and the alignment splatbooks in particular. Especially when they make it more nuanced and flexible than the PHB does.

Eberron, Heroes of Horror, FC2, Savage Species, Exemplars of Evil, Champions of Ruin and Champions of Valor, BoED and BoVD, all have interesting things to say.

Though Easydamus is (for me) a pretty interesting source too.


If you're a LN cleric of a LE god - I would assume then that you're particularly dedicated to the "Lawful" aspects of that god or theology, and that the good-evil axis isn't that important to you. You have no strong desire to be goody-goody, whereas you don't share your deity's (or fellow clergymen's) tendence to do evil acts.

For instance if you're a LN Cleric of Bane: You may believe strongly in the need for firmness and strict rules, a strict hierarchy, to keep order in society, everyone should know his place, follow the chain of command. You accept freely that violence may be needed to keep order, but you don't relish in it, and you're not particularly prone to doing evil acts yourself. You might even show kindness, if it is appropriate and within the rules of law.

Yet, you should still be tainted by the fact that you follow an Evil deity, since indeed the power of your aura stems from your connection with that deity.

The problem with that, is that if you assume "evil acts" are shorthand for "acts that only an evil person would commit regularly" then things like Rebuke Undead, for an undead-fighting cleric who rebukes undead so he can kill them, will eventually make for an evil alignment.

Heroes of Horror at least makes allowance for, if the person commits minor evil acts, but has overall good goals, them having a Neutral alignment and keeping it. This is referred to as "a flexible Neutral".

So, using the Heroes of Horror take, the LN cleric of Bane would be heroic and brave, committing evil acts like summoning fiends, animating dead, or rebuking undead, solely in the cause of protecting others.

Xefas
2010-08-19, 07:05 AM
Just to throw this out there, related to the "How should it work?" question in the title:

In the setting of my last D&D game, there was a growing conspiracy among the divine having to do with the Detect [Alignment] series of spells. Basically, it all started when one God wanted to engender a little extra faith and vigilance, and maybe a little extra self-esteem in his followers. So, since all Detect Evil spells and class features were being granted by him to his followers, he just tampered with them a bit on the way down.

The tampered Detect Evil just detected everyone who wasn't a member of that God's faith as Evil. Conversely, any Detect Good spells he granted always pinged his followers as Good, and no-one else. So now they could be absolutely sure that everything they were doing was good and righteous and everyone else in the world were just fiends waiting to back-stab them, unless they could "save" them by converting them to the faith, wherein they would then Detect as Good.

Eventually, the other Gods got jealous of how the first God's worshipers had become so devout and zealous with very little work put in by the God. So, they too made the same adjustments.

Over time, Protection from [Alignment] just became Protection From People Who Think Differently, and so on, until all of the alignment spells were made generic. Alignment restrictions came tumbling down as no one could keep it straight who was what anymore.

In the end, people were forced to distinguish from one another by their personality and new multi-faceted complex systems of behavior that weren't capable of being summed up in two-word phrases.

[the below wasn't part of the setting]

And then, in a Shyamalanian twist, we realize that the whole story was being read by a father to his son in modern-day New York City, explaining to his child about why he shouldn't judge people before he gets to know them, with the added implied Aesop about religious zealotry leading to suffering.

CoffeeIncluded
2010-08-19, 09:11 AM
In Aequar, my comic setting, Detect Evil detects evil outsiders, undead, people with evil intent, and people who are EVIL.