Detect Evil/Good/Law/Chaos

[javijuji]

I think our group has this line of abilities misinterpreted. Can you detect X on a character that has no aura (not a pally/cleric/outsider)?

Cause as we play it its basically an alignment radar that pops up on whoever you use it. Even with the first 6 seconds of channeling is enough to know there is a "Bad" person in front of you. Are we using it wrong?

[Morcleon]

I think our group has this line of abilities misinterpreted. Can you detect X on a character that has no aura (not a pally/cleric/outsider)?

Cause as we play it its basically an alignment radar that pops up on whoever you use it. Even with the first 6 seconds of channeling is enough to know there is a "Bad" person in front of you. Are we using it wrong?

Everyone has an aura. Paladins, clerics and outsiders just happen to have auras more powerful than everyone else. So yes, you're doing it right.

[Psyren]

They work on any creature, not just ones with a divine aura or alignment-based abilities of some kind. This is why Belkar has to hide his alignment from Miko in the comic despite being a ranger(/barbarian.)

Being a cleric/undead/etc. just affects how powerful the aura is relative to the target's level/HD. If you're scanning, say, an evil commoner and you get an Overwhelming aura, then you can deduce he's either pretty high level or that he's not what he seems to be (demon in disguise for instance.)

[javijuji]

The problem we tend to run into is every character with a strong alingment and purpose (paladins and clerics mostly) will use detect X when they meet someone and quite possibly end up in conflict if evil or good or whatever is detected. Not to mention since everyone uses detect X so much in our sessions it has started to be interpreted as an insult to start casting this on someone. Specially if he is familiar with the spell.

[Sir_Thaddeus]

Not to mention since everyone uses detect X so much in our sessions it has started to be interpreted as an insult to start casting this on someone. Specially if he is familiar with the spell.

I believe there are multiple feats/other methods that allow the concealment of spellcasting. If your players are worried about it being seen as an insult, they can easily make it so it isn't seen at all.

Not sure how to address your other concerns, though. Other than to remind Detect Evil-spamming characters that just because a person registers as "evil" doesn't mean it would be Good to attack said person outright.

[TuggyNE]

The problem we tend to run into is every character with a strong alingment and purpose (paladins and clerics mostly) will use detect X when they meet someone and quite possibly end up in conflict if evil or good or whatever is detected. Not to mention since everyone uses detect X so much in our sessions it has started to be interpreted as an insult to start casting this on someone. Specially if he is familiar with the spell.

Yeah, that's a bad idea; it's possible to be Evil without really deserving immediate death, and in fact several books specifically call out that detect-and-smite with no other basis is, if not actually Evil itself, at least definitely not Good.

[Psyren]

Do you have paladins doing it? It's an SLA for them, meaning no gestures and no verbal components - they can do it without anyone knowing unless they're actively scanning for magic or something. (Don't let OotS fool you, paladins don't have to run around yelling "Detect Evil!" or even "Smite Evil!" to use their powers.)

[Kelb_Panthera]

The problem we tend to run into is every character with a strong alingment and purpose (paladins and clerics mostly) will use detect X when they meet someone and quite possibly end up in conflict if evil or good or whatever is detected. Not to mention since everyone uses detect X so much in our sessions it has started to be interpreted as an insult to start casting this on someone. Specially if he is familiar with the spell.

A person's alignment tells you very little about the person themselves. It's really not enough to base any kind of decision on except maybe to keep a careful eye on someone who detects opposite your own ideas.

Smite-on-sight is a quick road to a fall. BoED makes it very clear that while violence isn't evil in and of itself, it has to be used with discrimination and applied only when appropriate. If a paladin smites everyone that detects as evil he -will- hit someone who's evil in thought but has never actually committed an evil deed and he'll fall on the spot for having meted out an unjust punishment and enacting indiscriminate violence.

A mild aura of evil really only tells you that the guy sporting it is probably not a nice person. You've got a little more leeway with a moderate aura and smite-on-sight against strong or overwhelmingly evil auras is probably not going to get you in too much hot water.

Also note this: humans don't tend toward any alignment. This means approximately 1/3rd of humanity is evil. How useful is it to know if someone's evil if 1 out of every 3 people will detect as such.

[ArcturusV]

Of course people in your game SHOULD recognize spells like Detect ____, Discern Lies, etc, and consider it an insult.

It'd be like in real life if I just walked up to you, started talking for 2 minutes. And suddenly I said, "I'm going to need to see 3 forms of valid ID, at least two of which are photo, your birth certificate, and I'm going to hook you up to this polygraph machine while I ask you deeply personal questions about your thoughts and beliefs. And I'm going to do this whether you like it or not."

That's basically what you're saying when you Detect ____, Zone of Truth, etc, on someone. Insulted is the least of it. It's really enough of a social faux pa, that any use of it should basically turn any target into Unfriendly at the very least, possibly Hostile if they recognize it. Possibly get you punched in the nose if they can get away with it. At the very least make them walk off and say "screw you!" and swear to never deal with you again.

Then again I TEND to apply the same sort of results to Psionics when someone catches you doing things like Telepathy. I just can't see a situation where someone is going, "Oh, you're rummaging around in my mind without asking me... that's cool."

And this is similar territory with Alignment Detect, Truth Forcing, etc.

[Duke of Urrel]

...just because a person registers as "evil" doesn't mean it would be Good to attack said person outright.

I agree with Sir_Thaddeus. Human beings in particular have a mutable alignment. They are highly changeable, and therefore always potentially redeemable. The purpose of a Good creature is ideally to help such wavering souls move toward Goodness – not to kill everybody who falls short and let the gods sort them out.

Of course, it is often more important to stop an Evil creature from doing evil, using lethal force if necessary, than it is to keep the creature alive in the dim hope that it will someday develop a conscience. And many Evil creatures other than Evil humans are less mutable and more unchangeably, irredeemably Evil. So it's okay to kill them.

I also agree with ArcturusV that the Detect Alignment spells are somewhat insulting. It is an invasion of personal privacy, certainly. Moreover, even paladins sometimes have reason to keep their own alignment a secret, which is why the Undetectable Alignment spell is on their class list.

Several comments have alluded to the fact that everybody has an alignment aura. I agree, and I have a house rule that underscores this fact. (Stop reading right here if you're not interested. If you are, here goes...)

If you use two Detect Alignment spells of opposite alignment, my house rule allows you to perceive not only both of these alignments, but also the Neutral ones that lie in between. For example, if you cast both Detect Evil and Detect Good upon yourself, you can detect not only Evil auras and Good auras, but also auras that are Neutral with respect to Good and Evil. (You still have to concentrate on these spells to become able to see alignment auras, but you can concentrate on both of them at once.) So basically, every creature's aura registers as something, unless your double Divination is blocked (by some Abjuration), in which case you are fully aware of the fact, because the warded creature seems to have no alignment aura at all.

Similarly, if you cast any three Detect Alignment spells upon yourself, you become able (following my house rule) not only to detect all alignment auras that are not in some way blocked from your view, but also to distinguish three of them as complex rather than simple alignments (such as Lawful-Evil, Lawful-Neutral, and Lawful-Good, rather than simply Lawful, Evil, or Good). With all four Detect Alignment spells in effect at once, you can distinguish every one of the nine alignments from every other, provided that no Abjuration stands in the way.

My house rule makes the Misdirection spell – if it succeeds – more effective than the Undetectable Alignment spell or even the Nondetection spell, because Misdirection can make you appear to have an alignment that is not your own. So with this spell, you can hide your own alignment without seeming to do so.

[Duke of Urrel]

One more thing. When you use the Detect Chaos/Evil/Good/Law spell, it pays to be subtle. Try not to make it obvious that you're scanning other people's alignment auras. If they don't notice that you're invading their privacy, they have no reason to get angry.

If I'm interpreting the statistics block of the Detect Alignment spells correctly, these spells do not in any way alert the individual being scanned, because they are not "Target" spells. A Detect Alignment spell is an "Area" spell whose effect emanates from the spellcaster. It should usually be an easy matter simply not to let a creature know that you're scoping out its psyche with the help of one of these spells. Of course, they can find out what you're doing by scanning you with the Detect Magic spell – but now you can argue that they've invaded your privacy, too...

[ArcturusV]

Except the spell has a verbal and somatic component. So it's kinda hard to hide it when you gotta chant something, waggle fingers, and show off your Holy Symbol. If they're trained in Spellcraft they'd probably take a shot at rolling to find out what's what. Might even succeed. Even if they're not... they're going to know SOMETHING is up. And you saying, "Umm... nothing... I didn't cast anything... promise!" probably isn't going to fly and instantly put people on the unfriendly footing and highly suspicious.

Least I'd be highly suspicious in said circumstances.

[Psyren]

If you're a paladin though, there's no indication that you've done anything because it's an SLA for them. So they can walk around scanning everyone they meet without tipping them off.

[ArcturusV]

True. But most Paladin players I've run have the subtly of a brick through a plate glass window and whenever they detect evil couldn't resist going, "OMG! You're EVIL! HAVE AT YOU FIEND!" and trying to smite them.

Not that they COULDN'T get away with it. Just they never do by the typical temperament of Paladin players I've seen. But it is one nice boost Paladins have. If only most of them didn't play like raging sociopaths with Justice issues.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Attaching silent spell and concealing your hand gestures isn't hard, and its something that any inquisitorial cleric, who likes to spam detect <alignment>, would do well to do.

Smite-on-sight paladins annoy me to no end. They make the rest of us that like the class and know how to handle it well look bad.

I understand that for some groups that's perfectly appropriate behavior but, IMO, playing a paladin to his wisdom score is much more entertaining.

[Pickford]

Except the spell has a verbal and somatic component. So it's kinda hard to hide it when you gotta chant something, waggle fingers, and show off your Holy Symbol. If they're trained in Spellcraft they'd probably take a shot at rolling to find out what's what. Might even succeed. Even if they're not... they're going to know SOMETHING is up. And you saying, "Umm... nothing... I didn't cast anything... promise!" probably isn't going to fly and instantly put people on the unfriendly footing and highly suspicious.

Least I'd be highly suspicious in said circumstances.

If you don't have training in spellcraft (the required check to comprehend what a spell is) you won't even know what's going on.

If there are no overt effects (i.e. Arcane Sight where the character's eyes start glowing blue) then you would have literally no idea what is going on.

This is one of those areas where Player knowledge and Character knowledge need to be separated through suspension of disbelief.

It would be like walking down the road as a human and seeing a pair of elves standing on the side chatting in elvish. If you don't speak it, it's just gibberish to you.

I have met alot of players who have difficulty with this (at least one who rotated in to GM a session) and treat any spellcasting as instantly hostile, even when there's no possibility that an NPC could comprehend what was going on in order to take offense.

further, if someone has a spell cast on them, and there aren't big flashing lights, and they succeed their will save all they feel is a tingle. That doesn't tell them what happened though.

Skill trick from Complete Scoundrel:
"Conceal Spellcasting
You can cast a spell without revealing that you are doing so. Make a Sleight of Hand check as part of the action used to cast the spell, opposed by the Spot checks of onlookers. If you are successful, an observer can't tell that you're casting a spell. That observer cannot make an attack of opportunity against you for casting, nor can it attempt to counter your spell."

And if you want to just mess with other casters, use false theurgy.

[ArcturusV]

Presuming though a village of any real size. And the standard DnD world though, most any NPC should have experience to recognize Spelljibberish as Spelljibberish when they see it. Even if their only real experience with Magic is seeing the local priest Hallow the cemetry, or Cure Minor Wounds on locals who suffered accidents, or a local druid using his magic to calm hostile animals, etc. Magic is so much a part of the setting it's hard to imagine any given NPC has never seen a spell cast before and could go, "Hmm... there's magic about."

While not all spells ARE hostile. Generally if someone casts a spell and doesn't tell you, you'd probably presume it's hostile. Logically. Normally. Fear of the unknown and all, and people who hide their intent.

It'd be like if I walked up to a guy with an exposed knife held in front of me. Most would probably presume I was threatening to use it if I didn't say anything. But if it was really benign "Oh, you got something stuck in your hair, I'mma hack it off", I would have told them before I pulled out the knife and advanced on them.

The language example isn't really comparable. Though typically most people seem to have a reflexive "Something is up" feeling when suddenly people start talking another language in front of them for no apparent reason.

[Pickford]

Presuming though a village of any real size. And the standard DnD world though, most any NPC should have experience to recognize Spelljibberish as Spelljibberish when they see it. Even if their only real experience with Magic is seeing the local priest Hallow the cemetry, or Cure Minor Wounds on locals who suffered accidents, or a local druid using his magic to calm hostile animals, etc. Magic is so much a part of the setting it's hard to imagine any given NPC has never seen a spell cast before and could go, "Hmm... there's magic about."

While not all spells ARE hostile. Generally if someone casts a spell and doesn't tell you, you'd probably presume it's hostile. Logically. Normally. Fear of the unknown and all, and people who hide their intent.

It'd be like if I walked up to a guy with an exposed knife held in front of me. Most would probably presume I was threatening to use it if I didn't say anything. But if it was really benign "Oh, you got something stuck in your hair, I'mma hack it off", I would have told them before I pulled out the knife and advanced on them.

The language example isn't really comparable. Though typically most people seem to have a reflexive "Something is up" feeling when suddenly people start talking another language in front of them for no apparent reason.

Not if they don't have any ranks in spellcraft, which is only a class skill for casters. And since characters routinely carry weaponry around villages, it's no more threatening than that. If a villager is really freaked out about what may be magic or may just be a lunatic ranting, they would just as easily refuse to speak to or serve someone who walks into an inn with a greatsword strapped to their back.

Edit: You're suffering from the inability to separate what 'you' know and what the characters know.

This is more easily solved by spellcasters just saying "I say some words and make a few gestures." If the NPC (or a PC) wants to know what was going on...let them ask. Then lie to them.

Further edit: What most people have or haven't seen really depends on the campaign setting. I would expect the average peasant to only see magic used for entertainment purposes. (i.e. using Prestidigitation to entertain and make money)

[ArcturusV]

Neither of us are really WRONG here. But you seem to misunderstand.

You need Spellcraft to Identify WHICH spell is cast. Or recognize an effect as a particular spell. It doesn't mean you need ranks in Spellcraft just to be aware that magic exists and that people typically chant like that, waggle fingers, and use foci. You don't know what spell is cast. But you definitely know SOMETHING was cast when that happens. And generally if someone is casting a helpful spell, or at least one that isn't going to bother you... they are probably going to warn you what's about to happen. More like "Oh, let me heal you!" and then cast Cure Light Wounds. Obviously casting a spell, then not telling anyone, or giving a warning? That's not Metagaming or OOC Knowledge to think they'd be paranoid. In a world where even the most piddling of spellcasters can effectively remove most of your free will with but a single action? That's just healthy. And rational.

Sure, you throw in the example of a Madman. Might happen. Then again considering there are sorcerers who just spontaneously get magic spells at random points in their life, and they can probably decimate most villages even at low level in a series of bloody nightly rampages... they probably don't put up with that sort of behavior too well. No telling when the "Madman" might get touched and suddenly be able to throw around Fireballs.

It's not really "OOC Knowledge" or "Metagaming". It's just the realities of about 95% of DnD settings. Magic is common place enough it's part of pretty much everyone's life. Bards sing tales of vile Necromancers, powerful wizards chucking fireballs, enchanters who can tame even the most savage and cruel dragon with just a chant and a few gestures. While they might not recognize the particular spell by the gestures and words used... what you're suggesting is akin to anyone without Craft (Calligraphy) being unable to notice that someone is writing down a note on a piece of paper. Even if the writing was blatantly done in front of them.

[Pickford]

Neither of us are really WRONG here. But you seem to misunderstand.

You need Spellcraft to Identify WHICH spell is cast. Or recognize an effect as a particular spell. It doesn't mean you need ranks in Spellcraft just to be aware that magic exists and that people typically chant like that, waggle fingers, and use foci. You don't know what spell is cast. But you definitely know SOMETHING was cast when that happens. And generally if someone is casting a helpful spell, or at least one that isn't going to bother you... they are probably going to warn you what's about to happen. More like "Oh, let me heal you!" and then cast Cure Light Wounds. Obviously casting a spell, then not telling anyone, or giving a warning? That's not Metagaming or OOC Knowledge to think they'd be paranoid. In a world where even the most piddling of spellcasters can effectively remove most of your free will with but a single action? That's just healthy. And rational.

Sure, you throw in the example of a Madman. Might happen. Then again considering there are sorcerers who just spontaneously get magic spells at random points in their life, and they can probably decimate most villages even at low level in a series of bloody nightly rampages... they probably don't put up with that sort of behavior too well. No telling when the "Madman" might get touched and suddenly be able to throw around Fireballs.

It's not really "OOC Knowledge" or "Metagaming". It's just the realities of about 95% of DnD settings. Magic is common place enough it's part of pretty much everyone's life. Bards sing tales of vile Necromancers, powerful wizards chucking fireballs, enchanters who can tame even the most savage and cruel dragon with just a chant and a few gestures. While they might not recognize the particular spell by the gestures and words used... what you're suggesting is akin to anyone without Craft (Calligraphy) being unable to notice that someone is writing down a note on a piece of paper. Even if the writing was blatantly done in front of them.

You're also assuming it was done 'to' the character. The character has basically no way of knowing and unless the PC is just standing in front of them doing it, they don't have any realistic way of knowing who did it. In either case it clearly violates social norms to just go harass someone.

Most divinations don't actually target anyone, so they won't feel anything. It is also pretty ballsy for a peasant to go harass someone who can use magic. Also, if magic is as common as you're presupposing (again, campaign dependent) then casting a spell in public wouldn't be any cause for alarm at all. Happens every day.

[The Random NPC]

I agree, and I have a house rule that underscores this fact. (Stop reading right here if you're not interested. If you are, here goes...)

If you use two Detect Alignment spells of opposite alignment, my house rule allows you to perceive not only both of these alignments, but also the Neutral ones that lie in between. For example, if you cast both Detect Evil and Detect Good upon yourself, you can detect not only Evil auras and Good auras, but also auras that are Neutral with respect to Good and Evil. (You still have to concentrate on these spells to become able to see alignment auras, but you can concentrate on both of them at once.) So basically, every creature's aura registers as something, unless your double Divination is blocked (by some Abjuration), in which case you are fully aware of the fact, because the warded creature seems to have no alignment aura at all.

Similarly, if you cast any three Detect Alignment spells upon yourself, you become able (following my house rule) not only to detect all alignment auras that are not in some way blocked from your view, but also to distinguish three of them as complex rather than simple alignments (such as Lawful-Evil, Lawful-Neutral, and Lawful-Good, rather than simply Lawful, Evil, or Good). With all four Detect Alignment spells in effect at once, you can distinguish every one of the nine alignments from every other, provided that no Abjuration stands in the way.

My house rule makes the Misdirection spell – if it succeeds – more effective than the Undetectable Alignment spell or even the Nondetection spell, because Misdirection can make you appear to have an alignment that is not your own. So with this spell, you can hide your own alignment without seeming to do so.

Except for the concentrating on more than one spell at a time (depending on how you do it) that isn't a house rule. That's explicitly how it works. In the first round, you detect the presence or absence of X, so if you can detect both Good and Evil, and one guy detects as not Evil and not Good, you know he's Neutral.

[Andezzar]

Except the spell has a verbal and somatic component. So it's kinda hard to hide it when you gotta chant something, waggle fingers, and show off your Holy Symbol. What you do is, you cast the spell(s) out of sight and out of earshot and go to the people you want to detect. The spells last for 10 min/CL.

I don't know any rule that concentration is particularly detectable.

[Duke of Urrel]

Except for the concentrating on more than one spell at a time (depending on how you do it) that isn't a house rule. That's explicitly how it works. In the first round, you detect the presence or absence of X, so if you can detect both Good and Evil, and one guy detects as not Evil and not Good, you know he's Neutral.

My rules go a little beyond that. If you are capable of detecting both Good and Evil, my rules make Neutral creatures identifiable not by the absence of any aura at all, but by the presence of a third kind of aura – one with a "neutral" color, so to speak. This means that with two opposite Detect Alignment spells in operation at once, you can distinguish a purely Neutral druid (say) from somebody who is using the Undetectable Alignment spell. The former has a detectable aura, whereas the latter has none.

The "how" of concentrating on more than one Detect Alignment spell is simple by my house rule – you concentrate on both spells, on all three spells, or on all four spells at once. As you do this, you become able to focus your sense of the presence or absence of each type of aura, so that after one round you can sense of their number and the greatest power, and after two rounds you can see auras as visible haloes, as the spell description says.