D&D 5E Zone of Truth Interrogations

[FreeTheSlaves]

Yep, our main campaign city has a ZoT protocol requiring involvement of at least 2 of 3: the main church, the crown and the wizard organization.

ZoT by itself won't convict or exonerate, just evidence.

There's an tri-inquisitor (counts as 1 member of any of the 3) that oversees the whole thing. Giving cute and otherwise unsatisfactory answers means more time in the cells waiting for the next ZoT.

(One of the PCs got himself arrested for murder. Was innocent, gave convoluted too-clever-by-half answers, languished briefly in jail before the baron pulled strings to discreetly release him. Was told "Hurry up with the damn mission, man!")

 

[Umbran]

If you're clever and convincing, you can get away with a lot by speaking in non sequiturs and at cross purposes.

I think that's bending the intent of the spell a bit too far, into actually lying.

 

[Dross]

From DnD Beyond:

You create a magical zone that guards against deception in a 15-foot-radius sphere centered on a point of your choice within range. Until the spell ends, a creature that enters the spell's area for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there must make a Charisma saving throw. On a failed save, a creature can't speak a deliberate lie while in the radius. You know whether each creature succeeds or fails on its saving throw.

An affected creature is aware of the spell and can thus avoid answering questions to which it would normally respond with a lie. Such a creature can be evasive in its answers as long as it remains within the boundaries of the truth.

I guess the question becomes, at what stage does evasiveness (non-sequitur, cross purpose) become a lie?

"What is your master like?"
"Simon is a wise and kindly old man. Many times he's given me good advice when I was at a loss. "

Can this be a lie? technically this us the truth, but isn't about the master, as the question that was asked.
but since the reply noted someone specifically "Is Simon the Master?" or similar would clear that up strait away.

I'd learn towards (with maybe a large grey area): if an answer (regardless of how many sentences used to answer the question) leave only an erroneous conclusion, then its a lie.

 

[see]

Yeah, sure, if you're dealing with careless, inexperienced users of zone of truth (like PCs) you can do some cute tricks with indirection.

On the other hand, a skilled and knowledgeable interrogator won't get tripped up that way easily.

Note, one of the darker implications of zone of truth is that it means torture can reliably extract reliable information. The practical problem with torture is that while it's good at making people talk, it's bad at making them tell the truth; they just say whatever will make the pain stop. The practical problem with zone of truth is that, while it makes sure they can't lie, it can't make them talk. The combination?

Welcome to the interrogation chambers of Mulmaster, where the the inquisitor has long experience asking well-worded questions, the torturer makes sure you will talk, and the zone of truth makes sure you don't lie. And at the end, a caster hits you with detect thoughts just before the inquisitor asks, "What did you not reveal in this interrogation session that you're most desperate to keep undiscovered?"

 

[humble minion]

The thing with Zone of Truth is that it doesn't compel the interrogation target to speak, or even that anything they say be relevant to the question asked. That makes it less than useful as an interrogation tool against a mulishly silent and hostile target unless you also load up on Detect Thoughts, a whole lot of Command spells ("Answer!") etc (or, as previously mentioned, torture, but if your PCs regularly torture people then I want no part of your game anyway). However, its advantage is that it's divinatory rather than compulsive and intrusive like lots of the enchantment alternatives, so it's more likely to find its way into 'good'-based fantasy legal systems.

To be honest, a cleverly phrased Suggestion is probably better for the interrogation job, outside a courtroom setting. Suggestion, when used well, will make the target WANT to tell you everything, even the stuff you wouldn't have thought to ask about.

Where Zone of Truth shines is in diplomatic negotiations between untrusting partners. You bring your cleric, I'll bring mine, we both have them cast Zone of Truth, we both agree to not resist the spell (willingly fail our saves), which our respective clerics can verify, then we can both negotiate knowing the other is telling the truth.