Are Commoners now immune to Detect Evil?

[BryonD]

So good creatures can generate an evil aura, too?

So you are not even trying to present reasonable arguments now....

I am not interchanging. Both being evil and how many HD something has are important to the spell as written. You are interpeting into my words something that is not there, the idea that I am measuring how "deeply evil" something is.

You flat out talked about degrees of evilness.

All it really says is that really bad evil has lots of hit dice. Lesser evil is... not that evil.

I didn't interpret anything. I reported what was wrong with that quote, as well as you other irrelevant to the sell function tangents about Aunt Janie’s brain, etc...

You, on the other hand, are trying to justify the idea that the detect evil spell fundamentally measures hit dice.

I'm not trying to "justify" anything. I'm simply reporting the fact of it.

I'm going to put forward the idea that killing and eating another human being, except as a singular act performed in a state of mental incapacity or as an act of survival, means your alignment is evil.

I agree with this point. However, both the PF book AND both 3X PHs CLEARLY show that it has ZERO impact on your aura strength.

So really strong auras are not bad? I should not feel threatened by the presence of a strong, evil aura?

He might just pick your pocket, while the 1 HD evil thing next door plots how to eradicate all life in the universe. Aura strength has no relationship to depth of evilness. Show me a quote from a 3E PH that says otherwise.

How is that a mistake? What does strong aura mean apart from containing whatever presence we are calling evil? Imbued with evil simply means it has collected this tangible evil. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, or you are misunderstanding me, but to me "imbued with evil" and "has a strong aura" are both ways of saying that something contains the element Evil.

Quite simply, my point is that gaining HD and thus moving up to a higher aura strength has no connection to the "amount of evil" (a meaningless term) a creature has. You could have 4 creatures with perfectly identical moral depravity and 4 completely different aura strengths, under the 3X rules. Show me a quote from a 3E PH that says otherwise.

So it does. That makes the lack of auras even more incomprehensible. I can tell if someone with 5 HD just walked through the room, but I can't tell if I'm standing right next to a Jack the Ripper?

I comprehend it. You can tell is a detectable aura has been there. An aura that can not be detected (or lack of aura, whatever) remains undetectable.


Please show me a quote from 3X that states a stronger aura means a deeper evilness. If you can not do that, then your whole line of reasoning is over.

 

[BryonD]

This is incorrect. An evil creature is a creature that is evil. There is no other definition. You seem to be confusing this with the Evil Subtype, which is actually not referenced by the spell at all.

You are correct here.
But the critically important point to the issue is that 3E makes no distinction between "evil" pickpockets and "EVIL" baby eaters. Again, it is evil [yes/no], if yes then how powerful is the creature.

As you say, there is no other definition. An evil pickpocket = evil [yes] and an EVIL baby eater = the exact same evil [yes]. It COMPLETELY makes sense that the DM and players would agree that the later is vastly more morally vacant. But smite evil hits them both the same. Holy word hits them both the same. Detect Evil sees them both as evil exactly the same and once that fact is fact is establishes, reports an aura strength based on HD. The 3X mechanics don't have more evil or less evil variables.

 

[Salthorae]

I think the critical factor that seems to be missing in this debate is this:

1st Round: Presence or absence of evil

Therefore if you had in a room an 11HD evil Thief and Jack the Ripper (4HD Commoner) and a goblin that eats childrens brains out of Aunt Jeanie's Skull (3HD Goblin), you will know that there is evil present in your 60' cone.

2nd Round: Number of evil auras (...) in the area and the power of the strongest aura

In the 2nd round you will only get 1 aura for the #, because only the 11HD thief actually has an aura of evil, the other 2 don't.

If the 11HD thief wasn't present, the Paladin would know there is evil in the room, but wouldn't be able to find a creature with an aura of evil...which would then require them to use *gasp* other tools at their disposal, such as Sense Motive, and Diplomacy to gather information about people in the bar, and observe behaivors to see if anyone looks suspicious, and maybe follow them out as they go to serial kill and/or eat from a skull etc.

I think this is great because it takes away some of the Paladin's crutch and lets them get back to creative thinking and role playing...

Alternately if a DM wanted to rule by DM fiat/rule 0 that the "amount" and/or "depth" of evil a creature has done (serial killing/eating from your aunt's skull) vs 11HD pickpocket (NE just wants gp and wealth) has a bearing on whether a creature gets an aura or not, then the DM is free to say that a PC detects an aura if he/she wants.

 

[SSquirrel]

Unless the Pf bestiary has altered the fiendish template, fiendish dire rats do not generate an evil aura. Curiously, if summoned, they do.

This is because Fiendish Dire Rats could have ben raised in captivity, fiendish by their nature, the genes passed down from their parents. SUMMONED Fiendish Dire Rats all come from the Abyss directly and, as such, are vile outsiders who ping as pure evil, ready for the smiting.

Mostly kidding around here, but seems like something that if my DM said I would agree was plausible.

I am an environmental engineer. I deal with analytical data constantly. It is very common for me to look at water data that has been tested for benzene, for example. I will never ever get a result that says there was no benzene in the water. That answer is not possible. A typical "not detected" result is < 1 microgram per liter. It may be that there truly was not a single molecule of benzene in the sample. But it also may be that there was 0.868 micrograms of benzene in every liter of water present. That I deal with reporting limits all the time may be part of why I find it so easy to wrap my head around a less than reported positive value.

I have not seen anything that says why evil must be detectable down to infinitesimal levels. If anything, following you argument to its logical conclusion should say that aura power should not exist and detect evil is an up/down yes/no for anything and everything.

Car analogy time!! Your car has a sensor (Detect Evil) that will tell you when your 10 gallon tank has less than 2 gallons of gasoline (5HD Evil) remaining. When your 10 gallon tank is at 7 gallons it doesn't say "Hey buddy, you're almost empty", b/c it's not at the point that it is supposed to warn you. [yes the gas tank is inversely scaled so a full tank would be 0 level commoner]

Therefore if you had in a room an 11HD evil Thief and Jack the Ripper (4HD Commoner) and a goblin that eats childrens brains out of Aunt Jeanie's Skull (3HD Goblin), you will know that there is evil present in your 60' cone.

What if we didn't like Aunt Jeanie and thought she was a bad person? Maybe since it's HER beanhead bowl it isn't quite so bad? Is a 16 year old kid who shoots up his school more evil than Palpatine ordering the Jedi be wiped out (note the careful real world politics dodge). Palpatine certainly has more hit dice, so the kid might not show on the Detect Evil radar.

The extra lines Mathius brought up could render it all useless anyway, but the wide ranging interpretations of things that are, by their own nature, rather subjective are likely part of what led them to finally unhitch alignment from the game mechanics. Many alignment arguements I've ben involved with over the last 20+ years involve one or both parties saying something to the effect of "Of course it happens like X, that's obvious. I don't see how anyone could think otherwise". Were some of the DMs and players I played with just stubborn or close-minded? Probably, but this is why we have rules. They have to have something as the line in the sand and they apparently chose 5HD. It could have been 4HD. It could have been 10HD. Arbitrary decision is arbitrary.

 

[pawsplay]

Please indicated to me what book and page the words "evil alignment = evil creature" in 3.5. And please quote the exact text as written please. Until you do this the above statement is meaningless and will summarily be ignored.

Ok.

Alignment: Alignment represents a creature's basic moral and ethical attitude. Alignment has two components: one describing whether a creature is lawful, neutral, or chaotic, followed by another that describes whether a character is good, neutral, or evil. Alignments are usually abbreviated using the first letter of each alignment component, such as LN for lawful neutral or CE for chaotic evil. Creatures that are neutral in both components are denoted by a single “N.”

 

[pawsplay]

So you are not even trying to present reasonable arguments now....

I cannot help but notice you have refused to answer what should be a really simple question. So once again, do you wish to state that an aura has nothing to do with how evil a creature is, only how powerful they are?

Originally Posted by BryonD
However, just as in 3E, the aura strength is a function NOT of how evil the target is, but of their personal power. You are falsely relating aura strength with degree of moral decay.

Now, I may be misunderstanding you, but it appears you are stating that how evil someone is has nothing to do with their aura strength. Being evil and aura strength are not related. Is that what you are saying?

 

[pawsplay]

I think the critical factor that seems to be missing in this debate is this:

Therefore if you had in a room an 11HD evil Thief and Jack the Ripper (4HD Commoner) and a goblin that eats childrens brains out of Aunt Jeanie's Skull (3HD Goblin), you will know that there is evil present in your 60' cone.

In the 2nd round you will only get 1 aura for the #, because only the 11HD thief actually has an aura of evil, the other 2 don't.

That's very interesting and could very well be true. Unfortunately, it's really ambiguous what is meant by "Presence or absence of evil." Especially since we know detect evil isn't necessarily what it says on the tine.

I think this is great because it takes away some of the Paladin's crutch and lets them get back to creative thinking and role playing...

If this has been a problem in your games, you have my sympathies. Personally, I have never found the paladin's ability to be a crutch or an obstacle to creative thinking and role playing. As a DM, I have always viewed detect evil as a tool for creating ethical dillemas. Detect evil is not a crutch, and it does not simplify a paladin's life. Detect evil, for an evil character, might be a crutch, but for a paladin, it is a responsibility. And not an easy one.

 

[Starbuck_II]

Please indicated to me what book and page the words "evil alignment = evil creature" in 3.5. And please quote the exact text as written please. Until you do this the above statement is meaningless and will summarily be ignored.

Creature is defined on page 306 of the PHB. Alignment is page 104 of PHB.

Fact: 3.5 offers no leeway as far as intention is concered. THEREFORE only beings with the "Creature" moniker can be detected by the spell. It says nowhere in the 3.5 materials that commoners can be given the creature label (please cite book, page number and exact text if I am wrong).

Yes it does read the PHB again.
Look, you haven't read it in a while; admit it.
I'm actually surprised at how well they define things in the glossary.

 

[Mathius]

Creature is defined on page 306 of the PHB. Alignment is page 104 of PHB.

The creature aspect I will grant you (Though, IMO I do not think that a commoner can be lumped in with the likes of Dragons and Demon by simply being "humanoid", but the text supports you, so I will not debate it as it is facts we are looking for). Good call.

But where in the PHB do the words "Evil intent = Evil Creature" SPECIFICALLY for the purposes of Detect Evil appear? The alignment section does not cover this. I have read it backward and forward. Evil Intention, Intention, or even Evil is not covered in the glossary, either.

The fact is that the Pathfinder spell Detect Evil, AS WRITTEN, functions in a far better and broader capacity than the spell As WRITTEN in the PHB.

And a side not to you, Pawsplay: If you had been as thorough as Starbuck II in your counterarguments, your arguement would have held a lot more water.

 

[Mathius]

Ok.

And that empty BS storm was supposed to do . . . what, exactly? Does that useless tidbit of random crap in any way shape or form state that for the purposes of Detect Evil, evil intention - evil creature?

No. No it doesn't. I never saw the word INTENTION, anywhere in there.

Try harder. You're a big kid. I know you can do it.