CSI: Waterdeep

[Nifft]

Does he see the unmasked assassin? Something else? I believe the spell would reveal the assassin, since what you are wearing shouldn't fool the spell as I understand it.

"Fooling the spell" and "revealing the identity" are two different statements. I'd say you can see the Assassin as though you were looking at him through the invisible Scry sensor. Thus, the mask still prevents seeing his identity, but you get to watch him in it for a while, and maybe you can get some other clues about who he is.

Otherwise, does Scry make everyone naked? Wizards wouldn't leave their rooms much after 7th level.

-- N

 

[Hypersmurf]

If you look at the names alphabetically (and meta-game like an S.O.B.), you're going to come to the wrong conclusion...

Hang on... metagaming? I'm not sure how the knowledge that you're playing a game helps you decipher Commune responses?

I'd say you can see the Assassin as though you were looking at him through the invisible Scry sensor.

I'm assuming he means he casts Scry some time later, when the assassin has already taken his mask off.

Even ninjas don't wear their masks twenty-four/seven

-Hyp.

 

[Dirigible]

Even ninjas don't wear their masks twenty-four/seven

Pshhh. Real Ninjae do.

 

[Nifft]

Hang on... metagaming? I'm not sure how the knowledge that you're playing a game helps you decipher Commune responses?

Wrong game... in this case, it's the PC that's meta-gaming the Deity's answers. ("Unclear" must mean "True, but I just can't tell you!" Ah-ha!)

-- N, whose Ninja all own Hats of Disguise

 

[Allanon]

CSI:Sigil

...
[Edit: Oh yeah, there is a 1st edition adventure along this line that was published in Dragon magazine, "Death of an Arch-mage". An excellent resource for this type of discussion.]

Which Dragon Magazine would that be? Cause this idea has sparked a lot of ideas.

I'm running a Planescape campaign and the problem with Commune would be easily solved by having the murder take place in Sigil. With the Lady of Pain keeping out the gods I'll just rule that communes and the like will shed no light on any situation in Sigil cause the gods can't look there.

An ex-dustman could handle the postmorum exam of the body and I have a player who is Harmonium. Mingle with the Mercy Killers...mmmm .
I could have the victim be an important high up Factol... The sensate factol. Who apparantly commited suicide, just as he was about to reveal something important to the PC's. Did he really kill himself for the 'sensation' or is there a dark conspiracy at work. I 'like' this. Very much

 

[Hypersmurf]

Wrong game... in this case, it's the PC that's meta-gaming the Deity's answers. ("Unclear" must mean "True, but I just can't tell you!" Ah-ha!)

That's not metagaming, that's drawing a conclusion. It's not guaranteed to be correct, as you noted above - the "Unclear" might be because the God didn't notice, or it might be because the guy's using a Mind Blank but didn't commit the crime (where the answer is "Unclear" instead of "No", rather than instead of "Yes").

-- N, whose Ninja all own Hats of Disguise

Which brings up another question. If the assassin isn't masked, but is Hat of Disguised as the mayor... does Scrying on "the guy I saw earlier" give a different result to Scrying on "the mayor"?

-Hyp.

 

[Nifft]

That's not metagaming, that's drawing a conclusion.

Po-tay-toe, po-tah-toe. The conclusion is based on assumptions about the "rules" of the "Commune" game, IMHO.

The point is: you can be made to draw the wrong conclusion if the God answers a certain way, and the text of the spell tries to rule that out. I think we can agree on that even if we call the underlying mechanism of self-deception different things.

Which brings up another question. If the assassin isn't masked, but is Hat of Disguised as the mayor... does Scrying on "the guy I saw earlier" give a different result to Scrying on "the mayor"?

I'd say that you will scry on the correct person, but you have "no knowlege" of them as though you'd never met -- you've certainly never seen the person. That's a hefty bonus on the Will save.

-- N

 

[Hypersmurf]

Po-tay-toe, po-tah-toe. The conclusion is based on assumptions about the "rules" of the "Commune" game, IMHO.

The point is: you can be made to draw the wrong conclusion if the God answers a certain way, and the text of the spell tries to rule that out. I think we can agree on that even if we call the underlying mechanism of self-deception different things.

I still don't agree.

If the answer to one of your "Did this guy do it?" questions is "Yes", you've got your guy. If it's "No", you can eliminate him as the killer. If it's "Unclear", he's still on your list as a suspect. Maybe it's Unclear 'cos he's Mind Blanked. Maybe it's Unclear 'cos the god wasn't paying attention. Maybe he's guilty, maybe he isn't.

You don't draw conclusions from the Unclears; you draw them from the Yes and Nos.

-Hyp.

 

[Byrons_Ghost]

I actually remember seeing this in the FAQ, because similar situations have occurred in my game. The most current FAQ has a question on p. 50 about scy spells detecting people who have polymorphed. The FAQ basically says that scry tunes into a person's identity, not their appearance. Scrying an enemy of yours who is impersonating someone else will reveal that your enemy has changed their appearance.

So, in the case of the masked killer, the spellcaster can focus in on "that guy who shot at me." I'd call this second-hand knowledge at best, so the roll would be higher. Also, in 3.5 (don't remember 3.0), if someone makes their save against your scry spell, you can't attempt to scry them again for the next 24 hours.

Of course, any assassin who succeeds at one or two jobs should use the funds for an amulet of nondetection ASAP.

Other tidbits... I remember the "Death of an Arch-Mage" adventure. I don't remember what issue it was in, though. I do know that the premise of the adventure (which was an RPGA tournament-style module) was that local laws prohibited the use of magic to find criminals or convict people, thus the PCs had to do regular investigative work. This was mostly interviewing suspects and establishing alibis, IIRC.

 

[Nifft]

"Oh God of Information - did Suspect A commit the murder?"
No.
"Did Suspect B commit the murder?"
No.
"Did Suspect C commit the murder?"
Unclear.
"Gotcha."

...

You don't draw conclusions from the Unclears; you draw them from the yes and Nos.

Perhaps you can forgive me for assuming you thought otherwise.

Anyway, if you're the sort of person who won't read "gotcha" into "unclear", then the obvious answers will actually work. Your deity should know what kind of person you are, at least to enough of a degree to answer usefully. The spell specifically says that it will give more than a Y, N or U if such an answer would be misleading.

-- N