Detect Evil => Detect Corruption

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'm of two minds on this. For most fantasy roleplay, I agree that detect evil is a real problem, and that alignment based magic as a whole causes problems.

At the same time, I'm enamored with the idea of a world where morality, the very concepts of good and evil, are a tangible force. They aren't subjective. An evil person may not belief that he's doing good, but may actually want to do evil for evil's sake.

But this in not a concept that should be applied to the default assumptions of the game. Making it an optional module seems the right idea.

 

[The Shadow]

I've thought of Detect Evil as Detect Taint for a long time.

As for the other alignment detects, I'm rather ambivalent about them.

 

[darkwing]

I hate magic replacing the role of detective work. Keep the detect spells out. If you want to know if someone is up to something, spy on them, ask around town, whatever. Don't replace that with a magic spell.

 

[trancejeremy]

Instead of adding more rules/complications, it's better to reduce them.

How would that work in this case? Well, change the alignment system back to the original one. L-N-C.

Or just ratchet back the power - does it detect the evil that lurks in the hearts of men or just supernatural evil?

And of course, the other way is to just construct the adventure/scenario/plot by taking it into account. Like there would only be one evil person in the area? So he's automatically the suspect? Read Agatha Christie, everyone is usually the suspect.

Red herrings are also good. Maybe the person isn't evil, they just happen to be wearing something that is.

 

[mkill]

Instead of adding more rules/complications, it's better to reduce them.

The KISS principle is important. That's why I want this ability to be nothing more than a Wisdom ability score check that only the Paladin gets to roll. The rules text would be nothing more than a rule of thumb for the DM to set the difficulty.
(Undead army - easily detect from a mile away; Succubus in Disguise - very hard)

 

[the Jester]

While I agree that detecting evil is an iconic and flavorful ability for Paladins, the way it worked was destructive. It's just way too precise and way too broad. It destroys classic plots like "find the murderer" and "demonic infestation in the church".

Only partially true. "Find the murderer" doesn't fold up so easily if not all evil npcs are murderers and not all murderers are evil, for instance.

 

[mkill]

Only partially true. "Find the murderer" doesn't fold up so easily if not all evil npcs are murderers and not all murderers are evil, for instance.

As DM, I want the rules to support me in telling a compelling story. I don't want to spend my time bending and breaking the plot to accomodate for PC abilities that were unintentionally designed to powerful. Design the rules in a way that anticipates or avoids such problems, or give the DM tools to deal with them.

5E is a good chance to look over all abilities that can have huge effect on plots, such as scrying, divination, speaking with dead, raising the dead, teleportation and planar travel, disguise, mind reading and mental domination. (Did I miss any?)

Each of them should be available from a certain level, but they also need chance of failure and countermeasures within the rules that allow a DM to preserve his plot without making him look like he is sabotaging PC abilities to railroad.

If the PCs find an item on the dead high priest that masked his fall into evil and corruption, and that item is known to exist, it looks like the NPC foiled the PCs, not the DM. Compare to "you can't Detect Evil here" "Why?" "Because I say so".

Different example: In an Eberron campaign we had a big plot arc with a number of NPCs being Changelings. My PC was a changeling too. Now, it turns out that Changelings don't get means to notice their own kind in the rules (such as a bonus to Spot or Sense Motive). The changeling NPCs had plot on their side, so they were able to identify my PC if they wanted, but my PC could not notice another Changeling better than other PCs. A playtest could have anticipated that.

 

[The Human Target]

"Detect Plot" is good if it is the opposite of "run around aimlessly and miss what the DM prepared".

"Detect Plot" is bad if it means "solve all secrets in 5 minutes the DM wanted to reveal piece by piece over a 2 year campaign".

This is why it's a passive ability: If the DM wants to keep a secret, he'll just set the DC so high that the Paladin will fail all checks (and doesn't even know he's rolling). The DM can be intentionally vague to set a theme and give hints, but not give it all away at once.

If an ability exists in the game that the DM has to out and out cheat to circumvent sometimes, it feels like it shouldn't be there at all to me.

I know where you are coming from but I got the opposite vibe; I thought "detect corruption" more flavourful and much less invasive in terms of plot. Can you expand upon your thoughts here?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Oh I agree, it is more flavourful and less invasive. I just think its still a bit too invasive.

I'd be more inclined to the idea of detect evil it it had more limitations, and required some sort of roll. Or if it was just some sort of class feature that worked differently but preserves the idea. (ie paladins receive a +5 bonus to Insight/Wisdom/Seanse Motive etc to determine when an NPC is lying about committing a murder, theft, blah blah blah.)

I dunno really, it just sits poorly with me. But then I'm kinda pro removing or heavily revamping how even the social skills work, let alone social spells.

 

[The Human Target]

Only partially true. "Find the murderer" doesn't fold up so easily if not all evil npcs are murderers and not all murderers are evil, for instance.

These are exactly the kind of alignment fistfights I was happy 4e mostly did away with.

 

[Gamer McSmartypants]

...