Good party needs to "extract" information

[Nifft]

IMC, the party captured a goblin were-rat recently. They brought him to the Church of Raelor the LG Sun God for questioning. The Church Inquisitors did what they could to elicit information, but unfortunately the goblin died. So, they called in a Cleric from the LN Moon Goddess of Death, and questioned the goblin's corpse, which was more informative.

Lessons Learned:
1) It's okay to kill goblins, because IMC they are all Evil.
2) It's sometimes even okay to "ask questions later".
3) If it's working for a Demon, it's probably best to kill it.

However, 'Detect Thoughts' would have to be my favored tool for non-lethal interrogation.

-- N

 

[MerakSpielman]

So, they called in a Cleric from the LN Moon Goddess of Death, and questioned the goblin's corpse, which was more informative.

Interesting. Why is the corpse more talkative? When my players tried Speak with Dead on a fallen foe, they basically got, "Pbbbbtttt!" (<-- raspberry noise) "Why should I answer your questions? What can you do to me? I'm already dead! HAHAHA!"

 

[Hypersmurf]

Interesting. Why is the corpse more talkative? When my players tried Speak with Dead on a fallen foe, they basically got, "Pbbbbtttt!" (<-- raspberry noise) "Why should I answer your questions? What can you do to me? I'm already dead! HAHAHA!"

"This spell does not let you actually speak to the person (whose soul has departed). It instead draws on the imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse."

If the corpse fails a Will Save (if its alignment differs from yours), it will answer. The answers are usually brief, cryptic, and repetitive, but it won't refuse to answer at all.

-Hyp.

 

[MerakSpielman]

"imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse..."

That's a vague phrase. I'm not sure exactly what it means, to be quite frank.

 

[Hypersmurf]

"imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse..."

That's a vague phrase. I'm not sure exactly what it means, to be quite frank.

The goblin knows the password is "Ramshorn".

You ask the goblin "What's the password?", and he says "It's 'Crionofenarr'".

But if you kill the goblin and use Speak With Dead, the spell draws upon the knowledge, not the personality, of the goblin to answer the question.

Now, it might take you too literally, and answer "What's the password?" with "It's the means by which you can gain access to the stronghold". But it won't actually lie to you like the goblin might.

-Hyp.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

That's one of the tactics my Lawful Good cleric uses as well. Except that he, usually adds: "I'll get the information out of you living or dead. So, I'll get my answers either way. The only choice you have to decide is whether you'd like to be alive or dead when I get the info."

Here is how I interrogated prisoners as a LG cleric (Law and Good domains) on two seperate occasions:

In both instances, the prisoners were known to be evil in intent and deed. They were captured by force, not because they surrendered.

With no ranks in bluff or intimidate, my cleric told the prisoners straight up -- their actions and souls were worthy of a death sentence. We were no where near civilization, so as a cleric of Law and Good, it was my duty to exact the punishment for their recent deeds. The only thing they could do at this point to be spared death, was to tell us what we want to know. If they didn't talk, I'd execute them immediately.

I was not bluffing, nor particularly trying to intimidate them. I was telling them exactly what I was going to do -- and I *was* going to do it. The DM only needed to roll/decide for them to determine that I was serious and honest in my claim. I would indeed kill or release them depending on their cooperation.

In one case, the prisoner talked. In the other case, the prisoner refused.

The first was released in the wilderness (no weapons or armor or other equipment) to live or die by his skill and the will of the gods. The second was justly executed.

This would work even better if you have more than one prisoner at a time. The second gets to see the first executed, just as you said. The second will probably talk.

Quasqueton

 

[Norfleet]

"imprinted knowledge stored in the corpse..."

That's a vague phrase. I'm not sure exactly what it means, to be quite frank.

Well, in my campaigns, "Speak with Dead" is a post-mortem brainscan interface by which the caster is able to access the memory imprinted into the brain-analogue of the deceased. As a rule, in order for this to work, the subject's brain or nervous system analogue must be mostly intact.

No disintegration.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Here is how I interrogated prisoners as a LG cleric (Law and Good domains) on two seperate occasions:

... so as a cleric of Law and Good, it was my duty to exact the punishment for their recent deeds. The only thing they could do at this point to be spared death, was to tell us what we want to know. If they didn't talk, I'd execute them immediately.

I'm not usually an alignment stickler, but I don't see it. If you kill someone because they don't help you, its not good. If you free someone who deserved punishement because they did you one favor, its not lawful... If I were your DM, you would probably lose one of your domains - I can possibly reconcile this with one or another but not both... especially not domain level allignment loyalty.

I was doubly shocked to hear that more than one LG cleric considered this an acceptable tactic.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, in my campaigns, "Speak with Dead" is a post-mortem brainscan interface by which the caster is able to access the memory imprinted into the brain-analogue of the deceased. As a rule, in order for this to work, the subject's brain or nervous system analogue must be mostly intact.

No disintegration.

[BobaFett]As you wish.[/BobaFett]

That's reasonably well-supported by the spell text.

"You can cast this spell on a corpse that has been deceased for any amount of time, but the body must be mostly intact to be able to respond. A damaged corpse may be able to give partial answers or partially correct answers, but it must at least have a mouth in order to speak at all."

It doesn't specify brain, but it does say "mostly intact".

-Hyp.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Now, it might take you too literally, and answer "What's the password?" with "It's the means by which you can gain access to the stronghold". But it won't actually lie to you like the goblin might.

-Hyp.

If you want to keep your players and their respect, I'd strongly advise against this tactic. The DM who used this sort of childish runaround taught me only that divination spells were non functioning in his campaign - and that he was a "play against the players" DM. I'd rather he'd told me that in advance, and I would have learned earlier to follow along like a good little sheep until he let us get to the fight.

Kahuna Burger