Good party needs to "extract" information

[Kahuna Burger]

Since none of us speak Chondathan (with or without a Russian accent), we don't know what any of those are. But if we never confuse the real Chondathan pairs, and sometimes confuse the English pairs, then on average, we're getting the same amount of confusion.

Unless you all start playing in Chondathan... what else would you recommend?

-Hyp.

um, his recomendation was obvious - don't play silly word games with divinaton spells, particularly (as seems popular) speak with dead. If you really LIKE silly word games with divinations, you can stretch a justification as you just have, but unless you have a character with Perform Puns, I don't know why this is a pertinent aspect of the game.

Nothing about "brief, cryptic and repeditive" really gives strong justification for word games. Incomplete answers sure, like "Where is the villain's castle?"-"by the lake" "How do we get there?"-"go north" fine. But not "On top of its foundation" or "you could walk" respectivly. Unless they clarified it to, "The corpse responds like a smart assed 12 year old digging himself in deeper in the principal's office."

The language issue is also relevant for rules like the "only one word for command" bit. I allow a fair amount of flexibility on command, allowing one simple command to be given (no direct or indirect objects, but if a concept is simple enough to have a single word for it in any language, you can use it... hey, common is, well, common right? should have lots of simple language solutions from all sorts of languages, yes? )

Kahuna burger

 

[Hypersmurf]

The language issue is also relevant for rules like the "only one word for command" bit. I allow a fair amount of flexibility on command, allowing one simple command to be given (no direct or indirect objects, but if a concept is simple enough to have a single word for it in any language, you can use it... hey, common is, well, common right? should have lots of simple language solutions from all sorts of languages, yes? )

About as many as English, I'd say.

Did you notice that's the language all the example one-word commands are in?

-Hyp.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

About as many as English, I'd say.

Did you notice that's the language all the example one-word commands are in?

-Hyp.

yeah, the ones it got from german... which iirc has a one word command for "commit suicide"

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I agree with this 100%. Playing word games with Divinations is almost always just the DM being tiresome. I don't think that there's any possible question that can be asked to which a smart aleck answer can't be given. Any DM who wants to can prevent any number of divinations and questions from working by utilizing that method. And because of that, the point that the DM ceases his inane word game and actually gives a useful answer is bound to be arbitrary. It makes divination spells a matter of how much of a pain the DM wants to be.

As Kahuna Burger says, incomplete and cryptic answers are fine. "Go north" would be an acceptable answer as would "by the lake" (provided there was only one lake at the time the suject was at the location). Both of these answers allow more specific follow up questions--"to other players: to go north we have to go through the Rakers mountains. To the corpse: Which pass do you use to get to the secret fortress from here?" or "What is the name of the lake?" If the answer is "try walking" or "atop its foundation", there is no question less vulnerable to such chikanery so further questioning is arbitrated by the whim of the DM rather than the skillfulness of the questioning.

um, his recomendation was obvious - don't play silly word games with divinaton spells, particularly (as seems popular) speak with dead. If you really LIKE silly word games with divinations, you can stretch a justification as you just have, but unless you have a character with Perform Puns, I don't know why this is a pertinent aspect of the game.

Nothing about "brief, cryptic and repeditive" really gives strong justification for word games. Incomplete answers sure, like "Where is the villain's castle?"-"by the lake" "How do we get there?"-"go north" fine. But not "On top of its foundation" or "you could walk" respectivly. Unless they clarified it to, "The corpse responds like a smart assed 12 year old digging himself in deeper in the principal's office."

 

[Quasqueton]

As to people who have accused me of being anal, the orriginal example was a person whose cleric had taken the domains of Law and Good. To repeat myself, I take domain choice VERY seriously. If you think you can't maintain both, you better not choose both, because its more than an overall description at that point - I'd hold them to paladinesque standards.

I did maintain the Law and Good ideals. You seem to be the only one in this discussion that thinks my "solution" was wrong in regards to LG. My DM had no problem with it. My fellow Players had no problem with it. Several people in this thread have no problem with it.

As for claiming its a "impossible situation" by my judgement, this entire thread was started on how to get information as a good party, with the assumption being that death threats and tourture would be out. Several good ideas have been put forth, and similar to what someone opined with speak with dead difficulties, obtaining information from an uncooperative prisoner while maintaining a good allignment and behaviour is supposed to be hard. Deal with it. (if people were saying my stance makes it impossible for a lawful good character to deal with survivors/prisoners at all, thats also false, but it is certainly true that you have to plan ahead a little and think about the issue. Field justice is also not easy, though magic has the capacity to make it a lot easier.)

So, I'll ask you again: what would you suggest as the correct/best LG solution to the delimma?

Would it make a difference if the captive (soon to be executed) offered info in exchange for his life, without the LG making the suggestion? Can a LG agree to such an arrangement?

Quasqueton

 

[Altalazar]

To get back to extracting information - I wonder the best medieval means of making the "fingernails on a chalkboard" sound - like five pairs of scissors at once.

We got discussing this at work yesterday - not in a gaming context - but it was universally agreed that if that were used for torture, we'd all be talking right quick. But then I might have to rule that as a CE act...

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I did maintain the Law and Good ideals. You seem to be the only one in this discussion that thinks my "solution" was wrong in regards to LG. My DM had no problem with it. My fellow Players had no problem with it. Several people in this thread have no problem with it.

and yet you won't let the subject drop no matter how many times I offer to... odd that. If you are so convinced of your own rightness, why do you need me to agree with you? I'm quite accustomed to holding my own opinion against the majority. Truths, objective or philosophical, are not open to vote. The philosophical ones, however are quite open to leaving it be.

I disagree with you on this subject. It is well thought through and I understand every point you have tried to make, and every point that has been brought up, including the non sequitors and why they were thrown in to confuse the subject, and I still disagree with you. And I don't mind. And I don't mind not changing your mind. And I'm willing to leave it be at that. Can you just be comfortable knowing someone disagrees with you? Who will likely never run your game and thus not bother you?

So, I'll ask you again: what would you suggest as the correct/best LG solution to the delimma?

why does it matter? I don't have to put forth my "solution" to have allignment issues with yours. And I don't care what your opinion of my solution would be.

But, if you have a burning curiosity unrelated to the former subject, lets see...

On the subject of aquiring information, actions to reduce saves, and several spells such as detect lies, detect thoughts, charm, zone of truth, command, geas, etc are all more effective, and more trustworthy than threats or torture could ever be, and I think allignment is irrelevant to that. Were I concerned with gathering information from unwilling subjects, I'd lay in a supply of scroll of such at as high a caster level as reasonable and possibly some of the poisons that do wisdom damage.

As for field justice, I would not let it come to the point of "death or freedom". If my character actually had the authority (from a recognized legal or religious body, not just her own righteousness/arrogence) to execute prisoners, and this prisoner was definitly deserving of death, he would get it. If there was some wiggle room in sentancing, or my character was not comfortable executing helpless prisoners, he would be given the option of allowing the casting of whatever spell or spells neccassary to prevent him from being a threat or burden until he could be brought to a settled area capable of more nuanced judgement and punishment. (Baleful polymorph is a fun one for that...) If the prisoner voluteered info, he would still be subject to many of the same spells as above, and his cooperation could be considered by the eventual sentancing authority, but would not go so far as going free, unless the prisoner really hadn't committed serious crimes in the first place.

I think that about covers it. And just so I don't have to say it later, you've made it so clear we are on completely different pages on the subjects of law, good, punishment and mercy, that I'm not concerned whether you like my solution or not. Just so you know before you spend too much time disecting it for me.

Kahuna burger

 

[jmucchiello]

To get back to extracting information - I wonder the best medieval means of making the "fingernails on a chalkboard" sound - like five pairs of scissors at once.

This returns to my unresponded to point of "why is psychological torture not evil if physical torture is evil, especially in a world where instant healing is but a potion away?"

Thanks to Kahuna Burger and Elder-Basilisk for responding essentially as I would have to the language subthread.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I'm not going to comment on the Law/Good argument. I already contributed all I care to contribute to that, and I'm perfectly happy to take Kahuna's advice and leave it be. He is absolutely correct that it's a philosophical question where every answer is the correct one.

Regarding language and Speak With Dead I agree with Hyp. The spell isn't meant to provide easy answers. It's meant to provide cryptic hints. That said, I tend to think of the interaction as indirect. The spell doesn't provide a direct link to the knowledge contained in the dead body, like a computer database. Rather, the body is a semi-conscious entity speaking a "language of the dead" which the magic of the spell then translates into a language of the living.

That being said, I try to imagine two people using Babblefish (is that spelled correctly?) to communicate. Lots of words and phrases are going to be slightly...off. Now, with effort and concentration, the general meaning of the information can be guessed at. But it won't be a simple task.

For instance, imagine an evil wizard who's placed his tower next to a large, clear lake. He's also made his tower invisible so that it cannot be seen, except when viewed through the facets of a yellow diamond. The heroes fight with some of the wizard's minions. Afterwards, they decide to cast Speak with Dead to try and learn where the wizard's tower is located.

Cleric: Where is the wizard's tower?

Body: At the edge of the crystal that moves.

Cleric: The crystal that moves? What is the crystal that moves?

Body: A mirror. A world.

Cleric: Argh! Okay, how can we find the wizard's tower?

Body: The tower rests beyond a curtain of sky.

Cleric: A curtain of sky? Curtain...curtain. It must be hidden, obviously. How can we get past the curtain of sky?

Body: A diamond can tear the curtain, but only one that has touched the sun.

*spell ends*

Cleric: Hmmm. Okay then, I'm off to the merchant's district to speak with a jeweler. Perhaps I can get a hold of a diamond that has "touched the sun." You guys try and figure out what the crystal that moves could be while I'm gone...
_________________________________

Okay, that example was off the cuff, but you can see my point. I want Speak With Dead to be a useful spell, absolutely, but neither should it allow the party to avoid thinking altogether. The spell can be useful without being straightforward.

 

[Altalazar]

This returns to my unresponded to point of "why is psychological torture not evil if physical torture is evil, especially in a world where instant healing is but a potion away?"

Yes, pscyological torture - which can be just as bad. Like casting divination spells to find out what someone most fears (say, "rats") and then attaching their head to a cage that you let in rats, so they can see them coming at them.

Or the power of illusion! Make an illusion of their loved ones as prisoners, under torture. Tell them that you will continue to torture their loved ones, perhaps even to death, unless they talk. Heck, you could even threaten to torture them to death, then to raise them from the dead and start all over again, until they talk. Since it is all an illusion, it boils down to psychological torture - is it evil? Seems like it is, though I would argue it is much less so than if you actually did physically harm their loved ones.