Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mysteries, Zone of Truth, and Savvy Players?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 8008248" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>Ok, so obviously the guilty party (and at least 1 other) have a ring of mind shielding.</p><p></p><p>It is invisible, and renders them immune to the zone of truth. They appear to be effected, but are not.</p><p></p><p>These rings are also immune to detect magic and see invisibility while the bearer is alive. Because otherwise they wouldn't be very good, now would they.</p><p></p><p>So the party or parties who did it, well, they lie. The people who didn't do it, tell the truth. The PCs have to figure out who is lieing and who is telling the truth.</p><p></p><p>There should be inconsistencies between the stories. The guilty party should have an inconsistency, the other wearer should have one (but is otherwise innocent of THIS crime). Oh, a 3rd person should have a ring, but tell the truth anyhow; these are criminals, after all.</p><p></p><p>Mix in at least one illusion that an innocent person saw. Say, person X saw an illusion of person Y doing something clearly suspicious in hindsight. And person Y maintains their innocence under the zone of truth. Neither have the ring that lets them lie.</p><p></p><p>This might be pretty cruel.</p><p></p><p>9 angry criminals:</p><p></p><p>A: The guilty party. Can lie freely. Makes a mistake at some point, states something inconsistent with Cs and Ys statements.</p><p>B: Can also lie freely. Has something else to hide, lies. Makes a mistake, states something inconsistent with D and Y's statements.</p><p>C: Can also lie freely, but chooses not to. One of their statements is very slightly inconsistent with one of A's statements, and saw Y when X saw the illusion.</p><p>D: Cannot lie. One of their statements is inconsistent with one of Bs and Xs.</p><p>E: Cannot lie. Is clueless. Like, out to lunch.</p><p>X: Saw an illusion of Y doing something suspicious. Believes it was Y. One of their claims disagrees with one of Xs, due to error.</p><p>Y: Maintains they did not do the action, but doesn't know C saw them at the same time, so alibi is poor. One of their statements is inconsistent with one of As and Bs.</p><p>Z: Cannot lie. Has and believes in a conspiracy theory, and will claim its tenants as truth under the zone. "I think I saw a shadow gnome. They grab things and frame people you know." Thinks the shadow gnomes are working in cahoots with A.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 8008248, member: 72555"] Ok, so obviously the guilty party (and at least 1 other) have a ring of mind shielding. It is invisible, and renders them immune to the zone of truth. They appear to be effected, but are not. These rings are also immune to detect magic and see invisibility while the bearer is alive. Because otherwise they wouldn't be very good, now would they. So the party or parties who did it, well, they lie. The people who didn't do it, tell the truth. The PCs have to figure out who is lieing and who is telling the truth. There should be inconsistencies between the stories. The guilty party should have an inconsistency, the other wearer should have one (but is otherwise innocent of THIS crime). Oh, a 3rd person should have a ring, but tell the truth anyhow; these are criminals, after all. Mix in at least one illusion that an innocent person saw. Say, person X saw an illusion of person Y doing something clearly suspicious in hindsight. And person Y maintains their innocence under the zone of truth. Neither have the ring that lets them lie. This might be pretty cruel. 9 angry criminals: A: The guilty party. Can lie freely. Makes a mistake at some point, states something inconsistent with Cs and Ys statements. B: Can also lie freely. Has something else to hide, lies. Makes a mistake, states something inconsistent with D and Y's statements. C: Can also lie freely, but chooses not to. One of their statements is very slightly inconsistent with one of A's statements, and saw Y when X saw the illusion. D: Cannot lie. One of their statements is inconsistent with one of Bs and Xs. E: Cannot lie. Is clueless. Like, out to lunch. X: Saw an illusion of Y doing something suspicious. Believes it was Y. One of their claims disagrees with one of Xs, due to error. Y: Maintains they did not do the action, but doesn't know C saw them at the same time, so alibi is poor. One of their statements is inconsistent with one of As and Bs. Z: Cannot lie. Has and believes in a conspiracy theory, and will claim its tenants as truth under the zone. "I think I saw a shadow gnome. They grab things and frame people you know." Thinks the shadow gnomes are working in cahoots with A. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mysteries, Zone of Truth, and Savvy Players?
Top