Crimson Longinus
Legend
Sure. But having magic that utterly trivialises common problems is unfun. Magical lie detector simply makes huge amount of potentially interesting things impossible.
D&D 5E No Equivalent of Detect/Discern Lies in 5E?
See my above post. Knowing someone lied doesn't actually tell you that much, especially if you already suspect them of, you know, lying.
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
I have a player in my campaign that's been running since 2006 who has never believed a single word an NPC has ever said. Depending on the system, he's used Detect Evil, Wisdom checks or Insight rolls constantly.
Discern Lies is a bad spell, IMO. It basically works as a cheat code for the players without offering anything meaningful to the rest of the game.
In contrast, Zone of Truth is interesting. There's a physical space it takes place in. The person it's cast on knows it's been cast on them and can adjust accordingly. The spell can serve a variety of roles in the game, including for ceremonies, trials, interrogations, etc.
A trickster NPC can still get away with some things, by technically giving truthful answers, but avoiding discussing things that would get them in real trouble. At that point, the ball is back in the players' court and outwitting them involves things other than a single saving throw roll one time.
It's a lot more interesting to have Zone of Truth in the game, rather than the very bland "just give me the answers" Discern Lies.
Discern Lies is a bad spell, IMO. It basically works as a cheat code for the players without offering anything meaningful to the rest of the game.
In contrast, Zone of Truth is interesting. There's a physical space it takes place in. The person it's cast on knows it's been cast on them and can adjust accordingly. The spell can serve a variety of roles in the game, including for ceremonies, trials, interrogations, etc.
A trickster NPC can still get away with some things, by technically giving truthful answers, but avoiding discussing things that would get them in real trouble. At that point, the ball is back in the players' court and outwitting them involves things other than a single saving throw roll one time.
It's a lot more interesting to have Zone of Truth in the game, rather than the very bland "just give me the answers" Discern Lies.
Last edited:
Crimson Longinus
Legend
I mean you literally just solved the murder in boring and anticlimactic manner. Couple of more questions and you can probably figure out why, not that it matters as in world where such magic is known to exist this would be probably enough. Granted, that they're a queen might protect them from prosecution, but if that's the case, then I'm sure why the characters were bothering to begin with. Also do you realise that you just had to make your murder suspect a royal to give the characters any sort of an obstacle?
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
I'm actually working on developing a similar ring. It's going to give advantage on Insight rolls and disadvantage on Deception rolls and be an attuned and cursed item that they cannot just rip off willy-nilly.
I think you're overstating it. My point is knowing someone lied doesn't automatically solve the actual problem. It doesn't tell you what the truth is. Let's say the murderer is a low level street thug. So what? You know they did it. Hurrah. The person is still dead and you still don't have any motive or evidence. Now what?
Crimson Longinus
Legend
The case is closed. And if for some reason knowledge gained via magic isn't admissible evidence, (but why wouldn't it) it still isn't terribly difficult to figure out the rest if you're a walking lie detector. This just doesn't sound fun to me, does it sound fun to you?
"Did you kill the victim?"
"No." dings as a lie
"We know you are lying."
"Okay, fine."
"Tell us why."
"Piss off." dings as true
What now? The adventure continues.
Crimson Longinus
Legend
That's a rally bad set of question, you presumably had some reason to suspect the guy in the first place, so you could have easily asked something based on that. Not that it matters. At this point you can take them to the authorities and even if they for some reason wouldn't be aware of such magic, it would be trivially easy to demonstrate to them that you indeed possess such power. Lying under this power about not doing it is in effect a confession.
Seriously, think basically any detective story and assume that the detective has this ability. Pretty much none of them would work. Now would it be possible to carefully design a scenario circumventing this power? Yes. Would it be awkward, terribly difficult and would repeating it become super implausible really fast? Also yes.
I'm pretty sure that WotC agrees with me that this is an unfun ability and that's why it's not in the game. A lot of such unfun problem-trivialising spells were nerfed or removed in the 5th edition.
I mean, sure, if you aren't interested in making any particular thing in D&D work, you can totally do that. I just don't understand why you would actively choose to eliminate your own fun rather than use the thing as a tool to make the adventure more fun.
How many thrillers have been built around knowing the who dunnit but hinging on the why, or the who next, or the what now? You interpretation seems to be bent entirely toward not wanting to engage in such an adventure. More power to you. Not everyone likes mysteries or thrillers.
