Thoughts about Detect Evil

[Saeviomagy]

I actually just came to that conclusion myself while walking back from lunch, and was on my way here to amend

-Hyp.

So what about the edit?

 

[DarkWizard]

'Undead' is not on the list of auras Detect Chaos detects. It will detect Chaotic undead as Chaotic creatures, but it won't detect any other sort of undead.

Nor is undead in any list of creatures for detect evil. The only place undead is mentioned there is on the accompanying table. Also note....

Detect evil snippet: ...1st Round: Presence or absence of evil...

The spell detects only evil. Just as detect chaos detects only chaos (which includes chaotic undead, but not lawful or neutral undead), and so on and so forth. On that line of thought, detect evil will detect evil undead, but it will not detect good or neutral undead.

Whether this is a simple omission from the book on the part of authors or publishers, or if it's simply something to be used as a house ruling, it's a hell of a lot easier than tweaking multiple spells and altering their balance relative to each other.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It seems like it's perfectly logical to deduce that a non-evil undead DOES NOT GET PAST THIS LINE OF THE CLASSIFICATION. It has no evil aura. It doesn't qualify as an evil creature, an evil object or an evil spell, nor is it specifically listed as generating an evil aura.

It has an evil aura, because Undead have an evil aura of a strength relative to their hit dice.

Otherwise it wouldn't be necessary to note 'evil creature', 'evil outsider', or 'evil spell or magic item' on the table. 'creature', 'outsider', and 'spell or magic item' would suffice.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The spell detects only evil.

Well, if you consider 'presence of evil' to be distinct from 'presence of evil auras', then yes, in round 1, the spell will say "There is no evil". And in round 2, it will say "There is one evil aura (but still no evil)".

The same would apply to a neutral cleric of an evil deity. There is no 'presence of evil', but there is an 'evil aura'.

So again, you'd get "No evil; one evil aura" as the result in round 2.

-Hyp.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Except on a strict reading, using detect chaos:

This is precisely the argument I used when defending myself desperately on rec.games.frp.dnd. (If you don't believe me, check the Google archives. I'd prefer it if you just believe me; that desperate struggle is not one of my proudest moments.)

This argument lost me $500 when I agreed to be bound by the ruling of the Sage.

I am still not convinced that, for 3.0, it was an incorrect argument. Frankly, I find it at least as likely that the Sage -- as happens often -- simply didn't have the wherewithal to logically work through the spell. So instead of doing so he jumped at the least complex answer, and then for 3.5 the function of the spell was changed in the most bizarre possible way: by changing the alignment of previously unaligned undead to "evil," and by assigning "auras" to Neutral clerics.

But, officially, detect evil detects any theoretical Neautral undead.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Well, if you consider 'presence of evil' to be distinct from 'presence of evil auras', then yes, in round 1, the spell will say "There is no evil". And in round 2, it will say "There is one evil aura (but still no evil)".

The same would apply to a neutral cleric of an evil deity. There is no 'presence of evil', but there is an 'evil aura'.

So again, you'd get "No evil; one evil aura" as the result in round 2.

I (truly) hesitate to ask ... but is this approaching an admission that the functioning of detect evil isn't "perfectly clear"? Because, I gotta say, it sure sounds like it.


Jeff

 

[Jeff Wilder]

Otherwise it wouldn't be necessary to note 'evil creature', 'evil outsider', or 'evil spell or magic item' on the table. 'creature', 'outsider', and 'spell or magic item' would suffice.

This is the one argument that I was never quite able to refute to my perfect satisfaction. The best that I managed -- and I do think it's in the realm of plausibility -- is that the writer of the spells simply forgot to account for Neutrally-aligned mindless undead. Since all other undead in the game are Evil -- unlike all outsiders, creatures, spells and magic items -- there would simply be no need to specify "Evil Undead" as there is for "Evil Outsiders."

 

[Hypersmurf]

I (truly) hesitate to ask ... but is this approaching an admission that the functioning of detect evil isn't "perfectly clear"? Because, I gotta say, it sure sounds like it.

Heh. Only if one accepts that an evil aura not counting as an evil presence is a feasible interpretation.

As far as I'm concerned, an evil aura is evil; therefore if an evil aura is present, evil is present.

I don't accept that the alternative interpretation has any merit, which still leaves the spell unambiguous in my opinion

-Hyp.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I don't accept that the alternative interpretation has any merit, which still leaves the spell unambiguous in my opinion

I see.

So do you recognize that "perfectly clear to me" and "perfectly clear" are not congruent statements? I suspect you do, and if so, that will bridge this divide we've had.

In any event, that's my last word on it. Stop glaring at me, Piratecat.


Jeff