Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="baradtgnome" data-source="post: 1275301" data-attributes="member: 2722">Very excellent and organized position.&nbsp; And I suspect that in most campaigns that have a problem with detect evil, you are dead on why.&nbsp; However I have to disagree that anything else is unworkable (sorry, I know I took that statement mostly out of context)&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> I don't think that a society or ruler would never abuse the power to detect and purge, our own real history shows too many tales of that.&nbsp; Even if it ends in warping the definition of good (and ultimately becoming evil as I think you suggested) and destroying itself.&nbsp; Same could be said of evil, chaos, or law if you rotate your game around those axis.&nbsp; A society, government or ruler does not necessarily behave rationally and in their best interests.In my campaign I didn't want Paladins to 'know' the alignment of those they were dealing with, instead they need to learn the alignments by those they deal with through their actions and react to their demonstrated behavior.&nbsp; (which I believe you also desired)On the other hand it is perfectly clear that your view applied consistantly by a competant DM is functional and rational.&nbsp; I just don't agree that there is only a single rational approach to the detect evil 'problem'.&nbsp; To me it was not really a problem, rather a question of flavor.&nbsp; I won't debate all the points with you - you have obviously so many points in the debate skill that I would lose.&nbsp;&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> All this from some asking how the spell works...&nbsp; &nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="baradtgnome, post: 1275301, member: 2722"] Very excellent and organized position. And I suspect that in most campaigns that have a problem with detect evil, you are dead on why. However I have to disagree that anything else is unworkable (sorry, I know I took that statement mostly out of context) ;) I don't think that a society or ruler would never abuse the power to detect and purge, our own real history shows too many tales of that. Even if it ends in warping the definition of good (and ultimately becoming evil as I think you suggested) and destroying itself. Same could be said of evil, chaos, or law if you rotate your game around those axis. A society, government or ruler does not necessarily behave rationally and in their best interests. In my campaign I didn't want Paladins to 'know' the alignment of those they were dealing with, instead they need to learn the alignments by those they deal with through their actions and react to their demonstrated behavior. (which I believe you also desired) On the other hand it is perfectly clear that your view applied consistantly by a competant DM is functional and rational. I just don't agree that there is only a single rational approach to the detect evil 'problem'. To me it was not really a problem, rather a question of flavor. I won't debate all the points with you - you have obviously so many points in the debate skill that I would lose. :p All this from some asking how the spell works... :D [/QUOTE]

Verification