Detect Evil and NPCs
Doc
Registered User, ClubPA regular
Registered User, ClubPA regular
Basically, how evil does someone have to be before they show up when someone detects evil? That is, let's say I have a corrupt politician. Sure, he'll take bribes to let people out of jail, but he's not about to kill someone or molest a kid or anything. What about a woman NPC who killed her husband and his mistress in a fit of rage?
I've not considered these people "evil enough." How do you implement it in your groups?
I've not considered these people "evil enough." How do you implement it in your groups?
Doc on
0
Posts
Frequently I'll make it so that the spell reveals measures of alignment. As in, chaotic evil always shows up, but if the spell is not particularly strong or well-cast, it may not reveal neutral or lawful evil.
Here's what I've done. While the person may not themselves be evil, their action can be considered evil. Therefore, the person who performs the act will not detect as evil themselves, but will have an evil "residue" on them for a length of time that corresponds with how evil the action was. There are some rules under Detect Magic about "lingering aura"; I use that as a guide.
Hope this helps!
Well, the player doing it is a Paladin, so he can do it at will. Which means I have to be more careful as a DM in terms of which characters in the plot I expose him to.
There are lots of ways around Detect Evil (Ring of Mind Shielding, Misdirection, etc.). Remember that Detect Evil only shows if someone is Evil; it cannot see the difference between Good, Neutral or blocked using one of the above methods.
However, I can see Karilmat's point as well... Detect Evil should detect evil acts, even if performed by otherwise non-evil (maybe neutral) people.
Well, the guy that's kinda-sorta-evil but not really evil is a local lord. So they'd have to do more than say "but he was evil!" To get out of a hanging afterwards.
Being evil isn't grounds for execution. Killing someone in cold blood who isn't doing anything wrong, evil alignment or not, will de-paladinize that character, or at the very least get them arrested; after all, that's pretty much murder, which is unlawful.
Just give your evil characters Rings of Mind Shielding. I would think "evil" sorts probably don't want to be detected, mind-read, etc., and for 8k it's a bargain.
For a campaign that I'm starting, I've decided to replace Detect Evil with Detect Undead for paladins. I think it's silly that paladins only are able to detect evil when they're also supposed to be paragons of law, but don't get Detect Chaos.
Ayliana Moonwhisper Ecksus Cerazal
I like to make "Detect Evil" not quite as reliable as they would want. It is, after all, a level one spell. it can be a fantastic lead, but it shouldn't be an End All decider of ANYTHING at all. That being said, all people with an evil alignment, wether they're simply corrupt politicians, greedy jerks or terrible murderers, shine the same shine. They still have to go about figuring out HOW they're evil before they act on it.
However, creatures with Evil Auras (such as Clerics of Evil Gods), are blindingly bright when Detect Evil is cast around them.
EDIT:
Exactly. Tons of people are Evil, but I wouldn't say evil enough to warrent an out-and-out instant execution based souly off of a Level 1 spell. Not under any circumstance.
If the campaign's already begun and you can't change the rules, then's a time to have the evil character employ magical safeguards, but if the campaign's not too long running you should have a little wiggle room to set the detection rules to your liking.
I'm not a huge fan of alignment though, and only use it as a hidden modifier, and I never had the PCs choose an alignment.
Normal people don't just go "hey, I feel like being evil". Nobody fights for "evil".
The best way to make it work is to make a LOT of people evil. I mean, the innkeeper who bilks his customers every once and a while might be evil, if the Paladin goes and pops the heads of everyone who is evil he will have a lot of trouble on his hands.
That or very rare, make an evil allignment be pretty evil.
I would never let a PC get away with, 'my magic power said he was evil, so why was it wrong to kill him?' If it happened, as the guards tossed them in the dungeon I'd have the captain say, "While at home, that evil fellow you killed was a relentless tyrant with a decided taste for child abuse and marital rape, in public he was a pillar of the community, and had many powerful friends. Good luck avoiding the noose."
Then again, I make sure that people understand the way I interpret alignment. Also, if there are ways to interpret the antagonists that won't leave them radiating evil, go for it. Just because two kingdoms are good, doesn't mean they will never go to war, and just because they are spies and assassins at work, doesn't mean they have to be evil.
Why not just have the guy kill the paladin in combat?
Anyone of evil alignment shows up. Now, depending on how many HD that person has will determine the size of the evil aura, and how the paladin reacts - particularly powerful auras can stun a paladin for a certain time.
What makes someone evil? *shrug* thats up to the DM. Personally, I go by alignment shifts. If the person was, say, lawful neutral before killing their wife in a fit of rage, then perhaps they might shift to chaotic or true neutral. From there, they act, albeit tentatively at first, as their new alignment. Then, if they break their alignment again (for good OR ill), it would shift a step or two.
Paladins who attack someone just because theyre evil deserve to be punished in some way by the DM. Goumindong, I think killing a character should be a last resort, or a punishment for something PARTICULARLY stupid (backtalking a dragon comes to mind). Perhaps if the paladin simply lost his powers for attacking in cold blood, or was thrown in jail/banished from the region. OR if the paladin just got his monkey ass handed to him.
Paladins are best played by people who can understand that evil can be allowed to live. Most people I play with, when they play paladins, won't pull the "STOP VILLAIN!" thing until they actually witness an evil deed.
Simply put, the alignment doesn't necessarily always dictate the character. I am of the opinion that the alignment is the 'guide' but not the absolute rule.
So me and my GM have gone back and forth on things like Detect Evil, those weapon enchants that do more damage against certain people, and most of all the Force powers in D20 Star Wars.
In fact, it was D20 Star Wars where we got our answer. In that game, certain abilities garner you Dark Side Points, regardless of how they are used. For example, Force Choke is a Dark Side ability - regardless of how you ended up applying it. It doesn't matter if you used Force Choke to kill someone attempting to slaughter a bus full of innocents - you still used the power. Me and the GM debated this a very long time before we decided while in real life such gray areas are allowable, in the game, they are not.
Certainly, the D20 system (DnD, Star Wars, or otherwise) is not the place for philosophy on the rights or wrongs of the human condition. That should be reserved for out and out roleplaying.
So that's how I think you have to rule. If they have an evil alignment, it's picked up by Detect Evil. Likewise, you use a Dark Side ability - you get the Dark Side point. In these games, Good and Evil are very clearly defined. You're one one side, the other, or in the middle - there are no gray areas of morality when it comes to spell mechanics or abilities.
Also, for NPCs, if 'He's evil, he must be the badguy, let's kill him,' is occuring too often, try and find ways to not have them be evil.
1: He's neutral. The good kingdom has waged a successful against local orcs, and are pushing them towards annhilation - neutral characters are siding with the orcs due to the fact the good guys are now being bad.
The NPC is a dupe: the villain is threatening to eat his kids, or something. He's a good guy, but he's being forced into taking bad actions.
There are two alignment axis, and a paladin has to follow both.
I like this, even though the DM I play with most absolutely hates paladins I might try to get him to use this for detect evil whenever we play.
Jordan of Elienor, Human Shaman
I find it hard to see why a DM would hate paladins. They are often the group member who keeps everyone else from getting off track.
Ive never played a paladin and never really had an urge to do so, so I dont really know the rules and all behind them. But the DM says he hates them because the class itself controlls the party. Somethin about not being able to be a paladin if he groups with people that perform evil actions, even if its like a one time thing.
Jordan of Elienor, Human Shaman
To a Paladin, the end doesn't justify the means, which is kind of unique to the available classes. I like them because they are a strong roleplay class.
I really want to model a character around the intricacies of Allen Shore from Boston Legal to be perfectly honest.
The Paladin code or whatever expressly says that they will not knowlingly associate with an evil character, and unless you have a special ability, the evil guy would have to eventually get caught in the Detect Evil radius.
We had a guy that always played a paladin, and always tried to go batshit crazy so he could play a Blackguard. Except he'd do it like...session two or three, so we'd just all kill him. Instead of waiting to do it agian in secret, he'd roll up a new character, and would do it again.
One of the more interesting Paladin orders I've seen included both Lawful Good, and Evil to represent both philosophical extremes of it's doctrines.
One game I played in I was a priestess of the god(dess) of thieves in the local pantheon. We also had an actual thief in the party along with a paladin wannabe (dm rule -- in this world you don't start out as a paladin, you start out as a fighter striving for paladinhood and once you do enough good, the god chooses you to give powers to). Our fourth was a mage-type, which was problematic in itself due to it being a low magic world where he could have been burned as a demon in any of the villages we went through if they had known what he could do. (For that matter, the same applied to me.)
The thief and I did a good bit of sneaking around behind Mr. Goody-two-shoes' back, finishing off fights what we couldn't finish with him around, looting corpses, etc.
I'm discouraging paladins in the game I'm starting right now for a similar reason. My party is predominantly thieves (rogues), and having a paladin around would be pretty inconvenient for most of their adventures. I can see where some DMs might not care for them -- it does limit your adventuring potential a bit, because you haven't got a chance of your group taking morally ambiguous, let alone selfish, challenges.
Now, desecration, thievery, and other more obvious unlawful or evil actions he would have a problem with his companions doing.
This is the exact reason I hate paladins and usually do not allow them in my games. Nearly all classes have some drawback, but in EVERY OTHER CASE the drawback applies to the person playing the character. With the paladin, it restricts nearly everything the party does because of how the RAW is read. That said, I encourage the use of knights (from PHB II) as a replacement, and have found it to work well.
Paladins may be able to detect Evil at will, but that doesn't mean that you will have the situation described above where they will instantly know if a person they happen across is Evil.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.