Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Drawdy 07-20-07, 10:04 PM	I know I'm the DM and can decide to rule however I want, etc. but I'd like to know what the official rules or at least the common consensus is for these: I run a campaign with a paladin who can use Detect Evil at will. This makes it very difficult for subterfuge by an evilly aligned NPC. How should a Detect Evil cast on an evil NPC be handled? In a similar vein, I had a character cast Detect Magic in a room with an invisible illusionist that had cast an illusion. How should I handle this? Can Detect Magic detect a creature with Invisibility spell cast upon it? Can Detect Magic show that an illusion is magical? That's pretty powerful for a cantrip.
MeinVT 07-20-07, 10:36 PM	I run a campaign with a paladin who can use Detect Evil at will. This makes it very difficult for subterfuge by an evilly aligned NPC. How should a Detect Evil cast on an evil NPC be handled? You need to decide the general tenor of your campaign and be consistent. Some folks play that only a few folks are evil and they detect as such. Others play that a large portion of the population has evil tendencies (as many as a third) so you can't tell that much from a detect. In my campaign I ruled before we started that mundane material creatures are 'vague' and their alignment as detected will vary depending on their current thoughts and actions. Magical or fey creatures will detect more strongly, right up to outsiders that are unmistakably aligned. There is no right answer here. The most important thing is to be consistent and remember that an evil nemesis may have non-evil allies. In a similar vein, I had a character cast Detect Magic in a room with an invisible illusionist that had cast an illusion. How should I handle this? Can Detect Magic detect a creature with Invisibility spell cast upon it? Can Detect Magic show that an illusion is magical? That's pretty powerful for a cantrip. Detect magic is indeed a fairly powerful spell for a cantrip. It can show that there is an aura of magic on something, so the illusion will appear to have an aura of magic (a spell craft check will even reveal to be illusion magic). Dependent on the illusion I'd usually also allow this to precipitate a save for disbelief. Detect magic also allows the caster to see the aura where invisibility is cast. It does not allow the caster to see the invisible creature though. Remember that detect magic generally requires concentration to maintain, so as soon as the caster starts attacking or casting another spell the detect is gone. I'd treat the invisible entity as having concealment at the least for an attack directed in this way. Also note that detect magic makes a great 'PC' locator. Most PCs walk around with an order of magnitude more magic on them than the average (even adventurer leveled) person. I do assume it is regularly used as a security spell by low level npcs in all sort of situations. Think that something odd is up, a quick detect magic scan of the area seams an appropriate recourse.
Kouk 07-21-07, 12:31 AM	Detect Magic will reveal the presence of "magic" when you have it look at an illusion, or at the space where an invisible person is standing. After you focus on the magical auras for 3 rounds, you can then make a check to identify what kind of magic it is. Reprinted for ease of reference: 1st Round Presence or absence of magical auras. 2nd Round Number of different magical auras and the power of the most potent aura. 3rd Round The strength and location of each aura. If the items or creatures bearing the auras are in line of sight, you can make Spellcraft skill checks to determine the school of magic involved in each. (Make one check per aura; DC 15 + spell level, or 15 + half caster level for a nonspell effect.) Magical areas, multiple types of magic, or strong local magical emanations may distort or conceal weaker auras. Aura Strength An aura’s power depends on a spell’s functioning spell level or an item’s caster level. If an aura falls into more than one category, detect magic indicates the stronger of the two. So first round: I see magic is in front of me somewhere. Second round: I can tell how many magical items or spells/effects are in existence in front of me. Third round: Oh, now I understand where the aura is coming from. Maybe it is a single brick in a wall, or an outline of a person or something. You still have no idea what it is. Maybe you are looking at a Dragon: it is either an illusion, or it is just a magically buffed Dragon ready to eat you. Not a tremendous amount of help. If you make a Spellcraft check on the third round, you can try to figure out what kind of magic you see. Invisibility or an illusory wall would read as "Illusion" magic, that's all you would know (and maybe a clue on spell/caster level by strength). In general, you would be able to figure out that illusion magic on a wall means it is a fake wall, but not necessarily - maybe it is a real wall, but the color of it is something different. You can reasonably assume it is an illusion to get a bonus to disbelieve it though. If you see a man-sized figure or blob or something you are reasonably likely to be correct that someone is invisible in front of you. Maybe it is some other kind of illusion that is making an "invisible" figment though :P. Spells such as Nystul's Magic Aura (just Magic Aura on the SRD) also mess with Detect Magic pretty heavily. For Detect Evil, if you make it clear that the law protects evil characters as long as they have not done anything wrong that might work. You might also consider that it is not terribly difficult to disguise your alignment, with spells like Nondetection and amulets of Proof Against Detection and Location. Many villains are just neutral though, or hire good/neutral lackies to deal directly with suspicious adventurers. You might also want to implement a house rule that using Detect Evil (or Good) results in the caster's eyes glowing some color, making it instantly obvious what you are doing.
Rerecros 07-21-07, 12:40 AM	Detect evil- fairly useless ability, except for tracking fiends/undead hiding around corners. Hostility and evil are two very different things. There are plenty of evil people who have never heard of these PCs, and mean them no specific harm. And there are plenty of non-evil people who have perfectly valid reasons to attack your PCs. Detect magic- What kind of party spellcaster is going to sit around for a few rounds waiting to see if monsters are illusions when the can use this time to throw some fireballs. Blast first, ask questions later.
Elessar 07-21-07, 01:05 AM	Also, this may be obvious, but I'll say it anyways. The spells Nondetection and Undetectable Alignment were made for this purpose. Also, to avoid magic items turning into detect magic beacons, the spell Nystul's Magic Aura works as a more economical version of Nondetection
zorgling25 07-21-07, 03:38 AM	This is covered in the FAQ: Is it possible for detect magic to locate an invisible creature? Yes, although not very efficiently. Remember that detect magic reveals the location of magical auras over the course of 3 rounds. A creature rendered invisible by a spell or magical effect could be located via detect magic, but only after 3 rounds of concentration. Furthermore, the invisible creature must remain within the spell’s area for the entire 3 rounds of concentration; if the creature moves out of the area, the process must start again from the beginning. However, even if everything works according to plan, you still don’t necessarily know that you’ve found an invisible creature—at best, the caster of detect magic would know that she had located a faint aura of illusion magic in a particular space. Presumably any caster that can cast invisibility would be able to Spellcraft a Detect Magic, and could find a way to either break concentration or get out of its Area of Effect before the aura could even be known to be an illusion.
Marcus Majarra 07-21-07, 01:18 PM	I run a campaign with a paladin who can use Detect Evil at will. This makes it very difficult for subterfuge by an evilly aligned NPC. How should a Detect Evil cast on an evil NPC be handled? For starters, the paladin is using a spell-like ability. In other words, he's deeply concentrating on something, to the effect that he would be open to AoOs if it were a combat situation. It's very easy to notice the paladin is using a spell-like ability. That should clue off the evil NPC that the paladin is up to something. Furthermore, subterfuge is ultimately governed not by alignment, but by Bluff and Sense Motive checks. While detect evil might register the NPC as a generally immoral person, what he has to say will be credible as long as no one beats his Bluff check (assuming he is lying in the first place). If his check isn't beat, then no subterfuge will be noticed. While the paladin will most certainly not associate himself with such an individual, he has no reason to doubt the NPC's claims, except maybe for prejudice against evil-aligned creatures. As it is, evil creatures are capable of good acts, and will many times perform good acts as well. A typical example of such an evil creature is one who regularly performs evil acts in the name of a wholly good cause. He acts in an evil way for the greater good. Suffice it to say that alignment is not an indicator of intention. Creatures of all alignments are capable of subterfuge and no alignment is more likely to use subterfuge than another.
Drawdy 07-21-07, 09:28 PM	Thanks everybody...this really helps me out a lot.
Leilond 07-23-07, 03:29 AM	It depends on your using of EVIL If you use the plain definition of the manuals, you'll find: Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit. "Evil" implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others Thus, in D&D, being evil isn't simply a matter of "intention", but a matter of action A person that "think evil" but never "act evil" (for fear or other reason) aren't "evil" in D&D terms. In D&D terms, evil is an energy, that shine under the effect of a detect evil spell; to have this energy inside you, you need to commit evil acts (hurt, oppressing, killing, bebasing or killing innocent life) as normal way of acting. Thus you do not "shine evil" for committing some evil act. You shine evil if you are EVIL and this mean your life style is "committing evil acts" This means that, if you play strictly by the RAW, a paladin that use "detect evil" in a tavern wouldn't recognize the mercant that sell broken tools as "evil"; he will be probably chaotic or neutral, but not evil. If you play strictly by the RAW, a detect evil spell let you discover "truly evil guys" and not "common people with some evil ideas that they never put into reality" For the general "detect rule", remember to use the "three round need". When a "wizard" cast detect magic, he won't know if the aura is detecting come from his "bracer of armors", or it comes from the "shield spell" that he casted few rounds ago, from the "continual flame" that is on the wall, until he spend 3 round to know where is every single aura On the "invisibility" spell. Every spell that isn't "istantaneous", has an aura. Thus, if someone casted invisibility on himself, you'll see the aura of the spell... if the invisibility caster remain 3 full rounds inside the "detect magic area" and the "detect magic" caster mantain the concentration (standard action each round) for these three round. You won't be able to "see the caster", but you can pinpoint the square he's in because of the aura he's emanating.
Eater_Of_Souls 07-23-07, 03:35 AM	What each detect spell gives is a feeling of a sorts and it requires heavy consentration to detect the source and strong enough a source can even stun your character, allways funny when a paladin is "feeling" something behind the wall and keels over from a sheer power of evil... So detect xx isn't a lie detector and if thats a problem use neutral or even good aligned NPCs as proxies for the bad guy ;)
Myers 07-23-07, 08:09 AM	On the original question though of an NPC being evil but hiding it. In a world with countless clerics and pali's running around, there's always items and such that can provide an "undetectable alignment". Thus they would no longer read evil
Marcus Majarra 07-23-07, 08:58 AM	This means that, if you play strictly by the RAW, a paladin that use "detect evil" in a tavern wouldn't recognize the mercant that sell broken tools as "evil"; he will be probably chaotic or neutral, but not evil. If you play strictly by the RAW, a detect evil spell let you discover "truly evil guys" and not "common people with some evil ideas that they never put into reality" I disagree. You're generalizing the idea of killing others and physically hurting others as being evil, whereas hurting can come in multiple fashions, and oppression can be subtle too. A merchant who extorts his customers, who deliberately sails faulty merchandise is quite evil. In fact, such a merchant would most likely be neutral evil: "A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple."
Leilond 07-23-07, 09:05 AM	I disagree. You're generalizing the idea of killing others and physically hurting others as being evil, whereas hurting can come in multiple fashions, and oppression can be subtle too. A merchant who extorts his customers, who deliberately sails faulty merchandise is quite evil. In fact, such a merchant would most likely be neutral evil: "A neutral evil villain does whatever she can get away with. She is out for herself, pure and simple." You quote only a little part of the rules. It isn't me that "generalizing", but it is you that use only "a small part of the rules" The rules require "very evil acts" to be evil for a good reason. Because in D&D "evil" isn't a matter of "I'm not a very good person", it is a matter of an energy that shine and change the world balance. Someone the simply "sell broken tools" isn't evil in D&D terms, because it isn't required "hurt, oppress or kill others" nor "debase or kill innocent life", it is required "hurt, oppress and kill others" or "debase and kill innocent life" Thus, strictly by the rules, if you "whish to sacrifice an infant to the most evil god out there" you won't be evil until you "do it" because "intentions" (as written in the DMG at page 134) aren't enought to be evil. That page is very usefull to truly understand that in D&D terms, being evil is something [b]very BAD[b] and not simply "not so good", nor "a bit bad" To be evil, you have to commit serious evil acts
eamon 07-23-07, 10:05 AM	If you want, you may interprete alignment as requiring actions. You certainly do not have to. Alignment is one of those things intimately linked with how you run your game, and you shouldn't feel straitjacketed by a straightforward interpretation. However, even the PHB is very vague about what "evil" is. It's a moral question, and as such, you can't just say you need to perform specific acts - what it means to be evil depends on the world, and depends on that persons capabilities. You don't need to kill anyone, for instance. It might even be sufficient to have no compassion. It's up to the DM, since it depends on the world you're playing in. In Eberron for instance, A good-aligned cleric may cast an [Evil] spell, and while doing so is an evil act, his own alignment doesn't instantly change. Similarly, even if he does change his alignment or violate the tenets of his faith, he does not lose spellcasting or other class features. So if you want to, you can tie positive and negative energy, good and evil, and the actions of a creature together very tightly, but you don't have to.
Leilond 07-23-07, 10:27 AM	If you want, you may interprete alignment as requiring actions. It isn't a matter of "interpreation" Page 134 of the DMG Actions dictate alignements You certainly do not have to. Alignment is one of those things intimately linked with how you run your game, and you shouldn't feel straitjacketed by a straightforward interpretation. If we talk about "how we want to play" you're surely right. For this reason I said "if you play strictly by the RAW". No one is forced to play always by the RAW, I use some house rule too in my games, but it is always a good attitude to specify when we're talking about "RAW" and when we're talking about "how we play", so that people do not misunderstand However, even the PHB is very vague about what "evil" is. It is vague on "when an action is evil" (and not so much, it reports example of what is evil), but not about "when someone is evil". All the definition about "being evil" talk about "acting evil" It's a moral question, and as such, you can't just say you need to perform specific acts - what it means to be evil depends on the world, and depends on that persons capabilities. You don't need to kill anyone, for instance. It might even be sufficient to have no compassion. It's up to the DM, since it depends on the world you're playing in. If you play strictly by the RAW, you have to act evil to be evil, and not simply "wish evil". In Eberron for instance, A good-aligned cleric may cast an [Evil] spell, and while doing so is an evil act, his own alignment doesn't instantly change. Similarly, even if he does change his alignment or violate the tenets of his faith, he does not lose spellcasting or other class features. So if you want to, you can tie positive and negative energy, good and evil, and the actions of a creature together very tightly, but you don't have to. In standard D&D a good-aligned cleric cannot cast an [evil] spell at all. An in standard d&d, a single evil act do not make you change your alignement, as page 134 of the DMG states Eberron is very different from the standard D&D rules, thus we cannot use it in this debate.
Marcus Majarra 07-23-07, 12:13 PM	You quote only a little part of the rules. It isn't me that "generalizing", but it is you that use only "a small part of the rules" You're using a small part of the rules yourself to justify your point. Obviously, alignment isn't about just the actions listed above. Would you argue that a creature who kills and hurts others, but doesn't oppress them isn't evil? For that matter, is a paladin evil for killing, hurting, and oppressing evil creatures? You cannot start generalizing a point such as alignment. Evil acts constitute an evil alignment, but evil acts are not limited to those mentioned in the basic description for alignments. This area of the rules is the one that requires the most leeway in definition, as otherwise you'd find yourself with 6 alignments being the best (a logical impossibility) and 3 alignments being the most dangerous one (another logical impossibility).
Leilond 07-23-07, 12:25 PM	You're using a small part of the rules yourself to justify your point. Obviously, alignment isn't about just the actions listed above. Would you argue that a creature who kills and hurts others, but doesn't oppress them isn't evil? For that matter, is a paladin evil for killing, hurting, and oppressing evil creatures? I said that the rules talk ALWAYS about acting, and never about willing You cannot start generalizing a point such as alignment. Evil acts constitute an evil alignment, but evil acts are not limited to those mentioned in the basic description for alignments. This area of the rules is the one that requires the most leeway in definition, as otherwise you'd find yourself with 6 alignments being the best (a logical impossibility) and 3 alignments being the most dangerous one (another logical impossibility). Sure, but the type of action that are described in ALL evil description are always HEAVY actions. I can accept that you consider "evil" the fact that I steal some money at the market, but by the RAW you CANNOT consider evil someone that WISH evil without acting evil It is a REQUIREMENT. It isn't enought, but is a requirement You have to act evil to be evil. Acting evil isn't enought to be evil. Like You need 17 dexterity to qualify for "improved two weapon fighting". Having 17 dexterity isn't enought to qualify for the feat Necessary but not sufficent condition
wrecan 07-23-07, 01:29 PM	Gentlemen, There are already two other threads about this in the main DM forum. Why are we importing this argument into a third?
eamon 07-23-07, 01:41 PM	A creature’s general moral and personal attitudes are represented by its alignment: lawful good,[etc.] Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Actions may dictate alignment - but who's to say whether an action is good or evil? That interpretive step is in the hands of the DM (and the players). The Eberron example is illustrative because even in WotC's own campaign settings alignment is interpreted wildly differently - so you shouldn't assume that actual game worlds are any different. Ahh alignment... it's a great flame-war starter :)
Leilond 07-23-07, 03:04 PM	Gentlemen, There are already two other threads about this in the main DM forum. Why are we importing this argument into a third? You're totally right I apologize and stop immediately ;)
mvincent 07-23-07, 03:51 PM	How should a Detect Evil cast on an evil NPC be handled?Either give the NPC a Ring of Mind Shielding (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/rings.htm#mindShielding), or be prepared for him to be detected. Notes: 1) The NPC will a likely notice the Paladin using this ability. 2) The Paladin will need 3 rounds to pinpoint the source of the evil. 3) Being evil isn't illegal (but wantonly attacking NPC's typically is).
ShubNiggurath 07-24-07, 04:10 PM	Am I the only one that reads 'evil creature' as a creature with the [EVIL] descriptor? Thus I think that detect evil uncovers devils, demons, undeads and clerics of evil deities (since it is specifically stated). That's basically it. (before someone says it, there are [EVIL] creatures that are not outsiders) The evil CR 20 human assassin that hides a poisoned dagger and is out to kill you (and that yesterday ate 2 babies) would not register in the paladin radar, as I read it. It is a crappy SLA like most of the paladin features.
mvincent 07-24-07, 04:27 PM	Am I the only one that reads 'evil creature' as a creature with the [EVIL] descriptor?You possibly might not be the only one, but I'm fairly certain that interpretation is incorrect. From the 3.0 FAQ: "The detect evil spell lets you detect the aura of evil creatures but not characters. Are characters counted as creatures with their level as their Hit Dice? The terms “creature” and “character” are interchangeable. Any subject with an evil alignment has an evil aura."
wrecan 07-24-07, 05:15 PM	Red dragons, for example, are "Always Chaotic Evil" and have neither the chaaotic nor evil descriptors. Presumably is a red dragon were to become chaotic neutral, they would not detect as evil.
Leilond 07-25-07, 05:53 AM	Red dragons, for example, are "Always Chaotic Evil" and have neither the chaaotic nor evil descriptors. Presumably is a red dragon were to become chaotic neutral, they would not detect as evil. By the RAW a creature that report "Always XXX" in the alignment description cannot "change" the alignment at all Only those with "usually XXX" or "often XXX" can have a different alignment from the one reported (house rule exceptions)
wrecan 07-25-07, 06:57 AM	By the RAW a creature that report "Always XXX" in the alignment description cannot "change" the alignment at all From the Glossary on Alignment (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_alignment&alpha=) (emphasis added): Always: The creature is born with the indicated alignment. The creature may have a hereditary predisposition to the alignment or come from a plane that predetermines it. It is possible for individuals to change alignment, but such individuals are either unique or rare exceptions.
eamon 07-25-07, 09:38 AM	By the RAW a creature that report "Always XXX" in the alignment description cannot "change" the alignment at all Only those with "usually XXX" or "often XXX" can have a different alignment from the one reported (house rule exceptions) Those are guidelines, not rules. D&D starts with the normal rule text, and in practice, most is then added by DM and players. Little things like a plot and so on. In a normal D&D game, there will be a huge swath of things that don't precisely match the core rulebooks. If you're discussion minor rules about premade monsters from a DM's perspective, it's sort-of irrelevant whether it's RAW or not. We're not talking about whether BAB from multiple classes stacks, or something... Let's get back to improving the game in practice, and away from the rules lawyering! The DMG constantly mentions how there's exceptions to almost everything anyhow, much as wrecan mentions, so in that sense, almost everything is RAW anyhow.
mvincent 07-25-07, 11:53 AM	Let's get back to improving the game in practice, and away from the rules lawyering!Well... I believe that is what the main "What's a DM to Do?" forum is for, and that this "DM Rules Counseling" sub-forum is indeed mainly concerned with rules. The issue appears moot though, since wrecan pointed out the rules that support your viewpoint. Along the topic of detect evil: It is interesting to note that Ghosts can be any alignment, but they will still show up on the evil-detecto-meter simply by virtue of being undead (even if they happen to be lawful good). Similarly, LN clerics of a LE diety will show up as evil. under the right circumstances, this could create problems for a Paladin Example: A Lawful Good ghost possessing a Lawful Good, willing volunteer (in order to do good works) would seem exactly like an evil person under the evil-detecto-meter.
Leilond 07-27-07, 06:49 AM	Well... I believe that is what the main "What's a DM to Do?" forum is for, and that this "DM Rules Counseling" sub-forum is indeed mainly concerned with rules. The issue appears moot though, since wrecan pointed out the rules that support your viewpoint. Along the topic of detect evil: It is interesting to note that Ghosts can be any alignment, but they will still show up on the evil-detecto-meter simply by virtue of being undead (even if they happen to be lawful good). I do not agree here. Detect evil detect you only if you have the evil alignement, the evil descriptor, or the evil subtype Similarly, LN clerics of a LE diety will show up as evil. under the right circumstances, this could create problems for a Paladin Not by the RAW. By the RAW the detect evil detect you if you your alignment is "evil" and not if you "committed some evil act" Example: A Lawful Good ghost possessing a Lawful Good, willing volunteer (in order to do good works) would seem exactly like an evil person under the evil-detecto-meter. The detect evil spell "detect alignment" not "intention". If you commit an evil act, but you're still good (as page 134 of the DMG say you have to commit more than one evil act to shif aligment) you're not detected by the spell If we talk about RULES, the spell detect your alignment, not the alignment of your last action nor your actual intentioin
wrecan 07-27-07, 08:45 AM	Leilond you are wrong. Neutral clerics of evil deities radiate an evil aura and will detect as evil. "A cleric of a chaotic, evil, good, or lawful deity has a particularly powerful aura corresponding to the deity’s alignment (see the detect evil spell for details). (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/cleric.htm)" -PHB on Cleric/Aura Also, see the chart under the detect evil description which lists a "cleric of an evil deity". Not all clerics of evil deities are evil: "A cleric’s alignment must be within one step of his deity’s. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/cleric.htm)" Thus, a LE deity can have a LN cleric. In addition, the chart in the detect evil (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm) spell lists "Undead", not evil undead. Mummies and ghosts are undead, but need not be evil. They will still detect as evil. This is not a discussion about what it takes to have an evil alignment, but rather what does the detect evil spell detect. It can (rarely) detect creatures and individuals who are not evilly aligned.
Coldkilla 07-27-07, 11:11 AM	wrecan, the passages you've quoted are indeed canon by the RAW, so perhaps this is a futile argument. But think of the all absurdities that are brought into being by following those rules too closely. A CG cleric of Heironious, who is LG, would then produce an aura of Law and an aura of Good. Plus the non-evil ghosts already mentioned being detected as evil. Isn't it preferable to imagine that the designers simply forgot to make a footnote exception for non-evil undead and for clerics who are a single-step away from their deity in alignment? After all, the much simpler and more practical mechanic is to have auras produced solely based on the creature's actual alignment. I'm just saying.
mvincent 07-27-07, 11:22 AM	I do not agree here.'s alright. I'm not telling you how to play, merely what the rules are. Not by the RAW. Yes by RAW
Marcus Majarra 07-27-07, 11:28 AM	A CG cleric of Heironious, who is LG, would then produce an aura of Law and an aura of Good. This, of course, is an impossibility. In standard D&D, a cleric's alignment must be within one step of his deity's. As such, Heironeous, a lawful good deity, only has lawful good, lawful neutral, and neutral good clerics. Your statement, however, would be true of Eberron (as it should be), as clerics do not follow alignment restrictions with respect to their deity's alignment. High Cardinal Krozen, a corrupt and powerful cleric of the Silver Flame (a lawful good deity) is lawful evil himself. As such, he radiates powerful auras of law and good, while also radiating a lesser aura of evil. Isn't it preferable to imagine that the designers simply forgot to make a footnote exception for non-evil undead and for clerics who are a single-step away from their deity in alignment? After all, the much simpler and more practical mechanic is to have auras produced solely based on the creature's actual alignment. Or perhaps the detect family of spells wasn't meant to be as accurate as one would think. Given that these are 1st-level spells, I'm not surprised by this.
mvincent 07-27-07, 11:29 AM	A CG cleric of Heironious, who is LG, would then produce an aura of Law and an aura of Good. I don't believe clerics of a LG god can be CG. However, A NG cleric of a LG god would indeed radiate a Lawful aura. This is canon D&D (and the designers did this purposefully). Isn't it preferable to imagine that the designers simply forgot to make a footnote exception for non-evil undead and for clerics who are a single-step away from their deity in alignment?I believe the undead thing was also purposeful. Detect evil was the same way in 3.0, where several undead were neutral. I seem to recall detect evil functioning similarly in earlier editions as well.
wrecan 07-27-07, 11:32 AM	A CG cleric of Heironious, who is LG, would then produce an aura of Law and an aura of Good. LG deities cannot have CG clerics. CG is two steps removed from LG. (Step 1: CG->NG. STep 2: NG->LG.) Isn't it preferable to imagine that the designers simply forgot to make a footnote exception for non-evil undead and for clerics who are a single-step away from their deity in alignment? I don't think that makes sense. The table clearly distinguishes evil types of creatures in which not all are evil. For example, the table clearly states "evil outsiders" right above where it said "Undead". So it seems intentional for them not to have written "Evil Undead". Apparently, in 3.0, the table did stats "Evil Undead", more evidence that they decided all undead should radiate as evil. They also clearly stated "Clerics of evil deities" on the charts and not "Evil clerics". The importance is that an Evil cleric of a neutral deity will radiate an aura based only on his character level. I.e., he won't radiate a moderate aura until he hits 10th level. A neutral deity of an evil cleric will radiate a moderate aura of evil at only 2nd level. The spell is distinguishing the basis of your allegiance. Thus, a cleric pledged to an evil god, even one who has not yet committed an evil act, is going to be strongly evil. Why? Because of his pledge. A cleric who happens to have strayed into evil is not firmly tied to evil, no more than any other non-cleric who strays into evil. That seems to me how the rules are intended. After all, the much simpler and more practical mechanic is to have auras produced solely based on the creature's actual alignment. That may be simpler, but it's clerly not what was intended.
Marcus Majarra 07-27-07, 01:05 PM	Indeed. The intent seems to be that the strength of your aura is governed not by your own convictions/alignment, but by what drives you: 1) Clerics of evil deities are driven by powers of unimaginable evil. 2) Evil outsiders are made, in part, of the raw essence of evil. 3) Undead are animated by evil energies, regardless of alignment. 4) Similarly, evil magic items owe their magic to evil energies. 5) Finally, an evil creature's evil aura reflects its personal strength and convictions. You can see an evident scale here: The most powerful auras are due to inherent evil. The second most powerful auras are held by those whose very existence is due to evil. Finally, the least powerful auras are held by those who espouse evil as their convictions, by choice.
Coldkilla 07-27-07, 01:31 PM	Okay, you've all convinced me. In no small part due to my egregious mistake re: a CG cleric of a LG deity in standard D&D. LOL. So then it sucks to Detect Evil on a neutral cleric of an evil deity and watch him walk through your Magic Circle against Evil and smack you with impunity. :D
wrecan 07-27-07, 02:05 PM	So then it sucks to Detect Evil on a neutral cleric of an evil deity and watch him walk through your Magic Circle against Evil and smack you with impunity. :D Protection from evil, actually. Magic Circle works against summoned non-good creatures, which the cleric is. Protection from Evil works against evil creatures, which a neutral cleric of an evil god is not (despite detecting as such). Although, to be fair, I have to imagine that most evil gods demand their clerics act evilly. A neutral cleric of an evil god ain't gonne remain non-evil for very long.
Coldkilla 07-27-07, 03:47 PM	Magic Circle works against summoned non-good creatures, which the cleric is. Huh? I realize I made another mistake in believing Magic Circle kept out evil creatures in general, instead of just non-good summoned creatures, but your assertion that the cleric falls into the category of non-good summons puzzles me. Btw, does anyone actually use the Magic Circle spell? Just curious.
wrecan 07-27-07, 03:55 PM	Huh? I realize I made another mistake in believing Magic Circle kept out evil creatures in general, instead of just non-good summoned creatures, but your assertion that the cleric falls into the category of non-good summons puzzles me. Ack!! I meant the cleric falls into the non-good category, not the summoned creature category!:embarrass
mvincent 07-29-07, 09:44 PM	does anyone actually use the Magic Circle spell? Just curious.Since it can last several hours (long enough for a dungeon crawl), it's an excellent buff to prevent your party from being dominated or charmed during an adventure. Also (when inward focused), it can come in use with Planar Binding (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/planarBindingLesser.htm), allowing you to trap an evil entity (i.e. like the traditional pentagram in a demon summoning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Akalabeth_box.JPG) scene). Interestingly, evil clerics (which should be the most likely to benefit from this usage) cannot cast the magic circle against evil spell.
Marcus Majarra 07-29-07, 11:08 PM	Also (when inward focused), it can come in use with Planar Binding, allowing you to trap an evil entity (i.e. like the traditional pentagram in a demon summoning scene). Interestingly, evil clerics (which should be the most likely to benefit from this usage) cannot cast the magic circle against evil spell. This is because planar binding is in the realm of wizard spells, not cleric spells. As it is, clerics have access to planar ally, which calls a creature of an alignment sufficiently similar to that of the cleric's. Clerics don't need to coerce their called creatures into service, unlike wizards.
Zealot 08-01-07, 04:44 PM	As a DM I wouldn't let a PC locate an invisible creature or object with Detect Magic. Invisibility is an illusion that allows no save and causes the target to become undetectible to "visual senses". Detect magic requires you to "see" the targets aura which would be invisible to visual detection as well. It is the same as when an invisible character holds a light source. If the aura of light became visible at the point of the torch people would see a floating ball of light. This is not the case. The light cast on the walls or objects around the invisible person is noticed. Since the aura of magic doesn't shine on the objects around a target unless the DM wishes to make it so, the target can not be seen at all. Especially with spells like Detect Invisibility, Invisibility Purge and True Seeing that are specificaly made to see through the illusion of Invisibility, it wouldn't make sense for a cantrip to do the same job.
Eater_Of_Souls 08-01-07, 05:37 PM	As for an alignment a lawful good would radiate both law and good, strenght of individuals aura depends on creatures HD and/or class levels. Hence aura strenght is tied to creatures "combat strenght" rather then it's actual commitments of doing evil. This also means that any tiefling is more "evil" than even the vilest of commoners you can think of, simply because a tiefling has more HDs then a commoner ;)
Eater_Of_Souls 08-01-07, 05:49 PM	As a DM I wouldn't let a PC locate an invisible creature or object with Detect Magic. Invisibility is an illusion that allows no save and causes the target to become undetectible to "visual senses". Detect magic requires you to "see" the targets aura which would be invisible to visual detection as well. It is the same as when an invisible character holds a light source. If the aura of light became visible at the point of the torch people would see a floating ball of light. This is not the case. The light cast on the walls or objects around the invisible person is noticed. Since the aura of magic doesn't shine on the objects around a target unless the DM wishes to make it so, the target can not be seen at all. Especially with spells like Detect Invisibility, Invisibility Purge and True Seeing that are specificaly made to see through the illusion of Invisibility, it wouldn't make sense for a cantrip to do the same job. You can allways let your baddy to have a spellcraft check. "oh hes casting a detect magic" "well I better start casting a fireball then" Since detecting anything else then that there actually is magic, using any detect spell without taking several turns to do so is useless as the spell also triggers from all the magic items that players are carrying around. So a baddy succeeds on spellcraft (surprise, surprise :P ) and quickly walks out of spell range, while our wizard is very busy on detecting auras of partys magical items ...
eamon 08-03-07, 11:17 AM	As a DM I wouldn't let a PC locate an invisible creature or object with Detect Magic. Invisibility is an illusion that allows no save and causes the target to become undetectible to "visual senses". Detect magic requires you to "see" the targets aura which would be invisible to visual detection as well. It is the same as when an invisible character holds a light source. If the aura of light became visible at the point of the torch people would see a floating ball of light. This is not the case. The light cast on the walls or objects around the invisible person is noticed. Since the aura of magic doesn't shine on the objects around a target unless the DM wishes to make it so, the target can not be seen at all. Especially with spells like Detect Invisibility, Invisibility Purge and True Seeing that are specificaly made to see through the illusion of Invisibility, it wouldn't make sense for a cantrip to do the same job. Light sources which become invisible still emit light, and the light they emit is directly visible. Detect Magic can be used to pinpoint aura's of invisible objects and creatures - but it takes 3 rounds. Even when pinpointed, however, the creature isn't visible and still has total concealment. To remain aware of the aura's location you must maintain concentration - i.e. pretty much do nothing but concentrate and move a little. The moment you start attacking, casting or anything else, you lose awareness of the precise location of the aura (although you can remember where it was). For reference see "Invisibility" in http://www.yoshiyama.org/srd/abilitiesAndConditions.html and see the D&D FAQ. So, although you can use Detect Magic to find an invisible creature, it doesn't work nearly as well as the other spells you mention. It takes three rounds of sustained concentration focused on one area - and before the end of that duration you learn nothing of value (since the party is liable to have a multitude of auras surrounding them, you need to wait the full three rounds and actually pinpoint the aura). Furthermore, it's only going to reveal a faint illusion aura (if even that only if you succeed on a DC 17 spellcraft check), which may or may not be an invisible creature.
Zealot 08-03-07, 01:23 PM	Light sources which become invisible still emit light, and the light they emit is directly visible. Detect Magic can be used to pinpoint aura's of invisible objects and creatures - but it takes 3 rounds. Even when pinpointed, however, the creature isn't visible and still has total concealment.... For reference see "Invisibility" in http://www.yoshiyama.org/srd/abilitiesAndConditions.html and see the D&D FAQ. First off you shouldn't ever quote that site to qualify a statement, it is not a WoTC resorce. It is a good resorce and I recomend it, but it is not always accurate. You are quite correct that the light is still visible but only after it is refracted off of a person or object not effected by the invisibility spell. If an Asherati from the Sandstorm book were to use his/her racial ability to shed light from their body while invisible, you would not see them or a glow in the shap of them. Just the well illuminated area around them. Does normal light still hit and get refracted by an invisible person? Yes, or see invis. would reveal a black form with no features. We do not see the refracted light or any light comming directly from the person or their items not because it is not being given off, but because the illusion fools us with no save allowed. All that being said, as a DM we can change any rule as long as we are consistant and fair. It might add interesting flavor to the game if casting invis. on the party seemed to create a swarm of floating balls of light. Think about all the magic items players have that give off light or glow starting with the number of magic weapons that shed light alone.
mvincent 08-03-07, 01:54 PM	First off you shouldn't ever quote that site to qualify a statement, it is not a WoTC resorce.Using a hypertext SRD is commonplace (almost expected) on these boards. Such sites are expected to use the SRD as given on the WotC site. I mainly use www.d20srd.org (which if anything is sometimes even more up to date than WotC's SRD), but other sites should be ok. If you believe any SRD site to be in error, you can always compare it with the SRD on the WotC site. However, saying that an SRD site in inaccurate simply because it is not on a WotC site is not sound, nor is advising others not to use hypertext SRD's as references when posting here. (To be fair: I too thought the same thing as you when I first started posting here. I have since researched the issue pretty thoroughly, and discovered that I was incorrect).
Zealot 08-03-07, 04:06 PM	I would like to point out that I was mistaken when i posted that Invis. would hide a target from Detect Magic. This point is made clear here on the WoTC site http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040914a Here it states Invisibility does not foil detection spells. A detect spell doesn't make an invisible creature or object visible, but if an unseen subject is in the area where the spell is aimed, the spell can give some hint of the unseen subject's presence. For example, a detect magic spell reveals the presence or absence of magical auras in the area where it is aimed. An invisible creature using an invisibility spell or magic item has a magical aura (thanks to the active spell or magic item) and a detect magic spell aimed into its area will reveal that aura. All the spell user knows, however, is that there is magic present somewhere within the area where the spell is aimed. If the detect magic user scans that same area for 3 consecutive rounds, the spell can reveal the location of the invisible magical aura (if the creature is still in area). The spell doesn't reveal anything else about the creature, or even that it is a creature at all. The spell user could aim an attack at the creature's location and have a chance to hit it. I like to be the first to point out any evidence that I am wrong.
MeinVT 08-04-07, 02:25 PM	I come back to my view that in the long run this is more easily used against the players than for them. In combat, Detect Magic is a pretty poor way to try to locate an invisible opponent. On the other hand, even a level 1 adept or sorceror placed to assist guards has the ability to cast detect magic when something 'odd is up'. Note that invisibility does allow a DC 20 spot check when within a certain distance (30 feet I think) to notice "something is odd". If a guard casts detect magic in response (a not unreasonable approach if your job is to watch for oddities) and they suddenly notice there are 13 auras ahead of them where normally there are none, well you can imagine the alarm will be raised!