Post/Author/DateTime	Post
2y1y1z2 10-25-05, 04:10 PM	What does anyone think about simply removing divination spells from the game. None of my PCs ever look twice at them, and all I hear about them is "They ruin the element of surprise and make finding the 'bad guys' too easy." As such, I am considering removing them entirely. What say you?
elemental evil 10-25-05, 04:22 PM	Yeah, why not? Mix it up. It always keeps the players guessing. Otherwise, they'll metagame everything to death.
FlameLover 10-25-05, 05:31 PM	It is a large part of fantasy though and removing it can have some detrimental effects to the feel of the world. Ofcrouse if no-one is currently using it those effects would be minimal but it'll still impact the world somewhat. What i would do is just fix Divination as a school of magic. It needs more combat spells like True Strike and the spells it does have like Scrying should be watered down abit so you can get vague concepts - nothing concrete - and even they can be wrong.
strumbleduck 10-25-05, 06:47 PM	Detect Magic, Read Magic, Comprehend Languages, Identify, True Strike, See Invisibility, Arcane Sight, Tongues, and True Seeing are in the Divination school and get used all the time. It's probably not a good idea to get rid of those spells. I assume, though, that you're talking about spells like augury, divination, and scrying. It's true that not all parties use these spells very often. They're sort of like illusion spells in that way -- some parties find them very powerful and use them all the time, and other parties just aren't interested. I played a campaign where they were never used once, until we were going up against a BBEG vampire cleric and we needed to figure out about what level she was so we knew whether we had a chance with greater turning attempts and disrupting weapon. We got our answer, but we didn't find out about some other tricks she had up her sleeve. In my experience, divination spells make the game more fun. Given the choice between: 1. having no idea what's going to happen, 2. having some idea what's going to happen, and 3. knowing exacty what's going to happen, possibility #2 is usually the most interesting. There's nothing particularly wrong about getting rid of them. It won't unbalance the game in any way to not have divination spells. But if I were you I'd leave them in.
Elgonn 10-25-05, 08:50 PM	Don't get rid of them. Just be happy your players aren't good at abusing them.
Ozymandias V. 10-26-05, 12:47 PM	Also, just because they're not being used DOES NOT mean you should get rid of them. Better to have and not need than to need and not have, da?
Psychoticpsymon 10-26-05, 01:18 PM	From what I hear, augery + deck of many things = pwnage.
weasel fierce 10-26-05, 01:52 PM	If you dont feel they add anything, ditch them
Gilean 10-27-05, 01:18 PM	I'd say that if they don't have a negative effect on anything (including the setting, the PCs, and NPCs, and players), leave them be. D&D is about choices, as they say.
Verelor 10-28-05, 09:09 PM	Remove the few spells that may actually ruin some part of your storyline, such as augury, divination, and scrying. Even then, I wouldn't recommend it, ESPECIALLY since most of your PC's hardly look twice at them. See the crud cycle you've got going here?
Tyler Do'Urden 10-29-05, 01:47 AM	If nobody's using them, why do you need to remove them? Nobody's using them. Just forget about them. Besides, if all you're talking about is seeing the future, ditching Divination entirely also removes detect magic, identify, scrying, detect evil, etc.
caeruleus 10-29-05, 02:22 AM	D&D is about choices, as they say. Including the choice to eliminate what one wants to eliminate. ;)
Gilean 10-29-05, 03:06 AM	Including the choice to eliminate what one wants to eliminate. ;)Which ends up negating a lot more choices, so not recommended.
2y1y1z2 10-30-05, 01:23 AM	Besides, if all you're talking about is seeing the future, ditching Divination entirely also removes detect magic, identify, scrying, detect evil, etc. I'm talking about detect evil and the laike as well. The classic paladin response to a new person is "I Detect Evil." A great way to ruin an otherwise great story of making a new NPC friend and having him backstab you, etc. But it seems that most of you disagree with getting rid of divination, so I'll leave it in. Like you said, they're not using it anyway.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-30-05, 01:14 AM	I'm talking about detect evil and the laike as well. The classic paladin response to a new person is "I Detect Evil." A great way to ruin an otherwise great story of making a new NPC friend and having him backstab you, etc. Well there's always...Undetectable Alignment Abjuration Level: Brd 1, Clr 2, Pal 2 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Target: One creature or object Duration: 24 hours Saving Throw: Will negates (object) Spell Resistance: Yes (object) An undetectable alignment spell conceals the alignment of an object or a creature from all forms of divination. Not to mention the halfling greeting sheet (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/GiantITP/ootscript?SK=202).
Verelor 10-30-05, 06:00 PM	If you're removing detect evil and other similair abilities, i really hope your games have some deep role-playing to make that up.
weasel fierce 10-31-05, 01:04 AM	Why ? There are plenty of RPG's that dont have "detect evil" or any such stuff, and work just fine.
Gilean 10-31-05, 01:09 PM	Alignments are notoriously bad at encouraging RP. Actual benefits for playing a character, OTOH, do facilate such playing. For examples, see the Riddle of Steel (http://www.theriddleofsteel.net/) or games from White Wolf (I suggest TROS, for reference, of these options).
Mind Rogue 11-01-05, 01:11 PM	Keep in mind that the Paladin's detect evil ability is a spell-like ability. This means that it provokes an AoO. In my campaign world, people tend to be very distrustful of magic until they understand it, so using detect evil is a good way of getting slapped on principle, regardless of what their alignment is. Also, don't forget about ambient background noise. The first round, you only find the presence or absence of evil, so if there is anyone else around, you can't be certain that you are really sensing the subject and not someone nearby (although this allows you to tell immediately that she is not evil if no evil is detected). Round 2 detects the quantity, but the exact positions of the evil sources is not detected until round 3. This is plenty of time for people to either move away outside of range or get so angry that you are using magic in their presence to attack you and disrupt your spell. Also, there are a large number of evil people around. Humans tend to favor no alignment in particular, so around 3 in 10 humans are evil. This might mean that they are greedy covetous people who overcharge for a room at the inn, or it might mean that they are actually out to backstab you. However, just being evil is not a crime or reason to be smote, and the former isn't likely to actually do anything against you (except charge you 2 gp for a 5 sp room).
Thelon Fairblade 11-02-05, 09:36 AM	As is pointed out, there are some commonly used spells in the Divination School. Before you remove the whole school, check the list to see which spells you want to keep. They can be easily moved to "Universal" or one of the other schools, or re-flavored for the world. For example, Detect Magic and Arcane Sight could be redefined as the mage's training allowing him to sense the mystic energies... not "divination", per se, just senstivity. Another thought is to redesign the spells. Make divinations (augury, divination, etc.) "ritual" spells that require much preparation, long casting times, costly components, etc. Oracles are mysterious and rare for a reason... they aren't casting 1-round 2nd-level spells, after all! Another thought is to move the divinations to another class entirely (even an NPC class), but even then you should examine which spells to leave in place.
2y1y1z2 11-02-05, 12:29 PM	Another thought is to redesign the spells. Make divinations (augury, divination, etc.) "ritual" spells that require much preparation, long casting times, costly components, etc. Oracles are mysterious and rare for a reason... they aren't casting 1-round 2nd-level spells, after all! I like this idea. It'll create a lot of work, but it seems more workable than just removing the spells altogether. Thanks for the idea.
Millennium 11-02-05, 05:02 PM	Keep in mind that the Paladin's detect evil ability is a spell-like ability. This means that it provokes an AoO. In my campaign world, people tend to be very distrustful of magic until they understand it, so using detect evil is a good way of getting slapped on principle, regardless of what their alignment is. Exactly. Casting this sort of thing directly on a person isn't Evil, but in most cultures it would be considered very rude, as it's not only a gesture of mistrust but an invasion of privacy. A paladin who uses Detect Evil in this fashion shouldn't have very many friends. Of course, you could also go back to the old 2e interpretation of the spells, where Detect _____ and such couldn't pick up on a person's alignment; they had to actually have an aura, like the kind clerics have. This is as easy as removing the "Evil creature" line from the Aura Power table. Note that there are some quirks in this altered system which keep Detect Evil from being the reliable Evil-dar that it's often abused as... A LE cleric of Wee Jas shows up on Detect Law but not Detect Evil, because Wee Jas isn't Evil. A LG cleric of St. Cuthbert doesn't show up on Detect Good for similar reasons. Paladins don't show up on Detect Law, because according to RAW their class only grants an aura of Good. Of course, you could amend the class feature so that they also get an aura of Law, and I recommend doing that. Eludecia the Succubus Paladin (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20050824a) shows up on both Detect Good and Detect Evil, because she has both auras: Good from her paladin levels and Evil because she has the Outsider [Evil, Chaotic] subtype. If you house-rule paladins to have an aura of Law as well as Good, then she will actually show up on all four Detect (alignment) spells. Incidentally, this means that she has to concentrate for at least two rounds to get anything useful out of her Detect Evil ability, because her own Evil aura always triggers the "presence of Evil" effect in the first round. Ordinary humans become much more valuable minions for fiends, because they can go into Detect Evil-secured areas without raising the alarm, walk right through a Magic Circle against Evil, and so on. Celestials can also benefit more from mundane humanoid servants for the same reason. Classes which suddenly become outsiders at a given level (such as the monk) will suddenly start to show up on Detect spells as appropriate. This may seem strange, but given that they also suddenly become immune to spells that only affect humanoids it's not really all that much stranger. This gives non-Aura classes a slight boost, because classes with Auras will have a vulnerability that non-Aura classes don't. Then again, considering that the two major Aura classes are often considered overpowered, maybe this isn't such a bad thing. Frankly, having ordinary aura-less people show up on Detect spells was one of the biggest mistakes Wizards made in 3e, precisely because it turned the spells into an Evil-dar for anyone who cared to use it that way.
2y1y1z2 11-03-05, 10:57 AM	Thank you Millennium, this is just the kind of solution I was looking for. Yay for Millennium!
Patrick Draken-Korin 01-26-06, 07:28 PM	some of these suggestions will be really useful; i'm already reworking the alignment detection spells (go Millennium!! :D ). i'd say definelty keep the school and mess with the spells (and other problematic abilities) instead. -------- also, as for that paladin, if spellcasting (of any sort) is considered extremely rude, then either this paladin is lawful stupid (can't understand why everyone dislikes/hates him/her, when he/she is "a champion of good") or you may have failed to coney the severe rudeness that is spellcasting. of course, i could be wrong on both counts, but any which way, i'd simply recommend comming down hard on the paladin. say, with a scaling effect based on a group of NPC's. guy A) minor flunky to the next employer; if detected, is angered and gives bad impression to employer (they still get the job, but are treated rudely and are told about the lower payout- of course the paladin might not mind, but the others probably would). guy B) major funky to employer (either is support on the mission, or otherwise aids the party); if detected is rightiously offended, as he/she's a good priest (though it isn't made obvious- they retain their job, but get little help, with the paladin getting nothing but scorn). guy C) employer (but identity isn't made obvious quickly, the employer likes to have a freindly relationship rather than master-servant); if detcted is freaking mad (he/she's had reports from both flunkies), fires them (no pay, even though they may have accomplished a signifigant portion of the overall job) and has them arrested (for challenging the honor of a noble known for it with magic)- paladin is not placed in solitary; allies are therefore allowed to berate him/her. guy D) parties legal advisor (a rival to the employer, honorable noble, specifically a paladin- intentionally keeps identity secret, waiting to see how accused paladin acts); if detected, simply makes no effort to aid them- party is fined, and if the paladin angers the judge, said paladin is hanged (other characters that anger the judge merely increase the fine as they are associated with the paladin, while the paladin is the offender). note that execution may be considered extreme, it requires a person to take 4 stupid acts in a row, and anger an impartial person. altogether i'd hope that a only someone who insists on playing lawful stupid could reach that conclusion (even an int 6 character should be able to figure out this, so even if int is the paladin's dump stat, they should stop detecting evil after guy B or C). if this proves helpful, good, otherwise, sorry i wasted your time. bye.
Aurotuli 01-27-06, 12:16 AM	Looking over the Divination school, we basically have these six categories: Communication, Detection, Divination, Locating, Magical Perception, and Scrying. Some spells are harder to place than others, and so I have placed them twice in the schools that seemed best suited to them. Dropping any one of these sub-sections of the Divinatory school could alter the game in a variety of ways, some more obvious than others. Detection spells, for instance, would seem at first to be scarcely missed, yet short of a few divinations (several of which are potentially inaccurate) there is no other way to be certain of alignment without attacking and hoping for the best (dispel evil, smite evil, etc). Furthermore, the removal of spells such as Detect Magic could make determining what is or is not a magic item more difficult short of paying 100 gp (minimum) to have it Identified, a costly endevour indeed. Discern Lies could be dropped without too much trouble due to Zone of Truth (a lower level spell, granted, but of another school), while the removal of Find Traps and Detect Secret Doors would enhance the importance of the Rogue. The loss of Detect Undead would make hunting them a little more . . . interesting, and possibly more dangerous - which can go both ways in terms of being a 'good' idea. The increase in danger / uncertainty is sometimes view positively by players. All this, just for the mostly first level detection spells. Divination, however, is typically used as a source of information. Removal of it will likely solve most of your problems with the Divinatory school of magic. However, what remains may not necessarily be divinatory either. Scrying often conjures eyes or a scrying sensor, for example, and magical perception could as easily be defined by transmutation or even the universal school. Communication spells mostly deal with thoughts - and therefore the mind, and therefore potentially Enchantment. Only Detection and Locating spells remain, and some of them could be solved via conjuration (summoning) [locate creature] or even necromancy (detect undead), although the Location spells are perhaps the hardest to reallocate. Removing all Divination spells will have a notable impact on the game. Alignments and even the very existence of magic is suddenly uncertain (as there is no way to determine if an item is magical - let alone what its properties might be). Locating anything is extremely more difficult, mysteries abound, and communication - if you do not know the language - is a real hassle. Without scrying the team will often have to work with guesswork (as Scrying, Prying Eyes, Clairvoyance, etc are out). On the plus side, True Strike is also gone. Note that getting lost becomes easier and tracking more difficult, due to the loss of spells such as Commune with Nature and Stone Tell. Understand also, if you remove this school the NPC villains also lose it, affecting there ability to track, plan for, understand their foes - the PCs. More surprises should abound on both sides as a result. I suggest merely reassigning some sub-schools of divination to other categories (communication -> mostly enchantment; magical perception -> mostly transmutation; scrying -> mostly conjuration, up the spell levels by two levels [Greater Scrying (9), Clairvoyance (5)]). If you then remove most detection spells (some can go to other schools, such as Detect Undead -> Necromancy), divinatory spells, and locating spells, then you will have removed the Divination school entirely while also keeping many of the spells - the ones that do not "ruin" the game for the players. So, what do you think? Oh, and I separated the spells as such: Detection Spells Communication - 0 - Detect Magic (listed twice) - 0 - Read Magic (listed twice) - 0 - Detect Poison - 1 - Comprehend Language - 0 - Know Direction - 2 - Detect Thoughts (listed twice) - 1 - Detect Animals or Plants - 3 - Tongues - 1 - Detect Chaos - 5 - Telepathic Bond - 1 - Detect Evil - 1 - Detect Good Locating - 1 - Detect Law - 1 - True Strike (listed twice) - 1 - Detect Secret Doors - 2 - Locate Objects - 1 - Detect Snares & Pits - 4 - Locate Creature - 1 - Detect Undead - 6 - Find the Path (listed twice) - 2 - Detect Thoughts (listed twice) - 8 - Discern Location - 2 - Find Traps - 4 - Detect Scrying (listed twice) Magical Perception - 4 - Discern Lies (listed twice) - 0 - Detect Magic (listed twice) - 6 - Find the Path (listed twice) - 0 - Read Magic (listed twice) - 1 - Identify Divination - 2 - See Invisibility - 0 - Guidance - 3 - Arcane Sight - 1 - Augury - 6 - Analyze Dweomer - 1 - Speak with Animals - 6 - True Seeing - 1 - True Strike (listed twice) - 7 - Arcane Sight, Greater - 2 - Status - 3 - Speak with Plants Scrying - 4 - Discern Lies (listed twice) - 3 - Clairaudiance / Clairvoyance - 4 - Divination - 4 - Arcane Eye - 5 - Commune - 4 - Detect Scrying (listed twice) - 5 - Commune with Nature - 4 - Scrying - 5 - Contact Other Plane - 5 - Prying Eyes - 6 - Legend Lore - 8 - Prying Eyes, Greater - 6 - Stone Tell - 7 - Scrying, Greater - 7 - Vision - 8 - Moment of Prescience - 9 - Foresight I wish there was a way to do 'code' that did not use such a narrow width for its window. :ahem:
weasel fierce 01-27-06, 12:28 AM	Aurotuli's post pretty much sums up why I'd rather not have divination spells :)
Aurotuli 01-27-06, 12:33 AM	Hmm, it occurs to me that another solution could present itself to your problem. Domains. Consider, for instance: 0 Guidance 1 Augury 2 Status 3 4 Divination 5 Commune 6 Legend Lore 7 Vision 8 Moment of Prescience 9 Foresight So, all of the 'problem' divinatory spells fit neatly into one domain (minus a third level spell). Of course, we could always bump up the Guidance spell and the others - nicely fitting all into one domaint. That would leave (if combined with most of the Locating spells): 1 Speak with Animals 2 Locate Object 3 Speak with Plants 4 Locate Creature 5 Commune with Nature 6 Find the Path 7 Stone Tell 8 Discern Location 9 It needs a nineth level spell, but it makes a good 'close to nature' domain - which should be limited to whomever the main nature deity is - quite separate from the other deity, thus preventing both of these spell lists from ever encountering each other in the same cleric. Hmm, if you bump all the spells up a level you could probably find a good 1st level Druidic spell to place in slot one, I think. Perhaps Detect Poison, if you also allow it to detect venomous creatures / polluted water. So the only spells remaining that could not readily be placed are the Discern Lies spells (which can be placed in the Detection category) and the True Strike spell (which becomes a bit of a problem due to lack of category, but perhaps it could be placed in Conjuration (summoning), reversed (bannished towards the creature, not summoned towards the caster). With these spells suddenly the perview of only a couple domains (perhaps the second domain also being only Druidic spells, but the same newly elevated level as the cleric domain equivalent, making them less commonly in use), the divinatory school sudden collapses into spells that - excluding many of the detection spells (which maybe could be placed - in part - into a Universal school?) - are readily placed into other schools, negating the need for a divinatory school, mostly. Well, how does this work?