DETECT EVIL - PALADINS

[CrimsonMist]

A paladin can't just go around finding evil people to attack, especially not in a civilised area with an established legal system Chaotic Good is as far from a paladin's required alignment as Lawful Evil.

[Moltrazahn]

Sadly no. We aren't mature enough to deserve it.

Dis.

[flipside43]

I was reading a book recently and the paladin in it was working to take down a band of thieves. He used it quite often to discern whom he might be able to trust, whom he might have to investigate further or as far as who might be part of the band (given their methods were rather evil, though this one is context based). Point is, it's used largely as a tool in how a paladin interacts with people vs just LN judge dread search and destroy.

[cosmic ray]

Imagine how trigger-happy paladins would be with an ability like this haha!

[Steve]

I was reading a book recently and the paladin in it was working to take down a band of thieves. He used it quite often to discern whom he might be able to trust, whom he might have to investigate further or as far as who might be part of the band (given their methods were rather evil, though this one is context based). Point is, it's used largely as a tool in how a paladin interacts with people vs just LN judge dread search and destroy.

It would be very interesting if a Detect Evil-like feat was generated, where the Paladin received a certain abstract understanding, about the subject, if used upon. Even if it was something like 2 optional returns: "This person is more morally aligned with you." and "This person is less morally aligned with you." Perhaps add in a benefit from points in Sense Motive, so that slightly more detailed "feelings" are gained.

Obviously, it should never be something that says "CHAOTIC EVIL! CHAOTIC EVIL! TAKE UP YOU SWORD AND STRIKE THEM DOWN!" kinda stuff. More along the lines of insight which should rely on further IC RP in order to discern the true morality of the subject.

[CleverUsername123]

If a cleric of your faith is nearby, you could use Awaken Sin.
"Now I will cast a spell to awaken the sins within you! If this spell harms you, you are an evildoer, and must repent. If you're unharmed, then you are a law-abiding citizen, and our suspicion has been unjust."
Something like that.

[Pimple]

If a cleric of your faith is nearby, you could use Awaken Sin.
"Now I will cast a spell to awaken the sins within you! If this spell harms you, you are an evildoer, and must repent. If you're unharmed, then you are a law-abiding citizen, and our suspicion has been unjust."
Something like that.

I don't see how that's any different from using smite evil or good for the same purpose?

[Yiska]

If a cleric of your faith is nearby, you could use Awaken Sin.
"Now I will cast a spell to awaken the sins within you! If this spell harms you, you are an evildoer, and must repent. If you're unharmed, then you are a law-abiding citizen, and our suspicion has been unjust."
Something like that.

I think any sort of harmful spell would have to follow standard PvP rules, unless both players consented before hand.

[CleverUsername123]

If a cleric of your faith is nearby, you could use Awaken Sin.
"Now I will cast a spell to awaken the sins within you! If this spell harms you, you are an evildoer, and must repent. If you're unharmed, then you are a law-abiding citizen, and our suspicion has been unjust."
Something like that.

I don't see how that's any different from using smite evil or good for the same purpose?

A) Clerics don't have the same code of conduct as paladins.
B) Smite Evil still deals your weapon damage against enemies who aren't evil. This doesn't damage non-evil enemies at all.

I think any sort of harmful spell would have to follow standard PvP rules, unless both players consented before hand.

True.

[Brother Bruce]

A) Clerics don't have the same code of conduct as paladins.
B) Smite Evil still deals your weapon damage against enemies who aren't evil. This doesn't damage non-evil enemies at all.

A) they can
B) evil character can make a will save to negate. fools everyone into thinking they arent evil. 2-e-z

[Rask]

Am I crazy or did this server once have detect evil? I dunno, it's been ages since I played a paladin, but I swear there was detect evil at one point, and it would pop up with that message "There is a faint evil in your presence" ect, or "there is a foul evil in your presence" depending on if they were le/ne/ce/ it would give a stronger evil detection, though it wouldnt point out who exactly it was near you. So you never got a pinpoint accuracy unless you got the person suspected alone.

[Winterborne]

I personally think that an ultra-zealous paladin who is going around casting detect evil on random people just because they might be evil is not really doing a good job of playing lawful good and should as a result have their alignment changed (and thus, lose the power to detect evil).

Killing someone because your spell told you they are evil is still going to end up breaking some laws, especially if they haven't (yet) done anything wrong.

[Darradarljod]

A paladin can't just go around finding evil people to attack, especially not in a civilised area with an established legal system Chaotic Good is as far from a paladin's required alignment as Lawful Evil.

That example I gave - he must have surely had a Smiting Permit!

[metaquad4]

Just a crazy idea that popped into my head: Base it on the Paladin's Wisdom Score. A paladin capable of reading someone's aura must be wise enough to interpret what each difference means, after all!

Detect Evil is capable of detecting creatures if you have a natural 16 (+3) wisdom (you get or can use the feat if you have paladin 10 and a natural 16 wisdom). The paladin starts off with 1 use of this ability, and gets another for every 3 WIS mod they have. If the paladin doesn't have 16 wisdom and attempts to use the feat, it gives them an immediate false reading.

Then, you go from here:

All the following rolls would be silent. Neither the paladin nore the victim of Detect Evil would be able to see what they rolled, and the Paladin would only see the result at the end.

Step 1) Defender Rolls a 3d20 vs a DC of the Paladin's WIS Mod+1/2 Sense Motive (Rounded Down).

Step 2) If the paladin succeeds this roll, they get a general reading that is open to interpretation (this person might be evil, this person might be good). This general reading has a 75% chance to be accurate.

Step 3) They must then roll WIS mod+1d10, with a DC of 25 to understand their reading and get a clear picture of the person's alignment (this person is evil, this person is not evil).

Step 4) If the paladin fails any roll, they roll WIS mod+1d10, with a DC of 15. If they fail this roll, they get a random misreading. If they succeed this roll, they are capable of recognizing that they are unable to read the individual properly and get no reading.

If the Defender has (lesser) mind blank or protection from good on, then Detect Evil will immediately skip to step 4.

If the Defender has non-detection on, then Detect Evil forces the paladin to roll Paladin Level+D20 vs the Defender's non-detection level (CL+15 if the caster cast on themselves, CL+11 if the caster cast on another individual.). If the Paladin fails this, then Detect Evil will immediately skip to step 4.

----------------------

Basically, it'll play out like this:

1) Paladin casts Detect Good on an individual.
2) The mechanics then do all the rolls in the background, the paladin/victim see none of the rolls taking place.
3) The paladin then sees the result only. The result could be one of the following:
a) (If he made it to step 2) This person might be evil, this person might not be evil. (25% chance of giving the wrong prediction.)
b) (If he made it to step 3 and passed it) This person is evil, this person is not evil.
c) (If he was jaunted to step 4 and was able to recognize he failed) You cannot read this individual's alignment.
d) (If he was jaunted to step 4 and did not recognize he failed) This person is evil, this person is not evil (chosen randomly with a 50/50 chance of choosing either).

----------------------------------------------------------------

This kind of implementation would not just allow some defense against the feat but it could also serve to showcase a good reason why paladins wouldn't just run around, being known as infallible beacons able to read any individual instantly and spread the knowledge of people's goodness or evilness. A paladin's reading wouldn't be infallible, and it would entirely be dependent on their ability to read the alignment aura presented to them (using their wisdom/judgement). Paladins being subject to false readings would give the outside world reason to be suspicious of their judgement and to take them with a grain of salt.

Meanwhile, paladins would be able to use these readings as a general guide on who to look out for and who to trust. They would know their readings are not infallible as well, and would use them just as much as they use their own eyes (they would know their eyes are subject to illusions, and would not just rely on them). By this token, they would use it but not rely on it completely.

Its a much more interesting dynamic than just painting paladins as infallible alignment detectors, and it has potential to generate interesting RP.

[amped]

I personally think that an ultra-zealous paladin who is going around casting detect evil on random people just because they might be evil is not really doing a good job of playing lawful good and should as a result have their alignment changed (and thus, lose the power to detect evil).

Killing someone because your spell told you they are evil is still going to end up breaking some laws, especially if they haven't (yet) done anything wrong.

I am overwhelmingly overjoyed that I am not the only person that feels this way. +1

Just because the person has an evil alignment doesn't necessarily mean that they would do anything to break your dogma or the laws of the land. This wreaks of metagaming (even if it isn't meant to) and would fall right in line with you asking me for a bluff roll if the name my characters gave you didn't match my character sheet. There would need to be some precursor as to why your character would be suspicious other than just jumping on the paranoia band wagon. We're evil. We aren't all Banites.

As for offering something that would be incredibly vague, I wouldn't mind. In the event that our characters fought under these pretenses and there were witnesses I would assume you would stand trial for attacking someone without reason near a town. If you plotted to do so outside of town I would imagine you would lose lawful points as it was against the laws of the land and plotting to kill really seems like pre-meditated murder......

Sense motive (which requires dm supervision) would be perfect for everything you're looking for.

If it were allowed to have it the way you like then as an evil character I should be able to attack and kill you without any indication I am doing so based on the holy symbols and attire you are carrying/wearing.