Detect Alignment Spells

[Kitunenotsume]

That being said, from an IC perspective, someone with an extremely evil alignment would probably pretty consistently flag as evil, so I agree with the suggestion at the bottom of Renshouj's post, too.

So everyone is aware, the 'flags as evil' provided by the 3.5 version is not a single "yes/no" value, but a gradient that does care about the nature of the thing.
This is in interesting counterpoint to what I have found in the 2e version which *is* a strict "Is/is-not evil", but accomanied by the rather complicated "Evil intent" parameter.

As such, I figured I'd post the 3.5 aura strength table here for ease of reference for everyone. Note that it's the same for all 4 Detect Alignment variants, just trade out [Evil] for the alignment of choice, and probably ignore the "undead" row.

Aura Power
An evil aura’s power depends on the type of evil creature or object that you’re detecting and its HD, caster level, or (in the case of a cleric) class level; see the accompanying table. If an aura falls into more than one strength category, the spell indicates the stronger of the two.

Creature/Object	Faint Aura	Moderate Aura	Strong Aura	OverwhelmingAura
Evil Creature* (HD)	10 or lower	11-25	26-50	51+
Undead (HD)	2 or lower	3-8	9-20	21+
Evil Outsider (HD)	1 or lower	2-4	5-10	11+
Cleric of an Evil Deity** (Class Levels)	1	2-4	5-10	11+
Evil item or spell (CL)	2 or lower	3-8	9-20	21+

*Except for undead and outsiders, which have their own entries on the table.
**Some characters who are not clerics may radiate an aura of equivalent power. The class description will indicate whether this applies.
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm

A few notes:

1. Classes like Blackguard are those explicitly listed as having an aura of Evil similar to clerics. Paladins have an aura of Good similar to clerics, as well. Why neither has an Aura of Law or Chaos is beyond my knowledge.
2. A neutral cleric of an evil god detects as evil appropriate for their class levels.
3. I usually have seen that full class level is considered, even if only 1 of them is cleric. The alternative reading is "Only your cleric class levels", but that interacts very weirdly with PRCs that are effectively extensions of cleric (and your Cleric/Hierophant/Solar Channeler is counted as way lower than they have any right to be), particularly considering that cleric by itself is only useful past the first level for PRC unlocks.
4. The "Evil magic item or spell" listing is a bit vague, since it's unclear if it means spell level or caster level, and by strict interpretation, a level 30 casting [Darkbolt] (Cleric/Wizard 2) would flag as "Overwhelming Evil". or it could be "Faint" if it was supposed to check Spell level.
5. An epic-level Good-aligned cleric carrying a Lich's phylactery (or more likely an Requires:Evil epic item) would detect as both Overwhelmingly Good, and Overwhelmingly Evil. Just because they detect as Evil doesn't mean Smite will work, nor is indicative of actual alignment.
6. I would personally be a proponent to reduce the lower-HD of "Evil Creatures" off the chart, so it progresses [11-15/16-25/26-50/50+], or a similar effect. A moderate level fighter would (depending on #4) show up as a lower evil than a neutral cleric with an active Death-Knell buff.
7. To actually identify that a given person is emitting a given alignment requires the caster to sit there for 18 seconds studiously looking over the target. If you choose to move away first because a creep decided to peer at you across the campfire that is fair play, as is popping a potion of Nondetection and decrying them for suppressing your halfling culture. Otherwise they just get either (a) *any* of the listed triggers exist in the area scanned (Which could literally be a CL1 Requires:Evil item), or (b) what the biggest aura is. In neither case does it tie it to a person or thing
8. Nondetection is Sorc/Wis 3. The potion cost would be 750GP by default, but making it short duration and cheaper could allow for a reactionary counter, as potions take much less than 18 seconds to use. As do scrolls, for that matter. It's still an opposed CL check though, so UMD might not be reliable.

[BloodRiot]

If Detect “Alignment” is going IG, why should it NOT function exactly as the 3.5 Rules describe?

Probably because if it simply detects "evil alignment" instead of the double confirmation that Rhi proposed, it would be a very unhealthy addition to the game. THEN people would use it excessively and likely even meta. Use it like how people used Smite Evil. With how Rhifox is currently proposing it, I see it as a useful tool for those that care about it, but not an end-all be-all. Since it requires double confirmation, it is less gamey from an OOC standpoint, and gives characters more flexibility.

Detect Evil as 3.5 would be great if DM supervision was 24/7. But it's not. And because of that, the way Rhi is intending to implement it works better without DM supervision. It doesn't ruin infiltration RP (since people will have access to either spells or amulets), it gives more challenge and an extra, in my opinion interesting, mechanic that directly deepens RP.

Also, I do not think either false negatives or false positives should be removed. Things not being 100% accurate help eliminate meta sillyness. Though, if possible, I'd maybe argue that someone of Evil alignment with, lets say, 10 or below alignment points on the G-E axis, should give off an evil aura, even if faint, no matter the class.

Ill say it for the benefit of those that don't know my opinion yet. I don't like this, I don't want this, I don't think we should have this.

Having said that, if we MUST have this, then this is my opinion on it:

The simply flagging off the alignment alone is in fact the most objective way to go about this. Good/Evil Axis is not a actually a tri state affair. It's a grading scale with 100 steps of precision separating the angelic do-gooder from the monstrous evil-doer. Requires no DM oversight 24-7 and if the spell still requires to meet a DC to succeed and has counters such as some hide alignment property or spell, it's the most objective, non confusing way to go about it while still having it not be a 100% success and fail without any gradient. The only thing it requires is having DMs be more liberal with awarding alignment change points based off IC actions. Even if someone games the system by being Neutral Aligned in sheet while acting Evil or Good, with enough time this will change.

The dual confirmation however, requires too many assumptions to be made, It's overly complex and arbitrary and has much less granularity then the above. Requires much more DM ruling. A character that is of Evil Alignment but has no mechanically evil classes, nor is a cleric type, worshipper of an evil deity, even if they commit evil acts, can't be flagged evil unless a DM does so as they will never be at risk of tripping a second confirmation. There is no mechanical way to flag a PC as having ICly committed an evil act without DM being present to oversee it. Therefore a hypothetical Good Orc that has taken Assassin Level and committed no acts of evil against anyone will run the risk of flagging by default, whereas an Evil Human that has objectively committed acts of evil ICly but has no other triggers for confirmation such as a triggering class or item in their possession will never flag as evil without DM oversight.

Are there any perfect solutions? no, unless a permanent 24/7 DM is invented. so to me the solutions that allows less gray areas and is more easily explained, implemented and played is best which i argue is simply going off you sheet's alignment.

[Wolfshear]

The alignment system in d&d has always been garbage. Detect evil has never really meaningfully contributed to rp it just creates an endless loop of "I detected evil so i stab" and will be the basis of all future arguements against a person.

It will only mechanically justify and further a complete lack of nuance thats already kind of a problem.
I think implementing this is going to lead to nothing but drama and eyerolling situations.

While I think for the most part bringing things closer to pnp can be a boon..There are certain things that just dont really work in a larger scope as they were designed for table play between a couple friends that all know each other pretty well. Detect alignment is much more feasible and manageable in a group of 3-5
But with the amount of people here it is just going to get messy, people will get annoyed at having to deal with "I detected evil so you are scum and i have full legal right to kill you" and people will also get annoyed if they are told that they don't have full legal right to kill something "Because evil...They detected it..It's right there"

I don't see a positive result in this.

[DaloLorn]

That being said, from an IC perspective, someone with an extremely evil alignment would probably pretty consistently flag as evil, so I agree with the suggestion at the bottom of Renshouj's post, too.

So everyone is aware, the 'flags as evil' provided by the 3.5 version is not a single "yes/no" value, but a gradient that does care about the nature of the thing.
This is in interesting counterpoint to what I have found in the 2e version which *is* a strict "Is/is-not evil", but accomanied by the rather complicated "Evil intent" parameter.

Yeah, I know. What I'm saying is that a PC with a Morality score of 10 or lower would definitely qualify as an "Evil Creature" per the table.

A few notes:

1. Classes like Blackguard are those explicitly listed as having an aura of Evil similar to clerics. Paladins have an aura of Good similar to clerics, as well. Why neither has an Aura of Law or Chaos is beyond my knowledge.
2. A neutral deity of an evil god detects as evil appropriate for their class levels.
3. I usually have seen that full class level is considered, even if only 1 of them is cleric. The alternative reading is "Only your cleric class levels", but that interacts very weirdly with PRCs that are effectively extensions of cleric (and your Cleric/Hierophant/Solar Channeler is counted as way lower than they have any right to be), particularly considering that cleric by itself is only useful past the first level for PRC unlocks.
4. The "Evil magic item or spell" listing is a bit vague, since it's unclear if it means spell level or caster level, and by strict interpretation, a level 30 casting [Darkbolt] (Cleric/Wizard 2) would flag as "Overwhelming Evil". or it could be "Faint" if it was supposed to check Spell level.
5. An epic-level Good-aligned cleric carrying a Lich's phylactery (or more likely an Requires:Evil epic item) would detect as both Overwhelmingly Good, and Overwhelmingly Evil. Just because they detect as Evil doesn't mean Smite will work, nor is indicative of actual alignment.
6. I would personally be a proponent to reduce the lower-HD of "Evil Creatures" off the chart, so it progresses [11-15/16-25/26-50/50+], or a similar effect. A moderate level fighter would (depending on #4) show up as a lower evil than a neutral cleric with an active Death-Knell buff.
7. To actually identify that a given person is emitting a given alignment requires the caster to sit there for 18 seconds studiously looking over the target. If you choose to move away first because a creep decided to peer at you across the campfire that is fair play, as is popping a potion of Nondetection and decrying them for suppressing your halfling culture. Otherwise they just get either (a) *any* of the listed triggers exist in the area scanned (Which could literally be a CL1 Requires:Evil item), or (b) what the biggest aura is. In neither case does it tie it to a person or thing
8. Nondetection is Sorc/Wis 3. The potion cost would be 750GP by default, but making it short duration and cheaper could allow for a reactionary counter, as potions take much less than 18 seconds to use. As do scrolls, for that matter. It's still an opposed CL check though, so UMD might not be reliable.

1. Good question.
2. You mean a neutral priest of an evil god. Yes.
3. The divine PRCs would, IMO, count as an extension of your cleric levels. Notice the ** comment at the end of your table.
4. It's not at all unclear, it says CL.
5. Yeah, that tracks.
6. That makes sense, I guess.
7. Uh huh.
8. Ehh, nerfing Nondetection for the sake of a new spell seems kinda weird.

Therefore a hypothetical Good Orc that has taken Assassin Level and committed no acts of evil against anyone will run the risk of flagging by default

... No. A hypothetical Evil orc with Assassin levels would flag by default, but a hypothetical Good orc wouldn't.

Also, there are reasons why the server has traditionally punished attempts at concretely identifying another PC's alignment via mechanics. (Which I think has always been very weird, considering that multiple PC-created spells key off alignment in ways that really should be understood by their creators...)

[Rhifox]

I usually have seen that full class level is considered, even if only 1 of them is cleric. The alternative reading is "Only your cleric class levels", but that interacts very weirdly with PRCs that are effectively extensions of cleric (and your Cleric/Hierophant/Solar Channeler is counted as way lower than they have any right to be), particularly considering that cleric by itself is only useful past the first level for PRC unlocks.

The script I have written tallies up your total level in classes that give progression before determining your total cleric levels.

Nondetection is Sorc/Wis 3. The potion cost would be 750GP by default, but making it short duration and cheaper could allow for a reactionary counter, as potions take much less than 18 seconds to use. As do scrolls, for that matter. It's still an opposed CL check though, so UMD might not be reliable.

Which is why undetectable alignment will also be added.

If Detect “Alignment” is going IG, why should it NOT function exactly as the 3.5 Rules describe?

To be perfectly honest... mostly because of player anger. As witnessed just in this thread and every other discussion where this has come up. People feel they should be able to play evil characters, even characters of obviously evil classes or races, and yet be completely immune to any magical attempts at detecting them. It's the usual one-dimensional Sneak RP paranoia where their character somehow becomes completely invalidated if they're exposed, because they were designed purely for Sneak RP and if they can no longer do that they feel they need to trash the character rather than having them grow and evolve and find a new purpose. It's an extension of the usual hatred of any and all forms of supposed "metagaming" (even though Detect spells are IC, not OOC, and have an easy guaranteed counter in undetectable alignment).

It'd certainly be easier on me if I could just implement it straight without all of these extra checks that inflate the script to ridiculous levels, and sometimes I think about just outright doing that. I'm opposite from other players in that I think RP is lessened by not having detect evil, rather than lessened by having it. Not having it removes reactivity and consequences for player actions. It makes being Evil mean basically nothing. It allows people to play outright evil classes like blackguards and yet be buddy-buddies with paladins. Paladins are largely useless at their actual job of routing out evil -- and in turn are relegated towards knee-jerk accusations of evil because the only thing they can do is judge character associations and rumors instead of having a tool to try and validate their assumptions. Not having it harms RP, in my opinion.

People say PCs would game the system if detect evil was IG (by rolling neutral instead of evil and so on), but I say... they already game it. Majority of evil infiltrators don't actually ever do anything evil and often don't even interact with other evil PCs in order to keep their cover, so they should be neutral aligned. Hard to have a healthy Evil RP community when most "Evil" PCs are part of team good, with zero effort needed and zero chance of being exposed.

Yeah, I know. What I'm saying is that a PC with a Morality score of 10 or lower would definitely qualify as an "Evil Creature" per the table.

This could be an interesting way of handling it instead. If the base default Evil alignment (15, I think?) doesn't flag (unless a cleric ofc), but lower values do. In this way, characters that actually commit evil and gain points towards evil begin to flag heavier and heavier on the evil scale. The problem of course is that it's too easy to reset any DM-given alignment points by just RCRing. Though I could probably fix the RCR tree to transfer alignment values to the recreated character.

[Wolfshear]

When you completely remove nuance from any kind of morality rp it does nothing but harm the rp in general.

Sure you already come across rp that centres on "You're evil because i say so" but it will turn into "You're evil because i detected it" *stabs with legal justification*. at least beforehand people had to actually prove that you are evil and come up with actual examples beyond pushing a button as proof. I fail to see how this adds to the rp or will improve anyones lives. And its definetly not going to enhance the evil community in the slightest, it will just further pidgeon hole people into either not playing evil at all or playing cartoonishly evil with accompanying moustache twirling since everyone even approaching that alignment will be treated so, only without the burden of actually having to prove said evil.

Or it will just lead to everyone picking a neutral alignment and calling it a day. But what it wont do is enhance anyones rp experience, just because people already game a system doesnt mean we should charge full tilt into making it easier to do so.

[Rhifox]

Or it will just lead to everyone picking a neutral alignment and calling it a day.

That would be more accurate to what they're already playing.

[Almarea90]

I understand there will be spells and items to conceal the alignment, which would make impossible to distinguish a neutral character from an evil but concealed one. Why would the spell detect alignment still be a problem under this premise?

[artemitavik]

Again, given the massive number of Good-aligned folks that likely have "Evil" gear for UMD that is apparently going to flag them as Evil because they have it, I would throw out that this is now suddenly "punishing" people for using "misaligned" gear after 10-15 years of stats arm races that require 100% gear/skill optimization to get anything outside of the most basic daily tasks done.

So, I guess I shall look forward to the absolute hilarity of all the Evil folks pinging Good from their gear and all the Good folks pining Evil from their gear, since there doesn't seem to be a way to tell the difference... thus making the spell pretty useless and unreliable even more so than the standard "false positives or negatives" because you'll never know if it's the person or their boots. (or lawful pinging chaos and visa versa, given the other versions of the spell)

[Wolfshear]

I understand there will be spells and items to conceal the alignment, which would make impossible to distinguish a neutral character from an evil but concealed one. Why would the spell detect alignment still be a problem under this premise?

Then everyone with such a blank slate would be considered evil and get shanked with the same kind of justification, or at best treated with mistrust. And if it doesnt work like that and non detection is so readily available and reliable, then whats the point? For that matter it also brings us to the mental gymnastics of having to delve into characters that do not perceive themselves as evil...But still ping as evil under this and willfully have to make use of non detection to avoid showing up as evil...Despite the definition of what is evil varying between players and dms alike. That is more an inherent problem with the alignment system itself of course...But throwing it around here hardly adds to the rp...People and morality are more complex than a simple button for a radar.


I am against anything that turns what could be fascinating nuanced rp where you actually have to convince other people that someone is naughty either with proof of action or good enough wordplay...To pushing a button and saying "See". It not only effects evil people in a negative way but it effects good people to..Because with the nuance gone...Welp, doesnt matter what you see X person do or know of X person or what they might be trying to do...Or all the complicated things that might go into their personality. They ping as evil thus you must kill them and if you do anything with them..With your now full knowledge of their "evil" then that makes you evil. I am not a fan of destroying nuance and moral quandries from people..Why shoehorn people in a single direction.


Am I saying it is always that deep and nuanced here? Absolutely not, but it is hardly going to add depth or nuance.
Nothing about this is actually going to enhance rp, only simplify it on both ends and make it boring or a chore.

[Kitunenotsume]

Again, given the massive number of Good-aligned folks that likely have "Evil" gear for UMD that is apparently going to flag them as Evil because they have it, I would throw out that this is now suddenly "punishing" people for using "misaligned" gear after 10-15 years of stats arm races that require 100% gear/skill optimization to get anything outside of the most basic daily tasks done.

So, I guess I shall look forward to the absolute hilarity of all the Evil folks pinging Good from their gear and all the Good folks pining Evil from their gear, since there doesn't seem to be a way to tell the difference... thus making the spell pretty useless and unreliable even more so than the standard "false positives or negatives" because you'll never know if it's the person or their boots. (or lawful pinging chaos and visa versa, given the other versions of the spell)

This is my main thought as to why built-in false-negatives are unrequired. Given the state of gear, it apples both consequence to alignment based requirements beyond just a UMD speedbump for equipping, and secondly provides distraction and chaff between both items and spells like Deathknell or Animate Dead that the sole reason for false-negatives should be the (honestly readily readily available) divination-protection spells.

Rhifox, thank you for your comments, as Undetectable Alignment was one I had missed and it's inclusion abates much of my concerns in that regards. 300gp for a 24-hour guaranteed false-negative seems quite reasonable to me.
It also opens up for interesting RP opportunities such as requiring that someone detect as an alignment to enter - which could be bypassed by carrying items of the right alignment.

I am against anything that turns what could be fascinating nuanced rp where you actually have to convince other people that someone is naughty either with proof of action or good enough wordplay...To pushing a button and saying "See". It not only effects evil people in a negative way but it effects good people to..Because with the nuance gone...Welp, doesnt matter what you see X person do or know of X person or what they might be trying to do...Or all the complicated things that might go into their personality. They ping as evil thus you must kill them and if you do anything with them..With your now full knowledge of their "evil" then that makes you evil. I am not a fan of destroying nuance and moral quandries from people..Why shoehorn people in a single direction.

Please refer to the well written Order of the Stick example[link] for how "Detect Evil" is not, by itself, valid grounds to excuse someone of being evil. (The few preceding comics are, exactly, a Paladin using simple Detection as an excuse to Smite Evil). You should still be doing the legwork to remove false-positives.
I'ld personally be a proponent for smite-killing a non-evil person should give you evil points. Or apply a system similar to druids with metal armor: Smite-killing a non-evil character denies spellcasting for 24 hours.

On a personal interest, Detect [Alignment] is also one of the few listed spells that can be cast through a Scrying, but that's a completely different topic and tangle of mechanics.

[Snarfy]

pretty sure the rules still support unwanted magic cast on you as auto pvp consent, since it can be viewed by a non caster as a hostile act

^ pretty much this.

[Tekill]

The title of the thread is "Detect Alignment Spell" but most of the discussion has been around Detecting Evil.
To me this indicates the lopsided imbalance this spell would introduce.
We don't mind being detected as good, lawful or even chaotic. But being detected as evil has consequences the other alignments do not have and will be a definite hindrance to players trying to RP evil.

If you introduce a 'detect evil' into the game I would suggest creating a disclaimer on the forum front page for new players stating that the philosophy of this server is catered to 'opposing evil', and that by choosing to try and RP an evil character you are doing so, at your own peril.

I personally feel this disclaimer should be posted even if you do not implement Detect Evil. I think new players especially, should invest thier time and efforts in creating characters that will be supported in a positive manner both IC and OOC.

Question: does the target of the spell get a saving throw?

[DaloLorn]

1) Being detected as good can indeed be just as dangerous. (Imagine being a lone Eilistraeen surrounded by Lolthites... you're a UD player, you should have seen that scenario coming! )

2) The discussion is around Detect Evil, because Rhifox hasn't indicated that any other Detect [ALIGNMENT] spells are coming yet.

[Kitunenotsume]

The title of the thread is "Detect Alignment Spell" but most of the discussion has been around Detecting Evil.
To me this indicates the lopsided imbalance this spell would introduce.
We don't mind being detected as good, lawful or even chaotic. But being detected as evil has consequences the other alignments do not have and will be a definite hindrance to players trying to RP evil.

For this to have any utility (and I would add Detect Good, Law and Chaos as well), it has to be non-arbitrary in what it detects.

Why does it need to be 100% guaranteed to have utility?

Also, yes, others would be added. Detect Evil is the one most people think about when talking about these, though.

There has been discussion of the other Detect [Alignment] spells, but the blueprint for one is fairly valid for the others as well. as noted in my post with the table, the only entry that needs adjustment beyond swapping out the Alignment is just the Undead line.
Once the pattern for one spell has been determined, the others follow suit.

Question: does the target of the spell get a saving throw?

Per the SRD: no, there is no saving throw for Detect [Alignment], nor is there any caster level check required for Undetectable Alignment. There is, however, an opposed caster-level check involved to Detect through Nondetection.
It is also relevant to point out that Detect [Alignment] is a 60-foot Cone effect, not specifically targeted at one person, and it takes three full rounds of focusing before you can determine if the Overwhelming aura is coming from the person you are looking at, or some artifact held in some passing wagons visible through the window outside, and hopefully you aren't stunned and nauseated from the exposure in Round 2.