Topic: Death's Tale and others

[pastaav]

Some random thoughts...I think the purpose of the true version is that it breaks through magical defenses and that it gives more context to the vision. A ordinary death tale spell shows the killing stroke while a death tale true spell shows the more why the killing stroke happened. For instance showing the persons that injured or distracted the victim so that he was open to the killing stroke. I don't think the spell is suppose to explain motive.

Another thought is that I really wonder if all the gods in your campaign worlds are open to provide death tale spells for any victim. Make the god's champion appear and require service from the player because he been using his channeling spell for such mundane purposes.

[mibsweden]

LordMiller your arguments and explanations and examples are absolutely brilliant - have an idea point.

[Arioch]

To offer a single clear example of why DTT isn't necissarily the death of drama, even if it works:

"Osama Bin Ladin"

Aight, you've got your killer's name and face, a glimpse of his motives and methods. . .adventure over, or just begun?

Which would be similar to the situation of the example in my first post:

(you caught the man who murederd your friend, but you know that the man behind him is the Duke of Algor, what will you do now?).

I don't know, as a player I'd still prefer having to reach the solution by putting together clues and hints!

[Marc R]

I concur Pas, but as I said above, it's not like DTT is the only mid to high level spell that would allow a 20th level party to tear up most murder mystery plots like a vorpal lawnmower. . .Channelers usually answer to a higher authority on their casting and PP budgets. . . .The mages and mentalists have buckets full of scry/lore/detect spells too, but are free agents. . .and then there's the other version ala Clue:

It shouldn't take a 20th level mentalist more than 20 minutes to figure out it was Professor Plum, in the library, with a candlestick. . .that's assuming they pick Plum last for a deep mind probing and nobody else saw anything. Few methods out there to allow you to avoid having your mental pockets turned out by a 20th level mentalist, especially if you're captured already and they have all the time they need.

I'm not so sure DTT is the root issue, so much as the chief example of how high level parties can tear a "mystery" to peices if it's not built with magic in mind. . . which applies to a broad swath of the 10+ level information gathering spells, not just DTT. . .I'd consider that to be a normal consequence of high level play, not a defect in the system.

I find that at high levels, the focus shifts to asking the right questions, and doing something with the answers. . .the spells just cut some of the middle part out. (At lower levels, the middle part often consists of a lot of data gathering, talking to people, examining the scenes, examining evidence, etc.)

[Marc R]

I don't know, as a player I'd still prefer having to reach the solution by putting together clues and hints!

I find, that as a GM, if you look pre game at 100% of what you will use that session.

The PCs spend 90% of their time on 10% of your prep work, and run over 90% of your prep in 10% of the time. (or never touch it at all, how many times have you made an NPC and never used them?)

I find, that since the game world is open ended, it doesn't matter how fast you make it through the material, there's always more out there in front of you. . .

like Finding. . . .locate any one object described within a mile. . . .

You know the killer tossed the knife in the moat, just where? I'd far rather cast the spell, locate it, and send someone after it than roleplay dragging the moat for 5 days.

90% of murder investigation is blind drudgery. . . .you'd miss the 10% that's amusing, but you skip over the drudgery too with the DTT. . .and you're only really "missing" anything if the GM has a limited supply of fun in them. . . .assuming your GM is a neverending pool of limitless fun, no matter what shortcuts you use, there should always be something fun waiting on the far end.

It's usually more fun to walk 100 miles through random encounters than to fly there, but flying is faster. . .which just takes you to the adventures at the destination. . .my assumption is that they'll be as much fun as a scary trip across the countryside would have been. . .in my mind, it's the same kind of thing.

[Rasyr-Mjolnir]

Or, how about you see who is responsible and it is a powerful political figure? Do you want to try to convince the authorities he did it and to do something about it? Will that just put you in danger? Will the knowledge alone put your life in jeopardy?

Exactly -- knowing who did it and proving it are entirely two different things.

As has been pointed out before, the word of a single caster is not going hold a lot of weight if there is no proof, it comes down to caster's word versus culprit's word.

And as has also been pointed out, IF the use of such spells are a common practice, then the opposition (thieve's guild, assassin's guild, etc) ARE going to come up with counter measures that prevent its use or misdirect things.

Additionally, there is "plausible deniability".   I remember hearing or reading about this English (I think) ruler who, instead of saying "I want him dead" said something along the lines of "My life would be easier without him" and one of his courtiers decided that the King wanted him dead and so had him killed.

Now suppose a person in power says "I wish he wasn't such a thorn in my side" and was only ruminating out loud with no ulterior motive (i.e. did NOT want "him" dead) and some retainer takes it the wrong  way and has "him" killed. Who is ultimately responsible there? The guy who misunderstood his bosses wishes or the boss.

By the wording of the spell, the boss would be ultimately responsible because his words were what put into motion the chain of events that caused the death, but he would also be innocent at the same time because he didn't really want the guy killed.

And most important thing to remember is that the spell only gives visions, it does NOT give names or any other information. So, if the caster had never seen or met Durgan One Eye, the spell showing an image of him would do no good in catching the killer.

[rdanhenry]

And in fantasy gameworld context. . . .

"Wormtongue killed him with poison, under orders from Sauron."

OK, you better be brave to challenge the king's minister for murder, and even braver if you want to serve an arrest warrent in Mordor. . . ."knowing is half the battle", but only half.

And then there's the question of "Will you realize you've been duped by Saruman's anti-scrying spells?" 

[rdanhenry]

Exactly -- knowing who did it and proving it are entirely two different things.

And until you investigate, you don't know how much more there may be to the story. Maybe it was justified homicide under the law of the land.

And most important thing to remember is that the spell only gives visions, it does NOT give names or any other information. So, if the caster had never seen or met Durgan One Eye, the spell showing an image of him would do no good in catching the killer.

Now, that depends on the nature of the vision. It might well include a name. Names can appear in visions. But even a good look at the killer and his name might not be enough.

"Glod Stonefoot, my lord? That's the most stereotypical Dwarven name of all! There must be several dozen in this city! Well, what does he look like?"

"Um... short. Bearded. Oh, Captain, you know they all look alike to me!"

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Now, that depends on the nature of the vision. It might well include a name. Names can appear in visions. But even a good look at the killer and his name might not be enough.

In a historically accurate enough setting, save for nobility, most people would only have a first name, anyway...

[Arioch]

I've been thinking  (and, usually, this is a bad thing!  )... have you ever read/played the Esoterrorists rpg? It's an horror game where PC are all experienced investigators (something like CSI meets Cthulhu).
Since they are all experts, probably the top in their field, they all automatically find every clue related to their field of expertise (they just have to say that they're using their skill X, no roll needed). By spending more effort on it, they'll gain extra informations.

Maybe divinations spells could be used in a similar way, with DTT being an extreme version of it, which gives to the caster all the possible informations on the clues in the crime scene .

[mocking bird]

Responsibilty is also an incredibly vague term.  If a carpenter does a shoddy job on a wagon that later crashes and kills someone, would he show up as responsible even though the accident was unintentional?  Or if a lord calls upon his guards to clean up an unsavory part of town and a fight erupts at a gambling establishment resulting in the death of a rival noble, is the lord also responsible for the death?

DTT is a spell that can really agrivate GM's.  Not necessarily for nerfing a plot but because it causes the GM to start to make stuff up.  For example the party finds a body hundreds of years old and casts on it.  A prop can now turn into a plot device.  Or for the reverse DTT could be used as the initial event to set a plot into motion.  So while I don't see the spell itself really as setting specific, it is something to take into account for the GM if a party member has it.  Or to keep the party honest if they start getting careless in their actions.  A mageant has an entire list to confound scrying spells.  The mythic can do both - scry or obscure.

[rdanhenry]

If the GM doesn't want a particular spell or spell list, he can eliminate or replace it. And he can make any restrictions he wants on the clergy to limit use of DTT.

"Ah, I see what has happened. Since it does not involve an enemy of the Church, I can only give you a hint to set you in the right direction. Wisdom must be sought, it cannot be given like a gift."

[fac]

I love the Vlad Taltos books by Steven Brust, one funny thing it's that Dragaera it's a "high magic world", so it's usual that Vlad has to arrange some magic before doing a work. Also he has to make some arrangements like hiding the body because it can not be resurrected after 3 days or changing all his weapons every 3-4 days so his aura does not impregnate the weapons and somebody can find him using sorcery.

I don't have Esoterrorits but I have Trail of Cthulhu, a good reading and nice illustrations, but game system solves a problem that any GM can manage without any problem.

IMHO the amount of magic depends on the setting, I don't know how many 19th level clerics are in your gaming groups, but a good idea for a game could be that the cleric is a NPC that casted the spell and knows who was the killer, and asks the PC to find proof, because without it there is nothing to present the court. And the cleric cannot direct them too much or the investigation would not be partial, think of a catholic priest with a confession secret or something like. So you got investigation and spells working together.

[markc]

 What if there is some drawback to DT? Such as if your god is interested in the death you the cleric have to take a large part in tracking down the murder and bring them to justice. This would/might take high level clerics out of the loop as they would not want to be drawn away form there other duties to follow the murder.
MDC

[Arioch]

What if there is some drawback to DT?

Until now I've used a common drawback for all Channeling divination spells: they make you see things how you god/patron would like you to see them.
Usually this means that there will be some minor variation (some details might be seen as more important than others or part of a scene could be left out of a vision), but in some cases the vision could be deliberately misleading, if it serves the god's cause.

[Marc R]

I'm in 100% agreement with Arioch there, or else it's not channelling.