PDA

View Full Version : Zone of Truth vs. Glibness...



Tyger
2010-10-08, 01:26 PM
This one applies to any of the various "speak the truth" sorts of spells.

Glibness dictates that, if the caster of the Zone of Truth doesn't beat your Caster Check on Glibness, you are not forced to tell the truth, nor can your lies be detected.

Query though - does the caster of the Zone of Truth know you have beaten their spell with yours? It would appear RAW that they would not know, as you haven't made a saving throw (which they could tell you made).

What's the rule, if any?

Diarmuid
2010-10-08, 02:35 PM
How would you know if they did/didnt make the save vs the Zone of Truth?

Delusion
2010-10-08, 02:46 PM
How would you know if they did/didnt make the save vs the Zone of Truth?

I am pretty sure you instantly know if someone makes a save against your spell.

Diarmuid
2010-10-08, 02:49 PM
Do you have any sources/material backing that up?

ShneekeyTheLost
2010-10-08, 02:58 PM
This one applies to any of the various "speak the truth" sorts of spells.

Glibness dictates that, if the caster of the Zone of Truth doesn't beat your Caster Check on Glibness, you are not forced to tell the truth, nor can your lies be detected.

Query though - does the caster of the Zone of Truth know you have beaten their spell with yours? It would appear RAW that they would not know, as you haven't made a saving throw (which they could tell you made).

What's the rule, if any?

In a word... no. You don't know if your opponent successfully resisted your spell or not, unless you can discern with empirical evidence (i.e. if your opponent is a pile of ash, then it is reasonable to assume that he failed his Fort save vs your Disintegrate, however he could simply have had few enough hit points that the 5d6 was enough to reduce him to 0 or lower and activate the dust clause).

That's what makes Enchantment so risky... you never know if your spell actually worked until his next action. Even then, if he has a sufficiently high Spellcraft check, he can see what you just cast, made the save, and 'played mook' until he stabs you in the back.

Soren Hero
2010-10-08, 03:02 PM
From the SRD:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm

Succeeding on a Saving Throw

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

zone of truth is an area spell..therefore you do not sense when creatures succeed on saves

Diarmuid
2010-10-08, 03:05 PM
Thanks Soren.

Delusion
2010-10-08, 03:08 PM
Do you have any sources/material backing that up?

phb page 177, Patagraph "Succeeding on a saving throw."

Edit: First time I was swordsaged and corrected by a same post :smallamused:

Soren Hero
2010-10-08, 05:03 PM
phb page 177, Patagraph "Succeeding on a saving throw."

Edit: First time I was swordsaged and corrected by a same post :smallamused:

first time i've ever swordsaged somebody

Tyger
2010-10-08, 07:11 PM
Those are great guys, but as noted in the OP, I am not asking about the save... that's covered in the rules. I am asking about the check the caster of the zone makes. Would the caster of the Zone know about the results of that opposed roll?

For the record, and from the SRD, Glibness states that:

"If a magical effect is used against you that would detect your lies or force you to speak the truth the user of the effect must succeed on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against a DC of 15 + your caster level to succeed. Failure means the effect does not detect your lies or force you to speak only the truth. "

Soren Hero
2010-10-08, 10:30 PM
Those are great guys, but as noted in the OP, I am not asking about the save... that's covered in the rules. I am asking about the check the caster of the zone makes. Would the caster of the Zone know about the results of that opposed roll?

For the record, and from the SRD, Glibness states that:

"If a magical effect is used against you that would detect your lies or force you to speak the truth the user of the effect must succeed on a caster level check (1d20 + caster level) against a DC of 15 + your caster level to succeed. Failure means the effect does not detect your lies or force you to speak only the truth. "

i guess i must've missed that description of zone of truth vs. glibness...zone of truth requires a will save and glibness forces a caster level check...id still say no for two reasons:

First reason (via SRD)

Caster Level Checks

To make a caster level check, roll 1d20 and add your caster level (in the relevant class). If the result equals or exceeds the DC (or the spell resistance, in the case of caster level checks made for spell resistance), the check succeeds.

nothing in the rules states that you know when u succeed or fail at a caster level check, except as stated earlier by ShneekeyTheLost, that you must observe the effects and determine if it did or not

Second reason (via SRD):
as stated before

Succeeding on a Saving Throw

A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

zone of truth is an area spell..therefore you do not sense when creatures succeed on saves..this is the more compelling reason that I say no, even though glibness clearly states it requires a caster level check, and caster level checks have no rules saying you know when u make/fail them...hope this helps
---------------------------------
incidentally, I think the only way to determine if you "succeeded" on a caster level check in regards to glibness and zone of truth is to ask the person a question that you already know to be true, and see if they "lie" about it