In the fiction, I would rule that such an NPC has a general understanding of the near-impossible difficulty of resisting the spell for the entire duration, rather than having them calculate the precise probability based on meta-concepts like your saving throw bonus.Īs pointed out in a comment by if your interrogator doubts that you have actually cast the spell at all, they can simply step into the area with you and experience its effects for themselves. As a DM, I might allow this trick to work against an intelligent NPC wizard who has studied this particular spell, but probably not anyone else. Depending on the type of world your game takes place in and the type of person interrogating you, this may or may not be reasonable to hope for. Of course, this technique requires your interrogator to understand how the spell works and to have a decent understanding of probability. This should be enough to persuade a skeptical interrogator.
As quick examples, someone could cast Wish on a character to produce this effect, homebrew spells/curses/feats/magic items can impose it, and so on. Other options in this area will certainly exist as well, but lie outside of the scope of this question. If your character is really focused on this, building them to be able to produce spell scrolls for Zone of Truth and then giving those scrolls to others so that the spell is as available as possible to other people might be the closest RAW solution involving this spell. The correct solution involving RAW Zone of Truth would be for the character to submit to another character casting the spell, perhaps repeatedly until the character fails the saving throw (voluntarily or otherwise). Trying to use Zone of Truth in that way may even backfire- without the spell being in effect, people may assume that the character is lying simply because they are eliding the situation in which lying would be impossible to get away with.
Aes Sedai cannot lie, with magical effects physically preventing them from directly expressing, verbally or in writing, something that they believe is untrue. This is particularly true if you are hoping for others' views of this character to include a reputation similar to inability to lie. If that would work, they might as well not bother with Zone of Truth at all. Since the character in question is not considered reliably honest by the others (that's why there's a question of honesty in the first place), the character's own word about whether or not they are affected by the spell is similarly unreliable. The only person who necessarily gains knowledge on whether or not a creature within the radius of Zone of Truth has been affected by the spell, and therefore is or is not capable of lying, is the caster. Zone of Truth has precisely the opposite power. And if the Aes Sedai said "I am not trying to mislead you, you understand my point correctly" it was more powerful. One of the great powers of the Aes Sedai First Oath was that if an Aes Sedai made a statement without evasion, then all knew it to be true and reliable. The benefit of this is illustrated by a binding oath taken some of the magic users of the Wheel of Time fantasy series: Is there any way I could reliably convince my interlocutors that I did indeed fail (note: this isn't "convince them I'm telling the truth when I'm lying" but "convince them I'm telling the truth when I am." I would also have to make a save, which I could fail voluntarily. If I cast ZoT, I know (to first order) who in the zone succeeds or fails. Is there any mechanism for using Zone of Truth to make verifiably True statements? But my character has the opposite problem: he's extremely truthful but people don't always believe him. I've seen a lot of posts about how "Zone of Truth" might be defeated by the target.
0 kommentar(er)
