[3.5] Magical Concealment vs. Detect Magic?

[TheJudicator]

This is something I am currently in debate with a few friends and myself, concerning what the above title mentions.

With spells that govern disguise/concealment...including alter self, disguise self, polymorph, shapechange, invisibility (and greater), to name the ones we've brought up...would they cause the recipient of the spells effects to light up like some magical Christmas tree? We're having trouble reaching a conclusion, so I'm bringing it to the experts :)

So, readers, what do you think? Opinions, observations, even wisecracks I'll accept.

[SamBurke]

Unfortunately, RAW, it'd find out that SOMETHING was there.

As a DM, I wouldn't let it pass as a hobo's thermal, though.

[AmberVael]

Yes, someone using detect magic would detect all of these. It lists no exceptions beyond the target being out of line of sight (and even that doesn't entirely negate its power, just makes it harder).

For obvious reasons, some people find this to be somewhat questionable and an oversight of the spell's potential power, so houserules are not uncommon.

[Keld Denar]

It would reveal the presence of an aura on the person (or auras, in most cases), as well as the number of auras, and the schools with a sucessful spellcraft check, but not the exact spells.

It would warent the need to take the person aside for further questioning, but wouldn't immediately reveal the reason why.

[BlackestOfMages]

the spell would reveal the person had magic on their person, and the schools of the magic, but it wouldn;t give any more details

and in a world where people can quite happliy walk around with a few dozen spells on themselves, a small city's worth of magic items and who knows what else, you'd be spending a lot of time investigating every aura

so, it'd only really work in a place where magic was illegal/banned :smallwink:

[Psyren]

Disguise Self/Alter Self/Polymorph etc. - you would detect a transmutation effect on the person but not the actual spell.

Invisibility and similar - you would detect an illusion aura hovering in the "empty space" in your field of vision but not exactly what it was or even that a person was there.

To identify the actual spell being used on someone (i.e. to know if someone is actually disguised or polymorphed) you need Analyze Dweomer. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/analyzeDweomer.htm) This would also let you know "hey, someone/something is invisible in front of you!" and you'd know to switch on SI or TS at that point.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I think this (http://www.antiheroescomic.com/comic/69) is how it works against Invisibility. Who needs True Seeing?

[Doug Lampert]

I think this (http://www.antiheroescomic.com/comic/69) is how it works against Invisibility. Who needs True Seeing?

Well, detect magic takes concentration and three rounds for full information in one direction only.

It's simply not nearly as good as something like true-seeing in the field. But it is almost unbeatable. False Aura is the only core spell I know that can beat detect magic, and it only works on objects, even if the spell comes from an object the aura is still on the character being changed.

DougL

[Curmudgeon]

If you can't detect the actual person, Detect Magic will just indicate that there's magic in a particular location. That could be any of the following:

a magical trinket buried in shallow debris in the square
residue from a recently cast spell, with nothing else there
a creature who can't be detected
There's no capability in the spell to "outline" a creature and distinguish it from those other possibilities. Even if you can see a creature, Detect Magic indicating an aura in their space won't let you know the magic is from them and not something buried under their feet in the same square. Pinpointing a magical effect's location in D&D doesn't get you more resolution than which 5' square, so Detect Magic isn't a very good substitute for True Seeing.

[Psyren]

If you can't detect the actual person, Detect Magic will just indicate that there's magic in a particular location. That could be any of the following:

a magical trinket buried in shallow debris in the square
residue from a recently cast spell, with nothing else there
a creature who can't be detected
There's no capability in the spell to "outline" a creature and distinguish it from those other possibilities. Even if you can see a creature, Detect Magic indicating an aura in their space won't let you know the magic is from them and not something buried under their feet in the same square. Pinpointing a magical effect's location in D&D doesn't get you more resolution than which 5' square, so Detect Magic isn't a very good substitute for True Seeing.

This is correct.

You could then, however, toss a dispel or some flour or something in that square once you've identified a disembodied illusion effect floating there. And if you have your detection spell permanencied, they might not even realize you suspect their presence until it's too late.

[Andion Isurand]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneSightGreater.htm

At that point, its hard to avoid a complete investigation.

One way of helping keep your spells from being detected via divination is the Subtle Magic feature from the Luckstealer PrC. I liked it so much I added it to my homebrewed Agent Arcanist PrC (http://andionisurand.blogspot.com/2011/10/agent-arcanist-prc.html).

In addition, when using long lasting polymorph effects, one good way to hide your true form from True Seeing is the Cloak of Khyber spell in Dragon 337.

[Douglas]

Yes, Detect Magic can locate such things... after 3 rounds of concentrating on a preselected 60' cone. If you picked the wrong area or your target moves in those 3 rounds, tough. It also won't tell you anything more than "there's magic here" plus possibly the school and a vague assessment of how powerful.

Detect Magic can defeat magical stealth, but the limitations on how it does it are so severe that it is rarely of any practical use.

[Diarmuid]

Of course it's 3 rounds before you can separate out the auras enough to make spellcraft checks against them individually to determine schools.

Round 1 - Yes there's magic
Round 2 - There are 5 sources of magic in that 60' cone, the strongest being of Moderate power
Round 3 - Location/Power of each aura

Now in rounds 4-8 you can designate which aura you want to Spellcraft and if there are 4 Faint and 1 Moderate, you're going to be randomly choosing the Faints, so you're just as likely to get the Transmutation from their +stat item as you are to identify the Illusion of their Disguise Self.

[NNescio]

Nondetection and the other anti-divination spells should block Detect Magic right?


the spell would reveal the person had magic on their person, and the schools of the magic, but it wouldn;t give any more details

and in a world where people can quite happliy walk around with a few dozen spells on themselves, a small city's worth of magic items and who knows what else, you'd be spending a lot of time investigating every aura

so, it'd only really work in a place where magic was illegal/banned :smallwink:

It would be hilarious when a well-dressed person (or well-armed, as the case may be) is pulled aside for questioning because he doesn't light up like a Christmas tree.

"Hmm... looks like you have something to hide."

[Fax Celestis]

There's no capability in the spell to "outline" a creature and distinguish it from those other possibilities.

No, for that you need faerie fire or glitterdust.

[Curmudgeon]

No, for that you need faerie fire or glitterdust.
Yep. And you won't know until you use one of these spells that you were just detecting residual magical energy.

[Banaticus]

At 9th character level, it's highly likely that anything in a city that's really meant to be guarded well and to be a level-appropriate encounter will have someone with a permanent detect magic guarding whatever it is that's being guarded.

So how does my character hide/move silently to sneak in and grab whatever the McGuffin is without looking like a glowing ball of lights as I saunter up? I don't want to have to remove all my magic items. Is this level about when rogues stop being able to steel stuff and wizards with scry and teleport can get the job done a whole lot better?

[Curmudgeon]

At 9th character level, it's highly likely that anything in a city that's really meant to be guarded well and to be a level-appropriate encounter will have someone with a permanent detect magic guarding whatever it is that's being guarded.
Why would you assume everything fits into the "level-appropriate encounter" category? Check Table 3–2: Encounter Difficulty (page 49 of Dungeon Master's Guide). 10% of encounters will be "Easy" (negligible XP value), and 5% will be of "Overpowering" difficulty (i.e., run away or die), if your DM follows the game standard.

So how does my character hide/move silently to sneak in and grab whatever the McGuffin is without looking like a glowing ball of lights as I saunter up?
Ever heard of dressing in layers? That holds in D&D, too. Detect Magic works with line of sight. A magic ring under a glove can't be seen. Put your gear out of sight. The stuff that can't be hidden can be masked with Nystul's Magic Aura (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicAura.htm) for a fairly moderate cost. You should never show a magic aura when you don't want to.

[Jack_Simth]

If you can't detect the actual person, Detect Magic will just indicate that there's magic in a particular location. That could be any of the following:

a magical trinket buried in shallow debris in the square
residue from a recently cast spell, with nothing else there
a creature who can't be detected
There's no capability in the spell to "outline" a creature and distinguish it from those other possibilities. Even if you can see a creature, Detect Magic indicating an aura in their space won't let you know the magic is from them and not something buried under their feet in the same square. Pinpointing a magical effect's location in D&D doesn't get you more resolution than which 5' square, so Detect Magic isn't a very good substitute for True Seeing.
The residue one doesn't work... that's a much weaker aura (dim, as opposed to faint - check the Lingering Aura segment of Detect Magic) and won't be confused with an active spell. The others are right, though.


So how does my character hide/move silently to sneak in and grab whatever the McGuffin is without looking like a glowing ball of lights as I saunter up? I don't want to have to remove all my magic items. Is this level about when rogues stop being able to steel stuff and wizards with scry and teleport can get the job done a whole lot better?
Magic Aura (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicAura.htm) on your magical items, Misdirection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/misdirection.htm), Nondetection (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/nondetection.htm), and arguably Mind Blank (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindBlank.htm) on yourself.

[Diarmuid]

Ever heard of dressing in layers? That holds in D&D, too. Detect Magic works with line of sight. A magic ring under a glove can't be seen. Put your gear out of sight. The stuff that can't be hidden can be masked with Nystul's Magic Aura (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicAura.htm) for a fairly moderate cost. You should never show a magic aura when you don't want to.

Dressing in layers does not work



Each round, you can turn to detect magic in a new area. The spell can penetrate barriers, but 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal, a thin sheet of lead, or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks it.


So unless you're lining all your clothing with lead, simply wearing gloves over a ring does nothing.

[ericgrau]

There is a magical aura of a certain school somewhere in the 60' cone. You don't know exactly what it is, or if it is even on a creature. After 3 rounds you know what square it is in but still cannot see it (50% miss chance if invisible). You still don't know exactly what it is... and 3 rounds might be too late.