Death by True Seeing

[davidbofinger]

Tarquin's ring of true seeing means he sees transformed objects as though they were untransformed. Does this mean he's unaware the transformation has taken place?

An argument against this theory is that he doesn't seem to have had any doubt that Nale was invisible.

But if it is true, could it be a fatal weakness? How about the following:

Tarquin sees a giant dwarf and thinks it's a regular dwarf.
Tarquin sees Bloodfeast the extreme-inator but doesn't realise he's become a lizard.


(Apologies if this has been done before.)

[Storm_Of_Snow]

I'd personally say that he either sees it as it currently is, but the ring tells him what it actually is ("There's Nale, he's currently under the effect of an Invisibility spell"), or there's some form of double image, where he sees the illusion/transformation as an overlay to the underlying reality.

[FireDrake]

The ring of true-seeing allows Tarquin to see through illusions, such as when Nale is invisible or if Elan were to use disguise self. When something transforms, such as when Durkon uses Thor's might, they physically change into something else, so there is no illusion there for Tarquin to see through.

EDIT: Sorry I'm wrong there, apparently when using true seeing you see the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:True_Seeing), so maybe there is some sort of built in ability to know that what you are seeing is not in it's true form.

[Trillium]

I thought True Seeing sees through illusion, not through transformations.
I mean, it "ignores" active magical effects. But instantaneous effect ain't "active" at the moment. It just happened and is gone. If you look at Bloodfeast, he is a lizard at the moment.

EDIT: Apparently I've been wrong.
However, it states it "it doesn't grant X-ray vision" - so Tarquin would steel be able to see a GIANT DWARF's silhouette blot out the sky's light.

[Chronos]

Baleful Polymorph, which is what happened to Bloodfeast, isn't an instantaneous effect, it's permanent. That means that he still really is an allosaurus, just one that's been turned into a lizard. The magic is still there, maintaining his new form, and if the magic goes away, he reverts to normal.

A more interesting question would arise in the case of someone petrified by Flesh to Stone, which is an instantaneous effect (albeit one that can be reversed by other instantaneous effects).

[MesiDoomstalker]

True Seeing shows the true form, with the magical alteration (whatever it may be) as a transparent overlay. Which is funny in Bloodfeast's case, since the 'disguise' is a lot smaller than his true form.

[AKA_Bait]

I do not know the answer to this, but may I suggest that you pose the question here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=318591)?

[colanderman]

Your question reminded me of a particular Roald Dahl story (can't remember the name) wherein Mr. Dahl toys with the idea of having the main character, who has acquired X-ray vision (not the same as True Seeing, I know), become aware of his own imminent death by looking in a mirror and seeing a blood clot inside himself traveling toward his heart.

[Haldir]

That's not how True Seeing works. Transmutation changes the way something actually is, so to See it True would be to see it inits transmuted form.

[Nightsbridge]

That's not how True Seeing works. Transmutation changes the way something actually is, so to See it True would be to see it inits transmuted form.

As was stated earlier in the thread, ring of true seeing also allows you to see the true form of transformed/polymorphed creatures.

[allenw]

As was stated earlier in the thread, ring of true seeing also allows you to see the true form of transformed/polymorphed creatures.

Which is also how the spell works. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/trueSeeing.htm)

If you want to make True Seeing a liability, you need to use illusion or shapeshifting to conceal something that hoses those who see it, such as various versions of the "Symbol" spells.

I was going to add "or a Medusa," but looking at the rules (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#gazeAttacks) it seems unclear whether or not "gaze attacks" would be prevented if the source is magically disguised or shapeshifted. They *don't* work if you can't see the source, and illusions of the source don't count.
Personally, I'd rule that a Medusa using Disguise Self wouldn't petrify people, but a Vampire could still Dominate people regardless of it's shape or appearance.

A Nymph's (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/nymph.htm)
"Blinding Beauty" would definitely be supressed by illusion or shapechange. Or, for an especially nasty trick, how about a 1st-Edition Nymph, naked (which would kill any onlookers) but wearing an illusionary burka?

[Trillium]

On a later thought, the best way to turn true seeing against its owner is to pretend to conceal, say a Greatsword of World Destruction +1 with an illusion, while also keeping a Keen Vorpal Dagger of Evil Tyrant Decapitation +5 in a simple old scabbard. Just divert true seer's attention elsewhere.

[Jaxzan Proditor]

There are probably better ways of tricking someone with True Seeing than assuming that they can't see the transformation. After all, an illusion can still be used to distract them. And there are probably ways of negating it too.

[Takver]

Your question reminded me of a particular Roald Dahl story (can't remember the name) wherein Mr. Dahl toys with the idea of having the main character, who has acquired X-ray vision (not the same as True Seeing, I know), become aware of his own imminent death by looking in a mirror and seeing a blood clot inside himself traveling toward his heart.

That's "The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar." :)

[ben-zayb]

True Seeing shows the true form, with the magical alteration (whatever it may be) as a transparent overlay. Which is funny in Bloodfeast's case, since the 'disguise' is a lot smaller than his true form.Nice houserule! Actual RAW doesn't say that, though.

[colanderman]

That's "The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar." :)

Ah yes, that's the one!

[Flame of Anor]

Nice houserule! Actual RAW doesn't say that, though.

Actual RAW says that someone who disbelieves an illusion sees it as a faint outline. It's hardly a big stretch to apply that to True Seeing.

[ben-zayb]

Actual RAW says that someone who disbelieves an illusion sees it as a faint outline. It's hardly a big stretch to apply that to True Seeing.I know, and considering possible RAI reasons I think it's a fairly reasonable houserule. It's still just a houserule, though. Not RAW.

[Gorfnod]

The general abuse here is to use the Invisible Spell metamagic on something like Solid Fog so that you can still see through it but people who are using True Seeing actually are subject to the vision limitations of the spell.

[Amphiox]

Someone needs to design a Lovecraft-based campaign where death (or insanity) by true seeing really IS an occupational hazard!

[ben-zayb]

Someone needs to design a Lovecraft-based campaign where death (or insanity) by true seeing really IS an occupational hazard!Not only that, but it would be where "death by Divination magic" is totally a thing too! Probably stretch it to "death by Spot/Listen checks" too, if you want to be extra cruel to overperceptive characters.:smalltongue:

[Loreweaver15]

An interesting possibility is that Tarquin DOES just see invisible people as if they're standing around normally, but the fact that Nale was just standing around logically means that he's invisible and believes he has avoided detection. Not sure if that's how it works, but it's a fun thought!

[Liliet]

Not only that, but it would be where "death by Divination magic" is totally a thing too! Probably stretch it to "death by Spot/Listen checks" too, if you want to be extra cruel to overperceptive characters.:smalltongue:

I want that too :smallbiggrin:

a good reason to choose Divination to be a barred school and just get by on normal intelligence :smallbiggrin:

[Kish]

You can't bar Divination.

[Liliet]

You can't bar Divination.

Awww. I forgot. Because everyone would do it, I guess?

Still, making every Divination spell a Russian roulette would be fun :smallamused:

[Kish]

Awww. I forgot. Because everyone would do it, I guess?
Mm, well, I wouldn't.

(Unless I had some metagame reason to believe the DM would screw me over for not doing so, I suppose.)

[ben-zayb]

I want that too :smallbiggrin:

a good reason to choose Divination to be a barred school and just get by on normal intelligence :smallbiggrin:Next thing the player knows, the DM is making secret Wisdom checks for the former character's Gather Information check.:smalltongue:

On topic and at the end of the day, though, a RAW argument is that True Seeing doesn't exactly make the target "unable" to see the illusion/darkness/etc, it just gives the target the additional ability to also see through them. Kind of how having a sense of smell won't make you lose your sense of sight, and that True Seeing simply means you get to see two sets of things at the same time (a Wizard did it, that's why).