How to deal with munchkin level hide

[thecrimsondawn]

So I am playing in a rather high power game, and I feel my gestalt caster with my parties gestalt BSF are strong enough alone to take out nearly any challenge that comes our way, however I am not so blind to know my weak points, and that is I dont personalty know how to deal with hide & move silently focused assassins.

While invisibility adds 50 or so to your hide, it also can be countered easy with a spell, that aside however, I am still looking at 40+ hide check to overcome.

All the rogues have that feat that lets them hide from blindsight/sense (name eludes me) so I cant use that, and while of course I have spells that make me immune to sneak attack, it does not change the fact that my BSF will not be.

To top this all off, some of them also have illusion magic so strong that it works at I think he said 180% of normal, due to race, monster levels, and prestige classes.


Advice?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Custom wondrous items that grant a continuous effect of Steadfast Perception (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/steadfastPerception.htm), Toughsight (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/touchsight.htm), and similar can thwart just about any stealth effect. Touchsight can even thwart Sequester's ability to hide something.

Heavy Fortification (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicArmor.htm#fortification) gives immunity to sneak attacks. There's a Gemstone of Heavy Fortification in the Draconomicon, which requires a Limited Wish to embed it in a non-dragon, but it doesn't take an item space and if his armor is already +2 or higher it's cheaper than putting it on his armor.

Hide checks automatically fail if the creature hiding doesn't have cover or concealment, though they probably have Hide in Plain Sight. Hire an NPC spellcaster with (DMM:) Heighten Spell, Earth Spell, and a Ring of Enduring Arcana to put a Continual Flame (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/continualFlame.htm) that counts as a 10th level spell at a caster level of 20th and a dispel DC of 35. At the standard rate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/goodsAndServices.htm#spell) that should only cost 2,050 gp, and it will automatically overpower and negate any darkness effect with a 9th or lower spell level within a 40-ft. radius. Combine it with an item that continuously generates Daylight and you have a 40-ft. radius of bright illumination that cannot be overcome except by a 10th+ level darkness spell. Even then, a 10th level Darkness spell (Heighten Spell + Earth Spell Deeper Darkness) will equally cancel out the Continual Flame where they overlap, and the Daylight effect will still be active in that area.

A Mindbender dip or some other source of telepathy plus the feat Mindsight in Lords of Madness automatically detects anything with an Int score within range of your telepathy.

[Asrrin]

Find a way to get telepathy and pick up Mindsight.

[Necromancy]

Robe of eyes, ultimate rogue nerfbat

[Flickerdart]

All the rogues have that feat that lets them hide from blindsight/sense (name eludes me) so I cant use that, and while of course I have spells that make me immune to sneak attack, it does not change the fact that my BSF will not be.
Darkstalker blocks detection by the following: blindsight, blindsense, scent, or tremorsense. This means there are several other sensory abilities that leave the enemy detectable:

Nemesis: Allows you to detect a Favored Enemy within 60 feet.
Mindsight: Allows you to detect intelligent beings within telepathy range. Some argue that Mind Blank or Telepathic Static blocks this, but the argument is extremely flimsy.
Lifesense: Makes living creatures shed light to your eyes. Doesn't matter how well they are hidden, if they light up the room like a torch then you know where they are.
Touchsight: Creates an area where you're basically touching everything, which allows you to find those pesky rogues.

[sleepyphoenixx]

If you know what race they are you can also get a Fiercebane weapon (MIC). It glows when the designated type of creature is within 60ft, even if you can't detect them.
Doesn't help you much if they're the same race as you though.

[Curmudgeon]

All the rogues have that feat that lets them hide from blindsight/sense (name eludes me) so I cant use that, and while of course I have spells that make me immune to sneak attack, it does not change the fact that my BSF will not be.
You're probably not as immune as you think. The Lightbringer Penetrating Strike ACF lets the Rogue sneak attack those who are normally immune (with ½ the normal dice, but no reduction in Craven's non-dice bonus). The Savvy Rogue feat lets the Rogue's Crippling Strike special ability affect those who are normally immune to sneak attack. My Rogues almost always have these overrides because sneak-immune foes are fairly common; I would expect your enemies to have them as well. And, of course, if any part of sneak attack works, the augments like Staggering Strike also work.

If you want to be immune to sneak attack you need to be unhittable. Work on that.

[FocusWolf413]

Glitterdust works wonders. It gives a -40 to hide checks with no save. Spam it when you know a rogue is nearby.

[Amphetryon]

Darkstalker blocks detection by the following: blindsight, blindsense, scent, or tremorsense. This means there are several other sensory abilities that leave the enemy detectable:

Nemesis: Allows you to detect a Favored Enemy within 60 feet.
Mindsight: Allows you to detect intelligent beings within telepathy range. Some argue that Mind Blank or Telepathic Static blocks this, but the argument is extremely flimsy.
Lifesense: Makes living creatures shed light to your eyes. Doesn't matter how well they are hidden, if they light up the room like a torch then you know where they are.
Touchsight: Creates an area where you're basically touching everything, which allows you to find those pesky rogues.


As I have a Player fond of extremely well-hidden Characters, I'd appreciate rules-text indicating that Nemesis, Lifesense, or Touchsight obviates or otherwise seriously impinges on Hide checks. For reference, a -20 on the check is not 'seriously impinging' because the Characters regularly hit Hide checks in or above the 40's before 10th level, generally requiring a Nat 20 or specifically tailored foe. If a -20 to the check still grants a better than 50% chance of success at Hiding against most generic, level-appropriate foes, the detection methods are not sufficient.

[Curmudgeon]

Mindsight: Allows you to detect intelligent beings within telepathy range. Some argue that Mind Blank or Telepathic Static blocks this, but the argument is extremely flimsy.

If a mind simply doesn't register to your telepathy, and Mindsight is dependent on your telepathy, I don't see how that argument is "extremely flimsy".

[Flickerdart]

As I have a Player fond of extremely well-hidden Characters, I'd appreciate rules-text indicating that Nemesis, Lifesense, or Touchsight obviates or otherwise seriously impinges on Hide checks. For reference, a -20 on the check is not 'seriously impinging' because the Characters regularly hit Hide checks in or above the 40's before 10th level, generally requiring a Nat 20 or specifically tailored foe. If a -20 to the check still grants a better than 50% chance of success at Hiding against most generic, level-appropriate foes, the detection methods are not sufficient.
Touchsight literally says "You do not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures."

Nemesis is specific about this also: "This feat does not allow you to see an invisible or hidden creature (although you can still discern its location)."

Lifesense doesn't care whether or not the creature is hidden, it still gives off light to the feat's owner (because nothing in Hide lets you conceal such a light).

If a mind simply doesn't register to your telepathy, and Mindsight is dependent on your telepathy, I don't see how that argument is "extremely flimsy".
Mindsight is dependent solely on your telepathy's range. Whether or not a creature "registers on your telepathy" (which is not even a rules thing) doesn't matter a bit.

[WhamBamSam]

As I have a Player fond of extremely well-hidden Characters, I'd appreciate rules-text indicating that Nemesis, Lifesense, or Touchsight obviates or otherwise seriously impinges on Hide checks. For reference, a -20 on the check is not 'seriously impinging' because the Characters regularly hit Hide checks in or above the 40's before 10th level, generally requiring a Nat 20 or specifically tailored foe. If a -20 to the check still grants a better than 50% chance of success at Hiding against most generic, level-appropriate foes, the detection methods are not sufficient.I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Nemesis clearly works, since it specifically says you pinpoint the creature, and isn't one of the specific things Darkstalker screws with. However, if you also have scent or blindsense or whatever, Darkstalker will force you to make a spot or listen check as normal. It also requires an exalted good character, so it's less useful to the DM unless the party is evil, especially as the "catch-all" favored enemy choices might or might not catch your party Rogue (Arcane Hunter probably will for most high-op sneaks I suppose, since Factotums, Chameleons, Gnomes, Kobolds and Changelings who have undergone the Draconic Rite of Passage, and a number of other strong stealth options give arcane spells or SLAs).

Lifesense isn't blocked by Darkstalker (even if you have blindsense or something, so that Mindsight or Nemesis wouldn't work). The creature might still be able to hide well enough to have total concealment, but you'll know there's something there producing all that light, so you at least know where to throw the glitterdust or whatever. (This is of course more useful to a DM than a PC, as the player will have a bunch of allies around illuminating everything, so you won't always know when new lights pop up.)

Touchsight says
You do not need to make Spot or Listen checks to notice creatures; you can detect and pinpoint all creatures within 60 feet. In many circumstances, comparing your regular senses to what you learn with touchsight is enough to tell you the difference between visible, invisible, hiding, and concealed creatures. It might hard-counter Darkstalker even if you also have some other sense which would otherwise render you susceptible, though that depends whether you consider the feat or the power more specific.

[Troacctid]

There are certain exotic senses like a balhannoth's dweomersight or a magekiller swarm's sense magic ability that will pick up the auras of your spells and/or magic items. Anyone with an arcane sight spell can do the same, come to think of it. Heck, detect magic does it too, if they concentrate, but if they waste multiple standard actions on that, you're probably happy anyway.

Be careful about being happy, incidentally, if you run up against a joystealer. They can sense emotions.

[Curmudgeon]

Mindsight is dependent solely on your telepathy's range. Whether or not a creature "registers on your telepathy" (which is not even a rules thing) doesn't matter a bit.
I'll rephrase, then. If you can't communicate telepathically with a creature, they're not within the range of your telepathy — even if they're standing next to you.
Telepathy (Su): A creature with this ability can communicate telepathically with any other creature within a certain range (specified in the creature’s entry, usually 100 feet) that has a language.

[eggynack]

I'll rephrase, then. If you can't communicate telepathically with a creature, they're not within the range of your telepathy — even if they're standing next to you.
That's not really what range means. An enemy is still in range of my fireball even if they're immune to fire. Telepathy blockers make the fact that you're in range of the telepathy not matter. They don't make you outside the range.

[Curmudgeon]

That's not really what range means. An enemy is still in range of my fireball even if they're immune to fire. Telepathy blockers make the fact that you're in range of the telepathy not matter. They don't make you outside the range.
There's a different specification. Telepathy says you can communicate telepathically with any other creature within a certain range. If you cannot do so either you do not have telepathy for this purpose, or they are not within your range. Either way, Mindsight fails.

[eggynack]

There's a different specification. Telepathy says you can communicate telepathically with any other creature within a certain range. If you cannot do so either you do not have telepathy for this purpose, or they are not within your range. Either way, Mindsight fails.
No, mindsight only fails if they aren't within your range, and they are. Having telepathy for this purpose, however you're defining that term, is irrelevant by the rules.

[sleepyphoenixx]

There's a different specification. Telepathy says you can communicate telepathically with any other creature within a certain range. If you cannot do so either you do not have telepathy for this purpose, or they are not within your range. Either way, Mindsight fails.

That's your (entirely reasonable) interpretation. But by the rules as written Mindsight does not have a counter. You have Telepathy with a range of 100ft? Everything within 100ft that has an intelligence score is revealed to you.

The only way to make Mindsight fail is to remove the telepathy ability, like with AMF or Antimagic Ray. But that doesn't exactly help when you're trying to be sneaky.

[Troacctid]

Mind blank does protect you from mindsight, and pretty unambiguously, I think. The text of the spell says it protects you from effects that would detect your thoughts. Mindsight detects thoughts. Therefore, it is stopped by mind blank.

I dunno about other ways you might block mind-affecting stuff, but that specific spell seems like an open-and-shut case.

[Platymus Pus]

This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected.
Why doesn't it work?

[eggynack]

Why doesn't it work?
Because mindsight isn't a mind affecting spell. Troacctid's argument seems more valid, however, especially given that mindsight grants information akin to that given by the spell detect thoughts, which indicates that the former does the latter.

[Curmudgeon]

That's your (entirely reasonable) interpretation. But by the rules as written Mindsight does not have a counter.
Where exactly are these rules which state that Mindsight does not have a counter?

[Dgrin]

Yes, it seems like by RAW, Mind Blank is not going to protect you against Mindsight. However, I believe that 6 levels of Illithid Slayer will protect you from both Mindsight and Nemesis abilities


Cerebral Blind (Su): After reaching 6th level, an illithid slayer is protected from all devices, powers, and spells that reveal location. This ability protects against information gathering by clairsentience powers or effects that reveal location. The ability even foils bend reality, limited wish, miracle, reality revision, and wish when they are used to gain information about the slayer’s location (however, metafaculty can pierce this protective barrier). In the case of remote viewing or scrying that scans an area an illithid slayer is in, the effect works but the slayer simply isn’t detected. Remote viewing or scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at an illithid slayer do not work. This ability is active as long as the slayer is psionically focused.

[Flickerdart]

Mind blank does protect you from mindsight, and pretty unambiguously, I think. The text of the spell says it protects you from effects that would detect your thoughts. Mindsight detects thoughts. Therefore, it is stopped by mind blank.

I dunno about other ways you might block mind-affecting stuff, but that specific spell seems like an open-and-shut case.

Mind Blank text for reference:
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all."

Mindsight is not a device, nor a spell, and therefore doesn't fall under the first sentence. Mindsight is not mind-affecting, nor a divination, so the second sentence doesn't touch it. Mindsight is not wish, limited wish, or miracle, and so doesn't care about the third sentence. Mindsight is not scrying, so is not affected by the fourth and fifth.

[eggynack]

Where exactly are these rules which state that Mindsight does not have a counter?
There wouldn't be any explicit ones, but y'know, if you can't find anything that counters it, then it can't be countered by anything by RAW.


Mindsight is not a device, nor a spell, and therefore doesn't fall under the first sentence. Mindsight is not mind-affecting, nor a divination, so the second sentence doesn't touch it. Mindsight is not wish, limited wish, or miracle, and so doesn't care about the third sentence. Mindsight is not scrying, so is not affected by the fourth and fifth.
True enough. Just blanked over that one. We're back to no counters then, I think.

Edit: However, device is at least a bit ambiguous. The most obvious way to define it is as an object or item of some sort, but there are definitions which could plausibly hold mindsight in their ranks. It's tenuous at best though.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Mindisght piggybacks on the creature's Telepathy special quality, per its rules text:
"Normal: Telepathy offers no special ability to sense other minds. The creature has to know that a being is there to communicate with it telepathically."
It confers an expanded use of telepathy, indicated by the fact that it points out that telepathy is not normally capable of doing what this feat enables.

Furthermore,
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all."

Mind Blank provides a blanket protection against any and all game mechanics which could possibly influence the subject's mind or gain information about it, which would include Mindsight.

[Platymus Pus]

Because mindsight isn't a mind affecting spell. Troacctid's argument seems more valid, however, especially given that mindsight grants information akin to that given by the spell detect thoughts, which indicates that the former does the latter.

The creature perceives where the others are and how powerful their intellects are.
The creature also perceives several observable characteristics about each being detected with mindsight, including the being’s type and Intelligence score.
Normal:
Telepathy offers no special ability to sense other
minds. The creature has to know that a being is there to com-
municate with it telepathically.
Scrying doesn't work, soul scrying doesn't work, other mind effects don't work. It detects intelligence score something in the mind when the spell mindblank blatantly prevents such things.
Why would this besides an attempt to twist the rules ever work?

This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well
Keyword "and effects"

[Curmudgeon]

There wouldn't be any explicit ones, but y'know, if you can't find anything that counters it, then it can't be countered by anything by RAW.
The old lead foil lining in the hat trick.

[Troacctid]

Given that there's text right there in the feat itself that says it's countered by mindlessness, I think it's safe to say it has at least one counter by RAW.

[Flickerdart]

Mindisght piggybacks on the creature's Telepathy special quality, per its rules text:
"Normal: Telepathy offers no special ability to sense other minds. The creature has to know that a being is there to communicate with it telepathically."
It confers an expanded use of telepathy, indicated by the fact that it points out that telepathy is not normally capable of doing what this feat enables.

Furthermore,
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all."

Mind Blank provides a blanket protection against any and all game mechanics which could possibly influence the subject's mind or gain information about it, which would include Mindsight.
How do you figure telepathy is mind-affecting?

Also the second thing you bolded only applies to Limited Wish, Miracle, and Wish, and thus has nothing to do with the discussion.

[eggynack]

Mindisght piggybacks on the creature's Telepathy special quality, per its rules text:
"Normal: Telepathy offers no special ability to sense other minds. The creature has to know that a being is there to communicate with it telepathically."
It confers an expanded use of telepathy, indicated by the fact that it points out that telepathy is not normally capable of doing what this feat enables.
That normal text doesn't necessarily imply expansion. It merely indicates what you weren't able to do before, as opposed to the stuff you're able to do now.


Mind Blank provides a blanket protection against any and all game mechanics which could possibly influence the subject's mind or gain information about it, which would include Mindsight.
No, it's the opposite of a blanket protection, as it only works against those three spells listed.

Scrying doesn't work, soul scrying doesn't work, other mind effects don't work. It detects intelligence score something in the mind when the spell mindblank blatantly prevents such things.
Why would this besides an attempt to twist the rules ever work?
Because mindsight is different from those things. Those things definitely do not work through mind blank, because the spell says they don't, and mindsight apparently does work through mindblank, because the spell doesn't say it doesn't. Spells do what they say they do, no more and no less.


Keyword "and effects"
Mindsight isn't mind-affecting to my knowledge. That's a specific descriptor that doesn't apply here.

The old lead foil lining in the hat trick.
Still wouldn't get you out of the range so much as it'd just provide immunity again.

[Dgrin]

Keyword "and effects"

Mindsight has no mind-affecting descriptor, therefore, it is not mind-affecting. It is rules term, which is not used in that case.


Mindisght piggybacks on the creature's Telepathy special quality, per its rules text:
"Normal: Telepathy offers no special ability to sense other minds. The creature has to know that a being is there to communicate with it telepathically."
It confers an expanded use of telepathy, indicated by the fact that it points out that telepathy is not normally capable of doing what this feat enables.

Yes, that's how it had to be. However, there's nothing in the actual text of the feat about it using telepathy. Which is an oversight and obviously not intended but still is the case.


Mind Blank provides a blanket protection against any and all game mechanics which could possibly influence the subject's mind or gain information about it, which would include Mindsight.

Unfortunately, the bolded part is related to limited wish, miracle, and wish spells, not all game mechanics.

[Dgrin]

So, it seems like you simply need to be incorporeal Vecna-blooded Necropolitan Illithid Slayer with Darkstalker not having any spells, spell-like abilities or magic items while enjoying +NI to Hide and Move Silently to be undetectable by any means... Not too much. I guess OP should be ready to meet a lot of quite interesting illithid haters from now on if his DM is reading this thread :smallamused:

[sleepyphoenixx]

You don't even need to hard counter the stealth. Get some kind of immunity to flat-footed and an immediate action spell that prevents an attack from hitting you by whatever means. Problem solved.
Foresight, Mark of the Stars, 10 levels of Divine Oracle, a legacy item with the necessary quality... there's probably a few more i don't recall.
Combine that with an immediate action teleport or a wand of Celerity, done.


So, it seems like you simply need to be incorporeal Vecna-blooded Necropolitan Illithid Slayer with Darkstalker not having any spells, spell-like abilities or magic items while enjoying +NI to Hide and Move Silently to be undetectable by any means... Not too much. I guess OP should be ready to meet a lot of quite interesting illithid haters from now on if his DM is reading this thread :smallamused:

There shouldn't be completely uncounterable stealth imo. That's just lazy game design. The problem with Mindsight is that it's way too cheap for such a broad and powerful counter.
If you want to see the guy who invested a big chunk of his character into being stealthy you should need to invest into spotting him. Not get Mindsight for the cheap, uncounterable solution and call it done. But that's up to your DM.

[thecrimsondawn]

So, it seems like you simply need to be incorporeal Vecna-blooded Necropolitan Illithid Slayer with Darkstalker not having any spells, spell-like abilities or magic items while enjoying +NI to Hide and Move Silently to be undetectable by any means... Not too much. I guess OP should be ready to meet a lot of quite interesting illithid haters from now on if his DM is reading this thread :smallamused:

Naa, I make some rather insane builds, but I always bring them up to him with where they are strong and where they are week. The stealth aspect of this game is not something I will have to deal with for a few levels, but as a major plot element in the game, every one of them is gestalt as well.

I am immune to sneak attack, but I will take half damage as they do also have either the feat or a spell that lets them sneak attack me, so you guys are right about that.

I am of the good alignment with no psychic ability's so I will have to find out how magic items work for psionics before I can find out if they are for sale. Sadly this limits me to not dipping into mindbender.
Is there a spell that gives me telepathy? I am a wizard/incantatrix+archivist/dweomerkeeper, with item familiar, domain wizard (spell domain), and spontaneous divination. As someone who can cast prepared spells, and spontaneous spells due to divination, I get to cheese a bit with access to feats and items like knowstones.

The assassins all have that acquired template shadow thing from Savage Species (I think its 5 levels or so) mixed with other nasty bits, they can control light levels to make shadow. Aware of this I picked up a couple of spells from the Forgotten Realms setting that allow me to deal with shadows a bit, but little of this will aid my BSF who I need to kill these guys. They can shadow jump and shadow teleport to more or less any shadow.

What about immune to piercing, slashing, and blunt? If I was able to use that, it would not be immunity to sneak attack, but they would not be able to damage him.

[thecrimsondawn]

There shouldn't be completely uncounterable stealth imo. That's just lazy game design. The problem with Mindsight is that it's way too cheap for such a broad and powerful counter.
If you want to see the guy who invested a big chunk of his character into being stealthy you should need to invest into spotting him. Not get Mindsight for the cheap, uncounterable solution and call it done. But that's up to your DM.

The issue is 9th column casters are broken in 3.5 as they have a spell that can do anything, often better, then the intended class they are imitating

[Necromancy]

Lets all simmer down here. Going through a huge amount of effort and class revamping just to raise your detection skill is extreme and over-reactive.

You will never have any 100% ability to detect

You will never be 100% immune to sneak damage

You CAN be 100% immune to sneak attack, with a single core magic item


Robe of Eyes

The robe of eyes sees all forms of invisible or ethereal creatures or objects within 120 feet. The wearer of a robe of eyes gains a +10 competence bonus on Perception checks. She retains her Dexterity bonus to AC even when flat-footed, and can't be flanked.


The robe is body slot, which doesn't have anything else that's good so you're not losing any items.

You're vulnerable to gaze attacks.... kind of a niche thing there and it's usually fine if you stay at range (most Gaze is 30' max). If you suddenly start fighting a lot of rogue classed medusae, your DM is a jerk

The blindness thing from light spells cast on the robe seems bad at first glance, until you realize you can just keep a potion of cure blindness handy, and then you never use it because someone has to spellcraft that robe on purpose, in the middle of a fight usually, to know to do that. Plus those are all AOO inducing touch spells anyway

[Doctor Awkward]

Here we go again...

For starters... pure, objective, RAW.

1. Telepathy (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#telepathy) is not mind-affecting. This is based upon the fact that the ability has (Su) and no [Mind-Affecting] tag, nor does it state anywhere in the description that it is a mind-affecting effect.

2. Mindsight, as a feat, becomes an Extraordinary Abiltiy once taken, since it does not have anything in the description to indicate otherwise. It also lacks any text which says it is mind-affecting, doing nothing but adding additional functionality to the Telepathy special quality.


Let's get to disqualifying Mind Blank:
Obviously, Mindsight is not a spell, divination or otherwise. But they also use the somewhat vague term of "device". This word is defined precisely two other times in the Player's Handbook.
Under Disable Device (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/disableDevice.htm), and Use Magic Device.

Use this skill to disarm a trap, jam a lock (in either the open or closed position), or rig a wagon wheel to fall off.

Use this skill to activate magic devices, including scrolls and wands, that you could not otherwise activate.

Devices would seem to come in two flavors: mechanical and magical.

The only two other times in the entirety of the Player's Handbook that the word device is used outside of the context of those skills is in the spells Sequester (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/sequester.htm) and Unseen Servant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/unseenServant.htm). The former makes reference to specific magic items (the Robe of Eyes and Gem of True Seeing), and the latter uses a pressure plate as an example. Magical, and mechanical.

Thus, devices, as defined by the Player's Handbook, are physical objects within the game that are either mundane or magical in nature, and does not extend to abstract concepts such as character statistics.

Ergo, Mindsight is a feat and is not a device.
Even if you feel like you can split further hairs regarding RAW, intent is clear.


The specific function of Telepathy and Mindsight is irrelevant for consideration with Mind Blank, as neither of them fall under the purview of what the spell prevents.


Do I like it? Hell no, I think it's retarded. But to quote Red Fel, "them's the rules."

[Curmudgeon]

Thus, devices, as defined by the Player's Handbook, are physical objects within the game that are either mundane or magical in nature
You're confusing "used in" and "defined by". A small number of examples does not create a limiting specification in the rules.

[eggynack]

You're confusing "used in" and "defined by". A small number of examples does not create a limiting specification in the rules.
True, though I doubt that mindsight could really be considered a thing made, a plan, a scheme, or a trick, which rules out the relevant definitions it could fall under. I mean, you can definitely take some weird and roundabout semantic path from one to the other, but as I noted above, it'd be tenuous at best.

[Doctor Awkward]

You're confusing "used in" and "defined by". A small number of examples does not create a limiting specification in the rules.

No, you're forgetting that the rules (ESPECIALLY spells) define things through contextual evidence all the time. Even the word context itself is specifically defined as influencing "meaning and/or effect".
Just because the book doesn't list a word in the glossary doesn't mean it isn't defined.

[eggynack]

No, you're forgetting that the rules (ESPECIALLY spells) define things through contextual evidence all the time. Even the word context itself is specifically defined as influencing "meaning and/or effect".
Just because the book doesn't list a word in the glossary doesn't mean it isn't defined.
Yeah, but your contextual evidence is pulled from entirely different sections of the book, so it doesn't really serve to define the term in this case. If you really want to make a claim from context, it should really be within about a sentence of the word's use.

[ExLibrisMortis]

You're confusing "used in" and "defined by". A small number of examples does not create a limiting specification in the rules.
Other than that, there's just the dictionary to go on, and that's about as reliable as a fishnet for an aquarium wall. I personally wouldn't be inclined to interpret 'device' to mean something so abstract as a feat. Sure, there might be some biological 'device', or even part of the mind/soul/whatever, that runs 'telepathy', but by that reading, the Illithid Hunter is hidden from eyeballs, ears, noses and anything else that is a sensory organ with a spatial (and depending on your stance on 'location', temporal) resolution, because those are 'devices':

"After reaching 6th level, an illithid slayer is protected from all devices, powers, and spells that reveal location" (note: except for Metafaculty)

(If you want to go all crazy, you could say that an Illithid Slayer is 'protected from' being able to influence the universe, because someone might find out that they're there)


Back to Mind Blank:
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all."


Mindsight does not detect, influence or read emotions or thoughts; only intelligence score.
Mindsight is not a mind-affecting spell or effect, as it lacks the descriptor. It is not a divination spell or effect, as it lacks that descriptor/school name.
Mindsight is not a limited wish, miracle or wish spell.
Mindsight is not scrying.


To elaborate on the first point: thoughts and emotions are the contents of the mind; merely detecting the presence of a mind capable of containing thoughts of complexity x, does not mean that you detect the thoughts themselves, or that the mind does in fact contain thoughts of complexity x, or any thoughts at all.

Now, you could perhaps say that Mind Blank hides your intelligence score from Mindsight, because it is still too much detail about thoughts and emotions - particularly the difference between animal and non-animal intelligence. But you certainly can't hide the presence of your mind from Mindsight, by RAW.

I don't think it's RAI, but that's how I'd read it.

[Doctor Awkward]

Yeah, but your contextual evidence is pulled from entirely different sections of the book, so it doesn't really serve to define the term in this case. If you really want to make a claim from context, it should really be within about a sentence of the word's use.

So what your saying is that, when reading and interpreting the Rules As Written, you don't need to consider all the rules, just the parts of them that (in your opinion) specifically pertain to the thing you want to interpret?

Sorry, no.
If the entire rule book is the rules, then entire book is the context.

[eggynack]

So what your saying is that, when reading and interpreting the Rules As Written, you don't need to consider all the rules, just the parts of them that (in your opinion) specifically pertain to the thing you want to interpret?

Sorry, no.
If the entire rule book is the rules, then entire book is the context.
That the entire book is the rules does not mean that the entire book is the context. Context, as used to define a word, is pulled directly from around the word. There is some degree of context you can pull from distant places, but the impact on the word's definition will be almost negligible. You can't get an absolute and concrete definition for a word by pulling how the word is used pages and pages away. That's just not what context means. In point of fact, context has little to do with how the word is used elsewhere.

[Doctor Awkward]

That the entire book is the rules does not mean that the entire book is the context. Context, as used to define a word, is pulled directly from around the word. There is some degree of context you can pull from distant places, but the impact on the word's definition will be almost negligible. You can't get an absolute and concrete definition for a word by pulling how the word is used pages and pages away. That's just not what context means. In point of fact, context has little to do with how the word is used elsewhere.

So... in spite of the fact that the entire book is a whole source reference for the rules of the game, the parts of it you are not currently looking at cease to be context when you turn a page? Because I'm pretty sure that's actually the opposite of context.

[eggynack]

So... in spite of the fact that the entire book is a whole source reference for the rules of the game, the parts of it you are not currently looking at cease to be context when you turn a page? Because I'm pretty sure that's actually the opposite of context.
No, that's just what context is. In fact, you should only really be looking within a sentence for context, or maybe some adjacent sentences if that sentence isn't enough. It's just how language works. You might look further out, to adjacent paragraphs, if the thing you're seeking context for isn't a word, but even then you wouldn't look to the skill section to divine the meaning of mind blank on a context basis. The thing is, what you're essentially arguing now, that the way a word is used in one place strictly and narrowly defines how it's used everywhere else, is absurd.

[Amphetryon]

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

Nemesis clearly works, since it specifically says you pinpoint the creature, and isn't one of the specific things Darkstalker screws with. However, if you also have scent or blindsense or whatever, Darkstalker will force you to make a spot or listen check as normal. It also requires an exalted good character, so it's less useful to the DM unless the party is evil, especially as the "catch-all" favored enemy choices might or might not catch your party Rogue (Arcane Hunter probably will for most high-op sneaks I suppose, since Factotums, Chameleons, Gnomes, Kobolds and Changelings who have undergone the Draconic Rite of Passage, and a number of other strong stealth options give arcane spells or SLAs).

Lifesense isn't blocked by Darkstalker (even if you have blindsense or something, so that Mindsight or Nemesis wouldn't work). The creature might still be able to hide well enough to have total concealment, but you'll know there's something there producing all that light, so you at least know where to throw the glitterdust or whatever. (This is of course more useful to a DM than a PC, as the player will have a bunch of allies around illuminating everything, so you won't always know when new lights pop up.)

Touchsight says It might hard-counter Darkstalker even if you also have some other sense which would otherwise render you susceptible, though that depends whether you consider the feat or the power more specific.
So, only Touchsight actually works as a counter to "+YES" Hide modifiers, then. "Clearly works . . . however forces you to make a Spot/Listen check as normal" reads, from here, as not terribly useful against the aforementioned +YES check, and Lifesense has similar problems, by your own language ("might still be able to hide well enough to have total concealment"). The light from Lifesense may provide a negative modifier to the Hide check, but that's not the same thing as a negation.

[Doctor Awkward]

No, that's just what context is. In fact, you should only really be looking within a sentence for context, or maybe some adjacent sentences if that sentence isn't enough. It's just how language works. You might look further out, to adjacent paragraphs, if the thing you're seeking context for isn't a word, but even then you wouldn't look to the skill section to divine the meaning of mind blank on a context basis. The thing is, what you're essentially arguing now, that the way a word is used in one place strictly and narrowly defines how it's used everywhere else, is absurd.

We aren't defining Mind Blank. We are looking for something that tells us what the rules think the word "device" means.

What you are suggesting is the same as saying that the Blindness/Deafness spell doesn't do anything, because the penalties for being blind and deafened aren't defined within the spell itself.

Since the spell itself does not, you reach out to the rest of the book. And given that the word device is used with nothing less than 100% consistency throughout the entire rest of the book, there really is no room for interpretation.

[eggynack]

We aren't defining Mind Blank. We are looking for something that tells us what the rules think the word "device" means.
But there isn't anything that does that. If you want something that tells you what the rules think the word "device" means, you don't need context. You need a strict rules definition, and you don't have one.


What you are suggesting is the same as saying that the Blindness/Deafness spell doesn't do anything, because the penalties for being blind and deafened aren't defined within the spell itself.
No, because blind and deaf are game terms with, as I noted above, strict rules definitions.


Since the spell itself does not, you reach out to the rest of the book. And given that the word device is used with nothing less than 100% consistency throughout the entire rest of the book, there really is no room for interpretation.
It doesn't matter how consistently the word is used in one way. That does not a rule make. If the spell doesn't defined a word, then you look to the standard English definition, and in the absence of clear indication that the term falls into one of those definitions, you look to immediately surrounding words for context. If there isn't enough immediate context, and the term isn't game defined, then you just have an ambiguity, simple as that. But we don't really have one in this case, because mindsight doesn't really fall under the other definitions of device either. So, y'know, problem solved.

[Doctor Awkward]

But there isn't anything that does that. If you want something that tells you what the rules think the word "device" means, you don't need context. You need a strict rules definition, and you don't have one.
I am gripped with a sudden sense of inevitability...


No, because blind and deaf are game terms with, as I noted above, strict rules definitions.

And THERE it is!

The circle is now complete. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19082129#post19082129)

[eggynack]

I am gripped with a sudden sense of inevitability...



And THERE it is!

The circle is now complete. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19082129#post19082129)
Different parts of the book can provide definitions if the words are defined as rules text. Had you a different part of the book, perhaps something in the glossary or anything really, that had a big "device" header, and then proceeded to give an explicit definition of the term, then you'd have something. Instead, all you have is a word being used in a particular way, rather than a word being defined, and a word can be used in two different ways in two different parts of the book. Blind is a game defined term. Device is not.

Edit: I mean, you could try to make an argument that it is a game defined term. Just not really an argument from context.

[thecrimsondawn]

Ill admit, im kinda impressed that such a simple topic ended up becoming such a hard fought debate :P

Dropping a nail into the coffin here tho, if mind blank was an issue, I could dispell the crap out of it. so I dont need to worry about that.
I have already thought about using detect magic to locate a hiding creatures magic auras by location, and lv2 dweomerkeeper gets arcane sight at will, as well as supernatural abilities that simply ignore SR.
Knowing a general location of high end rogue types is enough to AOE the crap out of a room, and I also have the option of crafting a contingency spell that activates when someone sneak attacks me.
I do have options, they are just costly ones.

As someone who has every divine spell and every divination spell access, I figure there has to be some buff or something I can use to help me deal with the situation.
Right now my option is to remove all shadows in the area and have a daylight spell on both of us, then stand back to back ready for approach. Of course they wont approach, but movement will be wonky then too.

As someone who is good aligned, are there any good ideas?

[eggynack]

Dropping a nail into the coffin here tho, if mind blank was an issue, I could dispell the crap out of it. so I dont need to worry about that.
Not necessarily a good solution, as a ring of counterspells can act as a relatively cheap counter to dispelling. Also, you are trying to detect someone here. Not really sure how you expect to dispel them if you don't know where they are.

[WhamBamSam]

So, only Touchsight actually works as a counter to "+YES" Hide modifiers, then. "Clearly works . . . however forces you to make a Spot/Listen check as normal" reads, from here, as not terribly useful against the aforementioned +YES check, and Lifesense has similar problems, by your own language ("might still be able to hide well enough to have total concealment"). The light from Lifesense may provide a negative modifier to the Hide check, but that's not the same thing as a negation.Well, only Touchsight works as a counter on the level Blindsight would be in the absence of Darkstalker, if that's what you mean.

So long as you don't have any unusual senses that Darkstalker works against (as most things, especially most things that would end up with Ranger levels, don't), Nemesis works as well as Blindsense would against things without Darkstalker. The "however forces you to make a Spot/Listen check as normal" bit only applies if you have scent, blindsense, blindsight, or tremorsense. It's at least as good as Mindsight. Is that not enough?

Similarly, Lifesense will at least allow you to determine the creature's location, even if they do still manage concealment. So no, it's not a hard counter to Darkstalker and +Yes to Hide in and of itself, but in conjunction with something like Glitterdust it will certainly suffice. Even if you're using it on a mundane (if unliving) guard, it's at least good enough to set up Blind Fight so long as you can tell the precise center of the illumination.

At the very least, these things are enough that stealth becomes less foolproof, which should spook the player behind the sneak.

You can also jack spot/listen up pretty high. A Totemist or Druid guard could potentially pose a serious problem to someone trying to sneak past.

Also, you can actually use the fact that Darkstalker beats senses beyond those listed if the creature also has a listed one to your advantage. If you have two creatures with a sense that beat darkstalker, and one of those creatures has a sense that Darkstalker beats, and the other doe not, then the one who does not have the sense beaten by Darkstalker will sense creatures with Darkstalker, while the other will not. Between the two of them they will know, specifically, that someone with Darkstalker is present. My personal favorite way to go about this is to use a Xorvintaal Dragon and Exarch, both with Mindsight. The Exarch will sense enemies with Darkstalker, while the Dragon will not, and so together they will be able to determine whenever anyone with Darkstalker (so any dedicated sneak) comes within 100 miles of the dragon's lair (or, at least, whenever any such person within that range tries to Hide).

[AnonymousPepper]

Can we just drop the RAW and go with the seemingly obvious and sane RAI that Mind Blank *should* protect, if only on the grounds that Mindsight at least works similarly to a divination effect? Nobody knows better than the Playground that RAW is not God, else the world would be ruled by Kobolds.

[bekeleven]

Here's a question. Can anyone give me some good examples of non-spell divinations?

[Amphetryon]

Well, only Touchsight works as a counter on the level Blindsight would be in the absence of Darkstalker, if that's what you mean.

So long as you don't have any unusual senses that Darkstalker works against (as most things, especially most things that would end up with Ranger levels, don't), Nemesis works as well as Blindsense would against things without Darkstalker. The "however forces you to make a Spot/Listen check as normal" bit only applies if you have scent, blindsense, blindsight, or tremorsense. It's at least as good as Mindsight. Is that not enough?

Similarly, Lifesense will at least allow you to determine the creature's location, even if they do still manage concealment. So no, it's not a hard counter to Darkstalker and +Yes to Hide in and of itself, but in conjunction with something like Glitterdust it will certainly suffice. Even if you're using it on a mundane (if unliving) guard, it's at least good enough to set up Blind Fight so long as you can tell the precise center of the illumination.

At the very least, these things are enough that stealth becomes less foolproof, which should spook the player behind the sneak.

You can also jack spot/listen up pretty high. A Totemist or Druid guard could potentially pose a serious problem to someone trying to sneak past.

Also, you can actually use the fact that Darkstalker beats senses beyond those listed if the creature also has a listed one to your advantage. If you have two creatures with a sense that beat darkstalker, and one of those creatures has a sense that Darkstalker beats, and the other doe not, then the one who does not have the sense beaten by Darkstalker will sense creatures with Darkstalker, while the other will not. Between the two of them they will know, specifically, that someone with Darkstalker is present. My personal favorite way to go about this is to use a Xorvintaal Dragon and Exarch, both with Mindsight. The Exarch will sense enemies with Darkstalker, while the Dragon will not, and so together they will be able to determine whenever anyone with Darkstalker (so any dedicated sneak) comes within 100 miles of the dragon's lair (or, at least, whenever any such person within that range tries to Hide).

No, forcing Spot/Listen checks - and forcing the DM to use guys that simply prevent anyone but Sir Sneaksalot from succeeding at Hide, ever - with a better than 75% chance that the Hide just succeeds is not exactly what I would consider a good solution.

[WhamBamSam]

No, forcing Spot/Listen checks - and forcing the DM to use guys that simply prevent anyone but Sir Sneaksalot from succeeding at Hide, ever - with a better than 75% chance that the Hide just succeeds is not exactly what I would consider a good solution.I'm not sure which of these things, apart from just optimizing Spot just as hard as the player is optimizing Hide, are supposed to result in that scenario. Can you explain what exactly you see happening when an enemy is using each of these abilities to try to catch sneaks?

[Bad Wolf]

Use true seeing?

[Flickerdart]

Use true seeing?
True Seeing provides no assistance when dealing with someone who is not using invisibility or a similar spell to hide, but just has a sky high Hide check.

[thecrimsondawn]

True Seeing provides no assistance when dealing with someone who is not using invisibility or a similar spell to hide, but just has a sky high Hide check.

What if they where invisible tho? The way we have run it is that because they are hiding AND invisible, you have to be able to spot them to see that there is someone there that is invisible.

[bekeleven]

Here's a question. Can anyone give me some good examples of non-spell divinations?

Anyone? Preferably multiple, in core?

[Troacctid]

Anyone? Preferably multiple, in core?

Many creatures have divination spells as spell-like abilities. Loremasters have legend lore, analyze dweomer, and identify as extraordinary abilities. Psions (obviously) have powers, not spells.

[bekeleven]

Many creatures have divination spells as spell-like abilities. Loremasters have legend lore, analyze dweomer, and identify as extraordinary abilities. Psions (obviously) have powers, not spells.

Psionic powers can't be divinations. Loremasters gain the ability to duplicate the spell effects, but it's not classed. Extraordinary and supernatural abilities never have descriptors.

Here's the thing. Mind blank says,


This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects.

There's two ways to parse this:

Information gathering by [Divination Spells] and [Divination Effects].

Or,

Information Gathering by [Divination Spells] and [Effects].

For a comparison, imagine I said, "Here comes tall jack and Jill." Is Jill tall? It's semantically ambiguous. Because D&D wasn't written in Lojban, so is mind blank.

But there's an easy way to solve it: Divination is a spell school. Thus, the only thing that could fall into the category of "Divination effects" is spell-like abilities. There aren't many of these, but an example is the Astral Deva's Discern Lies as a SLA.

Anyway, if mind blank protects against information gathering by effects, it would stop any form of -sight. But the wording is also rather... ambiguous. I'd interpret it as meaning it blocks any form of active sytems invocation, but maybe that's the programmer talking. In other words, you can see a hidden mind blanked character with a reactive spot check, but you can't gain information by performing any "effect".

The rest I leave to the philosophers.

[Sith_Happens]

Different parts of the book can provide definitions if the words are defined as rules text.

All text is rules text, as Curmudgeon is very happy to tell people on a regular basis.

[eggynack]

All text is rules text, as Curmudgeon is very happy to tell people on a regular basis.
Might need to use better terming then. Never in the books, to my knowledge, is there language that sets the definition of device to any particular thing.

[Curmudgeon]

All text is rules text, as Curmudgeon is very happy to tell people on a regular basis.
That's not quite right. The advertising in Dragon magazine ("100% OFFICIAL D&D") isn't rules text. The Player's Handbook "CREDITS" page isn't rules text. But the "plain language" description part of a feat (which I usually refer to as the feat "header") is RAW for the feat just as much as any other part. Often that's just a rehash of what's in the rest of the feat and it's therefore redundant. However, sometimes the header includes unique content, and you can't ignore all headers just because most of them happen to be ignorable.

All rules text is RAW.

[Amphetryon]

I'm not sure which of these things, apart from just optimizing Spot just as hard as the player is optimizing Hide, are supposed to result in that scenario. Can you explain what exactly you see happening when an enemy is using each of these abilities to try to catch sneaks?

Player: I don't care if he is hiding and has Darkstalker. I have Lifesense/Nemesis.

DM: Okay. Roll your Spot check. Target number *checks* 30.

Player: But. . . I'm 6th level. . . That means I'd need to roll a 19 on the die. . . .

DM: Good luck. The target number for your allies is 10 higher, if it makes you feel better. They'll get a bonus if you find him.

Player: But. . . I'm the only one who has a good Spot check in this party. . . .

An Ex (or Su) ability which is supposed to let you notice hidden people which doesn't actually do that, let alone allow you to give your allies anything beyond the mere ghost of a chance to notice the one(s) hiding seems decidedly less than useful. The thread talks about 'munchkin level Hide,' after all, so we're dealing with someone who has optimized the ability. If the only legitimate answer is 'munchkin back,' I'm not sure that ancillary abilities like Nemesis and Lifesense are more than minorly beneficial to the scenario.

[thecrimsondawn]

Player: I don't care if he is hiding and has Darkstalker. I have Lifesense/Nemesis.

DM: Okay. Roll your Spot check. Target number *checks* 30.

Player: But. . . I'm 6th level. . . That means I'd need to roll a 19 on the die. . . .

DM: Good luck. The target number for your allies is 10 higher, if it makes you feel better. They'll get a bonus if you find him.

Player: But. . . I'm the only one who has a good Spot check in this party. . . .

An Ex (or Su) ability which is supposed to let you notice hidden people which doesn't actually do that, let alone allow you to give your allies anything beyond the mere ghost of a chance to notice the one(s) hiding seems decidedly less than useful. The thread talks about 'munchkin level Hide,' after all, so we're dealing with someone who has optimized the ability. If the only legitimate answer is 'munchkin back,' I'm not sure that ancillary abilities like Nemesis and Lifesense are more than minorly beneficial to the scenario.

Right, and as of right now, our party consists of myself (a wizard+arch) and our BSF (half min Goliath barbarian+binder)
The item suggestions at the start of the thread are good, but I will need to read up on psychic item crafting and see if its available in game. The mind bender class is not an option as its evil only to enter.

[WhamBamSam]

Player: I don't care if he is hiding and has Darkstalker. I have Lifesense/Nemesis.

DM: Okay. Roll your Spot check. Target number *checks* 30.

Player: But. . . I'm 6th level. . . That means I'd need to roll a 19 on the die. . . .

DM: Good luck. The target number for your allies is 10 higher, if it makes you feel better. They'll get a bonus if you find him.

Player: But. . . I'm the only one who has a good Spot check in this party. . . .

An Ex (or Su) ability which is supposed to let you notice hidden people which doesn't actually do that, let alone allow you to give your allies anything beyond the mere ghost of a chance to notice the one(s) hiding seems decidedly less than useful. The thread talks about 'munchkin level Hide,' after all, so we're dealing with someone who has optimized the ability. If the only legitimate answer is 'munchkin back,' I'm not sure that ancillary abilities like Nemesis and Lifesense are more than minorly beneficial to the scenario.But here's the thing, you still know where he is. So it actually goes like this...

Player: I don't care if he is hiding and has Darkstalker. I have Lifesense/Nemesis/Mindsight.

DM: Okay. Roll your Spot check. Target number *checks* 30.

Player: But. . . I'm 6th level. . . That means I'd need to roll a 19 on the die. . . . *rolls*

DM: So you probably don't see him. Yeah, nope, he's still got total concealment, but you know he's in this square here.

At which point someone throws a Glitterdust or just some AoE blasting/BFC down on the place where you know he is. Or you have the meatshield with Combat Reflexes move into position to AoO the sneak if he tries to move or make a ranged attack, since that'll work despite being flat-footed. Or Bluff the sneak into thinking that you can see them, presumably with a circumstance bonus from knowing where they are. Or move to an angle where they don't have cover and can't hide. Or do any number of other things with that information.

That seems like enough to justify taking the feat in question, at least to me. They're less useful than Touchsight or Blindsight against things without Darkstalker, but they're still pretty darn useful.

EDIT:
Right, and as of right now, our party consists of myself (a wizard+arch) and our BSF (half min Goliath barbarian+binder)
The item suggestions at the start of the thread are good, but I will need to read up on psychic item crafting and see if its available in game. The mind bender class is not an option as its evil only to enter.Mindbender just requires nongood alignment. A neutral wizard could take it. You could also go Necropolitan and take Lifesense if your Cha is at least 13.

If you really want to brute force the problem, you can Planar Bind outsiders with Telepathy and either try to get ones that come with Mindsight, or have them PsyRef'ed/Chaos Shuffled to have it. Or get some subservient intelligent undead (Awaken Undead, Control Undead, Animate Dread Warrior) and get Lifesense on them somehow. Or at high levels/with a scroll, use the Sanctified spell Cry of Ysgard to get yourself some pet Rangers who can take Nemesis.

[Amphetryon]

But here's the thing, you still know where he is. So it actually goes like this...

Player: I don't care if he is hiding and has Darkstalker. I have Lifesense/Nemesis/Mindsight.

DM: Okay. Roll your Spot check. Target number *checks* 30.

Player: But. . . I'm 6th level. . . That means I'd need to roll a 19 on the die. . . . *rolls*

DM: So you probably don't see him. Yeah, nope, he's still got total concealment, but you know he's in this square here.

At which point someone throws a Glitterdust or just some AoE blasting/BFC down on the place where you know he is. Or you have the meatshield with Combat Reflexes move into position to AoO the sneak if he tries to move or make a ranged attack, since that'll work despite being flat-footed. Or Bluff the sneak into thinking that you can see them, presumably with a circumstance bonus from knowing where they are. Or move to an angle where they don't have cover and can't hide. Or do any number of other things with that information.

That seems like enough to justify taking the feat in question, at least to me. They're less useful than Touchsight or Blindsight against things without Darkstalker, but they're still pretty darn useful.

EDIT: Mindbender just requires nongood alignment. A neutral wizard could take it. You could also go Necropolitan and take Lifesense if your Cha is at least 13.

If you really want to brute force the problem, you can Planar Bind outsiders with Telepathy and either try to get ones that come with Mindsight, or have them PsyRef'ed/Chaos Shuffled to have it. Or get some subservient intelligent undead (Awaken Undead, Control Undead, Animate Dread Warrior) and get Lifesense on them somehow. Or at high levels/with a scroll, use the Sanctified spell Cry of Ysgard to get yourself some pet Rangers who can take Nemesis.If you, or your DM, are kind enough to let Player B target an enemy's location based on Player A's failed Spot check, that works. I'll stipulate that I've never seen a DM willing to make that particular allowance in actual play. Not sure how the meatshield gets any AoOs off against an enemy she never sees, either, but I'll concede that there are probably tables where that behavior also flies, contrary to my own personal knowledge.

[squiggit]

If you, or your DM, are kind enough to let Player B target an enemy's location based on Player A's failed Spot check, that works. I'll stipulate that I've never seen a DM willing to make that particular allowance in actual play.
I'm not sure why you wouldn't. A knows where C is. A tells B where to fire. B shoots, revealing C. What's the weirdness there?

[WhamBamSam]

If you, or your DM, are kind enough to let Player B target an enemy's location based on Player A's failed Spot check, that works. I'll stipulate that I've never seen a DM willing to make that particular allowance in actual play. Not sure how the meatshield gets any AoOs off against an enemy she never sees, either, but I'll concede that there are probably tables where that behavior also flies, contrary to my own personal knowledge.The failed spot check doesn't matter. All that means is that the creature still has total concealment against you and is successfully hidden for the purpose of whether you're flatfooted or what have you. Mindsight/Nemesis still tell you the exact location of the creature. That's what they do. For Lifesense, the hidden creature is still giving off light, so you can determine their location and size from the illumination they produce. This isn't the DM being nice. This is how these abilities work by the rules. They let you know where the creature is, even if they don't let you see them. They give you more or less exactly what Blindsense would in absence of Darkstalker.

[Nibbens]

So I am playing in a rather high power game, and I feel my gestalt caster with my parties gestalt BSF are strong enough alone to take out nearly any challenge that comes our way, however I am not so blind to know my weak points, and that is I dont personalty know how to deal with hide & move silently focused assassins.

The Alarm spell? Invis, hide, ms, don't matter to it. Cast a few of them around you while resting and you're ready for assassins... Seeing them once they walk in, however - that's left to glitterdust or large quantities of flour.

[Necromancy]

Holy crap how did this thread become a mind blank peen battle? None of this helps with the OP's question, as I seriously doubt he wants to completely remake his character to be able to deal with a minority of threats

[thecrimsondawn]

The Alarm spell? Invis, hide, ms, don't matter to it. Cast a few of them around you while resting and you're ready for assassins... Seeing them once they walk in, however - that's left to glitterdust or large quantities of flour.

Well this would work save the issue that alarm is a magical trap since its triggered as such, and these assassins will have no issue finding them.

The second issue is they can, and often do travel on the plane of shadow. There powers give them access to dimension door wherever a shadow is, as well as other nasty skills. Bypassing an alarm would be cake.


Holy crap how did this thread become a mind blank peen battle? None of this helps with the OP's question, as I seriously doubt he wants to completely remake his character to be able to deal with a minority of threats

Right, I am a wizard/archivist, and my BSF is a half min barbarian/binder. I will not be redesigning my whole build, but a dip is fine. With the way I am playing I may drop to LN down from LG as situations are calling for me to make decisions that I feel would be best held another way, so mindbender COULD be a choice, just not one at this time.
I was hoping to find cleaver uses of magic, class features, or something that would help counter 80+ hide checks as clearly nobody will be making that check