Arcane sight greater

[Braininthejar2]

What happens if you look in the direction of someone invisible?

How about looking directly at a person who is mind-blanked? Will you get a reading of his active spells, or not?

[Troacctid]

"You know the location and power of all magical auras within your sight." Invisible creatures are not within your sight.

[Kaleph]

"You know the location and power of all magical auras within your sight." Invisible creatures are not within your sight.
But the magical auras are. Actually, arcane sight alone should be enough to let you pinpoint (but not see) invisible creatures, or at least the auras of their active spells - see here for more info:
http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040914a

[Braininthejar2]

What about mind blank?

[Eldariel]

You see the spell, not the creature. Thus, Mind Blank does nothing and neither does invisibility. The only thing that does is Magic Aura but you do get to see the aura of said spell, so at least you know there's magic there.

EDIT: And same can be said for standard Arcane Sight, which can be Permanencied. You should pretty much always have one or the other active. Greater Arcane Sight is a rather minor upgrade over Arcane Sight, to be honest. It just skips the Spellcraft needed to decipher the spell/effect but it doesn't alter the fact that you need to actually see the target to determine the specific effect. Otherwise you only see auras and their location, much like with Arcane Sight. It's only DC29 Spellcraft to determine a 9th level spell in place and a Wizard should be hitting that pretty reliably in the teens (let's say +8 Int, 13 ranks, +2 synergy (K:Arcana) on level 10 does that on a 6 - 4 if Masterwork item is allowed and automatically with a +5 competence bonus item).

[MisterKaws]

In case a DM lets Invisible Invisibility pass, you'd actually see better with Arcane Sight than True Seeing, since with True Seeing you'd only be seeing an invisible person.

[Segev]

You see the spell, not the creature. Thus, Mind Blank does nothing and neither does invisibility. The only thing that does is Magic Aura but you do get to see the aura of said spell, so at least you know there's magic there.

EDIT: And same can be said for standard Arcane Sight, which can be Permanencied. You should pretty much always have one or the other active. Greater Arcane Sight is a rather minor upgrade over Arcane Sight, to be honest. It just skips the Spellcraft needed to decipher the spell/effect but it doesn't alter the fact that you need to actually see the target to determine the specific effect. Otherwise you only see auras and their location, much like with Arcane Sight. It's only DC29 Spellcraft to determine a 9th level spell in place and a Wizard should be hitting that pretty reliably in the teens (let's say +8 Int, 13 ranks, +2 synergy (K:Arcana) on level 10 does that on a 6 - 4 if Masterwork item is allowed and automatically with a +5 competence bonus item).

This is why you cast invisible fog cloud. Now there's a magic aura blanketing the area and obscuring the view of the invisible person's magic invisibility aura.

Displacement may also help, causing the aura to appear in the wrong place. Or show both places.

[Eldariel]

This is why you cast invisible fog cloud. Now there's a magic aura blanketing the area and obscuring the view of the invisible person's magic invisibility aura.

Displacement may also help, causing the aura to appear in the wrong place. Or show both places.

Fog doesn't block Arcane Sight (Detect Magic has the list if what it doesn't penetrate), onr of the big selling points. You'd see the bigger aura and the smaller one just as well.

I also don't think Displacement would work: you'd still see the auras on the target location including Displacement aura. Displacement is purely visual: it doesn't have any wording about displacing auras/magical energy/whatever.

[Braininthejar2]

that's cool.

Now a minor extra question.

There are people who might not like me checking out their spells.

Is there any way to prevent my eyes from glowing blue when arcane sight is active?

[Segev]

that's cool.

Now a minor extra question.

There are people who might not like me checking out their spells.

Is there any way to prevent my eyes from glowing blue when arcane sight is active?

The Invisible Spell feat comes to mind; this is exactly the sort of non-cheesy thing it's meant for.

[Braininthejar2]

Can't burn a feat on that I'm afraid. But perhaps I could make myself magical glasses...

[Segev]

If you're making it Permanent, you'd only need the feat the one time you cast it; metamagic rods are a thing.

Alternatively, you could cast light or daylight on a mask you wear, and have it look like a cosmetic choice: your luminsecent face with different-colored luminescence for eyes. Added bonus: you're brightly lighting up the area around you!

[Braininthejar2]

Now, before I come up with a simple and cheap solution, let's consider the extravagant option.

Let's say I make a custom magic item, glasses that invisibly cast greater arcane sight, but require me to actually have the spell prepared (so they are effectively still/silent/invisible spell for one specific 7 level spell once a day)

How much would that cost?

[Troacctid]

Now, before I come up with a simple and cheap solution, let's consider the extravagant option.

Let's say I make a custom magic item, glasses that invisibly cast greater arcane sight, but require me to actually have the spell prepared (so they are effectively still/silent/invisible spell for one specific 7 level spell once a day)

How much would that cost?
There's no such item, so you'd have to ask your DM.

[Braininthejar2]

Of the two of us, I'm the more rule-savvy. She'll probably trust my judgement on it.

But that makes it all the more important that I know what I'm talking about.

[Braininthejar2]

A greater metamagic rod costs between 25 and 170 thousands depending on the feat.

This one would be three such feats, so let's say 170 000, but once a day so 1/3, and takes a face slot instead of held, so probably once again by half. We're at 30 000. That's still too expensive, I think: a lens that gives truesight on its own was 50 000 I think?

This only works for a single, specific spell... I'll see how low I can haggle the GM down.

[Segev]

Invisible spell is a +0 slot adjustment. A greater rod of invisible spell would be no more than 24,500 gp market value. Get one, and use it on a casting of Greater Arcane Sight that you then Permanency.

If it gets dispelled, you’re just out the Permanency cost to reapply it.

[Doctor Awkward]

What happens if you look in the direction of someone invisible?

How about looking directly at a person who is mind-blanked? Will you get a reading of his active spells, or not?

Both arcane sight and the greater version function as detect magic, only much more quickly.

The Rules Compendium, pg 76, when discussing locating invisible creatures notes under "Special Senses" that "invisibility does not thwart detect spells."

Thus if a character with detect magic were to turn his 60-foot cone in the direction of someone who is invisible, he would immediately detect the presence of a magical aura. Three rounds later, he could discern that aura's exact location, assuming it does not move.

A character under the effects of arcane sight would immediately learn the exact location of the magical aura covering the invisible creature, and be allowed an automatic Spellcraft check to discern that the magical aura of the Illusion school.

A character under the effects of greater arcane sight would see the exact location of the magical aura of the invisible creature and immediately be aware that it is being generated by a spell of the Illusion school.

When using greater arcane sight, a character would also immediately be made aware if a creature they look at was such a creature was under the effects of mind blank, per the description of greater arcane sight: "you automatically know which spells or magical effects are active upon any individual or object you see."

[Doctor Awkward]

...actually on a second glance...

If a creature is under the effect of mind blank, greater arcane sight would reveal nothing, as the creature is protected from all "information gathering by divination spells or effects."

This clause is clearly not limited to things that detect and reveal thoughts, as it makes extensive mention of scrying spells which merely reveal their presence remotely.

[Braininthejar2]

Greater Arcane Sight that you then Permanency.

Greater arcane sight explicitly doesn't work woth permanency. only arcane sight does.

[Braininthejar2]

Wait, does that mean mind blank protects you from detect magic?

[Eldariel]

...actually on a second glance...

If a creature is under the effect of mind blank, greater arcane sight would reveal nothing, as the creature is protected from all "information gathering by divination spells or effects."

This clause is clearly not limited to things that detect and reveal thoughts, as it makes extensive mention of scrying spells which merely reveal their presence remotely.

The creature is protected but the auras of any spells and any items on their person are not, so if the creature inherently has a magical aura, that's hidden, but that's about it.

[MisterKaws]

Fog doesn't block Arcane Sight (Detect Magic has the list if what it doesn't penetrate), onr of the big selling points. You'd see the bigger aura and the smaller one just as well.

I also don't think Displacement would work: you'd still see the auras on the target location including Displacement aura. Displacement is purely visual: it doesn't have any wording about displacing auras/magical energy/whatever.

Doesn't block, but there's a huge ass aura all over the place. THAT blocks it.

[Doctor Awkward]

The creature is protected but the auras of any spells and any items on their person are not, so if the creature inherently has a magical aura, that's hidden, but that's about it.

They are by virtue of being on a creature protected by mind blank

Mind blank prevents any information about the creature from being revealed by divination magic. Magical effects upon the creature are information that is revealed by a divination.


Wait, does that mean mind blank protects you from detect magic?

And perhaps from see invisibility?

[Eldariel]

They are by virtue of being on a creature protected by mind blank

Mind blank prevents any information about the creature from being revealed by divination magic. Magical effects upon the creature are information that is revealed by a divination.

But their auras are a wholly distinct thing from the creature and even spells on it, and no matter how little information you can gain about the creature, you can gain information about magical auras in an area. The creature doesn't even enter the equation, the spell in no way interacts with creatures in any way. Whether you can infer something about the presence or absence of a creature doesn't matter, Mind Blank prevents divining about said creature and you're not doing that. Mind Blank doesn't protect traces a creature might or might not have left, just information about the creature itself. It doesn't allow a spell to detect oxygen in the creature's lungs but a divination could detect that something is breathing in a room with said creature just fine. Even Scrying can detect the area said creature is in no problem, just without showing said creature.

In fact, it goes even further than that. Arcane Sight has "Range: Personal" and "Target: You" so it doesn't target anything. It just gives you an additional mode of vision. The divination effect doesn't reach out; it just says your eyes gain a superpower. As it doesn't target any creature or object, effects that prevent doing something to other things are useless. It doesn't care about anything in the recipient end; the only thing that can stop it working is something on your end. Otherwise it just detects magical auras as stated. The only thing that it cares about are the magical auras and thus things that directly interact with those.

[Doctor Awkward]

But their auras are a wholly distinct thing from the creature and even spells on it, and no matter how little information you can gain about the creature, you can gain information about magical auras in an area. The creature doesn't even enter the equation, the spell in no way interacts with creatures in any way. Whether you can infer something about the presence or absence of a creature doesn't matter, Mind Blank prevents divining about said creature and you're not doing that. Mind Blank doesn't protect traces a creature might or might not have left, just information about the creature itself. It doesn't allow a spell to detect oxygen in the creature's lungs but a divination could detect that something is breathing in a room with said creature just fine. Even Scrying can detect the area said creature is in no problem, just without showing said creature.

In fact, it goes even further than that. Arcane Sight has "Range: Personal" and "Target: You" so it doesn't target anything. It just gives you an additional mode of vision. The divination effect doesn't reach out; it just says your eyes gain a superpower. As it doesn't target any creature or object, effects that prevent doing something to other things are useless. It doesn't care about anything in the recipient end; the only thing that can stop it working is something on your end. Otherwise it just detects magical auras as stated. The only thing that it cares about are the magical auras and thus things that directly interact with those.

Your argument requires knowledge of active magical effects upon a creature to be defined as something besides information about the creature. How can you not see the blatant contradiction there?

[Mr Adventurer]

My favourite Mind Blank effect is it's interaction with Hindsight. Hindsight lets you view the area you're in in the past. If a creature has Mind Blank, they won't show up in the recorded view you see.

However, what I'm not clear on is whether (a) a creature is hidden from view so long as they had Mind Blank active at the time that Hindsight is being used to view, or (b) a creature is hidden from view so long as they have Mind Blank active at the time Hindsight is cast.

Weird stuff.

[Eldariel]

Your argument requires knowledge of active magical effects upon a creature to be defined as something besides information about the creature. How can you not see the blatant contradiction there?

Because magical effects =/= creature. The two are not linked, the magical effects happen to be on the creature but that doesn't pertain to the creature directly as such. The fact that info about the magical auras caused by the magical effects provides information about the creatures is incidential and thus neither effect cares.

EDIT: To be clearer, it's one layer removed. At the core, you have the creature. Then on that creature, you have magical effects. Then on each of those magical effects, you have auras. Mind Blank cares about the core layer (that is, information about the creature). However, it in no ways provides protection to things linked to said creature, be it magical effect they have cast, magical effect on them, a person they know or whatever.

[Segev]

You have to be careful with that distinction. Can you discover a creature’s birthplace, family’s names, even “what others call him” because these are one step removed? What about what the creature is wearing? You might say “attended items” covers that, but then the magic auras should fall into a similar category.

Before too long, it doesn’t prevent any scrying at all in any meaningful sense.

[Eldariel]

You have to be careful with that distinction. Can you discover a creature’s birthplace, family’s names, even “what others call him” because these are one step removed? What about what the creature is wearing? You might say “attended items” covers that, but then the magic auras should fall into a similar category.

Before too long, it doesn’t prevent any scrying at all in any meaningful sense.

Attended items are explicitly called out though. Magical effects are not, nevermind magical auras (which can linger long after the spell ends for instance, of course). Indeed, magical auras are more like footprints than anything; merely casting a spell leaves a trace which remains unless hidden (which D&D doesn't provide in abundance, though breaking line of effect with anything in line with Detect Magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectMagic.htm), such as an Invisible Wall of Iron more than 1ft. thick, does work and Magic Aura may not entirely conceal you but does change anything into a faint Illusion aura). Of course, moving auras don't leave traces as such (which is a bit weird for particularly overpowering items and such but makes tracking them all the easier).

[Doctor Awkward]

Attended items are explicitly called out though. Magical effects are not, nevermind magical auras (which can linger long after the spell ends for instance, of course). Indeed, magical auras are more like footprints than anything; merely casting a spell leaves a trace which remains unless hidden (which D&D doesn't provide in abundance, though breaking line of effect with anything in line with Detect Magic (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectMagic.htm), such as an Invisible Wall of Iron more than 1ft. thick, does work and Magic Aura may not entirely conceal you but does change anything into a faint Illusion aura). Of course, moving auras don't leave traces as such (which is a bit weird for particularly overpowering items and such but makes tracking them all the easier).

You are attempting to invent rules text that does not exist in order to justify your position.

Magical auras are defined solely within the context of the detect magic spell. There are no general rules regarding them to be found anywhere else in D&D, and how they function outside of the context of that spell is not stated anywhere. This means the only relevant text that exists regarding magical auras is found within the various spell descriptions.

By RAW, detect magic reveals the presence and strength of magical auras, and allows a creature trained in Spellcraft to identify what school of magic those auras belong to. This is information that is revealed by a divination effect. Mind blank protects against "information gathering by divination spells or effects." As it explicitly foils wish, limited wish, and, miracle, it is highly illogical to assume that it would not also foil spells that are lower level than itself.

[Eldariel]

You are attempting to invent rules text that does not exist in order to justify your position.

Magical auras are defined solely within the context of the detect magic spell. There are no general rules regarding them to be found anywhere else in D&D, and how they function outside of the context of that spell is not stated anywhere. This means the only relevant text that exists regarding magical auras is found within the various spell descriptions.

By RAW, detect magic reveals the presence and strength of magical auras, and allows a creature trained in Spellcraft to identify what school of magic those auras belong to. This is information that is revealed by a divination effect. Mind blank protects against "information gathering by divination spells or effects." As it explicitly foils wish, limited wish, and, miracle, it is highly illogical to assume that it would not also foil spells that are lower level than itself.

Miracle, Wish, etc. affect a different thing. Detect Magic on the creature would fail too. Besides, that's an argument from "Is this balanced" and thus completely irrelevant a RAW discussion.

However, one rules text or not (makes no difference, where the rules are), magical auras are a thing produced by magical effects and items. Mind Blank protects the creature (and by nexplicit extension, attended items), nothing else. Any other reading fails due to reductio ad absurdum: due to chaos theory, one Mind Blanked creature would render the whole material plane (and everything else) immune to divination due to everything affecting everything. It has to be only what's explicitly called out by the rules.

[JNAProductions]

Miracle, Wish, etc. affect a different thing. Detect Magic on the creature would fail too. Besides, that's an argument from "Is this balanced" and thus completely irrelevant a RAW discussion.

However, one rules text or not (makes no difference, where the rules are), magical auras are a thing produced by magical effects and items. Mind Blank protects the creature (and by nexplicit extension, attended items), nothing else. Any other reading fails due to reductio ad absurdum: due to chaos theory, one Mind Blanked creature would render the whole material plane (and everything else) immune to divination due to everything affecting everything. It has to be only what's explicitly called out by the rules.

There's this thing called "Middle ground".

I suggest trying it.

[Braininthejar2]

Perhaps relevant to the last argument, Metafaculty defeats Mind Blank, and by fluff, it seems to be by divining through the world as it's interacted with the target.

[Doctor Awkward]

Miracle, Wish, etc. affect a different thing. Detect Magic on the creature would fail too. Besides, that's an argument from "Is this balanced" and thus completely irrelevant a RAW discussion.

No, it's an argument from "knowledge of existing rules", since the Rules Compendium quite definitively states, "Knowledge of the existing rules is key, because the rules often do cover similar cases or combine to make such judgment calls unnecessary," when discussing rules adjudication.


However, one rules text or not (makes no difference, where the rules are), magical auras are a thing produced by magical effects and items.
No one is disputing this. What I am arguing is that you are making assumptions about magical auras based on how you think they should work.



Mind Blank protects the creature (and by nexplicit extension, attended items), nothing else.
Yes. Protects the creature from having any information gathered about it due to divination spells.


Any other reading fails due to reductio ad absurdum: due to chaos theory, one Mind Blanked creature would render the whole material plane (and everything else) immune to divination due to everything affecting everything. It has to be only what's explicitly called out by the rules.
What kind of obnoxious conclusion is that?
How is mind blank going to protect a creature against spells and effects that don't even target it?

Also, your claim to following only what is explicitly called out in the rules is especially ironic in light of you desperately ignoring something that is explicitly called out in the rules. Arcane sight is a divination spell. It reveals information about a creature-- that is, which magical spells are currently active upon it. Mind blank states explicitly that it protects the creature from information being gathered via divination spell and effects.

This is rapidly rising to the level of willful ignorance.

[Eldariel]

There's this thing called "Middle ground".

I suggest trying it.

There's no logically tenable middle ground in this point. If one arbitrarily begins to state that indirect effects of a creature are also hidden from divination, it's inevitably an untenable conclusion or a line in water where it's completely arbitrary, what's hidden and what isn't.


What kind of obnoxious conclusion is that?
How is mind blank going to protect a creature against spells and effects that don't even target it?

Precisely. Arcane Sight pretty explicitly has "Target: You" and "Range: Personal" so it doesn't target any effect it provides information on.


Also, your claim to following only what is explicitly called out in the rules is especially ironic in light of you desperately ignoring something that is explicitly called out in the rules. Arcane sight is a divination spell. It reveals information about a creature-- that is, which magical spells are currently active upon it. Mind blank states explicitly that it protects the creature from information being gathered via divination spell and effects.

This is rapidly rising to the level of willful ignorance.

So you're saying you can't see a creature's footprints through Scrying if they're walking in snow and have Mind Blank? 'cause that's what your argument is reduced to. Their footprints provide information on them too so clearly, by this reading, divinations couldn't detect those either. And same goes for everything else too. Another person making way for them while they walk past something provides information on them. Scrying then can't notice that either.

Tell me, how exactly do you defend that magical auras are a part of "creature"? Mind Blank doesn't say "information about the creature and everything that has ever interacted with him", it just says "information about the creature". Magical effects on said creature aren't said creature. Attended items are explicitly covered by rules elsewhere but show me where in the rules it states that magical effects on a creature are treated as a part of said creature. And then tell me where it says that magical auras are protected by something that protects the magical effects that produce them at it. This is the crux of the problem, one you're just ignoring. Magical auras enable indirect inferences of the creature's location at any rate, but so do footprints or the movements of air caused by them or the actions of other beings related to them and so on. So unless you believe everything caused by a person indirectly is hidden from divination (again, an untenable assumption as pointed out in the previous post), you can't claim things caused by things caused by said creature (magical auras originating from magical effects on their person) are hidden.


That said, considering you still haven't addressed this point and we've written these same arguments three times, I surmise this is a waste of time. If you keep talking past me I'm ignoring further posts by you on this topic.

[Segev]

I define magic auras as part of the creature because they serve the same revelatory purpose as claiming that the creature’s clothes can be seen while scrying on them.

From a RAW standpoint, I also point out that the same reduction as absurdem to which you resort wrt footprints being hidden from scrying is held the other direction by asserting that your position means that mind blank fails to obscure alignment despite saying it does because it only obscures the creature’s alignment, not the alignment aura left around him. Or that it fails to prevent see invisibility from seeing the creature, because the invisibility is still visible. Or that it fails to prevent scrying, because the creature’s clothes still reflect light that can be seen even if the clothes themselves can’t.


Although, that’s an interesting question: does Mind Blank prevent the creature from being seen in the dark if the viewer depends on the Darkvision spell to see? Assuming iirc and it’s a divination spell, I think the RAW answer is “yes,” but it seems worth discussing.

[Eldariel]

I define magic auras as part of the creature because they serve the same revelatory purpose as claiming that the creature’s clothes can be seen while scrying on them.

Where there's no rules text definition though, the game defaults to English definitions. Aura in Merriam-Webster for instance is "3: an energy field that is held to emanate from a living being" as the most salient definition and we say "X has an aura of...", not "X contains/is an aura of..." or "The aura is a part of X". Thus auras are projected, not contained. Projections are inherently another layer: X image projected onto a surface is a 2d rendition of said image for instance.


From a RAW standpoint, I also point out that the same reduction as absurdem to which you resort wrt footprints being hidden from scrying is held the other direction by asserting that your position means that mind blank fails to obscure alignment despite saying it does because it only obscures the creature’s alignment, not the alignment aura left around him. Or that it fails to prevent see invisibility from seeing the creature, because the invisibility is still visible. Or that it fails to prevent scrying, because the creature’s clothes still reflect light that can be seen even if the clothes themselves can’t.

All of these are explicit rules exceptions though. "Attended items" covers the latter two and the first one is explicitly called out in Mind Blank. This only reinforces my belief that in the absence of such an explicit exception, X does not apply. Otherwise there would be no need to call them out specifically. "Attended items" in specific is aggravating evidence for things other than attended items not being subject to the same considerations.


Although, that’s an interesting question: does Mind Blank prevent the creature from being seen in the dark if the viewer depends on the Darkvision spell to see? Assuming iirc and it’s a divination spell, I think the RAW answer is “yes,” but it seems worth discussing.

The way I read it, a spell is only blocked if it targets the creature under Mind Blank in some way. As Darkvision is again a self enhancing effect that targets the caster rather than anything the caster might be viewing, I'd say Mind Blank does not interact with the spell in any meaningful way. Same with See Invisibility & al.