Can Scrying See a Hiding Character?

[Aluvial]

If I have a scrying spell on, and the character being scryed has failed their save, can I still see that character if he is Hiding.

The spell says that the sensor will move up to 150' a round and will also show the 10' radius area around the subject. If that subject is invisible, or hiding, can I still see him, will the sensor still follow him and show his immediate area? If this is the case, you would be pinpointing the character, because they would always be in the exact center of the area you see while scrying. Is this correct?

Aluvial

 

[Jack Simth]

Personal ruling?

1) Negates hiding; Scrying's "...you can see and hear the subject..." trumps Spot's "Typically, your Spot check is opposed by the Hide check of the creature trying not to be seen."

2) Does not necessarily negate Invisibility, due to Scrying's own limitation "...the sensor has your full visual acuity, including any magical effects..."

So if the subject is visible, in a lit area, and you are a human wizard who casts Scrying, you can see the subjet quite clearly. If the subject is visible, in a totally dark area, and you're a human wizard who casts Scrying, you get a bunch of blackness. If you then cast Darkvision, you can see the subject. If the subject is invisible, you get the immediate surroundings, but not the subject (until you cast See Invisible). Et cetera.

 

[wmasters]

Not sure about the RAW answer but I'd argue that you see the area and get a Spot roll to see the person, but don't automatically see them. So if someone's hiding in a dark alley you'd see the dark alley, but not necessarily Spot the person there.

So yes, I'd say that you can't see them, but you know where they are. Since it takes an hour to cast, I don't see that as being a problem.

 

[Graf]

I wouldn’t treat a hidden character any differently than an invisible one.
The rules don’t indicate that you get any special “immunity to mundane forms of obfuscation”.

You see the area of the target, and you know that the target ought to be right smack in the middle of your view, but if they’re invisible, hiding, covered by a sheet, in darkness or whatever you may not actually see them.

Making invisibility work one way and spot/hide work another (when it doesn’t refer to either power in the scry spell description) is an extra house rule you need to remember.

 

[Jack Simth]

Scrying actually does specify that you see and hear the subject; the fact that you see surrounding stuff is a separate clause in the same sentence. Spot indicates that Hide is an attempt to not be seen. If you're trying not to be seen, but an effect specifies that you are seen, are you seen (dispite little things like distance, walls, or planar boundaries), or are you or are you not seen?

 

[ThirdWizard]

Looking at "the sensor has your full visual acuity," one could easily say that you have to use your own abilities to notice anyone hiding. I see no reason why "you can see and hear the subject" would trump hiding but nothing else (including normal darkness, invisibility, cover, concealment, etc).

 

[Aluvial]

Looking at "the sensor has your full visual acuity," one could easily say that you have to use your own abilities to notice anyone hiding. I see no reason why "you can see and hear the subject" would trump hiding but nothing else (including normal darkness, invisibility, cover, concealment, etc).

I think that I will see the surrounding area, which should be good enough for a Teleport.

What's interesting about this case is that the character who is doing the scrying is in the combat area and trying to direct his minions to the area the Rogue/Shadowdancer is in!

Aluvial

 

[Infiniti2000]

What's interesting about this case is that the character who is doing the scrying is in the combat area and trying to direct his minions to the area the Rogue/Shadowdancer is in!

Scrying is a very poor combat spell. You need to have a big mirror, a font, or a pool of water AND it takes a whole frackin' hour to cast. Hopefully, by that time the function of the spell is useless. And, there are a lot better options than greater scrying for this purpose.

 

[Aluvial]

Scrying is a very poor combat spell. You need to have a big mirror, a font, or a pool of water AND it takes a whole frackin' hour to cast. Hopefully, by that time the function of the spell is useless. And, there are a lot better options than greater scrying for this purpose.

Just happened to be circumstance that allowed him to have the "(un)-holy font" ready and the spell cast when the group was infiltrating the stronghold. Once the alarm went up, it took them just over an hour to get to the main chamber. With the bad guy casting the spell to see what he would face, the spell is still under duration. So I thought, why not find the pesky thief hiding in the large chamber... he can't escape, is out of Shadowjump, and is soon toast. Four of the others escaped without him, because he was hiding, and two are dead! Soon to be three!

Bwuh-ha-HA!

Aluvial

 

[KarinsDad]

Just happened to be circumstance that allowed him to have the "(un)-holy font" ready and the spell cast when the group was infiltrating the stronghold. Once the alarm went up, it took them just over an hour to get to the main chamber. With the bad guy casting the spell to see what he would face, the spell is still under duration. So I thought, why not find the pesky thief hiding in the large chamber... he can't escape, is out of Shadowjump, and is soon toast. Four of the others escaped without him, because he was hiding, and two are dead! Soon to be three!

Bwuh-ha-HA!

On the surface, this sounds like DM abuse of this spell.

The spell does not give you information about targets you just sort of, kind of, maybe, know about.

It does not let you know to target the Rogue because he has a low Will save. It does not let you know that there is a Rogue at all.

The spell is not designed to allow someone "to see what he would face".

You must have some sort of connection to a creature you have no knowledge of.

Sure, you could cast it on an underling, but it is still limited to a 10' radius of the subject. Hardly enough to gain a lot of info on infiltrating adventurers.

Or, a DM could fudge this and claim that some underling came back and told the BBEG about the infiltrators (i.e. second hand knowledge), but this still sounds pretty lame. IMO.