Detect Magic

[anon]

I'm wearing a Hat of Disguise which is active (changing my appearance).

My friend casts Detect Magic and looks my direction (and let's say rolls 25 on the Spellcraft check).

What is seen?

 

[Maleketh]

He sees a faint illusion aura around your hat (or whatever it looks like in your disguise). He might see one around you instead or in addition, depending how your DM wants to run it.

 

[shilsen]

I'd say he sees a faint illusion aura over your entire form, and the appropriate auras on each of your magic items.

 

[anon]

So the question of 1 aura (me) or 2 auras (me + hat) is unclear?

 

[prospero63]

So the question of 1 aura (me) or 2 auras (me + hat) is unclear?

No, not in my opinion. The rules are pretty clear about what detect magic does/does not detect. If the DM decides to do as Maleketh suggests, he has opted to house rule it (and DM's can do that, but the RAW are pretty clear).

Round 1 - He detects the presence of magical aura/auras in your direction
Round 2 - He detects the number of magical auras in your direction. He also detects the power of the most potent aura.
Round 3 - He detects the strength and specific location of each aura.

In my game, I have always indicated the aura's as a faint glowing surrounding the item/object/person. If there are multiple auras, they are differentiated by color/flavor text. The more powerful, the more "glowing" the aura is.

So, specific to your scenario, it would proceed as follows:

Round 1 - The presence of magical auras in your direction is detected
Round 2 - He detects 2 magical auras, one of which detects as faint magic (both are actually faint, but he has no way of knowing this at this point).
Round 3 - A faint aura is detected on/about your head (it would actually detect specifically to the hat, in whatever form it currently is). If spellcraft is made, it is shown to be from the illusion school. This is from the hat. A faint aura is also detected over your entire body, indicating a spell effect is on you. This is the disguise self function of the hat. It would detect, if spellcraft is made, as illusion as well.

So two distinct auras, both faint and assuming that spellcraft is made, both from the illusion school.

Make sense?

Sources:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectMagic.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#hatofDisguise
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/disguiseSelf.htm

 

[shilsen]

So the question of 1 aura (me) or 2 auras (me + hat) is unclear?

As prospero63 pointed out, it's completely clear. 2 auras.

 

[anon]

So to protect against Detect Magic using Misdirection would require 2 castings of Misdirection? One on me and one on my Hat?

 

[shilsen]

So to protect against Detect Magic using Misdirection would require 2 castings of Misdirection? One on me and one on my Hat?

Correct.

 

[prospero63]

Correct.

I have to disagree here kind of.

As a general rule, items carried by the creature are affected by spells cast upon the creature. Objects don't make saves when the creature makes it's save. Objects change when the creature polymorphs. Objects teleport/etc. Objects go invisible too.

Based on that, I would adjudicate it that misdirection cast on a creature affects all auras from anything that is considered "in their possession". So magic armour, sword, hat, ring, etc. would all be misdirected. If however the items were removed (i.e. no longer in possession) then the object would require a second casting, just on it.

 

[shilsen]

I have to disagree here kind of.

As a general rule, items carried by the creature are affected by spells cast upon the creature. Objects don't make saves when the creature makes it's save. Objects change when the creature polymorphs. Objects teleport/etc. Objects go invisible too.

Based on that, I would adjudicate it that misdirection cast on a creature affects all auras from anything that is considered "in their possession". So magic armour, sword, hat, ring, etc. would all be misdirected. If however the items were removed (i.e. no longer in possession) then the object would require a second casting, just on it.

Actually I do think that's a reasonable reading of the spell and the way magic interacts with objects based on whether they're attended or not.