irdeggman said:
So if the chracter had a ring of protection +1 and a +2 longsword as well as the hat of disguise - this logic would have the single casting of misdirection working to cover all of the auras - even though they are "different" auras.
Ring of protection - abjuration
Long sword - evocation
Hat of disguise - faint illusion
Correct, assuming they are in the possession of the target of the spell.
The text for the misdirection spell states "On casting the spell you choose another object within range. For the duration of the spell, the subject of misdirection is directed as if it were the other object."
But it does also so that you can detect as "not magical".
I think you are mixing two different parts of the spell here. The sentence you cite doesn't apply to the target of the spell, it applies to whatever you want the target of the spell to appear to be. Here is the complete spell description:
Illusion (Glamer)
Level: Brd 2, Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature or object, up to a 10-ft. cube in size
Duration: 1 hour/level
Saving Throw: None or Will negates; see text
Spell Resistance: No
By means of this spell, you misdirect the information from divination spells that reveal auras (detect evil, detect magic, discern lies, and the like). On casting the spell, you choose another object within range. For the duration of the spell, the subject of misdirection is detected as if it were the other object. (Neither the subject nor the other object gets a saving throw against this effect.) Detection spells provide information based on the second object rather than on the actual target of the detection unless the caster of the detection succeeds on a Will save. For instance, you could make yourself detect as a tree if one were within range at casting: not evil, not lying, not magical, neutral in alignment, and so forth. This spell does not affect other types of divination magic (augury, detect thoughts, clairaudience/clairvoyance, and the like).
I think that the target must be a single object or creature though. My logic has to do with what would be detected in the above example if the character was "invisible" instead of "disguised".
You don't have to think, the spell clearly states that the target is "One creature or object, up to a 10-ft. cube in size". The sentence you cited, and where I think you are tripped up, applies to what you want the subject of the misdirection to appear as. For example, I cast the spell and select a stone as "another object within range. For the duration of the spell, the subject of misdirection is directed as if it were the other object". That means that when the various spells that detect auras are cast upon the target (a person or creature), the aura given off is a simple stone.
Not all spells affect all objects held by the target. Invisibility says it does, so does diguise self, misdirection does not.
Again, there is too much precedence in the RAW that spells that target a creature do not require that each item on the creature be dealt with individually. The descriptive text is just that. In the case of appearance altering effects, it makes sense that they would clearly call out "your gear is invisible too" and "you can change the appearance of your clothing as well". Those are parts of those specific spells.
I still stand by a single casting for a creature (and any equipment or possessions carried). In fact, I contend that if that was not the way it worked, that is actually what would be called out in the spell. If equipment, etc. wasn't covered, they would explicitly call that out. With that said, I can see how folks would do it differently, but that's not the way I would adjudicate it.
