Does True Seeing see some who is using Hide in Plain Sight

[Nifft]

All I am trying to say is that in this instance rules for supernatural abilities aren't as clearly defined in regards to how spells, feats,etc affect them and so to argue something such as this where both sides aren't equally documented through the rules there is little to be gained through such discussion if pure definitions of rules is applied.

How can you say that? The spell true seeing is very well defined. It lists exactly what it applies to, and then it gives a bunch of examples of what it does NOT apply to.

Supernatural abilities do not clearly say if they are affected by spells and feats and if so how. Because of this one needs to apply things such as the spirit of which it was intended. Otherwise you aren't arguing anything as there is nothing to connect them, things like logic, intent, and commonsense need to be applied before anything can be accomplished. I am not saying you are wrong I am just saying that there is more this particular discussion than simple rules definitions.

Logic and common sense are telling me that the rules don't assign schools of magic to all supernatural effects; also, that often when the rules say something, they actually mean it.

A dragon's breath weapon is neither an Evocation nor a Conjuration. It's just a bunch of magical energy damage with a Reflex save for half. A spell that protected you from Evocations would be impotent against a dragon's breath, and that's as should be.

-- N

 

[Fangorn Athran]

The spell text states "sees through illusions" not disrupts Illusion spells, but illusions, and what pray tell is hiding in plain sight by manipulating shadows anything else but an illusion, It states that True Seeing does not function under mundane hide attempts but there is nothing mundane about hiding in plain sight. Further if we do it your way we can look specifically at the text were the world "illusion" is lower case meaning it is different than the spell school Illusion thus the true seeing spell can disrupt such an illusion. Further if Hide in plain sight does not manipulate the shadows explain to me what they purpose is for a requirement to use the ability.

I would love to continue this debate but I have a previous engagement. I do apologize but it can't be helped.

 

[Nifft]

The spell text states "sees through illusions" not disrupts Illusion spells, but illusions, and what pray tell is hiding in plain sight by manipulating shadows anything else but an illusion

It's a supernatural effect. It's not an Illusion.

It states that True Seeing does not function under mundane hide attempts but there is nothing mundane about hiding in plain sight.

Unless you're a Ranger... as someone else already pointed out to you.

Further if Hide in plain sight does not manipulate the shadows explain to me what they purpose is for a requirement to use the ability.

Flavor. Just like the copper piece required to cast detect thoughts or the white feather required to cast fear.

I would love to continue this debate but I have a previous engagement. I do apologize but it can't be helped.

Don't worry, the internet will be here tomorrow, just for your convenience. (And your argument will still be wrong.)

-- N

 

[KarinsDad]

Glitterdust, Daylight, Faerie Fire

These spells are intrusive. The target knows the spell exists (and he is a likely target within it).

True Seeing is not instrusive. Different intents of different spells.


In fact, Faerie Fire does not affect HiPS and Daylight rarely affects HiPS.

 

[Nifft]

These spells are intrusive. The target knows the spell exists (and he is a likely target within it).

True Seeing is not instrusive. Different intents of different spells.

And? Sorry for being dense, but so what?

In fact, Faerie Fire does not affect HiPS and Daylight rarely affects HiPS.

Daylight removes shadows. There's bright illumination (not shadowy) in its area.

Faerie fire causes its target to shed light as a candle; that limits hiding, no?

For more unintrusive detection, turn to Psionics: touchsight, psi scent, and detect hostile intent spring to mind as good choices. Summoning critters with tremorsense or blindsight should be an option, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[RigaMortus2]

Now, we do not know what school of magic HiPS is.

I could have sworn there was a rule that stated if you could not determine what school of magic something was, it is considered Transmutation by defualt. Or am I just dreaming this?

 

[borc killer]

a reasonable interpretation

Ahh see I found your problem. D&D rules lawyers do not interpreted things reasonably. They would much rather it be convoluted and overly complex.

I have always ruled that “simply hiding” is anything covered under the Hide skill, and anything that modifies that is not simple. I am sure I would make exceptions to this but I sure as heck would not for supernatural abilities as they are “abilities [that] are magical but not spell-like” and I just see no way that someone can possibly argue that it is simple.

To me True seeing is very clear. It tells you want it can do and then lists exceptions to those rules. And HiPS is not listed as an exception BUT using simple/basic/mundane hide skill checks is listed under those exemptions. So if the person has cover or concealment from someone with True Seeing active, they can make a hide check. Using a magical ability to remove those limitation is NOT simple.

You can chose to remove the line: “True seeing does not help the viewer see through mundane disguises, spot creatures who are simply hiding, or notice secret doors hidden by mundane means” but then that would CLEARLY be a house rule.

 

[moritheil]

Over and over again, RAW indicates that cover or concealment is necessary to hide.

Yes. But none of those examples state that it is needed to continue hiding, only to begin hiding. Hence my question.

 

[KarinsDad]

And? Sorry for being dense, but so what?

In order to detect a magically hidden target without the target knowing that you are doing so, there are only a few spells: Detect Magic, See Invisibility, and True Seeing. True Seeing is the only one which doesn't have major limitations and is the highest level spell.

With your interpretation for HiPS, only the lowest level spell Detect Magic would actually work for this purpose and even that would be difficult to use at best.

Daylight removes shadows. There's bright illumination (not shadowy) in its area.

No, Daylight typically creates both light and shadows. Daylight is not a Spread. So, any object or creature between the object emanating the Daylight will give off a shadow. It is rare that there would not be any shadows at all in a Daylight area. For this to be true, there would have to be no objects and no creatures in the area either.

Faerie fire causes its target to shed light as a candle; that limits hiding, no?

Not necessarily unless the target is already in a brightly lit area with absolutely no shadows. The use of Faeire Fire is to put light in a shadowy illumination or dark area. But according to RAW (and your type of literal interpretation), it matters not if the HiPS user is in bright light. As long as there is a shadow within 10 feet, a 5 foot candle light on the HiPS user is irrelevant.

So, if it were pitch dark and there were absolutely no shadowy illumination or light anywhere near the target, Faerie Fire would work. But most of the time in a game, it is not pitch dark and most of the time, Faerie Fire does nothing against HiPS.

 

[KarinsDad]

Ahh see I found your problem. D&D rules lawyers do not interpreted things reasonably. They would much rather it be convoluted and overly complex.

I do not have a problem, I do not like being called a rules lawyer, and I do not consider that I interpret things unreasonably.

There are rules of conduct here, so if you do not want to be reported, please talk about the rules as opposed to the person.

I have always ruled that “simply hiding” is anything covered under the Hide skill, and anything that modifies that is not simple. I am sure I would make exceptions to this but I sure as heck would not for supernatural abilities as they are “abilities [that] are magical but not spell-like” and I just see no way that someone can possibly argue that it is simple.

It is not the hiding that I have an issue with. It is a supernatural (magical) ability that allows the hiding. No different than Blur which True Seeing does bust through IMO.

The issue is one that True Seeing cannot list every possible type of ability (hence, the reason there are schools of magic) and the fact that HiPS does not list how it does what it does (i.e. no game mechanic like a school of magic is listed for HiPS).