Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lamoni" data-source="post: 1846132" data-attributes="member: 12680">I am still confused by the 'magical ability' arguments.Some facts you should consider:True Seeing overcomes BOTH normal darkness AND magical darkness.If it overcomes it due to overcoming the darkness in the shadows, it does not matter that it is Su vs Ex.True Seeing DOES NOT overcome all magical concealment.&nbsp; It overcomes all magical figments and glamers, but there is a lot of magic that can overcome true seeing.&nbsp; Just look through the conjuration school.If you argue that it beats it due to HiPS being magical, then you are wrong again.&nbsp; If HiPS said that it created an illusion to grant concealment, you would be correct... but then it wouldn't require the use of the hide skill.One more thing.&nbsp; HiPS does not state how it works.&nbsp; It is just as correct to interpret it as moving the shadows to grant the person concealment as it is to interpret it as the person moving onto the shadow plane.&nbsp; (Or any number of other interpretations).&nbsp; Since this is a Rules forum, then we should look at what HiPS actually states.&nbsp; It states that a hide attempt is granted if there are shadows nearby.&nbsp; It doesn't say that it grants it if the observer can see shadows nearby, only that they actually exist.&nbsp; Darkvision doesn't remove the shadows.&nbsp; True seeing doesn't remove the shadows.&nbsp; Other spells like daylight might.&nbsp; Since it is a supernatural ability, antimagic field would also prevent the person from using it.&nbsp; True seeing DOES NOT say that it trumps everything that antimagic field beats though.&nbsp; Many people seem to think that since True Seeing is a high level spell that it is underpowered unless it is able to beat everything that is produced by lower level characters.&nbsp; Maybe it would make sense if it did grant that, but it isn't what the spell says.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lamoni, post: 1846132, member: 12680"] I am still confused by the 'magical ability' arguments. Some facts you should consider: True Seeing overcomes BOTH normal darkness AND magical darkness. If it overcomes it due to overcoming the darkness in the shadows, it does not matter that it is Su vs Ex. True Seeing DOES NOT overcome all magical concealment. It overcomes all magical figments and glamers, but there is a lot of magic that can overcome true seeing. Just look through the conjuration school. If you argue that it beats it due to HiPS being magical, then you are wrong again. If HiPS said that it created an illusion to grant concealment, you would be correct... but then it wouldn't require the use of the hide skill. One more thing. HiPS does not state how it works. It is just as correct to interpret it as moving the shadows to grant the person concealment as it is to interpret it as the person moving onto the shadow plane. (Or any number of other interpretations). Since this is a Rules forum, then we should look at what HiPS actually states. It states that a hide attempt is granted if there are shadows nearby. It doesn't say that it grants it if the [b]observer[/b] can see shadows nearby, only that they actually exist. Darkvision doesn't remove the shadows. True seeing doesn't remove the shadows. Other spells like daylight might. Since it is a supernatural ability, antimagic field would also prevent the person from using it. True seeing DOES NOT say that it trumps everything that antimagic field beats though. Many people seem to think that since True Seeing is a high level spell that it is underpowered unless it is able to beat everything that is produced by lower level characters. Maybe it would make sense if it did grant that, but it isn't what the spell says. [/QUOTE]

Verification