Mind Blank defeats the effect of a True Strike?

[kreynolds]

Ok, picture this:

There is a Mind Blanked wizard standing in the middle of a 20-ft square room. You are standing outside of the door and cast an augury spell. You ask, "If I open this door will I see anyone?".

Now, I would answer "No" or "Maybe" (at best), because even though the target of the augury spell is yourself ("Will *I* see anyone?") in order to answer "Yes" the spell would have to divine that the wizard is there, which it can't.

Since that's how the True Sight spell seems to work "If I swing here, will I hit?" I see it falling under the same constraints.

IceBear

Now I get it Ice! Guess ya' just needed to dummy it up for me a bit. That and it helps that I slept on it too.

 

[KarinsDad]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by KarinsDad
So, how does True Strike find an invisible target or a target in a Fog spell? It says in the True Strike spell that it negates the concealment miss chance, so how can it do that if if is not targeting the target?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It divines from the future of the caster the result of where he swings.

But, that’s the whole point, isn’t it.

If the target is invisible (say via Improved Invisibility where in the future, the only way he will not be invisible is if someone dispels it or it’s duration runs out: but the Time Travel paradox is irrelevant since the action does not actually resolve for the True Strike character until the next round when everyone does know what has happened), then what does True Strike do? Does it give you a mental image of a dozen different swings until one of them hits (and hits solidly due to the +20 to hit)?

This does not really make sense.

The “insight into the future” argument assumes that you will actually observe something in the future. If you do not because the target is concealed, the True Strike spell still negates the concealment miss chance and still effectively lets you know EXACTLY where the target will be.

If it lets you know where the target is, it is giving you information as to the location of the target. Hence, Mind Blank prevents you from acquiring that information and negates True Strike. That is the crux of my position on it.

 

[KarinsDad]

To be fair, I normally didn't post on threads that I agree with you, because you argue better than I do. So, there were lots of things that we argeed on, I just never posted my agreement before.

I'll remind you that you said that next time you disagree with me.

"Hey IceBear. You cannot be correct in this because you and I disagree and according to you, I am the better debater."

 

[Zenon]

But, that’s the whole point, isn’t it.

If the target is invisible (say via Improved Invisibility where in the future, the only way he will not be invisible is if someone dispels it or it’s duration runs out: but the Time Travel paradox is irrelevant since the action does not actually resolve for the True Strike character until the next round when everyone does know what has happened), then what does True Strike do? Does it give you a mental image of a dozen different swings until one of them hits (and hits solidly due to the +20 to hit)?

This does not really make sense.

The “insight into the future” argument assumes that you will actually observe something in the future. If you do not because the target is concealed, the True Strike spell still negates the concealment miss chance and still effectively lets you know EXACTLY where the target will be.

If it lets you know where the target is, it is giving you information as to the location of the target. Hence, Mind Blank prevents you from acquiring that information and negates True Strike. That is the crux of my position on it.

First, let me say I will bow to Monte's ruling on Mind Blank defeating True Strike.

Second, the reason why I still cannot reconcile your argument against True Strike divining the future of the target (Mind Blanked or not) is that True Strike does not guarentee a hit. It is not a "you will automatically hit the next thing you swing at", so in my mind, this does not equate to divining explicitly where the target will be at, only where the target may be at. It is still possible, even with the spell, to utterly miss the target either by swinging horribly (rolling a 1 on the attack roll), or by failing to hit the required AC (if they had a 23 or more and the attack roll was fairly low).

<shrug>

That aside, you have good arguments for the way you are presenting it and I understand what you are saying even if I cannot quite bring myself to agree with it. Like I stated, I'll be using the "semi-official" determination that Monte made until they errata is (if ever) if I ever come across this situation in my game (and as my player rise in level it's a distinct possiblity), although I have never seen True Strike cast by anyone in any of the games I run or play in (believe it or not!). I think no one wants to take that extra round to cast it....

 

[Shard O'Glase]

First, let me say I will bow to Monte's ruling on Mind Blank defeating True Strike.

I'm not sure I agree with your 1st. I don't really think Monte made a ruling on this. Upon reading is whole post, my actual reaction is that someone like the sage rules wise would answer the other way, but might say that would be a logical house rule. He explicetly said the intent was not for it to work v mind blank and they never even thought about it. But upon reading it if a player argued for it, he'd allow mindblank to protect against it.

That's doesn't = yes the rules say mind blank works v true strike. That = something more like if you read into the intent of true strike you could let mind blank defeat it. Two entirely different things.

Now personally I have no problem with it beating true strike, I'm more bothered by it beating see invisibility. Yuch think about that improved invisible, hasted, flying wizard is broken thread if they added this spell into the mix.

 

[Zenon]

I'm not sure I agree with your 1st. I don't really think Monte made a ruling on this. Upon reading is whole post, my actual reaction is that someone like the sage rules wise would answer the other way, but might say that would be a logical house rule. He explicetly said the intent was not for it to work v mind blank and they never even thought about it. But upon reading it if a player argued for it, he'd allow mindblank to protect against it.

That's doesn't = yes the rules say mind blank works v true strike. That = something more like if you read into the intent of true strike you could let mind blank defeat it. Two entirely different things.

Now personally I have no problem with it beating true strike, I'm more bothered by it beating see invisibility. Yuch think about that improved invisible, hasted, flying wizard is broken thread if they added this spell into the mix.

I agree with you. Monte's "ruling" (or decision or however you want to put it) will open up a whole can of worms. Having Mind Blank be proof against See Invisible and True Seeing and all other types of divination spells will (IMO) push Mind Blank into one of those things that "everyone wants to have", becoming too powerful (even for an 8th level protection) due to the sheer amount of spells it will protect against. Protection against all divination spells (invisibility, charms, domination, srcying, true strike, locates, clairaudience/clairvoyance, prying eyes, legend lore, foresight, even wish and miracle when it come to locating the protected creature) will make it too good for anyone to consider going without.

And as others have argued in other threads, having something that everyone "has to have" is one of the qualities of fiting the "broken!" definition.

Hopefully Tom Cashel will get an answer to his email to the Sage. I'll be curious to see if Skip's ruling matches what Monte has said.

 

[Number47]

"Must have"? It is certainly good, but it is an eighth level spell! It may be great in three and four-spell combos, but alone it is not a game-winner. Is it better than Horrid Wilting (15d8 minimum to a large group at longe range)? Is it better than Otto's Irresistable Dance or Maze (no saving throw spells)? Is it better than Summon Monster VIII (look up the stats for elder elemental)?

I will admit it is the best non-combat oriented eighth level wizard spell, but how many of those are there, even?

These comparisons are based on core-rulebook only, that's all I have.

 

[Caliban]

I agree with you. Monte's "ruling" (or decision or however you want to put it) will open up a whole can of worms. Having Mind Blank be proof against See Invisible and True Seeing and all other types of divination spells will (IMO) push Mind Blank into one of those things that "everyone wants to have", becoming too powerful (even for an 8th level protection) due to the sheer amount of spells it will protect against. Protection against all divination spells (invisibility, charms, domination, srcying, true strike, locates, clairaudience/clairvoyance, prying eyes, legend lore, foresight, even wish and miracle when it come to locating the protected creature) will make it too good for anyone to consider going without.

I really don't think that Mind Blank stopping See Invisiblity is a big deal. It still won't prevent you from hitting the Improved Invisible, Flying, Mind Blanked mage with a Readied Glitterdust that will automatically reveal him to everyone, and has a chance of blinding him temporarily.

Of course, my wizard PC usually has two glitterdust spells prepared as a matter of course. (It's an area of effect Blindness with a Will Save against fighter-types, and it reveals those pesky invisible spellcasters to everyone else, not just you.)

 

[Zenon]

"Must have"? It is certainly good, but it is an eighth level spell! It may be great in three and four-spell combos, but alone it is not a game-winner. Is it better than Horrid Wilting (15d8 minimum to a large group at longe range)? Is it better than Otto's Irresistable Dance or Maze (no saving throw spells)? Is it better than Summon Monster VIII (look up the stats for elder elemental)?

I will admit it is the best non-combat oriented eighth level wizard spell, but how many of those are there, even?

These comparisons are based on core-rulebook only, that's all I have.

My point is that it will be a definite "must have" just for the amount of protection it provides. It will be a "top slot" for an 8th level wizard giving spell selection any kind of thought.

Not only is it non-combat (stopping scry, etc), it is also very combat capable, stopping a large number of combat spells from affecting the caster. Throw in a duration of 1 day for the spell and you have a great all-around spell, useful for many purposes. Too useful? I guess that is for the individual DM to figure out.

As for being an 8th level spell, it certainly is good. The thing of it is, in 3rd edition we will be seeing it cast more. Unlike the rarity of high levels in other editions (where it might take years of dedicated playing regularly to reach the levels you'd need to cast an 8th level spell), it will not be uncommon to see PC's of that power level be reached in this edition.

Just out of curiosity, I pulled out my old AD&D PHB and looked up Mind Blank:

Mind Blank
Level: 8
Range: 3"
Duration: 1 day
Area of Effect: One creature
Components: V,S
Casting Time: 1 segment
Saving Throw: None

Explaination/description: When the very powerful Mind Blank spell is cast, the recipient is totally protected from all devices and/or spells which detect, influenceor read emotions and/or thoughts. Protection includes Augery, Charm, Command, Confusion, Divination [Zenon note: Divination is a 4th level cleric spell, a super augery], Empathy (all forms), Fear, Feeblemind, Mass Suggestion, Phantasmal Killer, Possesion, Rulership, Soul Trapping, Suggestion and Telepathy. Cloaking protection also extendsto prevention of discovery or information gatheringby crystal balls or other scrying devices, Clairaudience, Clairvoyance, Communing, Contact Other Planes or wish realted methods [wishing, limited wish, alter reality]Of course, exceeding powerful deities would be able to penetrate the spells powers. Note that this spell also protects from psionic-related detection and/or influence such as Domination (or Mass Domination), Hypnosis, Invisibility (the psionic sort is mind related), and Precognition, plus those powers already covered as spells.

Jusy looking at the old edition version brought to my mind the huge selection of spells that Mind Blank would protect against. The new version is already as powerful, if not more so. Now if you add in that it defeats things like See Invisible, True Strike, and others we may not have realized yet, how much more powerful is it?

Which 8th levels spell would I rather have? Let's see:

Otto's Irresistable Dance: Sure, no save. Range: Touch, duration 1d4 rounds, subject to SR.

Maze: Again, no save. Range: Close. Target: one creature, no SR. Max time that it can trap a creature? Less than 3 Int: 2d4 minutes.

Horrid Wilting: Save for Fort (1/2 damage) Range: Long. Target No two of which are more that 60' apart. 15d8 (average around 60-70 points, saved damge is average around 30-35).

Summon Monster: Good for 1 round per level (15 in your example). Nice stats on the Elder Elemental.

Mind Blank: Good against all divinations, mind effecting spells, mind influencing spells, Wishes or Miracles used to locate me, Duration of 1 day (BTW, it protects against Otto's Irresistable Dance, which has a Mind-Affecting in the type). Hold Person (another Mind-affecting spell), Antipathy(9th level, opps: Mind Affecting, doesn't stop me), Bane, Binding (another 8th levels spell, Mind-Affecting, stops it cold), Bless, Color Spray (Mind-Affecting), Demand (another 8th level spell, Mind-Affecting), Enthrall (either spell or Bard ability), Geas/Quest (Mind-Affecting that normally has no save), Magic Jar, Modify Memory, Nightmare, Sympathy (9th level, Mind-Affecting), I would argue also for Symbols of Discord; Fear; Pain; Insanity; Hopelessness; Pain; Persuasion; Sleep, Trap the Soul (tries to affect my mind, I would argue for it) and Weird (9th level, Mind-Affecting), Zone of Truth. [Just from the PHB]. All this lasts for 1 day per casting.

But before I choose, let me think that by extension that Mind Blank will protect me from all creatures (or potions, devices, artifacts, etc.) whose abilities are a spell-like or supernatural effect of any of the above (like a Umber Hulk's gaze), and any of the spells cast on me have no way to penetrate that protection (no caster check, spell penetration, nothing). It is also currently being argued to protect from See Invisible, so it won't let any magic target me (unless it's an area effect and you have a clue where I'm at before you cast it).

Hmmm. Which do you think I should pick?

Do you see what I'm saying? It's already a immensely powerful spell without adding anything to it.

{edit} Heck, I'll even argue that it should protect from the negative effects from an Unhallow or Forbiddance, since both spells need to detect my alignment, which per Mind Blank, is undetectable by anything sort or direct detection by a Deity.

 

[KarinsDad]

Do you see what I'm saying? It's already a immensely powerful spell without adding anything to it.

The point is that nobody is adding anything to it. The spell's description already states what it does. If you think that is too powerful for your game, dummy it down.