Mind blank vs True seeing and divinations

[Thanee]

I really wonder where you got that part from, that I would think True Seeing could defeat Mind Blank.

Or that I classify True Seeing as information gathering, when I said the exact opposite above.

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

I really wonder where you got that part from, that I would think True Seeing could defeat Mind Blank.

Or that I classify True Seeing as information gathering, when I said the exact opposite above.

You basically said information gathering is not information gathering.

"In a broad sense, of course, looking at a polymorphed creature with True Seeing, allowing you to see it in its natural form, does give you some information about the subject (what it looks like), but that's not what I understand as information gathering."

If it pierces invisibility or polymorph, it gives information on the target who is invisible or polymorphed. Hence the reason True Seeing is a Divination spell in the first place.

It comes down to a simple question: Does True Seeing give you information about Invisible or Polymorphed creatures that you would not have if you did not have the True Seeing spell up? Yes. You know what they look like. You know where they are, etc.

Hence, it is an informational gathering Divination spell (like all Divination spells).


I think the reason people interpret Mind Blank as not protecting versus all Divination spells is because it states:

This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it.

instead of:

This spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects, and divination spells or effects. Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about it.

I think people think that the phrase "as information gathering by" is superfluous with the interpretation that all divination spells are stopped. I disagree. The reason you need that phrase or one like it is because Mind Blank does not stop the divination spells from being cast and used. It just stops information from being accessed concerning the protected creature. You can cast Divination spells and still gain a lot of information, just as long as you do not gain information on the protected creature.

Mind Blank does not stop divination spells from working and that is why the "information gathering" phrase is important. Mind Blank merely stops them from working in regard to gaining information on the protected creature. The Divination spells still work in all other regards.

 

[IanB]

I think the most bizarre thing I've seen in this thread is the contention that when you look at a shapechanged target with true seeing, you don't see the form they've turned into at all.

Since they're really a dragon at that point, occupying a different face, reach, etc., this would seem to be a tremendous disadvantage for the person viewing the dragon/wizard.

I've always pictured true seeing as basically giving an overlay to your normal vision - so you might see the wizard superimposed in the dragon somehow, but certainly you would still see the (for the duration of the spell, extremely real) dragon there!

 

[kigmatzomat]

I want to fall on the "subset" side of things, mainly because I dislike the fact that an 8th level spell trumps Wish but since mindblank is a specialized spell I can't argue it too much. I am still willing to split hairs on the matter.

The true seeing example should have the viewer aware the polymorphed & mindblanked individual may not be what they appear but not perceive their true form. This would work simply because true seeing cannot confirm that the viewed form is their true one. By the same token, a mindblanked individual in their true form would generate the same response, possibly leading the viewer astray.

I'm kind of torn on the see invisibility question. If see invis simply nullifies the effects of invisibility then mindblank would have no effect. However, since see invis also shows ethereal creatures, it must be that the spell gathers information about those in range and provides it to the viewer.

True seeing would, however, allow someone to accurately attack a mindblanked, mirror-imaged foe as you could identify & ignore the illusionary targets. I think you could also see through blur because true seeing lets you see through the illusions. I'm not so confident about displacement as it must relocate your image.

 

[frankthedm]

I think it depeneds on what a DM feels the +20 insight bonus stems from.

To me, true strike tells the caster how and where the the target intends to evade to, which point the targets armour is the weakest and where the weapon should be swung for a [usually] 95% chance to hit.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I think the most bizarre thing I've seen in this thread is the contention that when you look at a shapechanged target with true seeing, you don't see the form they've turned into at all.

Since they're really a dragon at that point, occupying a different face, reach, etc., this would seem to be a tremendous disadvantage for the person viewing the dragon/wizard.

I've always pictured true seeing as basically giving an overlay to your normal vision - so you might see the wizard superimposed in the dragon somehow, but certainly you would still see the (for the duration of the spell, extremely real) dragon there!

that's how I've always viewed it as well. Same for illusions, its not that they dont see an illusion, its just that they can see that the illusion is an illusion. I guess you can have funny roleplaying experiences from this.

P1 "Look out for the troll"
P2 " huh, what troll"
P1 "the one that's charging you, you idiot."
P2 "are you feeling all right, did you bump your head or something, there isn't any troll here"

 

[Thanee]

You basically said information gathering is not information gathering.

In a way, yes. But not really.

If it pierces invisibility or polymorph, it gives information on the target who is invisible or polymorphed. Hence the reason True Seeing is a Divination spell in the first place.

It comes down to a simple question: Does True Seeing give you information about Invisible or Polymorphed creatures that you would not have if you did not have the True Seeing spell up? Yes. You know what they look like. You know where they are, etc.

Hence, it is an informational gathering Divination spell (like all Divination spells).

And that is exactly where I make the cut different, as to what constitutes information gathering (or gaining).

When you look at a polymorphed creature with True Seeing you do not gain the information how this creature looks like, instead you gain the ability to see the creature as it is. This in turn gives you the information how the creature looks like, but that is not an effect of True Seeing. Your own eyes give you this information.

A hypothetic Detect Invisible spell would give you the information, that there is an invisible creature around, while the spell See Invisible lets you see inivisible creatures, but does not give you any information.

And, if you do not make a cut like this, then pretty much every spell or effect would be an information-gathering spell or effect, since you can indirectly gain various information about a subject with just about anything.

Mind Blank does not stop divination spells from working...

Of course not, it just protects the subject against (some of) them.

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

And that is exactly where I make the cut different, as to what constitutes information gathering (or gaining).

When you look at a polymorphed creature with True Seeing you do not gain the information how this creature looks like, instead you gain the ability to see the creature as it is. This in turn gives you the information how the creature looks like, but that is not an effect of True Seeing. Your own eyes give you this information.

A hypothetic Detect Invisible spell would give you the information, that there is an invisible creature around, while the spell See Invisible lets you see inivisible creatures, but does not give you any information.

And, if you do not make a cut like this, then pretty much every spell or effect would be an information-gathering spell or effect, since you can indirectly gain various information about a subject with just about anything.

The problem is, your method has no real rhyme or reason to it (i.e. no rules).

For example:

DM: "He sees you with his True Sight spell."
Player: "How? I have Mind Blank up."
DM: "Because he divines you as you truly are."
Player: "But, divining is a divination."
DM: "I meant he gets information on what you look like."
Player: "But, that means he is gathering information on me."
DM: "I meant he breaks your invisibility with True Sight, but that is not targeting you specifically."
Player: "Then how come my See Invisibility did not work last week on the Mind Blanked Invisible BBEG."
DM: "Err, cause See Invisible is not as strong as True Sight."
Player: "But, it did not target him specifically either."
DM: "Shut up. I'm the DM. I know how it works."
Player: "Whatever. Can you make a list of which works and which do not?"
DM: "No. Instead, Mind Blank does not work for PCs in the game, only the BBEGs, and hence, I do not have to explain it."
Player: "Yeah, whatever. I Fireball his butt."
DM: "That doesn't work either."
Player: "What?!?!?"

The point is, if you make it the partial solution, you have to come up with why it does not REALLY gather information in some cases and why it does in others. And, you have to come up with a (house rules) list (that makes sense) as to which spells it stops and which it does not.

Otherwise, there are no set rules to follow, just DM whim.

 

[Thanee]

That example is just silly and has nothing to do with what I said.

It's actually very clear and very simple. Works like a charm. No ambiguity involved at all.

It's just a little hard to describe, I guess.

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

That example is just silly and has nothing to do with what I said.

It's actually very clear and very simple. Works like a charm. No ambiguity involved at all.

It's just a little hard to describe, I guess.

So, when does it work and when does it not work?