Mind blank vs True seeing and divinations

[Thanee]

Why do you always claim, that this ruling is not concrete? It's perfectly consistent as far as I can see.

Bye
Thanee

 

[KarinsDad]

Why do you always claim, that this ruling is not concrete? It's perfectly consistent as far as I can see.

A concrete rule is: This applies to all spells with the Mind Affecting property.

A subjective rule is: This applies when the spell directly gives you information.

For this second one, each DM will rule differently. For the first one, theoretically, all DMs will rule the same (shy of house rules).

Your direct versus indirect ruling is subjective. I have no idea how you would rule a given situation with those types of rules.

This is one of the reasons WotC added game elements (like Mind Affecting spell, like Fire spell, like Death spell) to the spells so that the rules would become concrete.

 

[Thanee]

I have no idea how you would rule a given situation with those types of rules.

Luckily, this is also not necessary.

This is one of the reasons WotC added game elements (like Mind Affecting spell, like Fire spell, like Death spell) to the spells so that the rules would become concrete.

...and then don't use them, yeah.

Bye
Thanee

 

[master arminas]

Just had a naughty thought. This means that Mind Blank protects the character against True Strike (a divination spell!). Even though True Strike is personal, would it still be negated against a character protected by Mind Blank? I think it would, since True Strike states that "You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack." Thoughts, anyone?

Arminas tar Valantil

 

[KarinsDad]

Just had a naughty thought. This means that Mind Blank protects the character against True Strike (a divination spell!). Even though True Strike is personal, would it still be negated against a character protected by Mind Blank? I think it would, since True Strike states that "You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack." Thoughts, anyone?

Yes, it would protect.

Like Scrying, you could not see the protected character in the future. You could only see non-protected characters. So, you could use the True Strike against other characters, but not the protected one.

This is a definite case of information gathering.

 

[Sejs]

Just had a naughty thought. This means that Mind Blank protects the character against True Strike (a divination spell!). Even though True Strike is personal, would it still be negated against a character protected by Mind Blank? I think it would, since True Strike states that "You gain temporary, intuitive insight into the immediate future during your next attack." Thoughts, anyone?

I'd say that Mind Blank would protect the target, that the caster wouldn't gain any insight bonus to hit, and that the spell is still expended as normal.

You gain temporary, intuitive insight (...you gain information on...) into the immediate future, which is essentially discharged in your next attack (...against the subject protected by Mind Blank).

Mind Blank says "Nope, sorry, can't glean any information", to which True Strike responds "Well fooey, then I just don't know what'll happen. Sorry, caster, I can't help you".

 

[Voadam]

After the intersting Vorpal thread I have another question:
What is your ruling or how do you understand the kind of protection granted by the Mind Blank spell.
Mind Blank
The subject is protected from all devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. 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. In the case of scrying that scans an area the creature is in, such as arcane eye, the spell works but the creature simply isn’t detected. Scrying attempts that are targeted specifically at the subject do not work at all.
Underlined sentences are about mind reading and influencing so there is no problem but the boldfaced part speaks about divination spells and effects, it is not clear even if we always ruled that tis spell protected from divinations such as see invisibility, true seeing and the like.

From the srd on divinations:

Divination
Divination spells enable you to learn secrets long forgotten, to predict the future, to find hidden things, and to foil deceptive spells.

That all sounds like information gathering to me.

So mind affecting and divination spells and effects are blocked. No divinations can gain info on the target, no charms can work on them, and no pattern or phantasm illusions. And other effects such as psionics that gather info or affect minds.

The info gathering = creates pure information as new senses as in the detect spells as distinct from simply modified or enhanced senses in spells like true sight or see invisible is an interesting theory though.

The distinction between divinations providing information through a new sense and through a display using an existing sense (sight) seems a bit artificial though.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Yes, it would protect.

Like Scrying, you could not see the protected character in the future. You could only see non-protected characters. So, you could use the True Strike against other characters, but not the protected one.

This is a definite case of information gathering.

Even though I subscribe to Thanee's "subjective rule" regarding Mind Blank, I agree with KD here. THis seems a clear-cut case of information-gathering.

 

[Victim]

I think Mind Blank is already good even if you can't use it be undetectable while invisible.