protection from True Seeing?

[Presto2112]

True seeing wins. The con fails.

Only the open ended uses of Limited wish / Wish / Wish have a chance of doing anything against true seeing if the DM is willing to let them.

That is the one thing that I hate about it. This one spell completely destroys an entire school of spells (illusion). What other spells have that much power?

 

[pallandrome]

This is one of my biggest gripes about magic in the D&D games I've always played in, no one (DM's included) making use/keeping track of Spell Components. I know that it is book keeping, but hey 250gp to cast True Seeing each time? How many people actually follow those rules? If the PC's in this instance are running a Con, and their is actually a system in place keeping track of Material Components, then the person being con'd might not want to waste his 250gp just to see through it. Heck, even if he uses it you've conned him out of 250gp, he just didn't give it to YOU!

Plus it would make the Epic Feat: Ignore Material Components actually useful!

Yeah, while I exclusively run homebrew settings, I always make sure that any spell with an expensive material componant, or costing in xp, is NOT availible for every day use by the city guard or what-have-you. Such would simply be economically unfeasable. Usually, depending on the magic of the setting, I have to weed out most high level spells from what the majority of cities would have availible.

 

[pallandrome]

That is the one thing that I hate about it. This one spell completely destroys an entire school of spells (illusion). What other spells have that much power?

Heh, I run a shadowcraft mage/shadowcrafter for just this reason.

 

[blargney the second]

As explained above, detect evil and true seeing work totally differently.

With respect to their interaction with nondetection, the two spells are not different - they're both divinations that let you see things. Nondetection tries to block divinations, and says so right in its text.
-blarg