Sage Response: More on Mind Blank

[Ristamar]

It explictly calls out that any spell, divination or otherwise, that gathers or gains information about the protected target is foiled.

You seem to think it is some other unknown and unquantified set of information (possibly mental) with your statement of "It seems to me that's not what they REALLY meant."

The problem with the Sage's answer that Nondetection stops See Invisibility but Mind Blank does not is that there is no given reason as to why this occurs. From what I can read of the two spells, they both stop divinations that gain information about the protected character.

What is the difference?

Nobody knows, but a bunch of people jump on the "The Sage gave a real reasonable answer here" bandwagon.

How is it reasonable if it is not explainable?

How do DMs rule the same if there is no rationale given as to why this works the way he claims it does? How do you rule each divination spell against the next anti-divination spell that comes down the road if you cannot explain why he ruled this way for this one?

While Nondetection and Mind Blank share similar qualities, the main difference I see is that Nondetection specifically mentions detection spells in the description of the spell. In fact, that seems to be the focus of the spell, as the name implies.

No offense intended, but I think you're getting hung up on the phrase 'information gathering.' I hope we can agree the phrase 'information gathering' in Mind Blank's description is a bit vague. Apparently, 'information gathering' refers to only magical scry attempts, mind affecting/influencing magics, and magics that read/detect the thoughts of the target. Detect Magic, True Seeing, and See Invisibility perform none of these tasks, so they are not stopped by Mind Blank.

I'm not going to argue that the wording in the PHB isn't unclear (in fact, it completely sucks), nor will I argue that your interpretation was unreasonable based on the spell's sketchy description. I do maintain, however, that the Sage's response clarified what types of spells are affected by Mind Blank.

 

[KarinsDad]

No offense intended, but I think you're getting hung up on the phrase 'information gathering.' I hope we can agree the phrase 'information gathering' in Mind Blank's description is a bit vague. Apparently, 'information gathering' refers to only magical scry attempts, mind affecting/influencing magics, and magics that read/detect the thoughts of the target. Detect Magic, True Seeing, and See Invisibility perform none of these tasks, so they are not stopped by Mind Blank.

I'm not going to argue that the wording in the PHB is unclear (in fact, it completely sucks), nor will I argue that your interpretation was unreasonable based on the spell's sketchy description. I do maintain, however, that the Sage's response clarified what types of spells are affected by Mind Blank.

Actually, he did not clarify much of anything.

Your first paragraph above clarifies more than what he said.

The problem here is that I use the phrase "spells which gather information about the target" to mean "spells which gather information about the target".

To me, it is not unclear at all. In fact, it is crystal clear (to me) considering that they used that similar phrase twice and even with respect to a Wish spell.

Now, if "'information gathering' refers to only magical scry attempts and magics that read/detect the thoughts of the target" as you suggest, that's fine. The spell does not state that in any way, but if he would have stated this rationale for it, I would have disagreed with it, but at least we would have a rationale.

He gave no rationale whatsoever for which divination spells are not stopped by Mind Blank except a vague reference that "True Strike doesn't reveal anything about a particular creature" without explaining the why of that. He just claimed for the most part that they are not foiled. Ok. Why?

Your rationale would be a good why, but he did not say that.

C'est la guerre!

 

[Ristamar]

Your rationale would be a good why, but he did not say that.

C'est la guerre!

Fair enough. I'm confident that's what he meant from the information we have and the answers he provided. If you don't agree, I can't provide much beyond what has already been stated. *salute* I will now take my bow...

 

[Zenon]

Hey!!! We got more than four words from Skip!!!!!!!!!

I'm glad my gut instinct on it was the way Skip went with his reply. I thought Monte's answer fit the "all divination" mention in the text, but I think they (the designers in the re-write for 3E) threw it in there without realizing that True Strike had a divination classification. In the other thread I posted the description for the AD&D version of it, and although the wording was very similar, it did not include protection from all divinations.

I think Skip went the way he did with his answer because it was as I originally said "Don't read too much into it" (Also known as WotC answer).

Since Skip still works full time for WotC (instead of freelancing like Monte does now), I think I'll go with his answer as "canon".

This still looks like a good one for people's lists of "House Rule". I would say if Skip's answer still bothers you, and you cannot reconcile it with how you think Mind Blank should work/what it should protect against, then you still can choose to agree with Monte and call it that way in your own campaign.

BTW, I agree that the wording of True Strike (and possibly it's classification as a divination) could use a little cleaning up. I think they assigned it as an insight bonus so that it would stack with many other things, but it seems like that type of bonus (and the divination classification) is what generating the most problems with people accepting Skip's word.

 

[Voadam]

old edition wording

Zenon,

While it was that way in first edition, I think in second edition Mind Blank did include a similar protection from all divinations element. I'll have to check but I remember it being that way when I played a high level mage in second edition. It meant that people clairvoying an area to teleport in could accidentally appear in mindblanked creatures, which was deadly to both involved. In the campaign there were even researched spells to deal with that (a very high level teleport that disintegrated the area it appeared in first (as in Terminator) so nothing solid would kill the teleporter).

 

[Zenon]

Re: old edition wording

Zenon,

While it was that way in first edition, I think in second edition Mind Blank did include a similar protection from all divinations element. I'll have to check but I remember it being that way when I played a high level mage in second edition. It meant that people clairvoying an area to teleport in could accidentally appear in mindblanked creatures, which was deadly to both involved. In the campaign there were even researched spells to deal with that (a very high level teleport that disintegrated the area it appeared in first (as in Terminator) so nothing solid would kill the teleporter).

It's possible, I never owned the 2nd edition PHB, so you're probably correct. I'd be interested to see the wording in the 2nd edition one if you cared to post it, then we could see it in all of the incarnations it has had.

Hmm, I'll have to pull out my original books and see if there's a version in there also....I can't remember if there was. If so, I'll drop it in here in a post.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Originally posted by KarinsDad:

Now, if "'information gathering' refers to only magical scry attempts and magics that read/detect the thoughts of the target" as you suggest, that's fine. The spell does not state that in any way, but if he would have stated this rationale for it, I would have disagreed with it, but at least we would have a rationale.

Actually, the spell does state that, and it is clearly the rationale on which the Sage based his interpretation.

From the SRD:

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 when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about him.

Clearly, how you interpret the spell depends on whether you interpret the first sentence to modify both subsequent sentences; IOW, whether the second sentence, properly worded, should say "this spell protects against all mind-affecting spells and effects as well as information gathering by divination spells or effects that detect or read emotions or thoughts, including scrying spells." The Sage probably based his ruling on that rationale, though with him, who really knows?

 

[Ristamar]

Yes, the wording/meaning in Mind Blank was always at the core of the debate which is why I stated the spell description sucks.

 

[Ristamar]

Double post.

 

[Voadam]

In depth lawyerly sentence analysis

Rules lawyer,

The problem with interpreting all of the sentences to be limited by the first, (it only protects against effects (divinations) that detect, influence or read thoughts or emotions) is that you then have to ignore the specific example presented later in the spell description (scrying with an arcane eye, which provides only visual information). General scrying is not covered by the first sentence, only the second and the example at the end. The exception would be a crystal ball with telepathy.

In general the first sentence says one set of things the spell protects against (protects thoughts and emotions from influence and detection). It includes no words of exclusion (it does not say it only protects against these categories). The second has a second set, mind affecting and divinations. There are no words indicating the second set is merely an example of the types of things listed in the first sentence. The next two do include words indicating that they are explanatory, using specific examples (foiling wishes and scrying).



Mind blank srd:

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 when they are used in such a way as to affect the subject’s mind or to gain information about him. In the case of scrying that scans an area that 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.


Zenon,

I will try and dig out my ph2 later and post the description along with 1e and 3e's srd so we can see the evolution.