Ruling needs consideration - True Seeing vs. Nondetection.

[Incarnate]

I'm pretty sure that as far as what DMs would probably say, the spells only do what their mechanics allow and for further usage of the spell, for what would be implicit functionality based on sourcebook information, you need direct DM approval for the specific interaction.

Now I guess the thing with these two spells is that their implementation is kinda all over the place and the documentation is rather poor.

We can fix that with some research on our scripts and writing the info down on the wiki...

The whole point of this thread is to actually have Nondetection work as its intended, which currently it isn't. Nondetection as its supposed to should ward against divinitive magic such as True Seeing, not just detect magic and similar.

Example: Someone has cast Disguise self or Invisibility on themselves along with Nondetection, due to Nondetection, True Seeing must first bypass the Nondetection where the True Seeing caster has to succeed a casterevel dc check for it to actually bypass the Nondetection spell.

True Seeing works against Illusion, but Nondetection is Abjuration, hence why it shouldn't just negate it, which it currently does.

Note: I have well over 27 years of experience as PnP DM & Player for various editions of D&D, so I know how to read, understand and if necessary interpret and adapt the rules. One thing I immediately notice is what I just mentioned above, True Seeing works against illusion spells, and Nondetection isn't an illusion, in fact its abjuration. Take a look the short information about abjuration.

A little info on Abjuration:
Abjurations are protective spells. They create physical or magical barriers, negate magical or physical abilities, harm trespassers, or even banish the subject of the spell to another plane of existence.

Nondetection is an invisible magical barrier that PROTECTS against Divination, a protective barrier that attempts to negate magical divination.

Source: D20Srd.Org#Abjuration

[Tsidkenu]

Non-Detection works as the Developer intended. I'm not sure why you're getting all worked up over something that works properly on this server.

On BG: True seeing rolls a secret non-detection check. You never see non-detection rolls because they are kept secret. So no-one knows from the combat-log whether you have non-detect active. This avoids disguise metagaming. (With true seeing you get a roll vs magical disguises)

[Incarnate]

Non-Detection works as the Developer intended. I'm not sure why you're getting all worked up over something that works properly on this server.

On BG: True seeing rolls a secret non-detection check. You never see non-detection rolls because they are kept secret. So no-one knows from the combat-log whether you have non-detect active. This avoids disguise metagaming. (With true seeing you get a roll vs magical disguises)

According to the wiki it doesn't reflect that Nondetection works as the developer intended, that it wards against True Seeing - because if Nondetection does ward against True Seeing and that it actually triggers the dc caster check, well then there is no need for the ruling I'm requesting here. In that case they just need to update the wiki to reflect that it wards against it specifically and specify what actually happens - from a gameplay perspective.

[CleverUsername123]

It's not that big of a difference at all. It's such a minor thing that you're the first and only person to ever care. "Think of it as fabric" isn't an argument either way, it's an incorrect metaphor. A better one would be "think about something that literally doesn't matter". This isn't D&D. It's similar, but it's NWN2, and it's a different game. It is how it is.

I beg to differ:
Neverwinter Nights 2 is a role-playing video game developed by Obsidian Entertainment and published by Atari, Inc. It is the sequel to BioWare's Neverwinter Nights, based on the Dungeons & Dragons pencil and paper fantasy role-playing game. Neverwinter Nights 2 utilizes an adaptation of the Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 edition rules. Neverwinter Nights 2 is set in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting—in and around the city of Neverwinter.

Source: Neverwinter Nights 2 - Wikipedia

It being based on D&D 3.5 rules makes it very much so D&D, that its an adaptation just means its been adjusted to suit its new virtual conditions.

Forgotten Realms is a campaign setting for the Dungeons & Dragons (D&D) fantasy role-playing game.

Its very much so D&D.

Look it might be that you don't care about it, but this is certainly something that will impact rp a lot more than you apparently realize. Currently, True Seeing COUNTERS virtually anything that magical that would be an illusion, which is counterinducive to rp, because it means an ENTIRE aspect of rp is reduced to being almost UNPLAYABLE UNLESS you use mundane means because the mechanics thats in the game to help you play deceptive through the use of magic simply is being countered by ONE SPELL.

Lastly, IF it doesn't matter to you, then stay out of it.

Besides having one spell that basically can TRUMPH ANY Illusion spell is beyond overpowered and imbalanced, not to mention that this spell is only a level 5 spell where it would be more reasonable if it had been a level 9 spell.

Nondetection doesn't make it impossible for True Seeing to bypass it, but True Seeing as it is in the game now COMPLETELY TRUMPHS ANY ILLUSION Spell.

You're seriously exaggerating the impact of a 5th level spell slot being taken up by an entirely non-combat spell that bypasses a couple illusions. A 5th level slot is a big price for that. Even ignoring that, it's a very small part of the player base that could possibly be hurt by this, and it's such a trivial thing that even if it is broken, fixing it would be a waste of time for the volunteers here.

True Seeing as a 9th level spell would be ridiculously useless. You're just throwing a fit because you don't like people being able to see through your illusions. It isn't an "ENTIRE aspect", it's a small, insignificant detail.

And being based on D&D doesn't make it D&D. The combat is, for the most part, real time. Initiative doesn't matter anywhere near as much as it does in D&D. Randomness in character creation is gone. The feat selection is much smaller, the spell selection is much smaller, choice is mostly removed in singleplayer campaigns, there are spell changes like the one you're whining about here, and quite a few other differences. It's not the same game.

[Incarnate]

You're seriously exaggerating the impact of a 5th level spell slot being taken up by an entirely non-combat spell that bypasses a couple illusions. A 5th level slot is a big price for that. Even ignoring that, it's a very small part of the player base that could possibly be hurt by this, and it's such a trivial thing that even if it is broken, fixing it would be a waste of time for the volunteers here.

No I'm not, because the consequences of "simple" illusion spells being bypassed can have quite SEVERE consequences for the character and rp, even future rp. Exactly how severe depends on that actual circumstances, that is why Nondetection is so important to function the way its intended, especially in relation to True Seeing.

True Seeing as a 9th level spell would be ridiculously useless. You're just throwing a fit because you don't like people being able to see through your illusions. It isn't an "ENTIRE aspect", it's a small, insignificant detail.

I'm not saying it should be a 9'th level, but you know exaggeration is a means to highlight the issues. What I'm saying, is that its way too powerful for a level 5 spell to bypass all illusion spells and at the same time render abjuration magic against it useless, hence my point about if it was a level 9 spell it would be more reasonable. True Seeing in it self requires no dc checks normally as many other spells would at that level would to function. If anything it should be opposed caster checks or similar.

And being based on D&D doesn't make it D&D. The combat is, for the most part, real time. Initiative doesn't matter anywhere near as much as it does in D&D. Randomness in character creation is gone. The feat selection is much smaller, the spell selection is much smaller, choice is mostly removed in singleplayer campaigns, there are spell changes like the one you're whining about here, and quite a few other differences. It's not the same game.

It is D&D no matter how you try to disregard it or argue its not. I'll grant you that its not PnP D&D, but that doesn't make it any less D&D.

You know combat is actually "real" time, because each round equates to a certain measure of time - 6 or 10 seconds per round depending on the dm when its PnP. Furthermore, in the singleplayer aspect of the game, you can pause the game, even set it to autopause on round end if I'm not mistaken. Feat & spell selection being smaller, thats no different from being limited to a smaller amount of source books.

In case you missed it straight from the guy who programmed it:

On BG: True seeing rolls a secret non-detection check. You never see non-detection rolls because they are kept secret. So no-one knows from the combat-log whether you have non-detect active. This avoids disguise metagaming. (With true seeing you get a roll vs magical disguises)

This is reflected VERY POORLY in the wiki hence why I requested the ruling. However it makes sense that the roll is done secretly and I wouldn't have it any other way, however this is something seriously does need to be reflected in the wiki, that it specically works against True Seeing.

[NegInfinity]

I beg to differ:
Neverwinter Nights 2 is a role-playing video game developed by Obsidian Entertainment and

You can't win an argument by providing a dictionary defintiion.

The situation remains the same - on bgtscc dms have final say, and their word overrules word of anyone else.

DMs have blue names. So far no dms have responded.

It is D&D no matter how

It is not D&D. It is inspired by it at best. There are game changing abilities that simply do not exist in standard D&D campaign (Epic Precision feat comes to mind). As a result logic that works in D&D frequently doesn't apply here. The sooner you understand that, the better.

No I'm not, because the consequences of "simple" illusion spells being bypassed can have quite SEVERE consequences for the character and rp, even future rp.

It is an extremely minor matter on bgtscc, and it did not stop illusionist mages in the past.

There are ton of characters that do not have access to true seeing. However, there are also ton of characters that have high detection skills and walk around with "see invisibility" effect on 24 hours per day.

You just need to get used to it.

Basically, rather than trying to change the server to your expectations, adapt to the server. You'll have more fun this way.

[Hoihe]

This is so dang trivial that the only reason it could possibly matter is pedantry. It makes no difference and it doesn't matter.

The change does matter a great deal especially to those who would use Nondetection to hide their illusion spells, because if this change is made then True Seeing suddenly doesn't just negate Nondetection. So its not really that trivial, maybe to you, but to rp consequences that can mean a VERY, VERY BIG DIFFERENCE.

But anyway, I don't think it changes anything—Non-detection prevents against scrying-like "detection" spells, but against "seeing" spells?!?

The question I have is if the mechanics are really all hooked up here on BGTSCC. But essentially, True Seeing should be capable of piercing Non-detection.

This is basically how Nondetection works with True Seeing (though not currently this way on the server).

A character with True Seeing on looking at a character with Nondetection on wouldn't do anything, because True Seeing doesn't interact with Abjuration which Nondetection is, True Seeing interacts with Illusion spells.

So if the character had an illusion spell on but not Nondetection on, then True Seeing would interact with at negate its effect, but with Nondetection on as well it would trigger the caster dc check.

Think of Nondetection as a very fine layer of abjurative fabric which doesn't interact very well with Divination, this fabric surrounds the character externally, hence why it will trigger the caster dc check.

It's not that big of a difference at all. It's such a minor thing that you're the first and only person to ever care. "Think of it as fabric" isn't an argument either way, it's an incorrect metaphor. A better one would be "think about something that literally doesn't matter". This isn't D&D. It's similar, but it's NWN2, and it's a different game. It is how it is.

The ability to think of the issues others face is a sign of empathy, a vital skill for humans to advance as a society.

Just because the range of your RP doesn't involve characters who find themselves toying with the limits of mechanics, are or wholly dependent on their existence and well defined nature, it doesn't mean you get to dictate what matters and what does not.

People like you are the same who go "Who cares?!" when someone wishes to discuss the rules of magic. Or "It's just a game/magic" when someone complains about something breaking the set rules of the setting. This is non-productive and should be kept to yourself. Or perhaps you should realize the importance of well defined rules and limits.

This person is asking a completely justified request.

And also, you've got True Seeing wrong. It's nowhere near a 9th level spell. It's a 7th circle spell.

I beg to differ:
Neverwinter Nights 2 is a role-playing video game developed by Obsidian Entertainment and

You can't win an argument by providing a dictionary defintiion.

The situation remains the same - on bgtscc dms have final say, and their word overrules word of anyone else.

DMs have blue names. So far no dms have responded.

It is D&D no matter how

It is not D&D. It is inspired by it at best. There are game changing abilities that simply do not exist in standard D&D campaign (Epic Precision feat comes to mind). As a result logic that works in D&D frequently doesn't apply here. The sooner you understand that, the better.

No I'm not, because the consequences of "simple" illusion spells being bypassed can have quite SEVERE consequences for the character and rp, even future rp.

It is an extremely minor matter on bgtscc, and it did not stop illusionist mages in the past.

There are ton of characters that do not have access to true seeing. However, there are also ton of characters that have high detection skills and walk around with "see invisibility" effect on 24 hours per day.

You just need to get used to it.

Basically, rather than trying to change the server to your expectations, adapt to the server. You'll have more fun this way.

Changes MUST be well defined and clarified. Otherwise we'll run cases of one DM saying A, the other saying B and a player's RP being tossed into the latrine when they want to do something they could under A and are now doing it under B.

My favorite is the idea of injuries being "permanent." I had a DM who wanted to permanently maim a PC for rolling a natural 20 on a strength check. Yes. For a natural 20.

Said DM wholly ignored the fact that Lesser Restoration fixes Crippling Strike where you literally shred muscle to ribbons. But apparently over-exertion hurts more than your muscles being ribbons. Logic.

[NegInfinity]

Changes MUST be well defined and clarified. Otherwise we'll

Distrusting and second-guessing a DM is not a good idea. Because you'll end up playing vs dm and not making a story together. If somebody is really overstepping bounds, you can raise it to other DMs.

My favorite is the idea of injuries being "permanent." I had a DM who wanted to permanently maim a PC for rolling a natural 20 on a strength check. Yes. For a natural 20.

This actually sounds like fun ("you tried too hard and broke your own bones") and I would personally roll with it and use regenerate/heal to fix damages, instead of lesser restoration.

See, Lesser Restoration doesn't heal. It dispels magical effects. If you tore a muscle by trying a move a mountain, it would do nothing.

This spell removes all magical, extraordinary, and supernatural effects that apply a penalty to ability scores, AC, attack and damage rolls, spell resistance, and saving throws. This spell will not remove the effects of a curse or a disease.

It does work against crippling strike because that one is an extraordinary ability. Meanwhile tearing your muscle because of overexertion is not.

[CleverUsername123]

The ability to think of the issues others face is a sign of empathy, a vital skill for humans to advance as a society.

Just because the range of your RP doesn't involve characters who find themselves toying with the limits of mechanics, are or wholly dependent on their existence and well defined nature, it doesn't mean you get to dictate what matters and what does not.

People like you are the same who go "Who cares?!" when someone wishes to discuss the rules of magic. Or "It's just a game/magic" when someone complains about something breaking the set rules of the setting. This is non-productive and should be kept to yourself. Or perhaps you should realize the importance of well defined rules and limits.

This person is asking a completely justified request.

And also, you've got True Seeing wrong. It's nowhere near a 9th level spell. It's a 7th circle spell.

I beg to differ:
Neverwinter Nights 2 is a role-playing video game developed by Obsidian Entertainment and

You can't win an argument by providing a dictionary defintiion.

The situation remains the same - on bgtscc dms have final say, and their word overrules word of anyone else.

DMs have blue names. So far no dms have responded.

It is D&D no matter how

It is not D&D. It is inspired by it at best. There are game changing abilities that simply do not exist in standard D&D campaign (Epic Precision feat comes to mind). As a result logic that works in D&D frequently doesn't apply here. The sooner you understand that, the better.

No I'm not, because the consequences of "simple" illusion spells being bypassed can have quite SEVERE consequences for the character and rp, even future rp.

It is an extremely minor matter on bgtscc, and it did not stop illusionist mages in the past.

There are ton of characters that do not have access to true seeing. However, there are also ton of characters that have high detection skills and walk around with "see invisibility" effect on 24 hours per day.

You just need to get used to it.

Basically, rather than trying to change the server to your expectations, adapt to the server. You'll have more fun this way.

Changes MUST be well defined and clarified. Otherwise we'll run cases of one DM saying A, the other saying B and a player's RP being tossed into the latrine when they want to do something they could under A and are now doing it under B.

My favorite is the idea of injuries being "permanent." I had a DM who wanted to permanently maim a PC for rolling a natural 20 on a strength check. Yes. For a natural 20.

Said DM wholly ignored the fact that Lesser Restoration fixes Crippling Strike where you literally shred muscle to ribbons. But apparently over-exertion hurts more than your muscles being ribbons. Logic.

I don't think you actually read any of the quotes. Incarnate is demanding that True Seeing be moved to 9th level. All of this is just another of his whiny demands for the server to be changed to how he wants it to be and to benefit him. Non-detection and True Seeing are both fine as is, it's not a problem, and it creates absolutely no issues for anyone except him that are worth talking about, given that he's the only person who's ever complained about this.

[Incarnate]

You can't win an argument by providing a dictionary defintiion.

I'm providing facts, thats what you do in an arguement when you have them.

The situation remains the same - on bgtscc dms have final say, and their word overrules word of anyone else.

DMs have blue names. So far no dms have responded.

Hence why I requested a ruling on the matter.

It is not D&D. It is inspired by it at best. There are game changing abilities that simply do not exist in standard D&D campaign (Epic Precision feat comes to mind). As a result logic that works in D&D frequently doesn't apply here. The sooner you understand that, the better.

It most certainly is D&D, just because you change it slightly here and there to make it fit, doesn't change it. Even homebrew doesn't change it from being D&D. Adding custom classes, feats, spells, doesn't make it something else - at its core this is D&D, even the setting is D&D. Apparently you fail to realize that they're actually trying to mirror the rules as best possible within the limits of the game engine - so yes its D&D.

It is an extremely minor matter on bgtscc, and it did not stop illusionist mages in the past.

There are ton of characters that do not have access to true seeing. However, there are also ton of characters that have high detection skills and walk around with "see invisibility" effect on 24 hours per day.

That may be a small maybe even a trivial issue to you, but it doesn't mean that it isn't an issue for others, and just because people haven't spoken their minds about it doesn't mean it doesn't produce the issues that I'm talking about - especially when people you keep saying "You just have to get used to it" - because that means people will try to cope rather than seek to have it corrected. So please, stop with the "You just have to get used to it".

See invisible isn't supposed to just work negate invisibility if the invisible has Nondetection on, which is the point. Having Nondetection actually work as it supposed to, which apparently it seems to do, its just very poorly reflected in the wiki.

---

The ability to think of the issues others face is a sign of empathy, a vital skill for humans to advance as a society.

I completely agree.

Just because the range of your RP doesn't involve characters who find themselves toying with the limits of mechanics, are or wholly dependent on their existence and well defined nature, it doesn't mean you get to dictate what matters and what does not.

The very point I've been trying to get accross - Thank you for elaborating further on it.

People like you are the same who go "Who cares?!" when someone wishes to discuss the rules of magic. Or "It's just a game/magic" when someone complains about something breaking the set rules of the setting. This is non-productive and should be kept to yourself. Or perhaps you should realize the importance of well defined rules and limits.

I completely agree on this, which I also have been trying to get accross, thank you for supporting.

you've got True Seeing wrong. It's nowhere near a 9th level spell. It's a 7th circle spell.

I know its not a level 9'th spell, I was just saying that IF it were to negate abjuration magic making it useless against it, then it would be a much higher level than level 5. What level it is depends on the class: Wiz/Sorc: 6'th, Cleric: 5'th, Druid: 7'th.

Changes MUST be well defined and clarified. Otherwise we'll run cases of one DM saying A, the other saying B and a player's RP being tossed into the latrine when they want to do something they could under A and are now doing it under B.

Again, I completely agree. It really does need to be properly reflected in the rules.

My favorite is the idea of injuries being "permanent." I had a DM who wanted to permanently maim a PC for rolling a natural 20 on a strength check. Yes. For a natural 20.

Said DM wholly ignored the fact that Lesser Restoration fixes Crippling Strike where you literally shred muscle to ribbons. But apparently over-exertion hurts more than your muscles being ribbons. Logic.

Yeah, there are these cases of BAD DM Rulings, I've seen some really bizarre and far worse DM rulings. The rules even state that one cannot critically fail ability and skill checks, and critically succeeding the strength check shouldn't have had a negative result, at all.

Like for instance, a DM ruled after a critical hit because he was hitting someone who was fighting his ally he had 50% chance of hitting his ally, roll was made, he ended up outright killing the ally - which was a PC - and they weren't low levels, they were just really low on health - so you can imagine the frustration, what made it worse - it was the party's cleric and they were far from any civilized area.

[Incarnate]

I don't think you actually read any of the quotes. Incarnate is demanding that True Seeing be moved to 9th level. All of this is just another of his whiny demands for the server to be changed to how he wants it to be and to benefit him. Non-detection and True Seeing are both fine as is, it's not a problem, and it creates absolutely no issues for anyone except him that are worth talking about, given that he's the only person who's ever complained about this.

Learn to read. I have NEVER demanded that it be moved to 9'th level. What I've said was that IF its also negates abjuration magic, then its not a 5'th level but something much higher, where 9'th level would be more reasonable. However it doesn't negate abjuration magic, its just Nondetection thats very poorly reflected in the documentation.

[Planehopper]

A DM can unlock this when/if they wish to respond.