Hide From Undead and See Invisibility / True Seeing

An interesting debate came up in my last dnd session regarding the Hide from Undead spell. Here is what it does...

_____________________

Hide from Undead
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Targets one touched creature/level
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); see text; Spell Resistance yes

Undead cannot see, hear, or smell creatures warded by this spell. Even extraordinary or supernatural sensory capabilities, such as blindsense, blindsight, scent, and tremorsense, cannot detect or locate warded creatures. Non-intelligent undead creatures (such as skeletons or zombies) are automatically affected and act as though the warded creatures are not there. An intelligent undead creature gets a single Will saving throw. If it fails, the subject can't see any of the warded creatures. If it has reason to believe unseen opponents are present, however, it can attempt to find or strike them. If a warded creature attempts to channel positive energy, turn or command undead, touches an undead creature, or attacks any creature (even with a spell), the spell ends for all recipients.

____________________

Now, the debate we were all having is whether or not an undead with see invisibility or 'True Seeing' would be able to locate a creature that was under the effects of this spell. Personally, I was kinda leaning towards the idea that 'True Seeing' WOULD allow the undead enemy to see his opponent, but see invisibility wouldn't (as the Hide from Undead spell 'technically' does not make you invisible). Again, not sure if it has been asked or not already, but any further input would be appreciated.

An interesting debate came up in my last dnd session regarding the Hide from Undead spell. Here is what it does...

_____________________

Hide from Undead
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Targets one touched creature/level
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); see text; Spell Resistance yes

Undead cannot see, hear, or smell creatures warded by this spell. Even extraordinary or supernatural sensory capabilities, such as blindsense, blindsight, scent, and tremorsense, cannot detect or locate warded creatures. Non-intelligent undead creatures (such as skeletons or zombies) are automatically affected and act as though the warded creatures are not there. An intelligent undead creature gets a single Will saving throw. If it fails, the subject can't see any of the warded creatures. If it has reason to believe unseen opponents are present, however, it can attempt to find or strike them. If a warded creature attempts to channel positive energy, turn or command undead, touches an undead creature, or attacks any creature (even with a spell), the spell ends for all recipients.

____________________

Now, the debate we were all having is whether or not an undead with see invisibility or 'True Seeing' would be able to locate a creature that was under the effects of this spell. Personally, I was kinda leaning towards the idea that 'True Seeing' WOULD allow the undead enemy to see his opponent, but see invisibility wouldn't (as the Hide from Undead spell 'technically' does not make you invisible). Again, not sure if it has been asked or not already, but any further input would be appreciated.

That sounds about right, actually. Hide from Undead doesn't make you invisible; just incapable of being perceived at all by undead. They might perceive things you affect, but not you yourself. True Seeing (OP that it is) allows you to see things as they are, so probably would see through Hide from Undead as well.

Can you post the school the spell is in? (PFSRD is blocked here at work). That could provide a clue towards solving your debate...

An interesting debate came up in my last dnd session regarding the Hide from Undead spell. Here is what it does...

_____________________

Hide from Undead
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Targets one touched creature/level
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); see text; Spell Resistance yes

Undead cannot see, hear, or smell creatures warded by this spell. Even extraordinary or supernatural sensory capabilities, such as blindsense, blindsight, scent, and tremorsense, cannot detect or locate warded creatures. Non-intelligent undead creatures (such as skeletons or zombies) are automatically affected and act as though the warded creatures are not there. An intelligent undead creature gets a single Will saving throw. If it fails, the subject can't see any of the warded creatures. If it has reason to believe unseen opponents are present, however, it can attempt to find or strike them. If a warded creature attempts to channel positive energy, turn or command undead, touches an undead creature, or attacks any creature (even with a spell), the spell ends for all recipients.

____________________

Now, the debate we were all having is whether or not an undead with see invisibility or 'True Seeing' would be able to locate a creature that was under the effects of this spell. Personally, I was kinda leaning towards the idea that 'True Seeing' WOULD allow the undead enemy to see his opponent, but see invisibility wouldn't (as the Hide from Undead spell 'technically' does not make you invisible). Again, not sure if it has been asked or not already, but any further input would be appreciated.

If they fail the saving throw from the Hide from Undead spell, no other aid would be of any use. Because it's not a make the target invisible spell, it's a "Don't Notice I'm Here" spell. or as the Whovians might say, a perception filter.

Another example from comics. Rom The Space Knight gave the Torpedo's visor the ability to detect Dire Wraiths. However the Wraiths made a subtle attack on his mind that prevented him from perceiving the visor's detect ability allowing them to infiltrate the town he was guarding until the entire population had been replaced by the Wraiths. At that point, surrounding him, they purposely dropped the spell.

School abjuration; Level cleric/oracle 1, inquisitor 1

That is the school from which the spell is from. As I said, this debate is something that many of my fellow DMs and players are on the fence about. Actually, in the 3.5 Magic item compendium, there is a shirt that grants the wearer the ability to use Hide from Undead at will (and also doesn't allow a save for intelligent undead either) for only 6000 gold!

Currently, a lot of the guys around my area are still using books from 3.5 (like the Magic Item Compendium and Spell Compendium) in order to give players more options for Pathfinder. Generally speaking, almost all of us agree that the modifications for Pathfinder are very good, and helped to fix a great many issues that 3.5 had.

Anyways though, from what I can tell, if Hide from Undead TRULY does keep you hidden from all undead (regardless of True Seeing or not) then that would make it a very useful spell (heck, I'll probably end up buying 'Shirt of Wraith Stalking' just for the utility).

Couple things to be aware of then:

1) It's a first level spell. This means that it should be relatively easy to overcome using higher level magic. This supports the belief that True Seeing would overcome this spell in the event that an intelligent undead employs it.

2) It's from the abjuration school, not the illusion school from which Invisibility derives. This means that See Invisibility will not work on it, as that spell sees through an illusion. Hide from Undead is not an illusion, so cannot be overcome in this way.

Just my views, but I think they add something to the argument.

Hope this helps!

You confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are. The subject sees through normal and magical darkness, notices secret doors hidden by magic, sees the exact locations of creatures or objects under blur or displacement effects, sees invisible creatures or objects normally, sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things. Further, the subject can focus its vision to see into the Ethereal Plane (but not into extradimensional spaces). The range of true seeing conferred is 120 feet.

True seeing, however, does not penetrate solid objects. It in no way confers X-ray vision or its equivalent. It does not negate concealment, including that caused by fog and the like. True seeing does not help the viewer see through mundane disguises, spot creatures who are simply hiding, or notice secret doors hidden by mundane means. In addition, the spell effects cannot be further enhanced with known magic, so one cannot use true seeing through a crystal ball or in conjunction with clairaudience/clairvoyance.

Nothing about piercing Abjuration effects. I would say it will not work.

1) It's a first level spell. This means that it should be relatively easy to overcome using higher level magic. This supports the belief that True Seeing would overcome this spell in the event that an intelligent undead employs it.

I disagree. Hide from undead is a very specific piece of magic targeted to a limited "audience".

True seeing wrote:

You confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are. The subject sees through normal and magical darkness, notices secret doors hidden by magic, sees the exact locations of creatures or objects under blur or displacement effects, sees invisible creatures or objects normally, sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things. Further, the subject can focus its vision to see into the Ethereal Plane (but not into extradimensional spaces). The range of true seeing conferred is 120 feet.

True seeing, however, does not penetrate solid objects. It in no way confers X-ray vision or its equivalent. It does not negate concealment, including that caused by fog and the like. True seeing does not help the viewer see through mundane disguises, spot creatures who are simply hiding, or notice secret doors hidden by mundane means. In addition, the spell effects cannot be further enhanced with known magic, so one cannot use true seeing through a crystal ball or in conjunction with clairaudience/clairvoyance.

Nothing about piercing Abjuration effects...

Except, of course, the very first sentence of the spell description. If the target of hide from undead "actually is," then the undead gains the ability to see him/her.

The second paragraph lists specific exemptions: creatures on the other side of solid objects (not applicable), concealment - except that provided by darkness (not applicable), mundane disguises (not applicable), creatures using the Hide skill (not applicable despite the name of the spell), and creatures being observed remotely via clairvoyance or the like (not applicable.)

Hide from undead does specify that "extraordinary or supernatural" means of sensing enemies, such as tremorsense, don't work. But true seeing is a spell effect, not a supernatural ability. (I know that's splitting hairs. Perhaps one or the other spell should include errata text indicating how it reacts to the other...)

@Lincoln
The Hide from undead spell is an abjuration. It don't change or hide anything, it modify the undead capacity to recognize the protected creature existence.
If yo give True seeing the capacity to trump an abjuration you could as well say that it defeat charm person as it allow you to see your "friend" as he actually is and not as the spell make you perceive him.

The fact that Hide from Undead grants a will save to intelligent undead pushes it further into the not effected by true sight realm.

The spell is actually effecting the viewer.

@Lincoln

The Hide from undead spell is an abjuration. It don't change or hide anything, it modify the undead capacity to recognize the protected creature existence.
If yo give True seeing the capacity to trump an abjuration you could as well say that it defeat charm person as it allow you to see your "friend" as he actually is and not as the spell make you perceive him.

The true seeing spell "confer[s] on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are." Thus, it also 'modifies the undead's capacity to recognize the protected creature's existence.'

As for your second paragraph, it is rich in buncombe. Hide from undead suppresses visual perception. True seeing specifically and directly overwhelms all defenses against visual perception except for a specific list. (That said, it's interesting that hide from undead would still shield its subject from smell, hearing, and tremorsense.) When you bring up charm person and use the word "see", you are using the definition "correctly perceive," not the definition "visually observe." The charm person spell has no effect for good or ill on the visual senses of its subject.

I don't suppose this is a good time to ask what happens if the undead creature in question has lifesense. After all, this is what the term 'Lifesense' means in Pathfinder:

The creature notices and locates living creatures within 60 feet, just as if it possessed the blindsight ability.

Now, according to Hide from Undead...the blindsight ability is negated, so therefore, wouldn't it stand to reason that lifesense is negated too?

On a side note, I'm kinda starting to understand the argument as to why True Seeing wouldn't work to locate someone hidden with the Hide from Undead spell. You see, while True Seeing does allow a character to SEE things as they actually are, the spell really has no effect if the character can't SEE the creature to begin with.

I suppose to explain better, lets say you gave a 'blind' creature True Seeing. Well, due to the creature's inability to SEE anything to begin with, the True Seeing spell wouldn't help the creature at all. Effectively, from what I understand, Hide From Undead works the same way: you are taking away the undead creature's ability to SEE you (thus True Seeing wouldn't help)

Again, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this point.

Diego Rossi wrote:

@Lincoln

The Hide from undead spell is an abjuration. It don't change or hide anything, it modify the undead capacity to recognize the protected creature existence.
If yo give True seeing the capacity to trump an abjuration you could as well say that it defeat charm person as it allow you to see your "friend" as he actually is and not as the spell make you perceive him.

The true seeing spell "confer[s] on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are." Thus, it also 'modifies the undead's capacity to recognize the protected creature's existence.'

As for your second paragraph, it is rich in buncombe. Hide from undead suppresses visual perception. True seeing specifically and directly overwhelms all defenses against visual perception except for a specific list. (That said, it's interesting that hide from undead would still shield its subject from smell, hearing, and tremorsense.) When you bring up charm person and use the word "see", you are using the definition "correctly perceive," not the definition "visually observe." The charm person spell has no effect for good or ill on the visual senses of its subject.

Illusion spells such as invis change the target. True Seeing basically makes it so that the magic around the target does not help him.

Spells like blindness/deafness, and hide from undead don't affect the target(hiding creature). They affect the victim(person using True seeing), and in no way trump true seeing.

In short illusion spells change the way the hider is seen.

Blindness/deafness and hide from undead remove another creature's ability to see clearly because of an effect that is place on the victim. The difference is big.

I don't suppose this is a good time to ask what happens if the undead creature in question has lifesense. After all, this is what the term 'Lifesense' means in Pathfinder:

The creature notices and locates living creatures within 60 feet, just as if it possessed the blindsight ability.

Now, according to Hide from Undead...the blindsight ability is negated, so therefore, wouldn't it stand to reason that lifesense is negated too?

On a side note, I'm kinda starting to understand the argument as to why True Seeing wouldn't work to locate someone hidden with the Hide from Undead spell. You see, while True Seeing does allow a character to SEE things as they actually are, the spell really has no effect if the character can't SEE the creature to begin with.

I suppose to explain better, lets say you gave a 'blind' creature True Seeing. Well, due to the creature's inability to SEE anything to begin with, the True Seeing spell wouldn't help the creature at all. Effectively, from what I understand, Hide From Undead works the same way: you are taking away the undead creature's ability to SEE you (thus True Seeing wouldn't help)

Again, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on this point.

I think that's all justified, based on the school of the spell being Abjuration. That makes the spell of the same family of spells as Sanctuary. The spell is a warding against undead, not an illusion or polymorph masking true form.

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

I suppose you feel that there is the need of a spell capable to pierce Sanctuary too, as the effect is very similar.

BTW: it already exist against both spells: it is called dispel magic.

Giving new powers to a already existing spell is never the solution. It is the main reason why people say that spellcasters are overpowered.

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

How is it more simple? The spell is simple enough to me.

Glitterdust and Faeire Fire negate invisibility, but Hiding from undead is not the same thing as "Invisibility against Undead" which is how it keeps being read by many of the posters.

They would not do anything at all get past it. Most intelligent undead have a good will saves so I would think casting this spell is not a good decision anyway if they are not mindless.

I'd rule that True Seeing would work.

Hide from Undead is functionally the same as saying "I now have the ability to evade your senses unless your willpower can overpower my defensive ability." Its important to remember that it's not doing anything to the undead at all. It's cast upon the warded creature; its just up to the undead's will save to determine whether or not he can still perceive through it.

True seeing surpasses the concept of "senses" by letting the buffed creature perceive things (through sight) as though there was no such inhibiting factor between them.

RAI I'd have to say True Seeing > Hide from X spells.

This would make an interesting FAQ entry though.

Illusion spells such as invis change the target. True Seeing basically makes it so that the magic around the target does not help him.

Spells like blindness/deafness, and hide from undead don't affect the target(hiding creature). They affect the victim(person using True seeing), and in no way trump true seeing.

In short illusion spells change the way the hider is seen.

Blindness/deafness and hide from undead remove another creature's ability to see clearly because of an effect that is place on the victim. The difference is big.

Except blindness/deafness is instantaneous and has no lasting magical effects for true seeing to "pierce", unlike hide from undead. You could no more see through blindness than a wall of stone. Hide from undead can't make the same arguemnet.

Also, blindness actually targets the creature. How can Hide from Undead affect the way undead perceive you (rather than affect the way you are perceived by the undead,) if you not only don't have to target the undead, but the undead don't even have to be on the same plane, or even exist at the time of casting?

Also, funny thing, Hide from Undead allows spell resistance, but that's your spell resistance, not the undead's.

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

Actually, what is more interesting is what other effects True Seeing would ignore. If it in fact works against any school of magic and regardless of whether or not you have to make a save, then players will abuse it against anything you throw in their way that hinders sight. The only thing that stops it in the form of magic is actually conjuring physical barriers or fog, given the extremely liberal interpretation by some in this thread.

Edit:

Except blindness/deafness is instantaneous and has no lasting magical effects for true seeing to "pierce", unlike hide from undead. You could no more see through blindness than a wall of stone. Hide from undead can't make the same arguemnet.

Also, blindness actually targets the creature. How can Hide from Undead affect the way undead perceive you (rather than affect the way you are perceived by the undead,) if you not only don't have to target the undead, but the undead don't even have to be on the same plane, or even exist at the time of casting?

Also, funny thing, Hide from Undead allows spell resistance, but that's your spell resistance, not the undead's.

Where does it say that the being needs to be able to see to gain True Seeing? True Seeing lets you see, that's the effect of the spell.

Hide from Undead is a ward, wards affect creatures that interact with it. See similar spells like Sanctuary. You cannot interact with a ward before you exist.

I disagree with the term 'extremely liberal interpretation', Trikk - I'm just reading what the darn spell says. And I happen to agree with you that it's awfully darn powerful for a 5th-level spell and it spoils a lot of the fun I have with high-level illusionists.

Sanctuary is not a visual effect. True seeing is not an effect "altering" the people that are looked at: its target is the observer, and its effect, once again, first sentence, is to "confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are."

You're saying that hide from undead forces undead within line-of-sight of the subject not to notice him or her. It can't be affecting the target's mind, because A) a mind-affecting spell aimed at undead only works for a rare kind of sorceror vs. specific kinds of undead; B) its target is the one who's being hidden, not the undead creature; and C) the (mind-affecting) descriptor isn't on the spell. If the obstacle to sight is any other kind of non-physical interference between the caster and the target, true seeing would apply just as it does to invisibility, ethereality, darkness, etc. I'm pretty sure we agree that hide from undead does not create a fog or wall or other actual, physical barrier, so we don't need to get into that.

I disagree with the term 'extremely liberal interpretation', Trikk - I'm just reading what the darn spell says.

[I}Sanctuary[/I] is not a visual effect. True seeing is not an effect "altering" the people that are looked at: its target is the observer, and its effect, once again, first sentence, is to "confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are."

You're saying that hide from undead forces undead within line-of-sight of the subject not to notice him or her. It can't be affecting the target's mind, because A) a mind-affecting spell aimed at undead only works for a rare kind of sorceror vs. specific kinds of undead; B) its target is the one who's being hidden, not the undead creature; and C) the (mind-affecting) descriptor isn't on the spell. If the obstacle to sight is any other kind of non-physical interference between the caster and the target, true seeing would apply just as it does to invisibility, ethereality, darkness, etc. I'm pretty sure we agree that hide from undead does not create a fog or wall or other actual, physical barrier, so we don't need to get into that.

You are asking for everyone to prove a bunch of negatives in order for you to be wrong, i.e. you have taken an unfalsifiable position. There's no reason (or possibility) to argue with you.

Seraphimpunk wrote:

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

Actually, what is more interesting is what other effects True Seeing would ignore. If it in fact works against any school of magic and regardless of whether or not you have to make a save, then players will abuse it against anything you throw in their way that hinders sight. The only thing that stops it in the form of magic is actually conjuring physical barriers or fog, given the extremely liberal interpretation by some in this thread.

True Seeing sees through ALL magical obfuscations. That's the point of the spell, that's what it does.

I'm really not seeing room for abuse. You can't hide magically or use magical disguises. You can't use magic to hinder someone's vision. Mundane methods of all of these, as well as conjurations that conjure physicall things work just fine

Hide from Undead is a ward, wards affect creatures that interact with it. See similar spells like Sanctuary....

That's right. Hide from Undead is a ward. And what do wards affect? The things that are warded. It's almost like the ward creates a magical barrier that undead can't see through.

Hmmm...

You are asking for everyone to prove a bunch of negatives in order for you to be wrong, i.e. you have taken an unfalsifiable position. There's no reason (or possibility) to argue with you.

You say this as if his interpretation wasn't correct, or if it was misleading in some regard. The reasons he gave are the precise reasons why True Seeing would work. Just because he can list these reasons in a way that makes them hard to argue against doesn't make them wrong.

Hide from Undead doesn't actually affect the senses of the undead around you. It's putting a ward that the undead just might have a hard time perceiving through, if it lacks the appropriate amount of willpower. (i.e. a will save).

By this token, its safe to assume that a spell who's clear and obvious purpose is to see through any such magical ward would continue to work here. The undead's senses aren't actually being taken away; there is just a magical force between his senses and the warded creature. By RAI, True Seeing is intended to pierce through this type of magic.

I'd rule that True Seeing would work.

Hide from Undead is functionally the same as saying "I now have the ability to evade your senses unless your willpower can overpower my defensive ability." Its important to remember that it's not doing anything to the undead at all. It's cast upon the warded creature; its just up to the undead's will save to determine whether or not he can still perceive through it.

True seeing surpasses the concept of "senses" by letting the buffed creature perceive things (through sight) as though there was no such inhibiting factor between them.

RAI I'd have to say True Seeing > Hide from X spells.

This would make an interesting FAQ entry though.

True seeing enhances your normal sight, but your normal sight has been shut off with regard to undead by the you failing your save. True seeing does not restore sight nor overrule will saves that affect you due to an ongoing condition.

[

That is incorrect. The spell is not placed on the hiding creature. It is placed on the undead creature

prd wrote:

Hide from Undead

School abjuration; Level cleric 1

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S, DF

Range touch

Targets one touched creature/level

Duration 10 min./level (D)

Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); see text; Spell Resistance yes

If the caster was the target focus point of the spell then the range would be "personal" or "you"

Read the rest of the spell...

Hide from Undead

Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, DF
Range touch
Targets one touched creature/level
Duration 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); see text; Spell Resistance yes

Undead cannot see, hear, or smell creatures warded by this spell. Even extraordinary or supernatural sensory capabilities, such as blindsense, blindsight, scent, and tremorsense, cannot detect or locate warded creatures. Non-intelligent undead creatures (such as skeletons or zombies) are automatically affected and act as though the warded creatures are not there. An intelligent undead creature gets a single Will saving throw. If it fails, the subject can't see any of the warded creatures. If it has reason to believe unseen opponents are present, however, it can attempt to find or strike them. If a warded creature attempts to channel positive energy, turn or command undead, touches an undead creature, or attacks any creature (even with a spell), the spell ends for all recipients.

If an undead were targeted by this spell, he would be unable to see, hear, or smell himself. (Pretty interesting thought)

The spell targets one touched creature per level so you can cast it on your allies, or anyone else you want to hide from undead.

Edit: And you ninja edited your own post.

True seeing enhances your normal sight, but your normal sight has been shut off with regard to undead by the you failing your save. True seeing does not restore sight nor overrule will saves that affect you due to an ongoing condition.

If you fail your save to disbelieve an illusion, True Seeing lets you see through it.

Trikk wrote:

Seraphimpunk wrote:

True seeing is a powerful spell. Barring True Seeing, you'd have to create another spell to pierce the obfuscation created by Hide from Undead ( a first level effect ).

The simplest answer is the best in this case: True Seeing allows the undead spellcaster to see anyone hiding via Hide from Undead after it fails its will saving throw. The spell already pierces Illusion effects, Transmutation effects, its not so much a leap that it pierces Abjuration effects, as that there's no other spell that would do it.

More interesting would be how Glitterdust or Faerie Fire work against creatures using Hide from Undead.

Actually, what is more interesting is what other effects True Seeing would ignore. If it in fact works against any school of magic and regardless of whether or not you have to make a save, then players will abuse it against anything you throw in their way that hinders sight. The only thing that stops it in the form of magic is actually conjuring physical barriers or fog, given the extremely liberal interpretation by some in this thread.

True Seeing sees through ALL magical obfuscations. That's the point of the spell, that's what it does.

I'm really not seeing room for abuse. You can't hide magically or use magical disguises. You can't use magic to hinder someone's vision. Mundane methods of all of these, as well as conjurations that conjure physicall things work just fine

So if a cast a spell that puts milky film over your eyes so you can't see does true seeing negate that also?

So if a cast a spell that puts milky film over your eyes so you can't see does true seeing negate that also?

Completely irrelevant, here's why: A spell that puts a film over a victim's eyes is affecting the victim's senses directly. That's not what Hide from Undead does.

True seeing enhances your normal sight, but your normal sight has been shut off with regard to undead by the you failing your save. True seeing does not restore sight nor overrule will saves that affect you due to an ongoing condition.

At my table, we call this "pulling words out of your rear end." Not to sound insulting, mind you. It's our way of saying you're reading what you want to read (probably using too much interpretation), not what's actually there. As a result, you're not properly evaluating the effects of the spells.

Hide from undead does not in any way, shape, or form disable the undead's senses. All its doing is hiding a warded creature from those senses. There is a gigantic difference between the two concepts. The undead creature still possesses each and every one of its senses, the warded creature is just hidden from them.

Hide from Undead affects the creature it targets, not the undead. The reason the undead gets a save is because he can simply overpower your protective ward with the strength of his willpower. This is basically just the magical equivalent of finding a person after they use stealth. This doesn't mean the ward affected him. The effect of the ward is on you (you meaning, the creature you buff, or yourself if you cast it on yourself).

edited for extra emphasis/elaboration.

See Invisible no, True seeing yes.

Is Trikk right? Have I set up a position that misleads me into thinking I'm right by being impenetrable to logic? Again - I'm just reading the darn spell descriptions. Let me trudge through the spell descriptions and so forth one more time, just for Trikk.

Once it fails its Will save, the undead in question simultaneously "cannot see the warded creature(s)" and can "see all things as they actually are."

OK, so we have a paradox. Turning to the CRB's Magic chapter, I'm looking at "One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant", which says that sometimes an earlier spell makes a later spell irrelevant. From it I'd infer that the first spell cast trumps the more recent casting. Anybody able to interpret it differently?

Unfortunately, a few paragraphs laster in 'Combining Spell Effects': "Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply." That's not very clear in cases like this where the spells were applied to totally different targets. Closest I can figure is that it depends whether hide from undead or true seeing was cast first (the more recent casting having priority) - which is exactly the opposite conclusion we had from the previous paragraph. Again, anybody able to interpret that one another way?

Contrary to what several folks (including myself) have assumed, I do not see a reference dictating that higher-level spells overwhelm contradictory lower-level spells. Except for certain specific spells (neither of the ones involved here.) Anybody able to find that specific rule somewhere?

So... somebody correct me, please... the RaW answer is that whichever spell was most recently cast "applies", unless the earlier spell "makes a later spell irrelevant." And although true seeing doesn't specify hide from undead as something it negates, it also doesn't specify it as a magical effect that it cannot negate.

(On a RaW versus RaI note: Bear in mind that hide from undead was once called invisibility from undead, but they changed the name. That may seem irrelevant, but unless they anticipated this exact combination, the folks updating 3.0 to 3.5 to PF would not have edited true seeing - which already blanket-negated invisibility effects - to specifically include this non-illusory effect.)

OK, somebody say something witty.

It's "impenetrable to logic" only because its correct.

Hide from Undead puts a protective ward that hides a creature from the senses of undead creatures.

True Seeing is a spell that supersedes "hiding effects" by allowing the buffed creature to use its sight to see everything as they really are; thus bypassing effects that hide/alter the reality around them.

True Seeing trumps Hide from Undead, on the basis of this concept. Hide from Undead is only hiding a creature from the undead's senses. It doesn't disable the senses or have any actual negative effect on the undead. The creature is just hidden from it, that's all.

Essentially, they are trying to argue that True Seeing apparently can't find something that's magically hidden; and that's the whole purpose of True Seeing existing as a spell.

concerro wrote:

So if a cast a spell that puts milky film over your eyes so you can't see does true seeing negate that also?

Completely irrelevant, here's why: A spell that puts a film over a victim's eyes is affecting the victim's senses directly. That's not what Hide from Undead does.

concerro wrote:

True seeing enhances your normal sight, but your normal sight has been shut off with regard to undead by the you failing your save. True seeing does not restore sight nor overrule will saves that affect you due to an ongoing condition.

At my table, we call this "pulling words out of your rear end." Not to sound insulting, mind you. It's our way of saying you're reading what you want to read (probably using too much interpretation), not what's actually there. As a result, you're not properly evaluating the effects of the spells.

Hide from undead does not in any way, shape, or form disable the undead's senses. All its doing is hiding a warded creature from those senses. There is a gigantic difference between the two concepts. The undead creature still possesses each and every one of its senses, the warded creature is just hidden from them.

Hide from Undead affects the creature it targets, not the undead. The reason the undead gets a save is because he can simply overpower your protective ward with the strength of his willpower. This is basically just the magical equivalent of finding a person after they use stealth. This doesn't mean the ward affected him. The effect of the ward is on you (you meaning, the creature you buff, or yourself if you cast it on yourself).

edited for extra emphasis/elaboration.

I will word it a different way. The spell forces undead to bypass the magical shield around me in order to see me. It is not a shield that changes my appearance, but merely makes me not able to be noticed. My true form is never really changed so true seeing should have no affect.

You confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are. The subject sees through normal and magical darkness, notices secret doors hidden by magic, sees the exact locations of creatures or objects under blur or displacement effects, sees invisible creatures or objects normally, sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things. Further, the subject can focus its vision to see into the Ethereal Plane (but not into extradimensional spaces). The range of true seeing conferred is 120 feet.

Sentence 1: Says it allows you to see things as they truly are. My appearance has not changed so true seeing has no affect.

Sentence 2: I am not hidden by magical darkness. I am not under blur or displacment. I am not invisible. I am not the subject of an illusion spell. I am not polymorphed or transmuted

Sentence 3: I am not on the ethereal plane

edit: not affect changed to no affect

Contrary to what several folks (including myself) have assumed, I do not see a reference dictating that higher-level spells overwhelm contradictory lower-level spells. Except for certain specific spells (neither of the ones involved here.) Anybody able to find that specific rule somewhere?

This is not really a rule, but a point of spell design that is often used to refute certain points. Sometimes it applies, but sometimes it does not.

I will word it a different way. The spell forces undead to bypass the magical shield around me in order to see me. It is not a shield that changes my appearance, but merely makes me not able to be noticed. My true form is never really changed so true seeing should have no affect.

This is irrelevant!

You're attempting to strawman my argument by saying that True Seeing only applies if your appearance changes. That is the most absurd statement I've seen in this thread so far.

True Seeing pierces effects that are intended to hide or alter the reality around the user in some form. Hide from Undead is a magical effect that hides the warded creature from the senses of undead creatures.

True Seeing will trump any magical effect that was intended to hide something. It's not limited to "altered appearances."

If you fail your save to disbelieve an illusion, True Seeing lets you see through it.

Failing a will save is not an ongoing condition. I was referring to when you fail a save, and have an affect that continues such as ray of enfeeblement.

With illusion spells you just don't notice them until you interact with them, and if you fail the save after interacting with them you still don't know they are not real.

Failing a will save is not an ongoing condition. I was referring to when you fail a save, and have an affect that continues such as ray of enfeeblement.

With illusion spells you just don't notice them until you interact with them, and if you fail the save after interacting with them you still don't know they are not real.

This is, again, irrelevant.

There is no ongoing condition on the undead creature. All of his senses still function, there is NO effect on him AT ALL.

This is the key reason why your analysis is totally off. Hide from Undead has no effect on the undead, its merely a matter of whether or not the undead can will himself into finding you anyway. Hence, it's like the magical version of a stealth check. Just because I can't see you doesn't mean my senses are impaired. It just means I don't know you're there; that's all.

True Seeing will function, on the basis that the RAI of the spell is that it allows the buffed creature to ignore exactly that type of effect. He sees things as they are: you are in fact there. So he now sees you there. He just can't hear you, smell you, blindsense you, tremorsense you, or anything else. He can see you, and that's it.

concerro wrote:

Failing a will save is not an ongoing condition. I was referring to when you fail a save, and have an affect that continues such as ray of enfeeblement.

With illusion spells you just don't notice them until you interact with them, and if you fail the save after interacting with them you still don't know they are not real.

This is, again, irrelevant.

There is no ongoing condition on the undead creature. All of his senses still function, there is NO effect on him AT ALL.

This is the key reason why your analysis is totally off. Hide from Undead has no effect on the undead, its merely a matter of whether or not the undead can will himself into finding you anyway. Hence, it's like the magical version of a stealth check. Just because I can't see you doesn't mean my senses are impaired. It just means I don't know you're there; that's all.

True Seeing will function, on the basis that the RAI of the spell is that it allows the buffed creature to ignore exactly that type of effect. He sees things as they are: you are in fact there. So he now sees you there. He just can't hear you, smell you, blindsense you, tremorsense you, or anything else. He can see you, and that's it.

You are right there is no ongoing condition just like failing a save against an illusion spell is not a condition. I was just explain that post. My analysis is address in the post I made when I quoted true seeing, which is not off.

You are right there is no ongoing condition just like failing a save against an illusion spell is not a condition. I was just explain that post. My analysis is address in the post I made when I quoted true seeing, which is not off.

Your analysis also completely ignores the RAI, which makes it off.

You are attempting to justify that True Seeing can't penetrate an effect that makes a creature magically hidden. That is absurd, my friend.

True Seeing will trump any magical effect that was intended to hide something. It's not limited to "altered appearances."

Like,not?

The subject sees through normal and magical darkness, notices secret doors hidden by magic, sees the exact locations of creatures or objects under blur or displacement effects, sees invisible creatures or objects normally, sees through illusions, and sees the true form of polymorphed, changed, or transmuted things. Further, the subject can focus its vision to see into the Ethereal Plane (but not into extradimensional spaces). The range of true seeing conferred is 120 feet.

I see a specific list of things that True Seeing bypass. but Hide from undead and Hide from animals aren't in that list.

You can add power to the spell, but it is home rule.
And you are fixating to much on that "hide" in the spell description and not looking what the spell do (description) and how it do it (school).

By your definition True seeing would pierce any magical fog.

Hey hey hey! Yelling - I mean, boldfacing won't cause agreement! Well, I shouldn't say that. I only say it because it never has so far. ;)

concerro wrote:

You are right there is no ongoing condition just like failing a save against an illusion spell is not a condition. I was just explain that post. My analysis is address in the post I made when I quoted true seeing, which is not off.

Your analysis also completely ignores the RAI, which makes it off.

You are attempting to justify that True Seeing can't penetrate an effect that makes a creature magically hidden. That is absurd, my friend.

The spell is intended to get past magic that changes appearance which, transmutation spells do, and polymorph spells do, along with other illusion spells.

In short the RAW is the RAI. Hide from undead is not something that snuck through the cracks.

If you disagree then I can only suggest hitting the FAQ button so errata is made to change the wording to make it more encompassing.

So, uh, several posts back I asked the rest of you guys to double-check the Magic chapter of the CRB. You can scroll back up to my longer post to see what I was asking. It seems to me that since the RaW for the two spells generate a paradox, either the 'One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant' paragraph or the 'Combining Magical Effects' paragraph would apply, but they seem to directly contradict each other. Take a look and see what you think.

Not sure why I'm pressing the point, since neither of the prevailing arguments have relied on "it depends which one was cast first." But if we're sticklers for RaW, and I go strictly by what's actually written in the spell description rather than extrapolating anything about how either spell works, then I run straight into the paradox, and the area that's supposed to help me resolve the paradox just confounds me further. Anybody?

So, uh, several posts back I asked the rest of you guys to double-check the Magic chapter of the CRB. You can scroll back up to my longer post to see what I was asking. It seems to me that since the RaW for the two spells generate a paradox, either the 'One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant' paragraph or the 'Combining Magical Effects' paragraph would apply, but they seem to directly contradict each other. Take a look and see what you think.

Not sure why I'm pressing the point, since neither of the prevailing arguments have relied on "it depends which one was cast first." But if we're sticklers for RaW, and I go strictly by what's actually written in the spell description rather than extrapolating anything about how either spell works, then I run straight into the paradox, and the area that's supposed to help me resolve the paradox just confounds me further. Anybody?

Read up on logical fallacies if you want people to take time out of their day to discuss issues with you. If you set up parameters that make you conclusion correct whether your arguments are right or wrong, then there is no discussion to be had.

Understanding how the scientific method works actually helps immensely whenever you try to come to a conclusion about things with people who disagree.

So, uh, several posts back I asked the rest of you guys to double-check the Magic chapter of the CRB. You can scroll back up to my longer post to see what I was asking. It seems to me that since the RaW for the two spells generate a paradox, either the 'One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant' paragraph or the 'Combining Magical Effects' paragraph would apply, but they seem to directly contradict each other. Take a look and see what you think.

Not sure why I'm pressing the point, since neither of the prevailing arguments have relied on "it depends which one was cast first." But if we're sticklers for RaW, and I go strictly by what's actually written in the spell description rather than extrapolating anything about how either spell works, then I run straight into the paradox, and the area that's supposed to help me resolve the paradox just confounds me further. Anybody?

I read it, but the issue is that due to the paradox you have to refer to the spells once again. True Seeing is very specific about what it covers. Hide from Undead did not make the cut.

So, uh, several posts back I asked the rest of you guys to double-check the Magic chapter of the CRB.

I think that most of us feel that you are inferring something that is not there from those snippets of the rules.

The whole quote is:

Combining Magic Effects

Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:

Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don't stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Types: The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that doesn't have a type stacks with any bonus.

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.

Same Effect with Differing Results: The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.

Multiple Mental Control Effects: Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

Spells with Opposite Effects: Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description.

Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.

First very important quote:

Second quote:
"Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:"
i.e the following are generic rules, superseded by specific rules in the spell description.

Third:
"One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion."
The order in which the spell are cast isn't relevant to this. What is relevant is that a spell can make another irrelevant.
It don't cancel it, simply it make it no longer relevant.
For example fly will make feather fall irrelevant.

Fourth:
"Spells with Opposite Effects: Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply."
An example of this are Bull strength and Ray of enfeeblement. For convenience you apply first one and then the other, in the order in which they were cast, but the actual order in which you apply them don't really make a difference.

Fifth
Continuation of: "Spells with Opposite Effects:"
"Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description."
This is relative to counterspelling spells, not about them meeting each other.
Examples are using a light spell to counterspell Darkness, Haste to counterspell slow and so on.

Excellent post! It answered my actual question and did not invoke its poster's superior grasp of the scientific method or logical fallacies, nor did it contain veiled insults, nor did it imply that I am incapable of believing myself to be wrong. Thank you, Diego Rossi.

The first quote, just as you said, resolves the current rules question to my own satisfaction:

"Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect."

Considering the implied inverse of this rule - 'If Spell A's description does not specifically describe any effect on Spell B, then Spell A does not have an effect on Spell B.' gives me my answer. The problem I had before was that hide from undead was in neither the Yes column nor the No column: this general rule indicates that the Yes column is exclusive, while the No column includes 'all other effects not listed.'

I conclude that in the rules as they currently stand, I am in error regarding hide from undead versus true seeing. I'm almost certain that this was an unintentionally overlooked hole in the true seeing description, but I don't consider myself on solid ground to argue RaI. (Who ever is, really?) I cheerfully concede the RaW.

Excellent post! It answered my actual question and did not invoke its poster's superior grasp of the scientific method or logical fallacies, nor did it contain veiled insults, nor did it imply that I am incapable of believing myself to be wrong. Thank you, Diego Rossi.

The first quote, just as you said, resolves the current rules question to my own satisfaction:

Quote:

"Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect."

Considering the implied inverse of this rule - 'If Spell A's description does not specifically describe any effect on Spell B, then Spell A does not have an effect on Spell B.' gives me my answer. The problem I had before was that hide from undead was in neither the Yes column nor the No column: this general rule indicates that the Yes column is exclusive, while the No column includes 'all other effects not listed.'

I conclude that in the rules as they currently stand, I am in error regarding hide from undead versus true seeing. I'm almost certain that this was an unintentionally overlooked hole in the true seeing description, but I don't consider myself on solid ground to argue RaI. (Who ever is, really?) I cheerfully concede the RaW.

Meh, you can always argue the RAI, but in this case I can make a halfway decent case for both sides, so I would go with the RAW.

There is no paradox here.

If it helps, think of Hide from Undead as a mind altering affect that specifically bypasses the usual Undead immunities to such. It is not preventing the True Sight from working, it is preventing however the creature's mind from perceiving the information it's brain is receiving.

(PFSRD is blocked here at work).

FYI, you can access d20pfsrd.com in any of three ways:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com
http://www.pathfindersrd.com
https://sites.google.com/site/pathfinderogc

Try each. If one doesn't work one of the others might.