True Seeing and Phantasmal Killer


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

24 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does casting phantasmal killer on a creature with true seeing automatically fail? This came up in a game I recently played.


Yes, True Seeing would see through Phantasmal Killer and make you unaffected by it.


I stand corrected.

edit:Changed incorrect idea. :)

Grand Lodge

That was my interpretation as well. Thanks.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

True seeing has no effect on Phantasmal killer.

Phantasmal killer is listed as a Phantasm .

'Core rules on Phantasm pg 211' wrote:


Phantasm: A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression, all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see. Third parties viewing or studying the scene don’t notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells.

This means it goes to the mind there is nothing there for True seeing to see through.


Ughbash wrote:

True seeing has no effect on Phantasmal killer.

Phantasmal killer is listed as a Phantasm .

'Core rules on Phantasm pg 211' wrote:


Phantasm: A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression, all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see. Third parties viewing or studying the scene don’t notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells.
This means it goes to the mind there is nothing there for True seeing to see through.

+1

Good catch!!!


True Seeing automatically sees through illusions. Phantasmal Killer is an illusion. Further, it specifically offers you the chance to see through it with a save and if you do, you are not subject to the death effect.

If you see through the illusion, you can't die, and True Seeing automatically sees through illusions, ergo, True Seeing automatically defeats Phantasmal Killer.

The Exchange

I'm not sure about this logic. This would mean if I'm blind, I'm immune to phantasmal killer?

Can't see it, it can't effect you... wow...


nosig wrote:

I'm not sure about this logic. This would mean if I'm blind, I'm immune to phantasmal killer?

Can't see it, it can't effect you... wow...

Of course not. Physically seeing it is irrelevant. Seeing through the illusion is the key.

True Seeing sees through illusions--that is the relevant bit.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Phantasmal Killer:
Phantasmal Killer

School illusion (phantasm) [fear, mind-affecting]; Level sorcerer/wizard 4

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S

Range medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)

Target one living creature

Duration instantaneous

Saving Throw Will disbelief, then Fortitude partial; see text; Spell Resistance yes

You create a phantasmal image of the most fearsome creature imaginable to the subject simply by forming the fears of the subject's subconscious mind into something that its conscious mind can visualize: this most horrible beast. Only the spell's subject can see the phantasmal killer. You see only a vague shape. The target first gets a Will save to recognize the image as unreal. If that save fails, the phantasm touches the subject, and the subject must succeed on a Fortitude save or die from fear. Even if the Fortitude save is successful, the subject takes 3d6 points of damage.

If the subject of a phantasmal killer attack succeeds in disbelieving and possesses telepathy or is wearing a helm of telepathy, the beast can be turned upon you. You must then disbelieve it or become subject to its deadly fear attack.


True Seeing:
True Seeing

School divination; Level cleric 5, druid 7, sorcerer/wizard 6

Casting Time 1 standard action

Components V, S, M (an eye ointment that costs 250 gp)

Range touch

Target creature touched

Duration 1 min./level

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

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.

I'm with Ughbash on this one, Phantasmal Killer is a mind-effecting effect, there's nothing to "see through". The Will save is to disbelieve a mental projection from a mind-affecting fear effect.


'Core rules on Phantasm pg 211' wrote:


Phantasm: A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression, all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see. Third parties viewing or studying the scene don’t notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells.

The fact that True Seeing allows you to see through illusions and that phantasms are entirely within the minds of the target makes me believe that Ughbash is correct.


Phantasmal Killer:
"The target first gets a Will save to recognize the image as unreal."

True Seeing:
"The subject...sees through illusions..."

The fact that a Phantasm spell is only seen by the target is irrelevant--the target still sees it.

True Seeing sees through illusions--it does not say "illusions except phantasms" or "figments, patterns, and glamers" or whatever.

I also think you're taking "True Seeing" too literally. Do you guys somehow think True Seeing wouldn't defeat Ghost Sound because it's not visual?

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's all in the mind.

True Seeing has no more effect on it then it does telepathy, or a charm spell. A phantasm is basically a charm spell with lights on it, but it's still all mental.

basically, what True Seeing is going to tell you, at best is, "there's a horrible illusion there, and it's going to devour your soul!" because your mind thinks it can, regardless of what your eyes tell you.

Save or die.

On the other side, Mind Blank would give you the +8 save bonus against it, as it would all mind-affecting stuff, no?

==Aelryinth

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.

And, um, how's True Seeing going to see through a sound? Because I really want to know how it's seeing a sound.

==Aelryinth


Why does everyone assume True Seeing is literal, physical vision? It works on the blind--it's magic sight that sees through magic (and actually not through normal stuff like fog or just being stealthed). I don't get why anyone would think it's purely physical.


mplindustries wrote:
Why does everyone assume True Seeing is literal, physical vision? It works on the blind--it's magic sight that sees through magic (and actually not through normal stuff like fog or just being stealthed). I don't get why anyone would think it's purely physical.

probably because it does references to vision

Components V, S, M (an eye ointment that costs 250 gp)
or
You confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are.
or
Further, the subject can focus its vision...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

True Seeing is vision based, just see invisibility is.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

1 person marked this as a favorite.
mplindustries wrote:
Why does everyone assume True Seeing is literal, physical vision? It works on the blind--it's magic sight that sees through magic (and actually not through normal stuff like fog or just being stealthed). I don't get why anyone would think it's purely physical.

Because True Seeing specifically references vision... It's not a 5th level spell that just completely shuts down an entire school of magic.


Ssalarn wrote:
mplindustries wrote:
Why does everyone assume True Seeing is literal, physical vision? It works on the blind--it's magic sight that sees through magic (and actually not through normal stuff like fog or just being stealthed). I don't get why anyone would think it's purely physical.
Because True Seeing specifically references vision... It's not a 5th level spell that just completely shuts down an entire school of magic.

Uh, I'm pretty sure it does. It literally says it sees through illusions.

Now, it doesn't totally hose the Illusion school, though--only the spells in the illusion school that can be disbelieved.


how about

WEIRD
School illusion (phantasm) [fear, mind-affecting]; Level sorcerer/wizard 9
Targets any number of creatures, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart
This spell functions like phantasmal killer, except it can affect more than one creature. Only the affected creatures see the phantasmal creatures attacking them, though you see the attackers as shadowy shapes.

If a subject's Fortitude save succeeds, it still takes 3d6 points of damage and is stunned for 1 round. The subject also takes 1d4 points of Strength damage.

true seeing can totally negate Weird's effect just because it is illusion school? Does it give you total immunity of illusion? or you can take its second effect stun, strength damage, and 3d6 damage?


Wintercome wrote:
true seeing can totally negate Weird's effect just because it is illusion school?

Yes, sort of. Actually, it negates Weirds effect because Weird is negated if you disbelieve, and True Seeing sees through illusions, meaning you automatically disbelieve.

Wintercome wrote:
Does it give you total immunity of illusion?

It sees through the illusion. If an illusion has an effect despite disbelief, then that would still happen. If an illusion has no effect on a disbelieving target, then the spell has no effect against someone with True Seeing.

Wintercome wrote:
or you can take its second effect stun, strength damage, and 3d6 damage?

No, if you succeed on the Will save, nothing happens, it's only the Fort save that has conditions. The Will save is to see through the illusion and disbelieve, and True Seeing automatically sees through and disbelieves. Thus, True Seeing means nothing happens if someone uses Weird on you.

Are you upset because a 5th level spell sees through a 9th? Would you try and argue that True Seeing shouldn't see through Mass Invisibility because its a 7th level spell?

True Seeing automatically pierces illusions. Yes, it totally hoses illusions--that's what it's supposed to do.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTr5CjpSp-g


1 person marked this as a favorite.

True seeing keeps using the word "seeing". There is nothing that says it ignores illusions that are not based on actual sight. I even uses the word "vision".


wraithstrike wrote:

True seeing keeps using the word "seeing". There is nothing that says it ignores illusions that are not based on actual sight. I even uses the word "vision".

Even if you argue that, which is fine, the victim of a Phantasmal Killer undeniably sees it--it's even described as an image.

Grand Lodge

Well, seems it is not quite so simple. I have marked this as an FAQ candidate. Hopefully someone from Paizo will weigh in (I'm not holding my breath though).


They don't see it with their eyes though, they perceive it with their mind. True seeing allows them to see through visible illusions, not mental effects that bypass their eyes and go straight to their brain. That's why it's a "mind effecting" spell.


mplindustries wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:

True seeing keeps using the word "seeing". There is nothing that says it ignores illusions that are not based on actual sight. I even uses the word "vision".

Even if you argue that, which is fine, the victim of a Phantasmal Killer undeniably sees it--it's even described as an image.

No they don't. A mental image is not really seeing, not in the sense that the spell is describing. It is like when people "see" hallucinations. They really did not see anything. They only imagined it, because it was all mental.


mplindustries wrote:

Are you upset because a 5th level spell sees through a 9th? Would you try and argue that True Seeing shouldn't see through Mass Invisibility because its a 7th level spell?

True Seeing automatically pierces illusions. Yes, it totally hoses illusions--that's what it's supposed to do.

Actually, just one 5th level spell can give you total immunity is very nervous me. I always hated Aura of resolve to give you a total immunity from compulsion effects.

and true seeing is so common to devil or demon or etc... (and always on!)

it just complain. ;(

Proper use of spell or item always deserved their action, I think.

The Exchange

I'm still puzzled by something.
Some people here seem to be saying if you don't see the Killer, it doesn't effect you. But that would mean that blind targets, or persons in the dark (without Darkvision) would not be effected - they can't see the Killer.
.
Guess I'll mark this as a FAQ.


nosig wrote:

I'm still puzzled by something.

Some people here seem to be saying if you don't see the Killer, it doesn't effect you. But that would mean that blind targets, or persons in the dark (without Darkvision) would not be effected - they can't see the Killer.
.
Guess I'll mark this as a FAQ.

Absolutely zero people have said that, and I said as much when you brought that up earlier in the thread, too.


I think Nosig just brought up a great point with lack of darkvision in a dark area. This probably negates alot of sight based illusions but actually seeing something in your mind should not matter how light or dark it is...

It would also be like saying that a person could defeat a 4th level save or die spell by just closing his/her eyes as an immediate action and that seems a bit much to me. I think if you close your eyes Phantasmal Killer would still work because it is in your mind and almost like a bad dream that kills you. I see things in my dreams all of the time without actually using my vision.

The thing about True Seeing is it isn't tremor sense or life sense, or blind sense. It allows you to see through false visions that you are able to experience with your eyes...you rub an ointment on your eyes, so it would be like using a magical set of eyeglasses contacts...when you close your eyes it wouldn't work. If someone were to remove your eyes or your sight it wouldn't work. and it wouldn't work on your other senses...you couldn't touch better or taste better and you couldn't hear better, so in my opinion it would not defeat sound based illusions.


Lord Worcestershire of Perrins wrote:
It allows you to see through false visions that you are able to experience with your eyes

I just see no evidence that it is limited to physically affecting your eyes. Fireballs used to require rubbing bat poop between your fingers. The material component is not always related to the spell, and can't be used to judge what its effects are.

True Seeing "sees through illusions." It doesn't say, "through vision based illusions" or "through illusions that aren't phantasms" or whatever.

Have you ever heard someone say something like, "I see through your lies!" Did their physical eyes have anything to do with that? I can't detect lies with my eyes close? Is a blind man unable to "see through" someone's social schemes?

I just don't think it should be taken so literally. True Seeing sees through Illusions--no exceptions are listed.

Even if you want to limited it to sight, why must be it be physical sight with your eyes? It's a magical effect and sees through magic. Why wouldn't it work on your mind's eye, too?


Wow!

My first gut reaction was Ughbash has it right.

But ... not so sure after reading thru the thread and descriptions of the spells.

Yes it pretty much hoses the entire Illusion school at least while within 120 feet of the Illusion. This makes me nervous (again by reflex). On the otherhand there's whole classes of creature types that nuke mind effecting Illusions ... Constructs, Oozes, Plants, Undead, and Vermin.


Mplindustries: We take the meaning of True Seeing literate because we have no reason not to. If the intent of the spell were to cut through all illusions, then I find it terribly awkward and poorly written for it to reference "seeing" and "vision" so often. I think better of the editors than that. Yes, True Seeing cuts through all visually based illusions and non mundane disguises, but that is its limit. Not to laugh in the face of every illusion school spell.

Edit: my phone misspelled your username originally, sorry.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 7 people marked this as a favorite.

RAW is very clear here. D20 has keywords to help with these situations. They clearly define this situation. As Ughbash pointed out with his snippet of rules, the phantasm is not a visual illusion that harms you. It is a "mind-affecting" effect that harms you. Mind affecting is the keyword that is important to the game mechanics here. True Seeing does not see through mind affecting effects. You should be able to see through the illusion aspect of the phantasm, but the save isn't against an illusion, a glamer, or a figment. It is against a mind affecting effect. So if you fail that save, then somehow your mind doesn't allow you to believe your eyes. A cool GM would probably give you a bonus to the save versus the mind affecting aspect of the phantasm though. I know I would.

Not everything in the Illusion school of spells is purely illusion. Shadow magic is its foray into conjuration and a few, like phantasmal spells reach reach into the realms of enchantment.

Also RAW True Seeing is only good for vision. Everything about the spell makes that clear. The spell name indicates this and it constantly restates that it is vision only throughout the description. You are focusing on one aspect of it and inferring things that just aren't there. The illusion aspect of it is powerful and cool, but that is just one of the perks of the spell. It's focus is vision. It does some other fun things for vision too, such as see into the ethereal plane and see in darkness.

Every instance describing how it affects the sense that I could see in the spell description:
"see all things as they actually are"
"The subject sees through normal and magical darkness"
"sees the exact locations of creatures or objects"
"sees invisible creatures or objects normally"
"sees through illusions"
"sees the true form of polymorphed" (I didn't realize it did that, nice!)
"can focus its vision to see"
"True seeing, however, does not penetrate solid objects" (Just like vision, so a ghost sound behind a bush would be terrifying, until you walk around so you could see the sound somehow)
"X-ray vision or its equivalent" (Just normal illusion peircing vision)
"viewer see through mundane disguises"
"spot creatures who are simply hiding"

There are only two reference in it which could possibly affect something other than vision. One is the word "notice". The other word, and the only clear indication of sound, is this part "clairaudience/clairvoyance" which it says True Seeing doesn't work with. Of course that part is only referring to a spell name, but I just wanted to point out that the only clear indication of a sense other than sight explicitly is not affected by True Seeing.

The saying "I see through your lies" doesn't correlate to a spell description. Spell descriptions are designed to be clear and explanatory. They will be as literal as possible. Figures of speech like often make no sense and are rarely literal. Using that argument is like trying to make the claim that excrement is a good building material, because there is the saying (altered for the kids) "defecating bricks".

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the problem is that mp is expanding the definition of 'seeing' to stuff beyond sight. In other words, she's adding to the definition of what seeing is.

Seeing is its own definition and restriction. The spell does not supersede the base meaning of 'sight'.

Its akin to the 'dead' argument, which also isn't defined by the game. Accordingly, you can read into it that being dead allows you to get back up and start acting, because the book doesn't say no.

Realize that 'sight' means you actually have to visually see something,and true seeing does not escape that simple definition.

And a phantasm is all in the mind, you aren't actually seeing it. True Seeing won't see it, because you're not seeing it.

==Aelryinth


At best I would give a bonus on the will save due to True seeing. PK is a fear effect. Target will die from fear if fort save is failed. True seeing does nada vs fear affects.

In context (<<important part) with True Seeing it SEES through what outside force is deceiving your visual senses (your eyes, not your mind).

PK is a rather nasty hallucination, fear effect. When you dream you AREN'T seeing with your eyes, it's all in your mind. Yet if you have a scary enough dream it can cause negative physical reactions.


Archamus << I like your brick building!! :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelryinth wrote:

And, um, how's True Seeing going to see through a sound? Because I really want to know how it's seeing a sound.

==Aelryinth

Synesthesia?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Seeing the magic that's creating the sound?

Illusion means the school of magic, figments and phantasms are subtypes. Why would it say that you see through illusions, when it actually means you can see through figments and patterns but not phantasms?

Illusion per PRD:
Illusion

Illusion spells deceive the senses or minds of others. They cause people to see things that are not there, not see things that are there, hear phantom noises, or remember things that never happened.

Figment: A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. It is not a personalized mental impression. Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the figment produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like (or copy another sense exactly unless you have experienced it#.

Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.

A figment's AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier.

Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.

Phantasm: A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject #or subjects# of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression, all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see. Third parties viewing or studying the scene don't notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells.

Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real.

Saving Throws and Illusions #Disbelief): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.


Aelryinth wrote:
I think the problem is that mp is expanding the definition of 'seeing' to stuff beyond sight.

I am expanding it to it being magic. It's literally magic sight. It doesn't require you to see in the first place, for example. A blind man could cast it and see through magical darkness.

Aelryinth wrote:
And a phantasm is all in the mind, you aren't actually seeing it.

This brings up all sorts of philosophic discussion points that probably aren't worth bringing up in an RPG forum.

Suffice to say, I don't think there's any reason you have to physically see the illusion with your actual eyes for True Seeing to work, but I also don't think there's any reason you don't physically see the phantasm with your actual eyes, either.

It's mind affecting, I get that. It's all in our heads. Ok--but so is real vision. Everything is all in our heads. "Vision" exists because our brain translates light hitting the optic nerve a certain way. Which part of the eye/brain does True Sight affect vs. which part does a phantasm affect? How can you decide that True Seeing affects, say, the Cornea, rather than the part of the brain that translates the light?

I know this all sounds excessively pedantic and complicated and weird, but that's kind of my point--trying to read into the spell and draw arbitrary lines in the sand (phantasms are in your mind, so you don't actually see them even though everything in your brain reacts exactly as if it's seeing something) is going to cause problems.

I think it's much simpler and safer to take the line "The subject...sees through illusions..." at face value and make a single mental check. Is the spell an illusion? Yes? Then True Seeing sees through it.

It seems clear that people don't agree with me, and while I still think you're wrong, I get that, and can let it go--so I will.

Cult of Vorg wrote:

Seeing the magic that's creating the sound?

Illusion means the school of magic, figments and phantasms are subtypes. Why would it say that you see through illusions, when it actually means you can see through figments and patterns but not phantasms?

Thank you!


You have to see the illusion to see through it, unless you can prove all of the references to vision are don't mean anything.

See can be used in many ways. Example: "I see your point. Now that use of the word see does not allow you to see anything.

True Seeing does not say it allows you to be able to perceive a false illusion as real. It only references sight.

As I said in my hallucination example. Just because something is in your mind, that does not mean you saw it. Imagining or having the image in your mind does not equal seeing.


Seeing the image does not equal the image existing.
However, the visual image in your mind is an essential part of vision.

Visual hallucinations are seen. That's why they can be so dehabilitating, because there's no difference to us between a mentally received visual image and an optically received visual image. And also why sight's accuracy and reliability is so often overrated.

When there's damage to the optic nerve or the parts of the brain that process images, blindness can result despite their eyes receiving images and reacting to them.

If the phantasm is visual, then visual enhancements should apply to processing it.

As far as being able to see through a spell like Ghost Sound, I consider it to be like Detect Magic. Detect Magic will show the magic aura for a spell without any visual components, and you can see that despite not being able to see the spell. Same for True Seeing, you're seeing the aura of the spells so you can also disregard them.


No they are not seen. You see with your eyes. By your definition of "see" blind people can see. Is that really what you want to promote since the blind condition does not state loss of "eyesight".

Quote:
Blinded: The creature cannot see

Or would your rule that a blind person is immune to phantasmal killer?


Many blind people can see mental images. In fact, I'm arguing that being optically blind does not equal being immune to visual images.

A more hardline reading of Blinded = Cannot See would mean the blind person's immune, but that's the opposite of what I'm saying.

PK states "You create a phantasmal image of the most fearsome creature imaginable to the subject simply by forming the fears of the subject's subconscious mind into something that its conscious mind can visualize". Obviously the spell is based on visual imaging. I'm saying that not only is the blind person not immune to PK, but also that they or anybody with True Seeing would get to "see through" the magically created visual image.

Like so many things, sight is more complex than non-specialist-cant language can communicate about without confusion, as we all have our assumptions as to definition, context, intent, etc. I think I'll be going back to lurking.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you want to take all of this literally, True Seeing says you, "see through illusions," not that you disbelieve them, or that you don't see them at all. In other words, if someone were to create an illusion of a mansion around a house, you would see the house through the illusion of the mansion, but wouldn't NOT see the illusion, it would just be see-through.

Seeing through Phantasmal Killer doesn't prevent you from believing it, so it still scares the crap out of you and kills you if you fail your saves.

Satisfied?


I never said blind people could not see mental images. I am saying that if you want to use the see* argument you must decide if it applies to just visual sight or all the time. If see refers to all things then a blind person can't see mental images. You can't just pick and choose as you see fit.

*Seeing refers to vision and mental images.


True Seeing makes no mention of other senses, specifically uses "see" instead of something like "disbelieve" or "ignore." The name of the spell is True SEEING. With PK you aren't really seeing the Phantasm, it's just in your mind. No one else sees it.

As for a blind person...I'd say that PK still affects them.


Archamus wrote:

RAW is very clear here. D20 has keywords to help with these situations. They clearly define this situation. As Ughbash pointed out with his snippet of rules, the phantasm is not a visual illusion that harms you. It is a "mind-affecting" effect that harms you. Mind affecting is the keyword that is important to the game mechanics here. True Seeing does not see through mind affecting effects. You should be able to see through the illusion aspect of the phantasm, but the save isn't against an illusion, a glamer, or a figment. It is against a mind affecting effect. So if you fail that save, then somehow your mind doesn't allow you to believe your eyes. A cool GM would probably give you a bonus to the save versus the mind affecting aspect of the phantasm though. I know I would.

Not everything in the Illusion school of spells is purely illusion. Shadow magic is its foray into conjuration and a few, like phantasmal spells reach reach into the realms of enchantment.

Also RAW True Seeing is only good for vision. Everything about the spell makes that clear. The spell name indicates this and it constantly restates that it is vision only throughout the description. You are focusing on one aspect of it and inferring things that just aren't there. The illusion aspect of it is powerful and cool, but that is just one of the perks of the spell. It's focus is vision. It does some other fun things for vision too, such as see into the ethereal plane and see in darkness.

Every instance describing how it affects the sense that I could see in the spell description:
"see all things as they actually are"
"The subject sees through normal and magical darkness"
"sees the exact locations of creatures or objects"
"sees invisible creatures or objects normally"
"sees through illusions"
"sees the true form of polymorphed" (I didn't realize it did that, nice!)
"can focus its vision to see"
"True seeing, however, does not penetrate solid objects" (Just like vision, so a...

You point would be more solid if Phantasmal Killer did not use the word see in almost every sentence. I sort of agree, although it is in the mind, I am not sure why that would bypass True Seeing. The spell specifically says you see a vague shape and make a will save to determine if it is real. The whole point of true seeing is you know what is and isn't real.


Actually the point is to be able to use your vision to do it, just like see invis intends for you to use your vision to see invisible things.

If see is being used in every sense for then spell then it must continue to be that way for consistency. So by that logic a blind people are immune to PK, since the book only says blind people can't see. At least TS references vision, and not just "see". The blind condition does not even give you that much.

1 to 50 of 132 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / True Seeing and Phantasmal Killer All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.