Improved Invisibility + Mindblank = near total safety?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

You are a wizard. You've got Mindblank and Overland Flight on because they're smart long-duration buffs for a wizardy-type to have. Let's say suddenly you're in a fight against another group of humanoids (rival adventuring party perhaps) and the first thing you do is cast Greater Invisibility.

Now...barring Invisibility Purge and Blindsense/Blindsight or other similar abilities, what in the Nine Hells can anyone do to actually attack you reliably? You're invisible. You can attack and not break invisibility. Mind blank protects from all devices and spells that gather information about the target through divination magic (such as detect evil, locate creature, scry, and see invisible). The list presumably isn't exhaustive, so by extension spells like Arcane Sight won't work either to at least pinpoint a square (since Arcane Sight is a Divination spell).

You are perfectly safe as long as you cast a spell and then move to another location. Enemy casters have to guess your general location if they wanna lob AoE evocation spells at you or maybe an Area Dispel, and you've got 3-dimensional movement.

Isn't this a bit overpowered? True Seeing doesn't help either because it is also a Divination spell.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Scent.


Presumably, by the time you can cast a spell that gives you this, your opposition can make perception checks to identify your square. If you move and do not stealth, it is only a DC20 base to detect an invisible creature.

And glitterdust will still outline you to everyone


A good Perception check and Glitterdust.

edit : damned, ninjaed by the elven chick

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required.

True Sight and Arcane Sight will work, actually, because they don't gather information about you. They just allow the caster to see in a way that will detect you.

Also: making some stormy weather might have fun effects on flying creatures.


The counter to high-level casters is always other high level casters.

AoE spells ignore the entire issue. Area Dispels strip the relevant protections. There are also magical ways to counter invisibility like Glitterdust.


Readied actions also work. (You could even ready an action to interrupt spell-casting, assuming a good enough ranged weapon)

Once the masked creature tries to cast a spell, the verbal components give up his square to the observant enemy(perception check is reactive in this case, so free as far as action economy goes) and let's loose. They still have to deal with the 50% miss chance though.

Dark Archive

But why would True Seeing work? It is a divination spell.


Lyrax wrote:

True Sight and Arcane Sight will work, actually, because they don't gather information about you. They just allow the caster to see in a way that will detect you.

Also: making some stormy weather might have fun effects on flying creatures.

If See Invis doesnt work, I have no clue why True Seeing would.

And Seeing someone's magical aura is gathering information about them.

Scent won't do much. It takes too many actions and you only pin point at 5ft away.

Perception is a good point. Cross-class skills in PF aren't as big of a hinderance compared to 3.5. Still, with Distance penalties though it's difficult. For every 10 ft there's an additional -1 penalty. Plus the ambient sounds of battle imposes more penalties (exact figures are in the Rules Compendium. Technically that was for the Listen skill, but it translates over directly). If the Wizard is sitting at say...200 ft above the battlefield (well within his Medium range), you've got a -20 to try to pinpoint his location.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Torinath wrote:

Readied actions also work. (You could even ready an action to interrupt spell-casting, assuming a good enough ranged weapon)

Once the masked creature tries to cast a spell, the verbal components give up his square to the observant enemy(perception check is reactive in this case, so free as far as action economy goes) and let's loose. They still have to deal with the 50% miss chance though.

Silent Spell and Ventriloquism fix this right quick.


Ravingdork wrote:
Torinath wrote:

Readied actions also work. (You could even ready an action to interrupt spell-casting, assuming a good enough ranged weapon)

Once the masked creature tries to cast a spell, the verbal components give up his square to the observant enemy(perception check is reactive in this case, so free as far as action economy goes) and let's loose. They still have to deal with the 50% miss chance though.

Silent Spell and Ventriloquism fix this right quick.

Not every wizard has Silent Spell and Ventriloquism. But then I gues not every humanoid group you encounter will have Glitterdust prepared.

And all of this relies on the assumption that there is an enemy arcane caster. What if there's only martial types?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bard-Sader wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Torinath wrote:

Readied actions also work. (You could even ready an action to interrupt spell-casting, assuming a good enough ranged weapon)

Once the masked creature tries to cast a spell, the verbal components give up his square to the observant enemy(perception check is reactive in this case, so free as far as action economy goes) and let's loose. They still have to deal with the 50% miss chance though.

Silent Spell and Ventriloquism fix this right quick.

Not every wizard has Silent Spell and Ventriloquism. But then I gues not every humanoid group you encounter will have Glitterdust prepared.

And all of this relies on the assumption that there is an enemy arcane caster. What if there's only martial types?

Let me rephrase: Silent spell OR ventriloquism make it so using hearing to determine location will not only NOT help, but can actually mislead.

The only thing all that viable that I've seen is the area effect of greater dispelling, and even that's not all that great cause the area is small enough that you might miss anyway. What's more, greater dispelling is 6th-level, whereas fly and greater invisibility are lower level, which means the troublesome wizard likely has them prepared more times than the enmy wizard has greater dispels.

Traditional damaging area effects might work, but not all will hit and it is likely the enemy wizard has energy resistance.

The OP's tactics isn't full proof, but its pretty damn effective.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess you need to use non-divination based methods to find the opponent, such as Deathwatch, Blindsight, Scent, Perception, Glitterdust, Invisibility Purge, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field/Ray, etc.


And Invisibility Purge is the only reliable method. All the other spells have small radii.


He, he, I remember I once played a wizard who just got invisibility (or improved invisibility, I don't recall precisely at the moment). The party got into a major fight and my wizard helped buffed the fighters, but was getting hurt pretty badly, so he cast the invisibility spell on himself in order to forestall further damage. Unfortunately, he was taken down to negative hit points anyway and because he was invisible, the rest of the party couldn't find him to stem the bleeding... now you can all laugh at me!


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bard-Sader wrote:
And Invisibility Purge is the only reliable method. All the other spells have small radii.

Ooh. I hadn't thought of that. Still, the effect is centered on you, and it is likely you are getting fireballed from a LONG ways away.


So does anything else think Mindblank itself is overpowered? If the duration were paired down to 1 min/CL I think it'd be a lot better...


Bard-Sader wrote:
So does anything else think Mindblank itself is overpowered? If the duration were paired down to 1 min/CL I think it'd be a lot better...

really?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bard-Sader wrote:
So does anything else think Mindblank itself is overpowered? If the duration were paired down to 1 min/CL I think it'd be a lot better...

Which is an interesting statement as it used to just grant immunity to divination and mind-affecting effects in v3.5. You're looking at the neutered version.

I would not recommend toning down the duration.


PRD wrote:

Mind Blank:

Mind blank even foils limited wish, miracle, and wish spells when they are used in such a way as to gain information about the target.

Holy Forksnargle!

[Edit] I just remembered the Master Spy gets this as a permanent class ability at 9th level. NOW the GM can TRULY make mystery adventures!


I just...offers somany immunities...I dunno...I tend to hate them. I mean, at least Deathward is also mins/CL and True Seeing is 10 mins/CL.

Liberty's Edge

I have no earthly idea why this stops See Invisible, except that that's how they interpreted it. Given that See Invis is a self buff, it's pretty clear that it doesn't shield against Mind Blank to me- but that's clearly not the Pathfinder rules.

Presumably if it stops See Invis, it also stops True Sight.

Yea, pretty strong!


It is strong, but it is also a 4th level spell combined with an 8th level spell. An 8th level spell is powerful on its own. By the time you can use the combo it wont be that hard to stop though. Blindsight, blindsense and other EX abilities can pinpoint the square. Glitterdust does the rest, or even faerie fire.

Liberty's Edge

wraithstrike wrote:
It is strong, but it is also a 4th level spell combined with an 8th level spell. An 8th level spell is powerful on its own. By the time you can use the combo it wont be that hard to stop though. Blindsight, blindsense and other EX abilities can pinpoint the square. Glitterdust does the rest, or even faerie fire.

Well it means that countering a high level wizard got oddly difficult in a new and strange way. And presumably high level magical duels will consist of two invisible, unfindable dudes with readied actions.

Mind Blank is historically an all-day sort of spell, making it great and all, but essentially wrapping improved invis (a mid level threat) in a new "really super undetectable invis" is definitely a challenge. The bar went up from "dude who can see invisible, available as a scroll, a potion, a spell, or several abilities" to "combo of at least two characters, one of whom has abilities that are not available to all archetypes / parties".

Note also that glitterdust doesn't even end it- it can be dispelled by an ally of the caster or the caster himself.

I guess what I'm saying is, I wouldn't allow mind blank to function like this in my games- I greatly prefer the 3.5 and previous version. Hell, I even like the immunity to mind affecting stuff better than a +8 to saves, it's more flavorful. But blocking true sight and see invis isn't cool.


cfalcon wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
It is strong, but it is also a 4th level spell combined with an 8th level spell. An 8th level spell is powerful on its own. By the time you can use the combo it wont be that hard to stop though. Blindsight, blindsense and other EX abilities can pinpoint the square. Glitterdust does the rest, or even faerie fire.

Well it means that countering a high level wizard got oddly difficult.

Mind Blank is historically an all-day sort of spell, making it great and all, but essentially wrapping improved invis (a mid level threat) in a new "really super undetectable invis" is definitely a challenge. The bar went up from "dude who can see invisible, available as a scroll, a potion, a spell, or several abilities" to "combo of at least two characters, one of whom has abilities that are not available to all archetypes / parties".

Note also that glitterdust doesn't even end it- it can be dispelled by an ally of the caster or the caster himself.

I guess what I'm saying is, I wouldn't allow mind blank to function like this in my games- I greatly prefer the 3.5 and previous version. Hell, I even like the immunity to mind affecting stuff better than a +8 to saves, it's more flavorful. But blocking true sight and see invis isn't cool.

I believe that the 3.5 version had quite similar language with regards to divination. It might in fact have been even a bit more strongly worded.

Liberty's Edge

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindblank.htm

The wording is strong, but it doesn't include See Invis.

Sage advice:

"Q: In addition, there have been questions raised concerning how Mind Blank functions in conjunction with other spells. For example, lets say a wizard casts Mind Blank and Improved Invisibility on himself. Does the invisibility now count as part of the caster, or is it considered a separate entity in regards to spells like See Invisibility?

A: Mind blank is not effective against see invisibility (non detection is). Mind blank protects against devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. And against scrying, which is magical information gathering conducted remotely. See invisibility is not scrying.

Q: In other words, is the Mind Blanked/Invisible wizard protected from See Invisibility? Detect Magic? True Seeing?

A: No in all three cases."

Pathfinder keeps the wording, but then adds explanatory text which distinctly calls out See Invis as being affected.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bard-Sader wrote:

So does anything else think Mindblank itself is overpowered? If the duration were paired down to 1 min/CL I think it'd be a lot better...

...

I just...offers somany immunities...I dunno...I tend to hate them. I mean, at least Deathward is also mins/CL and True Seeing is 10 mins/CL.

I don't understand defensive spells with short durations AT ALL.

A long duration spell you can cast and forget about. A short duration spell, on the other hand, won't be cast until you THINK you need it, which means that it will most likely be cast too early and go to waste, or it will be cast AFTER you have come under the effect that you were trying to defend against (assuming the first attack didn't kill you). AND THAT'S IF YOU KNOW IT OR BOTHERED TO PREPARE IT AT ALL.

Leave the short durations on things that you will always need to defend against, like damage (i.e. fire shield or stoneskin). For more situational things such as death attacks, divinations, or enchantments, the buffs should last a minimum of tens of minutes, if not hours (or even all day).

cfalcon wrote:

The wording is strong, but it doesn't include See Invis.

...

Pathfinder keeps the wording, but then adds explanatory text which distinctly calls out See Invis as being affected.

Um, so which is it?

Also, isn't sage advice from v3.5 and as such doesn't necessarily apply?


cfalcon wrote:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mindblank.htm

The wording is strong, but it doesn't include See Invis.

Sage advice:

"Q: In addition, there have been questions raised concerning how Mind Blank functions in conjunction with other spells. For example, lets say a wizard casts Mind Blank and Improved Invisibility on himself. Does the invisibility now count as part of the caster, or is it considered a separate entity in regards to spells like See Invisibility?

A: Mind blank is not effective against see invisibility (non detection is). Mind blank protects against devices and spells that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. And against scrying, which is magical information gathering conducted remotely. See invisibility is not scrying.

Q: In other words, is the Mind Blanked/Invisible wizard protected from See Invisibility? Detect Magic? True Seeing?

A: No in all three cases."

Pathfinder keeps the wording, but then adds explanatory text which distinctly calls out See Invis as being affected.

Yeah that is sage advice. As near as I can tell he is just making stuff up when he equates "This spell protects against [...] information gathering by divination spells or effects." to only scrying and nothing else ever under any circumstance.

Liberty's Edge

Ravingdork wrote:
Um, so which is it?

It's both. In Pathfinder, it affects See Invis. In 3.5, it does not. Read the stuff I responded to, you seem to have missed the context.

Quote:
Also, isn't sage advice from v3.5 and as such doesn't necessarily apply?

It applies quite well to 3.5. Obviously it doesn't affect Pathfinder, which clearly has See Invis as an example of a spell blocked right in the description of Mind Blank.


cfalcon wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Um, so which is it?

It's both. In Pathfinder, it affects See Invis. In 3.5, it does not. Read the stuff I responded to, you seem to have missed the context.

Quote:
Also, isn't sage advice from v3.5 and as such doesn't necessarily apply?

It applies quite well to 3.5. Obviously it doesn't affect Pathfinder, which clearly has See Invis as an example of a spell blocked right in the description of Mind Blank.

Well it only applies to 3.5 if one accepts that regardless of track record the sage is always right (even after admitting that he has been wrong) and thus the so far as I can see unfounded ruling that either mind blank does not actually do anything against mind-affecting spells and effects in general with a specific exception for ones that detect, influence, or read emotions or thoughts. Or alternatively that the only form of information gathering that can possibly be done by divination is scrying. Any other form of divination no matter what it does is not information gathering.


RavingDork: The whole point is to *force* the casters to *not* be protected all day long. They have to be careful and ration out the times of the day in which they're protected. Fire and forget is just too good given the effects of Mindblank.

Basically, making it Mins/CL makes it an in-combat buff that you must use an action to cast, so ther's a trade off. Do I want superiorprotection in exchange for an action (or perhaps give that superior protection to my ally with the +3 will save at level 17) or do I want to fire off an offensive spell?


We are speaking of an 8th level spell, it's obvious that it have to be strong and game-breaking...for a short duration protection there are the 4th level spells (death ward), if you are a 15th level wiz, or a 16th level sorc...you have the right to be completely invisible and undetectable all day long...if you think that it could be too broken, make the Npg use the same tactics, there isn't a real problem in my opinion.

Or the GM find a method to see the wiz (and there are a lot of methods), or the wiz will be free to do all he wants without risks...at the 15th level in my opinion is acceptable.

wake up...cast overland flight\mindblank\contingency on invisibility greater extended (activable by password)

At the begining of each fight i, as free action, become invisible for 30 rounds (at least)...and changing my position after casting each spell flying (12 meters)i can do what i want without risks.

i'm a 15th level wiz or witch and maybe cleric or a 16th level sorc,
it's my right be quite invincible...after all i'm a full caster


Okay guys, you are over thinking things if i may say so myself.

Good compromise would be to work as it says it works - it doesn't allow for gathering of personal information - meaning scry, locate creature, detect evil, etc. Maybe you won't agree with me on this one - but there is a difference between trying to find a person and countering his spells. All of above are used to find a person, See Invisibility is not used to "find" a person as much as counter Invisibility spells.
If a player isn't ready to compromise after you've given him your proposal and explained reasons behind it, just out right ban the spell, you as a GM have every right to do so if you think he is breaking the game - and i count near invincibility as one of those. Or if you wanna be meaner, put random high-CR dragons every once in a while, whos whole purpose is to eat a said Wizard :P

In 3.5 i had more problems with Core spells than all those in splat books, thats how always is to be honest, most broken of spells are found in core not in splat books.

@avatar-84 - no comment, i will leave it at that, cause i don't want to turn this tread into a flaming pit of doom.


@Zoddy: I think that if a GM would erase\modify the spell he commits a very big mistake. First of all 'cos you are cutting an important option for the casters of the group (and this is always a really bad thing), furthermore i believe that the paizo's guys when wrote this spell had a very exact idea about what could\couldn't allowed to do to casters.

If in the text there's wrote "like see invisibility" you have to respect it, you can't take the spell of 3.5 to giustify the idea (only yours) of a broken combo (that isn't so broken).
Same name, two different spells. At this point i could argue against the prevented immunity by mind-effects, saing that in 3.5 i had...Mindblank has already been deeply nerfed...at least leave it with this little combo.

P.S. If you are so terrify about this option put all the possible skill points in perception and make a good roll, than cast a glitterdust or something similar and the problem i solved! After all isn't so broken!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ravingdork wrote:

[

I don't understand defensive spells with short durations AT ALL.

It's called keeping the "Glass Cannon" factor of mages healthy and alive. It's also part of the same reason that 3.5 turned the hours/level buff spells to minutes per level.


avatar-84 wrote:

@Zoddy: I think that if a GM would erase\modify the spell he commits a very big mistake. First of all 'cos you are cutting an important option for the casters of the group (and this is always a really bad thing), furthermore i believe that the paizo's guys when wrote this spell had a very exact idea about what could\couldn't allowed to do to casters.

If in the text there's wrote "like see invisibility" you have to respect it, you can't take the spell of 3.5 to giustify the idea (only yours) of a broken combo (that isn't so broken).
Same name, two different spells. At this point i could argue against the prevented immunity by mind-effects, saing that in 3.5 i had...Mindblank has already been deeply nerfed...at least leave it with this little combo.

P.S. If you are so terrify about this option put all the possible skill points in perception and make a good roll, than cast a glitterdust or something similar and the problem i solved! After all isn't so broken!

Problem is that this combo simply can't be defeated without some serious cheating - it auto defeats any brute they come in contact with and with that said it hands down ruins most encounters, even if monsters got true seeing which is surprise surprise divination. most of other special senses are also useless cause of limited range.

Casters can be around 70 feet away from PC's or monsters at that level just to be in close range or ~250 feet for medium OR ~1040 FEET - no perception in the world will allow you to make that DC.
Yea its improbable that someone will be even at medium maximum range in any given encounter, so we will dismiss that - on other hand its very probable that casters will be at around 60-100 feet apart from each other. And as only casters can cast spells like Glitterdust, minus bard and druid (which has to have fairy fire prepared) and that most casters don't bother with Perception cause its not class skill and they got better things to take, its not nice little combo, its a 2 spell combo that can break any encounter where it stands, both ways, players and GM wise.
Stealth on other hand can be used untrained - so it automatically goes from 20 to 20(invis)+dex+roll+distance vs perception check.

Casters, all of them ... in my opinion got enough defensive buffs - blur, displacement, mirror image, invisibility, windwall, globe of invulnerability, stoneskin, reduce person (yes, reduce person you heard me right, +4 to stealth duo to size) and these are just the ones on top of my head that don't buff AC or just AC.
So i don't really think they will be too nerfed or hurt by this either way.


Counterspell? It won't knock down the existing spell, but there's no range limitation. The real problem can you target an undetectable foe?

PRD wrote:
To use a counterspell, you must select an opponent as the target of the counterspell.

If you can you can tie down the invisible mage. Plus you've now got a reason to take the Improved Counterspell Feat.

Liberty's Edge

avatar-84 wrote:
@Zoddy: I think that if a GM would erase\modify the spell he commits a very big mistake. First of all 'cos you are cutting an important option for the casters of the group (and this is always a really bad thing), furthermore i believe that the paizo's guys when wrote this spell had a very exact idea about what could\couldn't allowed to do to casters.

I routinely modify spells in my games. Claiming that it's a mistake is a little offensive. Paizo didn't write the spell so much as bring it over and clarify it using some rules that they have.

Anyway, no damned way I'd allow it in my games. I don't understand why anyone would want Mind Blank, never originally intended for this use when written way back when, to grant super duper unbreakable invisibility. This isn't even what you use mind blank FOR lol. If you want the Pathfinder version in your games, then obviously run it like it's written. Personally, I create my worlds assuming that True Sight and See Invisible work as written, and aren't cheesed around by the "can't scry me, can't dominate me" all day buff spell.

Anyway, obviously Paizo thinks this is a good way for Mind Blank to be played, and you agree with them. I definitely disagree. This would have pretty handily blown up my high level games without rewriting my game worlds to handle it, should it have come around back in 3.5, so no, I won't be using it.

But back to OP's original question:

Hell yes this combo is good! I'd suggest taking the basic common precautions with invisibility, such as moving after casting, and stacking some long range spells. Work on eliminating or neutralizing the targets that can sniff you out, or simply use the sheer turn advantage generated to waste the turns of enemy casters who would otherwise be casting against your party but instead are trying to ready glitterdust against you. Note that both Mind Blank and Greater Invis can be cast on your allies, so that they can be stacked up with scrolls and spell slots should that become desirable or necessary.

Shadow Lodge

Bard-Sader wrote:

Not every wizard has Silent Spell and Ventriloquism.

...
What if there's only martial types?

Don't you know that the base assumption of everyone on this board is that all wizards have EVERY spell existing in their campaign world in their spellbooks, and what few they don't happen to have memorized they have on scrolls. It's part of the CASTERS >>> EVERYBODY and WIZARDS >>>>>> OTHER CASTERS mentality that's inherent in this board.

If there are only martial types, they are obvious cannon fodder, that are utterly inept and incapable of threatening your GOD WIZARD.

:P


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
Bard-Sader wrote:

Not every wizard has Silent Spell and Ventriloquism.

...
What if there's only martial types?

Don't you know that the base assumption of everyone on this board is that all wizards have EVERY spell existing in their campaign world in their spellbooks, and what few they don't happen to have memorized they have on scrolls. It's part of the CASTERS >>> EVERYBODY and WIZARDS >>>>>> OTHER CASTERS mentality that's inherent in this board.

If there are only martial types, they are obvious cannon fodder, that are utterly inept and incapable of threatening your GOD WIZARD.

:P

Though it looks like you were just joking, its pretty much true. Any wizard past 10th-level with Craft Wondrous Items can craft himself one or two blessed books and have more than enough starting funds to put every core spell in them (since you only have to pay for the privilege of seeing said spells).

I even did the mathematical breakdown:

46,630gp (give or take a few gp for the prohibited 0-level spells I'm not accounting for) for the privilege of looking at every core wizard spell in the game (minus 9 of the first level ones and 4 each for all other spell levels, so you can still get things for free at level up).

Tack on 12,500gp needed to craft two blessed books to hold them all and you can get every core spell in the game for under 60,000gp!

Seeing as you won't need all of them right away (if you're only 10th-level, for example, you can't cast 6th-9th level spells anyways) the cost will actually be much lower.

For a 10th-level wizard only concerning himself with 5th-level and lower spells, it would cost less than 18,000gp!

When it is that cheap, wizards really do become the best class in the game. Knowing all the spells also makes arcane bond with an item MUCH more interesting.

Shadow Lodge

Except not everyone plays in a campaign world where the characters have the opportunity to buy scrolls of any given spell. I personally have never played in a world where you can walk into the Wish isle of Magic Mart and grab a handful of wish scrolls. Usually when a wizard finds a very powerful scroll in most games I've played, they've been forced to use it before they get the chance / level to transcribe it to their spellbooks.

It's another reason that the people who claim that the wizard is even more of a god in a low-magic world make me laugh. A wizard would be a sorcerer's b%*!~ boy in a low-magic world...following him around BEGGING him to scribe a scroll so that he could add some more spells to his pitifully sparse spellbook.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:

Except not everyone plays in a campaign world where the characters have the opportunity to buy scrolls of any given spell. I personally have never played in a world where you can walk into the Wish isle of Magic Mart and grab a handful of wish scrolls. Usually when a wizard finds a very powerful scroll in most games I've played, they've been forced to use it before they get the chance / level to transcribe it to their spellbooks.

It's another reason that the people who claim that the wizard is even more of a god in a low-magic world make me laugh. A wizard would be a sorcerer's b&#** boy in a low-magic world...following him around BEGGING him to scribe a scroll so that he could add some more spells to his pitifully sparse spellbook.

Except my calculations don't need you to buy scrolls at all.

In a low-magic game you will rock as you are one of the few who can create magic items and cast spells. In a high magic game you still rock as you can go to the local wizard's academy/library and learn every core spell in the game as I've described. It's win win.


I was really glad to see that Pathfinder added The Most Important Rule (PCR pg.9) to the game once again.


cfalcon wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
It is strong, but it is also a 4th level spell combined with an 8th level spell. An 8th level spell is powerful on its own. By the time you can use the combo it wont be that hard to stop though. Blindsight, blindsense and other EX abilities can pinpoint the square. Glitterdust does the rest, or even faerie fire.

Well it means that countering a high level wizard got oddly difficult in a new and strange way. And presumably high level magical duels will consist of two invisible, unfindable dudes with readied actions.

Mind Blank is historically an all-day sort of spell, making it great and all, but essentially wrapping improved invis (a mid level threat) in a new "really super undetectable invis" is definitely a challenge. The bar went up from "dude who can see invisible, available as a scroll, a potion, a spell, or several abilities" to "combo of at least two characters, one of whom has abilities that are not available to all archetypes / parties".

Note also that glitterdust doesn't even end it- it can be dispelled by an ally of the caster or the caster himself.

I guess what I'm saying is, I wouldn't allow mind blank to function like this in my games- I greatly prefer the 3.5 and previous version. Hell, I even like the immunity to mind affecting stuff better than a +8 to saves, it's more flavorful. But blocking true sight and see invis isn't cool.

Greater Invis only last rounds per levels. 2 minutes, assuming caster level 20, is not really all that great for an almost epic level caster to be invisible. You can even throw a bag of flour on his. There is way to dispel that. That dispel magic might also dispel the mind blank and greater invisibility. You don't get to choose what gets dispelled.


Kthulhu wrote:
A wizard would be a sorcerer's b&#** boy in a low-magic world...following him around BEGGING him to scribe a scroll so that he could add some more spells to his pitifully sparse spellbook.

OT so:

According to the PRD:
Independent Research: A wizard can also research a spell independently, duplicating an existing spell or creating an entirely new one. The cost to research a new spell, and the time required, are left up to GM discretion, but it should probably take at least 1 week and cost at least 1,000 gp per level of the spell to be researched. This should also require a number of Spellcraft and Knowledge (arcana) checks.
Ravingdork wrote:
In a low-magic game you will rock as you are one of the few who can create magic items [...]

Here's a rough draft of:

The Amulet of Death from Above!
Greater Invisibility; Continuous: 120,000gp
Mind Blank; Continuous: 240,000gp
Overland Flight; Continuous: 150,000gp

Total 510,000gp, CL 15

You may add attack spells and Ventriloquism if you like.

Liberty's Edge

wraithstrike wrote:
Greater Invis only last rounds per levels. 2 minutes, assuming caster level 20, is not really all that great for an almost epic level caster to be invisible.

20 isn't epic, and this is possible starting at level 15, or before if you are willing to cough up the gold for a Mind Blank scroll. I'm not a big believer in magic item shops in all games, but it's a pretty sparse campaign if you can't grab an 8th level scroll with your contacts and wealth by about 11th level.

Quote:
You can even throw a bag of flour on his. There is way to dispel that. That dispel magic might also dispel the mind blank and greater invisibility. You don't get to choose what gets dispelled.

A bag of flour becomes something he's wearing, and is then invisible, that's something out of a movie. Invisibility doesn't just effect the stuff you are wearing when you cast it. Note that if you apply dust to someone, like powder, it reveals them for just that turn- that's why. Glitterdust works because the motes emit light.

Yes, the dispel magic could also hit the wrong things too, but that's a risk you actually can take- you likely have another greater invis and it isn't doing anything, after all. In any event, it's a very generically good combo and it wildly buffs invisible tactics by actually hunting down and eliminating the spells meant to counter invisibility- and it's not like there's some super sneaky spell here, this is Mind Blank, a staple spell you are probably casting for other good reasons.

Anyway, if you think it's fine, run with it. I think it's not good design, and I'll certainly play by the older spell / actual intent of Mind Blank.


Invisibility is not quite the be-all end-all defense mechanism that it is made out to be. Under the OP circumstances (combined with Mind Blank) it is effective against magically based means of detection. It does nothing against healthy Perception bonuses. Your wizard is also subject to the sniping rules. If your wizard has not invested any ranks in Stealth, you remain easy to spot and thus target. Under idealized conditions, you will be able to decimate your foes.

At that level, you should anticipate equivalent tactics. Can your wizard protect his allies against the same tactic?

A Widened Invisibility Purge at the CR range you're facing covers your non-Enlarged Medium range *I think* (mobile phone now, no books with me). NPCs designed to "hunt" the PCs are probably going to have Alertness and Skill Focus (Percption), fielding a minimum Perception bonus of +27 - and in my own higher CR stat blocks that is quite a bit lower than typical. Most higher-CR foes will have that bonus in the low 30s to 40s range.

Don't forget that light conditions and your ability to see through them will very often restrict visibility to 120' or less. Sure, you may be enjoying an average Stealth check of +32 - before the -20 for sniping. Invisibility let's you cancel out the sniping penalty, it does not make up for bona-fide Stealth skill. THAT will make you a lot closer to not-targetable.

If your foes are moderately intelligent and some of their number posess a modicum of Spellcraft, they can and will adapt to your tactic. Blanketing themselves with darkness, using depth charge tactics with very wide AoE spells such as Cone of Cold and *especially* Firestorm will ruin your day PDQ.

Be careful with heavy use of this combination in various environments as well. Control Winds will hose you thoroughly...


Turin you make some valid points, but you are wrong about sniping, you don't need to snipe when you are under Greater Invisibility - snipe simply allows you to stay hidden via mundane means.

And as it does not matter if you are moving or not while Invisible, its pretty much always DC 20 + distance (and anyone using this tactic will try to stay as far back as possible) + dex + d20.
Note that stealth doesn't take its own action, its made as part of movement which anyone invisible will take after he is finished with casting.

Also on one of your tactics - someone needs to be a cleric, cause Invisibility Purge is cleric only spell, widen takes up spell slot 3 levels higher (so 6th level spell), but yes, if you get cleric with Widen Invisibility Purge you will be able to see him as long as he is in 160 feet of you.
Now, if lets say, hunters were sent after a party that knows their tactics all of above would be okay, if not ... well not so much. Not to mention, that if you wish effectively to counter this combo, that every encounter should consist of at least one 12th level cleric whose sole purpose after a while is to make wizard a valid target.


Good point on the sniping thing. I was aiming the widen invisibility purge tactic at the OP scenario addressing other groups of adventurer types. As in, I think the intent is for the 15th+ level Wizard in question to nuke the other group from orbit/ambush.

It should be interesting to hear a report on how that ambush goes down.

I can see a nasty pairing on the opposition though: Wiz (arcane bond) with a druid using Wild Shape to pretend to be the familiar.

A few well-placed illusions (when getting ambushed at range) can by the targets some time potentially ...


Well I;m definitely coming down on the: This combo will require me to rewrite the vast majorities of my encounters so I'm nerfing this crap.

Pretty much the *only* effective magical tactic is a Widened Invisibility Purge, and the caster can still fly to like 200 ft and only stick to Medium-range spells. Can you make a DC 40 perception check with ease? Or more if Stealth is employed?

Remember you can't do a Targeted Dispel becuase you can't detect the cater. And Area Dispel is only 20ft radius.

1 to 50 of 142 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Improved Invisibility + Mindblank = near total safety? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.