I'm also highly amused by the assertion that a person who cannot see can cast True Seeing and suddenly be able to see. This would also assert that someone with True Seeing Cannot be blinded. It would also assert that someone with their eyes closed is still True Seeing, which is a great reason to send something with a gaze attack against them.
And if the source of the Ghost Sound is around a corner, you're not seeing the source of the sound, you're just hearing the noise. You can't 'see sound'...be it magical sound or otherwise. It's simply not visible, and not because of magic.
PK would work fine on a blind person. They'd literally spin the horrors out of their own imagination and be attacked inside their own minds. Sight isn't needed.
And no, blind people can't cast True Seeing and suddenly be able to see. It would mention in the description if it was a blindness cure, however temporary. True Seeing requires the ability to see, it does not GRANT the base ability. It would say if it did.
===Aelryinth
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.
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.
...Seeing the magic that's creating the sound?
Illusion means the school of magic, figments and phantasms are subtypes. Why would
You argue that Aelryinth is wrong because he's bringing up philosophical discussions for an RPG yet in the next couple paragraphs you are trying to bring actual human biology into an RPG to prove your point. I think you are just trying to argue to argue and have no actual desire for discussion. Otherwise you would have already realized how silly your argument seem considering that this is all for an RPG.
You argue that Aelryinth is wrong because he's bringing up philosophical discussions for an RPG yet in the next couple paragraphs you are trying to bring actual human biology into an RPG to prove your point.
No, I argued that he's wrong because of philosophical discussions, and I then went on to corroborate that point by bringing up how sight actually works and how it's so complicated that we can't make arbitrary restrictions on things beyond what the rules text actually says.
I think you are just trying to argue to argue and have no actual desire for discussion. Otherwise you would have already realized how silly your argument seem considering that this is all for an RPG.
You don't have to agree with me--that's the nature of debate. But you don't get to tell me what I do and don't believe or what I think is silly.
I really do think sight is more complicated than what others are suggesting and that any reading but the simplest (i.e. True Seeing sees through illusions->phantasms are illusions->phantasmal killer creates an image->True seeing sees through phantasmal killer) hits philosophical, biological, and all sorts of other problems.
There's no need to get more complicated than the basic, but if you're going to try, you should be going the entire way and not stopping at some arbitrary point where True Seeing works on physical vision, but you don't want to discuss how physical vision actually works.
Feel free to disagree--most have. I'm not going to lose sleep over that.
Except that in the spell PK it says that it is a mind affecting spell.
It even says. "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."
Thus supporting the fact that it is mind affecting. So you, the caster, who knows that it is an illusion.... can be affected, because it is mind affaecting, not vision based.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/phantasmalKiller.html
Except that in the spell PK it says that it is a mind affecting spell.
It even says. "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."
Thus supporting the fact that it is mind affecting. So you, the caster, who knows that it is an illusion.... can be affected, because it is mind affaecting, not vision based.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/spells/phantasmalKiller.html
I don't really want to drag this out more when you're not going to accept my argument, but my point is that vision is also mind affecting.
Phantasmal Killer is mind-affecting because only you see it--but you still see it. Why is my spell messing with your brain different from light waves messing with your brain? What part of the optic system does True Seeing affect, exactly?
Did you know that blind people are still affected by color, for example (blue light makes you more alert/awake), because they still see it, they just don't consciously process it?
Vision is insanely more complicated than most people could ever imagine. Rather than arbitrarily draw lines in the sand about a magical vision enhancement, I'd rather just take the simplest explanation (i.e. True Seeing sees through all illusions).
Hey, if you want to apply real world logic to a game, go for it. Regardless if the logic is completely flawed, being that it's using magic... which doesn't exist in the realy world. :)
being that it's using magic...
That's my point. It's magic. I'd like to leave it at that. And leaving it at that means it sees through Phantasmal Killer.
You want to go one step further and claim it's magic, but it's magic that only affects things that reflect light through your physical eyes or whatever and that everyone else can see, and in response, I am suggesting that if you want to make a "this is how sight works" argument as you're doing, you can't arbitrarily stop there, you have to go all the way. And all the way is messy and probably still ends up with True Seeing working against Phantasmal Killer.
:)
That's what house rules are for I guess.
Someone cannot accept his logic being flawed it seems. Denial at the table, denial on the forums, and still persisting.
The argument was made that vision is also mind affecting.
There are three possibilities for seeing a wall.
1) The wall exists and you see it and thus your brain believes it is there.
2) The wall is an illusion and your eyes see it and thus your brain belives it is there.
3) The wall is all in your mind and your brain believes it is there.
Now lets look at how true seeing interacts with these.
1) The wall exists and you see it, you have true seeing up you still see it thus your brain belives it is there.
2) The wall is an illsuion, true seeing sees through the illusion and thus yoru brain AUTOMATICALLY knows it is not really a wall.
3) The wall is all in yor mind and your brain belives it is there.
And I contend that in #3, the wall is all in your mind, but you have True Seeing on, so you see through the illusion and so your brain automatically knows it's not really there.
The difference between an illusion that's made of actual light and whatever vs. one that's all in your head is solely who sees it. If it's actually light or whatever illusions are made of, then everyone can see it. If it's in your head, only the people targetted can see it. True Seeing, I contend, does not care how many other people see it--only that you do.
If that's how you play it then obviously someone with mind blank negates true seeing correct?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the primary reason we logically conclude True Seeing does NOT in fact negate an entire school of magic is simple:
1)TS is a divination and not an abjuration and therefore not meant to be protection of any kind.
2) There are no similar spells that shut down other schools of magic as entirely as mpl argues. I'm sorry this is a sore issue with you, but sometimes when you stand alone, it's because you are in fact wrong.
If that's how you play it then obviously someone with mind blank negates true seeing correct?
Yes.
2) There are no similar spells that shut down other schools of magic as entirely as mpl argues.
Mind Blank. Death Ward. Just off the top of my head. Protection from Evil hoses a hell of a lot (though admittedly no complete schools) and it's only level 1.
I'm sorry this is a sore issue with you, but sometimes when you stand alone, it's because you are in fact wrong.
Sometimes, and that's ok. Sometimes I am wrong. I don't believe I am wrong this time, but I'm not above thinking it's possible.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If true seeing bypasses all illusions, why isn't the spell description, "The recipient of this spell is aware of all illusions within range and is completely immune to all deleterious effects of the heretofore aforementioned illusions?"
I would argue that since the spell description isn't absolutely clear, there must be some wiggle room; some exceptions. To illustrate, I submit the natural 20. "A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a success."
But what if 20 + BAB doesn't equal the AC? Always a success is very clear. It is an absolute that leaves no room for interpretation.
This is but one of many examples of where the rules are crystal clear. That true seeing does not have such an absolute description as the one I posited above suggests that the spell does not "win" against every single illusion in the game.
Therefore, I do not believe that true seeing would make one immune to phantasmal killer.
Vision is mind-affecting. Then why doesn't light say it is mind-affecting? The evocation light produces something that is exclusively perceived with the sense of sight, thereby affecting the mind and yet the game-makers stupidly left "mind-affecting" out of the spell description. As they left it out of darkness, prismatic wall, prismatic sphere, prismatic spray to mention just a few. Even spells where the recipient's vision is directly affected, like arcane eye, and prying eyes lack "mind-affecting" descriptors.
How careless of the game-makers to leave this out. And as much as PF was play tested, one would think that someone would have been smart enough to point out the egregious oversight.
And yet, no one did. That must be because there is a difference, in game, between those things that are seen and those that are perceived in the mind.
The description of phantasmal killer states that only the subject can see it. So, then, does the spell blind everyone else in the area so that they cannot see it? Does SR apply to that? Is there even a save? No, it doesn't blind everyone else. It doesn't have to because there isn't anything for the other people to see! Think of phantasmal killer as a hallucination, if you will.
I once knew a guy who tripped so hard that was convinced that he'd gone crazy. Even though he knew he was on drugs, he was sure that even after the drugs had worn off, he'd still be crazy.
So, even if true seeing allows the victim to perceive the phantasmal killer as an illusion, the victim would still suffer the effects because it affects what the mind perceives, not what the eyes view.
Mind blank is just a greater protection against scrying and detection from the divination school not a beat all divinations. It is also 8th level. Death Ward? Really? Were you thinking of a different spell? Because Death Ward only negates one fraction of Necromancy and gives a bonus against some aspects. I'm not trying to be rude, but I do believe you are putting too much thought into the meaning of true seeing. I have published works for Open Design in the Pathfinder rules set and something the developers harp to is constantly is to write with a certain expectation of intelligence. Ie, do not leave wide open for abuse, but don't waste precious word count explaining every contingency. If you really want a 10,000 page explanation of every minute detail, may I suggest GURPS?
I think maybe the problem rests with phantasmal killer's school. As a phantasm, it belongs in illusion, but as mind affecting it could also be an enchantment. The same way mage armor is a conjuration instead of an abjuration. I stand by my opinion that true seeing does nothing against phantasmal killer, but perhaps this is partially why there is so much back and forth on it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm playing a character right now focused on phantasmal killer. Here's my take.
You still visualize a mental image of a phantasm. Even if you're blind, you still "see" the image because it's in your head. This is different from a pattern -- if you're blind, you literally don't see a pattern and it doesn't affect you.
That said, seeing something in your mind or seeing it with your eyes isn't what true seeing says. It simply says you see through illusions. Whether it's a mental image or a "real" image (like a figment/pattern), you see through illusions when affected by true seeing. The differentiation between actual images (patterns/figments) and mental images (phantasms) is not made. . . and we shouldn't assume that there is a difference.
I know this nerfs the heck out of my character, but it's illogical to assume mental images are not "seen" -- when an image (mental or physical) *has* to be seen. Otherwise, it's not an image.
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.
Then it's not an image. By definition, an image must be seen. Eyes are not always required to see things. I see the number 4 very clearly in my head. How am I not seeing it?
I would dearly love to see where in 'sight' and 'vision' the game gave it the 'mind-affecting' descriptor. No?
Sorry, MP, but the 'mind-affecting' part completely trumps the True Seeing. Basically, if you feel the will save, then it doesn't matter what your eyes tell you, your brain refuses to accept it. In short, you'll ignore the True Seeing the same way you ignore normal vision...and True Seeing doesn't give you a bonus on the Will save, either.
It's all in your head. Not in your sight.
Note that True Seeing is neither a Detect Spell nor a Scrying spell, and Mind Blank is going to have precious little effect on it.
==Aelryinth
Even in your example from CotT, something physical is projecting an image into the mind. Phantasmal Killer is not something physical, it's all in your head. Yes, a creature with true seeing may recognize it as an illusion, does that make it less terrifying? When you watch a really good horror flick, even though you know it's fake, doesn't it still sometimes scare you? This is the point of phantasmal killer, you are literally scared to death, a rare but legitimate way to die if a person is so shocked by something that their adrenaline pumps enough to push them into cardiac arrest. Yes, you recognize it as an illusion, no you are not immune to its effects. As stated already, a cool GM will give the player a bonus for having true seeing up, but not immunity. It just doesn't work that way.
Note that True Seeing is neither a Detect Spell nor a Scrying spell, and Mind Blank is going to have precious little effect on it.
"The subject is protected from all devices and spells that gather information about the target through divination magic"
Is True Seeing a divination spell that gets information about you? Yes? Then Mind Blank makes you immune to it.
Even in your example from CotT, something physical is projecting an image into the mind.
How is the (I assume) magic of the eye "physical"? Are you suggesting that simply because the eye is an object, it therefore isn't generating mental images in the minds of the witches? How would that work? Maybe the eye is a bluetooth device that is beaming video data into the eye receptors of the witches? (:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't really understand the argument "PK is mind affecting, so True Seeing doesn't apply". Patterns are also always mind affecting, but any visual patterns would be pierced by True Seeing. If this argument were true, then both patterns and phantasms would bypass True Seeing, but I find that very difficult to believe. It would be easier to say "sees through figments and glamers" since half the subschools of illusion are unaffected by True Seeing according to some of the people here, but the designers chose not to word it that way. Instead, they made a catch all "sees through illusions".
Additionally, the power level of True Seeing with the interpretation that it can see through phantasms is completely in line with design conventions. A number of low level spells(silent image, invisibility, alter self, etc.) are being thwarted by a single higher level spell (True Seeing). This is completely allowable by the design philosophies within the game as can be seen by Mind Blank (thwarts all magical attempts to gain information about the target).
True Seeing can also thwart spells higher level than itself, and while this initially seems rather powerful, it is also supported by the design philosophy of the game. Almost all, if not all (I haven't checked to see if it is actually all yet), of the higher level spells that are being thwarted are simply higher level variants of lower level spells. This can also be seen by the relationship between Wall of Force and Disintegrate as many higher level variants of Wall of Force, such as Force Cage, can be completely destroyed with a single Disintegrate, just as the base spell. There is also a hint of this in Mind Blank, as even Wish and Miracle, the most powerful spells in the game cannot thwart Mind Blank's perfect protection against divination.
True Seeing is definitely a powerful spell, and it should be treated as such. There is a reason why it has a short duration with an "expensive" material component (250g is cheap, but you still have to have it). It does not shut down the illusion school by this interpretation as completely as people seem to think. Looking briefly over the spells in the CRB, many of the higher levels spells would still function in the area of True Seeing.
My personal opinion, though, falls on this line of True Seeing: "You confer on the subject the ability to see all things as they actually are." The creature sees everything as it truly is. What the Phantasmal Killer would actually look like is nothing, as the thing created by PK isn't real. So not only would True Seeing thwart PK completely, the person with True Seeing would not even necessarily be aware of the attempt and would be unable to turn it with telepathy.
TL;DR : In my opinion, the idea of TS beating PK seems to fall in line with the design behind the game as well as the wording of the spells.
It's all in your head. Not in your sight.
Then you can never see mental images. Since you can't see them, you can't be affected by the spell -- ever. How do you detect a mental image? With smell perhaps? Or maybe taste?
I agree that mind blank trumps true seeing, but back to the point. True seeing never says you don't see the illusion, it says you see through them. It also never says you automatically disbelieve anything. Even by the argument presented, the subject still "sees" something, and whether or not that something is scary enough to kill them is left to phantasmal killer's will save.
Invisibility + Mind Blank means only epic tier things can see you, and that is left up the the GM.
Don't forget blindsight!
I agree that mind blank trumps true seeing, but back to the point. True seeing never says you don't see the illusion, it says you see through them. It also never says you automatically disbelieve anything. Even by the argument presented, the subject still "sees" something, and whether or not that something is scary enough to kill them is left to phantasmal killer's will save.
Yes, but what you see you "see through" -- or "understand the true character or nature of"
You know that the spell effect isn't real. . . believing something isn't real is the same thing as having disbelief.
I agree that mind blank trumps true seeing, but back to the point. True seeing never says you don't see the illusion, it says you see through them. It also never says you automatically disbelieve anything. Even by the argument presented, the subject still "sees" something, and whether or not that something is scary enough to kill them is left to phantasmal killer's will save.
I think that if True Seeing informs the target that the PK is an Illusion, it falls into this rule: " A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw." Since TS has a 100% accuracy of making this distinction, the target doesn't need a saving throw even if it sees a spooky outline because it will always have proof it is false.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that mind blank trumps true seeing, but back to the point. True seeing never says you don't see the illusion, it says you see through them. It also never says you automatically disbelieve anything. Even by the argument presented, the subject still "sees" something, and whether or not that something is scary enough to kill them is left to phantasmal killer's will save.I think that if True Seeing informs the target that the PK is an Illusion, it falls into this rule: " A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw." Since TS has a 100% accuracy of making this distinction, the target doesn't need a saving throw even if it sees a spooky outline because it will always have proof it is false.
If that were the case, then the caster who cast the spell and "knows" that it isn't real, wouldn't have to make the same save if the target is psychic and turns the phantasm back against them.
Excellent point, widjit!
==Aelryinth
Yes Widjit, thank you. I don't know how else to say it, the nature of PK does not care if the target knows it's real or not. Movies can scare us and we know they are not real. As a Mind Affecting effect, PK makes the target THINK of something so terrifying it scares them to death.
Yes Widjit, thank you. I don't know how else to say it, the nature of PK does not care if the target knows it's real or not. Movies can scare us and we know they are not real. As a Mind Affecting effect, PK makes the target THINK of something so terrifying it scares them to death.
And that's why True Seeing will not negate Phantasmal Killer.
Amen.
If that were the case, then the caster who cast the spell and "knows" that it isn't real, wouldn't have to make the same save if the target is psychic and turns the phantasm back against them.I agree that mind blank trumps true seeing, but back to the point. True seeing never says you don't see the illusion, it says you see through them. It also never says you automatically disbelieve anything. Even by the argument presented, the subject still "sees" something, and whether or not that something is scary enough to kill them is left to phantasmal killer's will save.I think that if True Seeing informs the target that the PK is an Illusion, it falls into this rule: " A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw." Since TS has a 100% accuracy of making this distinction, the target doesn't need a saving throw even if it sees a spooky outline because it will always have proof it is false.
How we he know that it was his PK that was attacking him? Would he actually know that it had been turned on him? I don't think he would be able to tell that a PK had been turned, and as such would not be aware that it isn't real. From the casters perspective:
1) Caster attacks a target with a Phantasmal Killer Spell.2) A horrifying monster appears and attacks the caster (as a PK).
And for the record, as an illusion, PK does care if you know it is real. Read the saving throw line. It says Will disbelief If you don't believe it is there, then it can't effect you. As an illusion, TS automatically informs you it isn't real. As such, TS completely defeats PK.
Yes, please faq it. If true seeing trumped all illusions, then if I have true seeing on while looking at you, you can't use the spell shadow step. Yeah, that makes sense. :-p
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, please faq it. If true seeing trumped all illusions, then if I have true seeing on while looking at you, you can't use the spell shadow step. Yeah, that makes sense. :-p
Huh? You see through illusions--it's not "counter all illusions as they are cast under your gaze."
If you got attacked by a Shadow Conjuration while you had True Seeing on, you'd still take 20% of the damage, since 20% of it is real.
You don't have to agree with me, but I'd prefer if you don't misrepresent my position like that, even with a :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Im with you mplindustries. Any Shadow illusion spell still works as normal, though anyone with True Seeing does know that it is mostly illusory. As I see it, its pretty obvious that TS does trump PK, both RAW and RAI.
Phantasmal Killer is an illusion spell that causes the creature affected to see the most horrible thing their mind can imagine and, through this fear, kill them. It allows a Will save to disbelieve the illusion, just as most illusion spells do, with a successful save making the phantasmal killer completely ineffective.
True Seeing allows a creature to see all things as they are, and specifically states that it sees through all illusions. From the Saving Throws and Disbelief section of the Illusion school of magic, any creature that has proof an an illusion spell of any type is not real, they automatically pass the save to disbelieve said illusion. It can be gathered from this that True Seeing gives the creature constant proof that an illusion it sees is not real and thus automatically pass the Will save to disbelieve.
Since the Phantasmal Killer is seen by the victim, True Seeing automatically sees through it, meaning he has proof it is fake, and automatically passes his save to disbelieve. According the Phantasmal Killer spell, a successful save to disbelieve causes the spell to fail with no effect.
If this seems overpowered to you, in my first post on this thread I talked about how this falls within the design philosophy of the game and you can refer to that.
If you wish to split hairs about the difference of what is seen in the mind and what is seen with your eyes and how this changes things, you need to realize that is beyond the scope of the rules of the game. As the rules are written, True Seeing defeats any visual illusion, which includes Phantasmal Killer.
Wasn't calling anyone specifically out MPL, no harm intended. I think most of us here are misrepresenting the other's positions though; that's usually what happens during a debate. I've already had my own words twisted to fit the counter argument, as have you. I just hope for some faq action and a clear decision. If it means I'm wrong, I'm okay with that.
Page: 210 and 211 of Core Rule Book.
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.
I put this here cause it bears weight on the subject.
And is the counter to the logic presented by Dominigo. If true seeing is not sight based, then yes it negates phantasmal killer. But if it, like I and others believe, is sight based, then true seeing does not negate phantasmal killer. May we all at least agree this is the crux of the debate?
And is the counter to the logic presented by Dominigo. If true seeing is not sight based, then yes it negates phantasmal killer. But if it, like I and others believe, is sight based, then true seeing does not negate phantasmal killer. May we all at least agree this is the crux of the debate?
No, and I wonder if that's leading to all the disagreement.
While I do think True Seeing is more than just sight based, I would still think it stopped Phantasmal Killer, even if it was.
Phantasmal Killer creates an image in your mind. Images are things you see. Yes, you still see if it you are blind or your eyes are closed or anything else, but it's still something seen in your mind.
But really, the crux of the issue is that I think the other side is overthinking things (which is why my defenses have been over-overthinking related).
True Seeing sees through illusions. "Seeing through an illusion" means you know it's not real and thus automatically disbelieve it. Phantasmal Killer is an illusion that can be disbelieved. Therefore, True Seeing lets you automatically disbelieve in Phantasmal Killer. It's straightforward and extremely simple and doesn't require arguing about the nature of vision and whether you see mental images and how something that is mind affecting could still be seen even if nobody else sees it, etc.
I still disagree, but you already know why. We can haz faq please?
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
So, based on the assumption that True Seeing is not restricted to sight and the entity with True Seeing sees through all illusions, this means that if an entity has permanent True Seeing (like some Demons/Devils/Celestials/Gods), he/she/it would not be able to dream. Since dreams are not real, True Seeing would negate them. As there are many campaign supplements and modules that mention the dreams of these beings in them, I doubt very much True Seeing works in this way.
Further, using the Mind Blank assertion that it counters all Divination spells: Is a being with Mind Blank invisible to someone with True Seeing, since physical appearance is technically "information about" you? Or, does someone with True Seeing see you as you really are when you stand in front of them, since the spell allows you to see things as they really are? Seems to me, based on MPL's logic, if you had someone with True Seeing in the same room with someone with Mind Blank, you'd create some kind of magical paradox.
This is all too complicated for the purposes of playing a game. I'm going with the basics:
* True Seeing sees through sight-based illusions and effects, per its description. Nothing more, nothing less.
* Mind Blank counters attempts to divine or scry information about a person, not his/her/its physical appearance or other factors some have tried to shoehorn in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, 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)." So Mind Blank could prevent True Seeing from functioning in the sense of making it unable to pierce through shape changes and the like, but it doesn't actually prevent you from just looking at the creature and seeing it in its current form.
As far as prevent something from dreaming, that's the same as arguing that a creature's thoughts aren't real, thus True Seeing preventing sentient thought. The main difference between the two is that thoughts and dreams aren't truly "illusions" in any sense of the game mechanics, so they can't be caught by that catch all, and they don't fall into any of the other subcategories listed in True Seeing.
Additionally, True Seeing specifically deals with how the creature is perceiving the world around it. PK is placing a false image into that creature's perception of the world in order to frighten it to death. While this image is 100% in the creature's head, it is also within that creature's perception of the world around it. More specifically, it is within the creature's visual perspective of the world. True Seeing specifically states it sees through illusions, so phantasms like PK still get caught by it, while dreams and the like don't ever encroach on the visual perceptions of the world in the same way.