PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Dust of Disappearance = Win?



AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 03:01 AM
Is this item really as useful as it seems? Chump change for Greater Invisibility that can't be foiled by anything but a specific item? (Dust of Appearance) It seems like there's just no real way to avoid it other than to run away for a time, which in many cases isn't possible. Am I looking at this item wrong, or is it really that powerful?

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-09, 03:03 AM
Is this item really as useful as it seems? Chump change for Greater Invisibility that can't be foiled by anything but a specific item? (Dust of Appearance) It seems like there's just no real way to avoid it other than to run away for a time, which in many cases isn't possible. Am I looking at this item wrong, or is it really that powerful?One-use only, and still defeated by Blindsight/Blindsense/Trueseeing/Glitterdust.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 03:15 AM
Trueseeing and Glitterdust work? It says magical effects don't work on it, I thought.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-09, 03:38 AM
Is there any errata that would make it actually a one use item?

Because all you have to do is touch it, not use it, not cover yourself. Just touch.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 03:40 AM
You have just died of munchkinitus.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-09, 04:42 AM
You have just died of munchkinitus.

No seriously, it's way to expensive for one use only, and every other dust of X thing has some way of making it clear that it's one use only, because you have to cast the dust over an area, or it soaks up the water and forms a pellet.

Dust of Disappearance is poorly worded, and way more expensive then a one use item should be, especially since you can get Greater Invis for one round per encounter for 3000gp,

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 04:52 AM
Don't forget to factor in the fact that it resists most magical ways of seeing invisible. That's worth more than 500 gold.

Anyways, rules lawyering aside, I'm not seeing how True Sight and Glitterdust get through this. It says they can't "be detected by magical means, including see invisibility and invisibility purge." True Sight and Glitterdust are magical, so...

Oslecamo
2008-12-09, 05:09 AM
Anyways, rules lawyering aside, I'm not seeing how True Sight and Glitterdust get through this. It says they can't "be detected by magical means, including see invisibility and invisibility purge." True Sight and Glitterdust are magical, so...

Rules lawyering inside, gillterdust doesn't destroy invisibility effects, it just gives you a heavy penalty in the hide check. Invisibile creatures can still be spoted normally, but the invisibility gratns a fat +30 bonus on the hide check.

Glitterdust gives -40 penalty. It doesn't breack the invisibility itself.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 05:16 AM
Unfortunately, dust of disappearance doesn't just make you invisible as per Greater Invisibility. It makes it so you can't be seen by normal vision. period. So, that's glitterdust out. How does true seeing work, then?

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 05:34 AM
Rules lawyering inside, gillterdust doesn't destroy invisibility effects, it just gives you a heavy penalty in the hide check. Invisibile creatures can still be spoted normally, but the invisibility gratns a fat +30 bonus on the hide check.

Glitterdust gives -40 penalty. It doesn't breack the invisibility itself.

Uh, you averaged it there. +40 to hide if you are still, +20 to hide if you move.


Unfortunately, dust of disappearance doesn't just make you invisible as per Greater Invisibility. It makes it so you can't be seen by normal vision. period. So, that's glitterdust out. How does true seeing work, then?

Glitterdust doesn't make it so you are visible it just outlines you in glitterydust so they know where you are. Sounds like....dust of apperance, doesn't it?

True seeing is seeing the world as it is. Basically a silly spell of "screw you illusion school."

I'm at work and can't check SRD, so any one who can could quote it. However I do believe each of those way to see ya would work.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 05:39 AM
Dust of Disappearance

This dust looks just like dust of appearance and is typically stored in the same manner. A creature or object touched by it becomes invisible (as greater invisibility). Normal vision canít see dusted creatures or objects, nor can they be detected by magical means, including see invisibility or invisibility purge. Dust of appearance, however, does reveal people and objects made invisible by dust of disappearance. Other factors, such as sound and smell, also allow possible detection.

The greater invisibility bestowed by the dust lasts for 2d6 rounds.The invisible creature doesnít know when the duration will end.

Moderate illusion; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, greater invisibility; Price 3,500 gp.


True Seeing
Divination
Level: Clr 5, Drd 7, Knowledge 5, Sor/Wiz 6
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
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.
Material Component

An ointment for the eyes that costs 250 gp and is made from mushroom powder, saffron, and fat.

Not seeing how True Seeing pierces Dust of Disappearance.

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 05:46 AM
Dust of Disappearance

This dust looks just like dust of appearance and is typically stored in the same manner. A creature or object touched by it becomes invisible (as greater invisibility). Normal vision canít see dusted creatures or objects, nor can they be detected by magical means, including see invisibility or invisibility purge. Dust of appearance, however, does reveal people and objects made invisible by dust of disappearance. Other factors, such as sound and smell, also allow possible detection.

The greater invisibility bestowed by the dust lasts for 2d6 rounds.The invisible creature doesnít know when the duration will end.

Moderate illusion; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, greater invisibility; Price 3,500 gp.


True Seeing
Divination
Level: Clr 5, Drd 7, Knowledge 5, Sor/Wiz 6
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
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.
Material Component

An ointment for the eyes that costs 250 gp and is made from mushroom powder, saffron, and fat.

My Emphasis
Doesn't it say higher level spells trump lower level ones? DoD is made from a 3rd level, and True seeing is 5-7th. Seems like it would, but I have few ranks in Profession: Rules Lawyer.

Also its funny how it says "normal vision." Does that technically include Darkvision and Low-light Vision?

*edit* Just noticed the material component for True Seeing. How the heck did they figure that one out? I could see how it was fun to develop so long as they tested it on other people though...

lord_khaine
2008-12-09, 06:22 AM
*edit* Just noticed the material component for True Seeing. How the heck did they figure that one out? I could see how it was fun to develop so long as they tested it on other people though...

dont worry, they dont need to use people for things like that, not when they have goblings.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 06:35 AM
But high level beating low level is a general rule, and the "can't be detected by magic" is a specific rule. Specific beats general by RAW. Also, it never gives a spell level, just a caster level.

I'm not trying to rules lawyer this into working, I want to see how it works by RAW, and I just can't see how True Seeing works. The only things I know of that could work would be stuff like tremorsense or listen checks followed by throwing dust of appearance in the general direction you hear them in.

Eldran
2008-12-09, 06:37 AM
Unfortunately, dust of disappearance doesn't just make you invisible as per Greater Invisibility. It makes it so you can't be seen by normal vision. period. So, that's glitterdust out. [...]

Wrong
It is quite clear that Glitterdust works completely around the effect of Dust of Disappearence, since you don't get to see the invisible creature but the thing that you see is the "Glitterdust" freshly sprinkled around it after Dust of Disappearance has already been applied (earlier on).

You see a glittering form shaped like the creature that was hit by the spell.

If you want to beat Glitterdust I would advice you to dodge the effect by misleading the caster or by making the reflex saving throw.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 06:38 AM
Wrong
It is quite clear that Glitterdust works completely around the effect of Dust of Disappearence, since you don't get to see the invisible creature but the thing that you see is the "Glitterdust" freshly sprinkled around it after Dust of Disappearance has already been applied (earlier on).

You see a glittering form shaped like the creature that was hit by the spell.

If you want to beat Glitterdust I would advice you to dodge the effect by misleading the caster or by making the reflex saving throw.

That's true by RAI, probably, but not RAW, as far as I can see. Glitterdust does: You cast spell, you see person.

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 07:04 AM
But high level beating low level is a general rule, and the "can't be detected by magic" is a specific rule. Specific beats general by RAW. Also, it never gives a spell level, just a caster level.

I'm not trying to rules lawyer this into working, I want to see how it works by RAW, and I just can't see how True Seeing works. The only things I know of that could work would be stuff like tremorsense or listen checks followed by throwing dust of appearance in the general direction you hear them in.

CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, greater invisibility

CL 7th means 3rd level, as does the specific spell "greater invisibility."

Furthermore it is very specific on "sees through illusions." Which the dust of disapperance is specific on being.

So it is a spell that seems general but is very specific on certain things. So we now have two spells (or spelllike effects) that specifically state the other doesn't work. As far as I can guess it would either go to a CL check or just check the level of the spells.

I'm sorry if you think I'm accusing you of rules lawyering, that is not my intent. I'm merely stating that I don't argue RAW a lot so I am admitting that if there is a ruling somewhere I wouldn't know of it.

Personally I'm on the boat that True Seeing shouldn't exist. I hate that spell, beyond measure. No one spell should cancel an entire school of magic.

Eldran
2008-12-09, 07:07 AM
That's true by RAI, probably, but not RAW, as far as I can see. Glitterdust does: You cast spell, you see person.

By RAW as well, it is a conjuration spell the dust that hits the DoD-covered creature is not even magical by itself (Spell Resistance won't work against it and again-> Conjuration).

So the only RAW excuse to make it not work, the sentence that the hidden creature is not "detected by magical means" , is out as well.

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 07:13 AM
By RAW as well, it is a conjuration spell the Dust that hits the DoD covered creature is not even magical by itself (Spell Resistance won't work against it and again-> Conjuration).

So the only RAW excuse to make it not work, the sentence that the hidden creature is not "detected by magical means" , is out as well.

Three exceptions: AMF stops Glitterdust if the creature enters it, right? Makes summoned creatures wink out at least.

You casted a spell. Using magic you detected a creature.

You just created a magical thing. It is magical. You are using magic to detect it.

Spell Resistance doesn't prove it isn't magical, AMF would.
(I'm not positive on AMF. Talk about a werid spell to figure out.)
Still think glitterdust will work though.

SydneyLosstarot
2008-12-09, 07:16 AM
Can't see how Glitterdust doesn't pierce the DoD



A cloud of golden particles covers everyone and everything in the area, causing creatures to become blinded and visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell. All within the area are covered by the dust, which cannot be removed and continues to sparkle until it fades.

The sparkles are magical in nature, but the nature of our seeing the covered object is completely mundane, thus rendering the "not detected via magical means" clause totally irrelevant

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-09, 07:17 AM
Wrong
It is quite clear that Glitterdust works completely around the effect of Dust of Disappearence, since you don't get to see the invisible creature but the thing that you see is the "Glitterdust" freshly sprinkled around it after Dust of Disappearance has already been applied (earlier on).

You see a glittering form shaped like the creature that was hit by the spell.

If you want to beat Glitterdust I would advice you to dodge the effect by misleading the caster or by making the reflex saving throw.

Will save, not Ref. Glitterdust would be the best 2nd level spell in the game if it targeted Ref, as Evasion doesn't get around being Blinded and Reflex is the worst save for over 3/4s of the MM.

Oh, and there's no save for the Hide penalty.

Of course, that doesn't change the fact that Glitterdust is all ready one of the 5 best 2nd level spells there is.

BardicDuelist
2008-12-09, 07:22 AM
Glitterdust would just outline you, so, IMO, it would work to beat DoD.

True Seeing, however, is more or less what it seems the description was getting at, so yes, this foils what is otherwise a win button for not getting caught with your pants down. IMO, would not beat DoD.

Eldran
2008-12-09, 07:29 AM
Three exceptions: AMF stops Glitterdust if the creature enters it, right? Makes summoned creatures wink out at least.

You casted a spell. Using magic you detected a creature.

You just created a magical thing. It is magical. You are using magic to detect it.

Spell Resistance doesn't prove it isn't magical, AMF would.
(I'm not positive on AMF. Talk about a werid spell to figure out.)
Still think glitterdust will work though.

Thanks for applying so much thought to the AMF problem.

After reading it and thinking it through though I would sum it up as follows:

we cannot be sure about the AMF-effect here
that you just use just use magic to "bring something somehwere else" is in general the difference between the fire that hits you through an evocation effect (magically evoked magical fire) and the acid that hits you through a conjuration effect (magically conjured normal acid)
That a summonded creature disappears is due to the AMF cancelling the magic that allows it to be here, the AMF is hardly disintegrating the creature itself
We both agree that it is more likely that Glitterdust will work


The argument that Trueseeing works since DoD is an Illusion effect, the thing that Trueseeing is specifically targeting, seems solid as well. So we have at least two ways for a Caster to work around the item.

To the OP: Don't worry, DoD seems to be far from auto-win and is most likely not unbalanced or overpowered.

On a sidenote: A simple Bag of flour would work as well and would be as unmagical as you can get, usable by everyone and cheap as well. Very easy counter for the costly DoD.

And if one wants to continue the "magci" discussion... how about a non targeted dispel magic?

Eldran
2008-12-09, 07:31 AM
Will save, not Ref. Glitterdust would be the best 2nd level spell in the game if it targeted Ref, as Evasion doesn't get around being Blinded and Reflex is the worst save for over 3/4s of the MM.

Oh, and there's no save for the Hide penalty.

Of course, that doesn't change the fact that Glitterdust is all ready one of the 5 best 2nd level spells there is.

I stand corrected :smallsmile:
So Glitterdust is not as good as I remembered it but even better so for beating DoD (no save) , ok.

Talic
2008-12-09, 07:36 AM
By "Cannot be detected by magical means", based on the interpretation given above...

1) any magical blindsight, blindsense, tremorsense, or the like would not work.
2) Any divination spell would fail to work, when used to detect the target, by any means.
3) A paladin's detect evil ability would not detect them.

Roderick_BR
2008-12-09, 08:32 AM
Not seeing how True Seeing pierces Dust of Disappearance.
Not seeing how True Seeing DON'T pierces Dust of Disappearance.
This is an example of spell/powers/effects that instead of giving a high value at something, so you can compare it to others, just go forth and say "you can never do X", then something else comes along and says "you can always do X".
I'll agree that higher spell level trumps lower level spell.

And it's weird as that dust doesn't say how many uses it have. Looks like you can remove it from the bag, thouch something, and put it back.

Sinfire Titan
2008-12-09, 08:56 AM
I stand corrected :smallsmile:
So Glitterdust is not as good as I remembered it but even better so for beating DoD (no save) , ok.

Not as good? Kinda. If it did target Ref for the Blinding part, then it would be amazingly powerful. But it's only Powerful.

Still, a 2nd level spell that has a 50% chance of screwing the entire encounter is hard to beat.

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 01:19 PM
On a sidenote: A simple Bag of flour would work as well and would be as unmagical as you can get, usable by everyone and cheap as well. Very easy counter for the costly DoD.

And if one wants to continue the "magic" discussion... how about a non targeted dispel magic?

Flour is amazing :D
No. It counts as an "item" and therefore can only be surpressed (which requires a targeted dispel) as it doesn't cast greater invisibility on you. Although it really sounds more like superior invisibility...


I stand corrected :smallsmile:
So Glitterdust is not as good as I remembered it but even better so for beating DoD (no save) , ok.

Pfft. I made a 5 level sorc who basically did nothing BUT cast glitterdust. He was practically the MvP every fight.


Not seeing how True Seeing DON'T pierces Dust of Disappearance.
This is an example of spell/powers/effects that instead of giving a high value at something, so you can compare it to others, just go forth and say "you can never do X", then something else comes along and says "you can always do X".
I'll agree that higher spell level trumps lower level spell.

And it's weird as that dust doesn't say how many uses it have. Looks like you can remove it from the bag, thouch something, and put it back.

If you capitalize something for emphasis, spell it right. I normally don't care, but this physically hurt.

RAI would say ya have to cover yourself with it, but RAW is great for infinite use. I kinda want to invent a DoD patch. Slap it on when ya need it.

Blood_Lord
2008-12-09, 02:25 PM
1) True Seeing beats it.

2) 3,000gp is for infinite uses at one round each. If you want a one time use of GI, you can get it (with a known duration, AKA superior) for 700gp. So the question is, is it worth 2,800gp to not be detected by see invis. And the answer is no.

AgentPaper
2008-12-09, 03:51 PM
"Spells that see invisible stuff" is more specific than "illusion spells". And if True Seeing works, then should See Invisibility work with a boosted caster/spell level? (or maybe just spell level, I don't remember) Even Glitterdust beating it is a bit iffy, by RAW. I'd definitely make it work as RAI or houserule, but that's it. Dust of Disappearance is so horrendously worded in general, though, that I think I'm just going to outright ban it.

Keld Denar
2008-12-09, 05:34 PM
Dust of Disappearance

This dust looks just like dust of appearance and is typically stored in the same manner. A creature or object touched by it becomes invisible (as greater invisibility). Normal vision canít see dusted creatures or objects, nor can they be detected by magical means, including see invisibility or invisibility purge. Dust of appearance, however, does reveal people and objects made invisible by dust of disappearance. Other factors, such as sound and smell, also allow possible detection.

The greater invisibility bestowed by the dust lasts for 2d6 rounds.The invisible creature doesnít know when the duration will end.

Moderate illusion; CL 7th; Craft Wondrous Item, greater invisibility; Price 3,500 gp.


As Greater Invis, thats the key phrase. Invisible creatures can still be pinpointed through the use of the spot skill, provided the spotter can beat the invisible creatures hide check modified by the +20 to 40 bonus that Invis gives. This is not magical means. Also, the spotter is only able to "pinpoint" the invisible foe, not actually see them. Glitterdust imposes a -40 on this check. That makes it much easier for the spotter to pinpoint the invisible creature. Note, I didn't say that the spotter can actually "see" the invisible creature, only that they are able to pinpoint the invisble foes square. 50% miss chance should still apply while under the effects of both DoD and Glitterdust.