Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The phrasing in the DMG seems (to me) to indicate Seeking weapons would work against any miss chance, including Entropic Shield or Blink. Is there disagreement regarding this?

share|improve this question
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 7 down vote accepted

As Written There's No Disagreement...

The seeking weapon special ability has the effect of "negating any miss chances, ...such as from concealment" (DMG 225). Honestly, that's about as absolute as this game gets.

...Unless the DM's Really, Really Out to Nerf It

The only disagreement I can see arising is that the spell used in the manufacture of the seeking weapon special ability is true seeing [div] (PH 296), which explicitly "does not help the viewer... spot creatures who are simply hiding." A DM who's very, very angry at a an archer ignoring miss chances on his creatures could on that basis house rule that the seeking weapon special ability can't overcome mundane concealment because the spell used in its creation can't either. That's a really mean house rule, though. Archery's hard enough as it is.

"What If the DM Does Do That?"

The spell corpse candle [conj] (SpC 53) reveals hidden creatures.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks. I don't think the true seeing thing should be an issue either. –  Epiphanis Dec 23 '13 at 20:44
add comment

If it is writen as a miss chance, seeking weapon will ignore it, but it is better to study individual effects:

  • Concealment says it grants a miss chance, so it is negated by a seeking weapon.
  • Entropic Shield provides a miss chance that "works like concealment", so it is fully negated. Blur works almost in the same way (it states it grants concealment)
  • Blink makes you become ethereal at intervals. It gives you 50% miss chance, but only 20% is for concealment (that 20% would be negated by seeking weapons) and 30% for intermitent etherealness. That 30% represent the chance your arrow has to hit in the precise moment your opponent arrives from the Ethereal plane and before he is gone again, so it is a matter of striking at the rigth time more than striking at the rigth place. Remember that anyone under the effects of blink also have a chance of having their spells or attack fail due an inoportune dimension shift. Of course, if you can somehow strike at ethereal oponents, then your oponent is out of luck.
  • Invisibility per se cannot be negated by seeking weapons. Unless you manage to pinpoint the exact square in which the target is hidding,that is. In that case, he would be protected only by a full concealment status, which is negated by seeking weapons.
share|improve this answer
    
But the blink spell's nonconcealment-based miss chance (from being on a another plane, which is a pretty extreme kind of miss chance) is just another kind of miss chance, hence covered by the seeking weapon special ability. –  Hey I Can Chan Dec 23 '13 at 21:04
    
Also, ghost touch is useless against blink (it only works against incorporeality, not etherealness). Lord, how I hate how Blink is written up, it gives me a headache. –  Epiphanis Dec 23 '13 at 21:11
    
Seeking weapons ignore normal miss chance because they always strike at their target, but intermitent etherealness means that the may strike at the correct place, but in the wrong moment, when the target is in another plane of existence. The 30% is to acount for those moments when the target is no even present to begin with and unless you can shoot into another plane, you could not touch him. I will remove the ghost touch part, thanks for noting it. I agree that Blink is horribly writen. –  MACN Dec 23 '13 at 21:19
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.