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?


2 Answers 2


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.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks. I don't think the true seeing thing should be an issue either. \$\endgroup\$
    – Epiphanis
    Commented Dec 23, 2013 at 20:44

If it is writen as a miss chance, a 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)
  • 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.
  • Blink is kinda hard to explain...and read. But there is two ways it can interact
    with seeking weapons. Blink says you have 50% miss chance against the blinking target, which would be negated by seeking weapons just fine, but there is also the tricky part, where it says:

    Since you spend about half your time on the Ethereal Plane, you can see and even attack ethereal creatures....
    An ethereal creature is invisible, incorporeal, and capable of moving in any direction, even up or down. As an incorporeal creature, you can move through solid objects, ...

    If this mean you are a truly incorporeal creature, then:

    Even when hit by spells or magic weapons, it has a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source (except for positive energy, negative energy, force effects such as magic missile, or attacks made with ghost touch weapons).

    50% chance to ignore damage is not 50% miss chance. So seeking weapons will not work unless they are ghost touch weapons too. Of course, the spell is so badly written you do not know if you become incorporeal all the time, 50% of the time, 20% of the time or if you ever become incorporeal at all.

  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ 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. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Dec 23, 2013 at 21:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ 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. \$\endgroup\$
    – Epiphanis
    Commented Dec 23, 2013 at 21:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ 'Seeking' states it negates all miss chances, not just from concealment. Anything more than that is a House Rule, even if it makes sense. \$\endgroup\$
    – GreySage
    Commented Jul 22, 2015 at 19:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .