GameBanshee Forums

I think this question was posted before, but no one answered it. I use the cloak of non detect quite often, but what good is it? It won't prevent true sight from dispelling your invisibility, if you read the spell discription and the cloak discription it will prevent psionic and other forms of scrying from detecting you, but I also recall lich scripted true sights removing my invisibility sever times. so what, if any protection does it offer???

So if a mind flayer who has psionic ability is in the smae room, will it prevent the flayer from knowing if an enemy is there or not?

Heck the damned thing won't prevent liches from seeing your invisible form at all!!! some liches can see invisible, even though you got mislead up, spell immunity and cloak of non detect!!! the liches in the shade lord could see me as soon as I had walked into field of vision.

so what good is it? I want to know specific monster type it can protect you from.

Stuff that sees the invisible will see you whether or not you wear that cloak, I believe.

From what I understand...

If you wear the cloak, True Sight will still dispel any magical invisibility, but not the invisibility gained through Hide in Shadows.

So, the cloak is good for sneakers that go up against True Sighting enemies. Nothing else.

Some mages (and other creatures) can sense your presence but not see you and will therefor cast true sight. the cloak should prevent that they cast any spells that will reveal you unless you are "sensed" in another way (like backstabbing him or nearby foes) try it out on Ribald Barterman (the guy in Adventurer's Mart) if you are invisible he will cast true sight if you wear the cloak he shouldn't.

Ah, so no Detect() script functions will work on you. Kinda makes sense for a Cloak of Non-Dectection.

Scripts use See() functions to pick a target, but some use Detect() to tell if there's an invisible creature sneaking around (I guess they hear or smell him, or have some sixth sense that warns them).

As I recall, dragons (and some other creatures) can smell an invisible or hidden presence, and locate the offender. Non-detect acts as a sort of magical deoderant.

Originally posted by Xyx:
<STRONG> (I guess they hear or smell him, or have some sixth sense that warns them).</STRONG>

As far as I know, faint vibration of air, somewhat like that around hot objects, can be seen around invisible creatures. Someone intelligent (a mage, usually) can probably detect this. Most people, seeing such shimmering, wouldn't notice anything or would just think their eyes are deceiving them. But a mage, having experience with invisibility users, would recognize that effect and use a True Sight or similar to be sure.

Ok, that's the technical explanation. The more obvious one is that Bioware is trying to prevent the party from killing the strong enemy mage before any battle is fought.

In addition to the Cloak of Non-Detection, Boots of Speed are good when using invisibility. In Planar Sphere, I killed the mage of the Halfling Warriors (I was at low level then, it was a tough fight) by casting invisibility on Anomen, who ran quickly near the mage and whacked him with Slay Living before he could do anything.

Here is an alternative explanation. When you approach, mages suddly put up all their protections, right? Check out triggers for contingency spells. "Enemy Present" might trigger the contingency, visible or not!

Just to clairfy something, according to AD&D rules (not sure about 3rd ed) any creature with more than 10 HD and an intelligence rating of 14 or more (or monster equivalent) can sense invisible creatures/objects. That even went for PC's. DM's throughout the ages have found ways to get around it though. Some claim it doesnt counteract smell, etc. Depends on the DM, or in this case, game designer.

"DM's throughout the ages have found ways to get around it though. Some claim it doesnt counteract smell, etc. Depends on the DM, or in this case, game designer."

oops, i just realized that didnt make sense. what i was talking about here was non-detection, not the sensing invisibility