How do Illusion spells work?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Umbral Reaver wrote:
It's better to think of most illusions as holograms than universally mind-affecting. They create light and sound and sensation but aren't solid.

By that line of thought invisibility wouldn't really work. By its very description it has to effect everyone who perceives the subject. How is something effecting your senses not also mind-effecting (in description, if not game mechanics)?


I said most, not all.

In the case of invisibility, it's pretty simple to explain it as saying the magic permits light to pass through you without impedance.


Umbral Reaver wrote:
It's better to think of most illusions as holograms than universally mind-affecting. They create light and sound and sensation but aren't solid.

+1. Invisibility doesn't go into everything's head and erase the image of the person. It's not global, it's a blanket sized bit of magic that covers over someone's visual appearance.

Having invisibility be global mind manipulation is as extreme as sayingjump just pulls everything else in the universe down 5 feet for you.

Ravingdork wrote:


By that definition invisibility wouldn't exist.

Why? It's just one hop skip more magical than camouflage...

Glamers are there, they're just immaterial and massless veils that alter the appearance of something that is there.

Throwing a glamer of a mansion on top of a large but crummy house will work pretty darn well. Throwing a tower up in a field (in which case the illusion is almost entirely figment) is not going to be a long lasting ruse.


Ravingdork wrote:


Glamers that affect all your senses could easily give you the perception that you are walking up stairs even when you aren't.

Glamers change the appearance of something that is there. It could make a ramp look like a set of stairs, and a loose GM may allow the character think it is stairs, though it would still be like walking up a ramp.

I looked at this sort of thing carefully for a recent encounter. The bad guy's lair is behind an illusory wall. My expectation was that the players would have to make a Will save to walk through the wall. I was thinking of Ron and Harry on the 9.75th platform. However, once there is proof that the wall is illusory they auto-disbelieve. The players followed a bad guy, watched him walk through the wall and were automatically able to do the same. If they had searched for a secret door a Will save would have enabled them to disbelieve it though it would give them auto-disbelief. If they had said they hit it with a hammer they would gain auto-disbelief, though I'd try to describe what happened rather than telling them it was an illusion.

The players would not be stopped by the wall - at best it could only misguide them in their pursuit, or delay them. It could only deceive them whilst they thought it was real.

The second floor of an illusory tower would be inaccessible (unless there really was a ladder or stairs) and would provide an opportunity for auto-disbelief, or perhaps a will save. It can only deceive them whilst they think it is real.

A good use for the spell that RD has inspired for me is to cast it over a crumbling tower, that has stairs that end suddenly, providing falling damage for those who fail their will save.


What then, is the purpose of the Illusion spells?
Obviously, to deceive. To change the appearance of something/someone/somewhere.
But, to deceive what?
The senses.
How?
By creating magic that is applied to something.
So, this magic is applied to something that is external to the one being deceived?
Yes.
So it is deceiving the external senses: sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste?
Yes.
What about a sense of temperature?
...

It seems that the illusion spells are aimed at deceiving the Five Traditional Senses: sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste (to varying degrees depending on the spell); and a sense of temperature.

There are more than Five Senses [gasp!] The Five that we think of are the external senses, and it is these that the illusion spells deceive. We should also include Temperature as one of the basic External senses.

The other senses are Internal. We experience a sense of pain, balance, time, acceleration, motion, and joint movement (and perhaps love and hate and all the emotions, but I don’t think we should debate that here). The illusion spells do not (and cannot) deceive these senses. The illusion spells would need to be Mind Affecting in order to deceive these senses Because they are internal.

(In the modern world we deceive some of these with some theme-park rides, the ones with the moving seats and big screen. Here the senses of sight, motion and acceleration are all deceived together in order to heighten the experience of the sense of motion)

Walking up illusory stairs will never deceive our sense of motion. Walking on the spot does not give one the sense of moving forwards and upwards, nor do we gain a true sense of joint movement that matches what our eyes are telling us.


This has got me looking into the higher level illusion spells mentioned.

Interestingly, Mirage Arcana is the only Illusion spell which includes changing tactile elements. However, it is still classified as a Glamer – it only changes things that are already there. In conflict with this, it then goes on to say that it can add structures where there are none, which is what Figments do that Glamers cannot. Perhaps it should have both descriptors.

No other illusion would give you the tactile experience of being able to open a door by its handle, gently run your fingers along a table, or feel the delicate texture of a blanket on a chair that doesn’t exist*. However, if you were to kick in that door, jump on that table, or sit on that chair you would discover that it is an illusion and perhaps end up prone. Depending on the GM, you may believe that the door/table/chair to be an illusion, or you may see through the entire casting of Mirage Arcana.
*[That is a generous interpretation of the spell can alter the appearance of structures (or add them where none are present). Personally, I still see it as only a Glamer, and therefore only able to veil real objects in magic, other than by the addition of ‘structures’ which I read as ‘buildings’]

You could cast Mirage Arcana to make a field look, feel, smell and sound like a swamp – but it would still need to be realistic; it could be on a slope though the spell could include a hill to bound it in (though the hill would be an illusion which could easily be disbelieved if one tried to walk up it).
[Interestingly, Hallucinatory Terrain would not work as well for this application as it does not have the tactile element to it. Once you entered the water, you would realise that you didn’t feel wet at all.]

As an Illusionist PC I was hoping to find an illusion spell to have the ogre believe that bugs were crawling around in its ears and nose, but there is no illusion spell that permits that tactile element, and Mirage Arcana makes an ‘area’ appear as something other than it is.


I forgot to add – the reason I used the word Deceive so much it to be able to compare it to Bluff. It doesn’t matter how high your bluff check is, the lie doesn’t become real – the dragon is not coming right now to attack the village. You may be able to deceive people into a course of action (or inaction) other than that which they may have otherwise done. They may see through your lie and then there may be consequences for you.

Illusions are designed to deceive. The casting of Illusions is (in my opinion) to deceive people/monsters into a course of action (or inaction) other than that which they may have otherwise done.
“This corridor ends in a wall. That is rather unusual. Let’s [waste a few rounds at least] check for secret doors.”
“The Seer’s hut is in the middle of that swamp. Let’s come back tomorrow when we are better prepared.” Or “Let’s [waste] some resources now to avoid the problems of travelling through a swamp.”
“That wizard just summoned a Bone Devil. That’s way beyond what we can handle.” [The wizard cast Major Image.]
“Here’s another corridor that ends in a wall. I’m just going to walk through it. … Ouch. This one is real.”


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
OberonViking wrote:
What about a sense of temperature?

Temperature isn't a sense, it is a state. You would use your sense of touch to determine temperature.

OberonViking wrote:
The other senses are Internal. We experience a sense of pain, balance, time, acceleration, motion, and joint movement...

Pain, balance, acceleration, motion, and joint movement are all the sense of touch at work. Time is a bit trickier to classify. It is something to be observed, but isn't directly related to any of the senses in a way that I could describe well.

OberonViking wrote:

This has got me looking into the higher level illusion spells mentioned.

Interestingly, Mirage Arcana is the only Illusion spell which includes changing tactile elements. However, it is still classified as a Glamer – it only changes things that are already there. In conflict with this, it then goes on to say that it can add structures where there are none, which is what Figments do that Glamers cannot.

I see absolutely nothing preventing glamers from creating things that aren't there. Am I the only one who thinks that the rules using the term "subject" in the glamer section may be referring to those perceiving the illusion and not the object/location the spell was cast on?

OberonViking wrote:
No other illusion would give you the tactile experience of being able to open a door by its handle, gently run your fingers along a table, or feel the delicate texture of a blanket on a chair that doesn’t exist*. However, if you were to kick in that door, jump on that table, or sit on that chair you would discover that it is an illusion and perhaps end up prone.

If players can feel the door, the doorknob, etc., I see no reason why they couldn't also kick it in. It is no more or less interaction than turning the knob.

A player could also sit in a non-existent chair and think they are. Essentially, they would be standing half-prone in weird positions. If you can see the chair and feel the chair, you can pretend to sit in it. You wouldn't feel the strain of your awkward position because that is your sens of touch in action, and this glamer fools all of your tactile sensations if you fail the save against it.

In other words, you do not auto-disbelieve for kicking in a door or sitting in a chair, though you may well get a save for interaction.

Dark Archive

There are some interesting points in this thread as Illusions have always been kind of tricky IMO to judge.

I have always kind of went by the assumption that if you fail the save vs. the illusionary wall you cannot walk through it. I haven't really read the Pathfinder rules on illusions.

I am more inclined to go with the opinions of the dork thought on illusions. (I cant believe I am in agreement with RD.)


I disagree with RavingDork, and as I enjoy a good debate with someone intelligent who can articulate their point of view (it makes a nice change - I'm a high school teacher).

This Wikipedia article agrees with what I learnt about the senses. I disagree that pain, balance, acceleration, motion, and joint movement are all the sense of touch at work as I believe them to be separate senses.

Figments create new things. Glamers change the appearance of things. That is how I understand the PRD on Illusions.

I do not see that 'subject' in the Glamer section refers to the viewer. It says:
A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

I believe RD's interpretation would read:
A glamer spell changes a subject's sensory qualities, making them see, feel, taste, smell, or hear like something that they are percieving is something else, or even seem to disappear.

Note that Mirage Arcana is the ONLY Illusion spell that grants tactile experience.
Every illusion will fail when a character tries to put pressure against it - be it a sword blow, leaning against or walking upon - nicely illustrated by the Silent Image as a bridge across a chasm; Fail your saving throw and you still can't walk across it.
And even with Mirage Arcana: Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight...

I think that the example of standing half-prone thinking that you are in a chair could only work with something akin to hypnotism (in a RL sense, not the spell Hypnotism). This would have to be mind-affecting, as the muscles in my legs straining to hold me in that position is so very different to the relaxation they get when I am actually in a chair. Furthermore, sure this example falls apart when you attempt to lay on a bed, especially for the witnesses.


I think the problem is not the definition of illusion, but mirage arcana itself. It needs to be ditched or rewritten.


Umbral Reaver wrote:
It's better to think of most illusions as holograms than universally mind-affecting. They create light and sound and sensation but aren't solid.
Ravingdork wrote:
By that line of thought invisibility wouldn't really work. By its very description it has to effect everyone who perceives the subject. How is something effecting your senses not also mind-effecting (in description, if not game mechanics)?

Because it doesn't say mind-affecting ANYWHERE in the spell description.

When I see a boat on a TV, it is basically an illusion. There is no boat within that black box in the corner of the room. The TV is not affecting my mind in any way. My eyes are sending signals to my mind, yes, but that is not the same as the TV or an illusion spell directly affecting my mind. The eyes are easily deceived.

Invisibility works, to my mind, by allowing light to pass through the subject of the spell (the one that the spell was cast on) without any interference, as someone said earlier in this thread.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
OberonViking wrote:
Every illusion will fail when a character tries to put pressure against it - be it a sword blow, leaning against or walking upon - nicely illustrated by the Silent Image as a bridge across a chasm; Fail your saving throw and you still can't walk across it.

You're right about the bridge, but if you fail your save when stabbing an illusion, it tricks you into thinking nothing is wrong. Perhaps it "dodged" your attack.

Umbral Reaver wrote:
I think the problem is not the definition of illusion, but mirage arcana itself. It needs to be ditched or rewritten.

And I think Mirage Arcana is the only illusion that really works, whereas all the others are broken and in need of fixing.

Take Hallucinatory Terrain, for example: Without the tactile sensation, it will NEVER work. If I turn a grassy field into a desert, anyone walking through it can still feel the grass brushing against their legs. And you can forget about a wet swamp meant to slow your enemies! :(


Ravingdork wrote:
You're right about the bridge, but if you fail your save when stabbing an illusion, it tricks you into thinking nothing is wrong. Perhaps it "dodged" your attack.

Though that would count as interaction for the purposes of the Will Save.

And most Illusions require concentration, so that explains why they react in a believable manner.

Ravingdork wrote:
I think Mirage Arcana is the only illusion that really works, whereas all the others are broken and in need of fixing.

Whilst I don't think that all the Illusions are in need of fixing, I would like to see the addition of some more that include tactile elements. I would like to cast illusory bugs in an ogre's nose and ears.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber

So here's an inexpert question: illusary damage - if someone were to take damage from an illusary creature (plus a failed Will save), would they a) automatically disbelieve 'cause the bite didn't hurt, or b) feel illusary pain and take illusary hp damage, which would disappear one he succeeds a Will save?

If it's "a," should the person controlling the illusion make it so the creature always misses, so as to avoid the auto disbelief?

And if it's "b," what would happen at 0 hp? Would you pass out, thinking you were dead?


The only ways to cause damage with an illusion spell are phantasmal killer/weird or shadow spells. In the case of shadow spells, they already handle that case. The damage is always real. Belief or disbelief determines how much you take.


Mosaic wrote:

So here's an inexpert question: illusary damage - if someone were to take damage from an illusary creature (plus a failed Will save), would they a) automatically disbelieve 'cause the bite didn't hurt, or b) feel illusary pain and take illusary hp damage, which would disappear one he succeeds a Will save?

If it's "a," should the person controlling the illusion make it so the creature always misses, so as to avoid the auto disbelief?

And if it's "b," what would happen at 0 hp? Would you pass out, thinking you were dead?

Figments and Glamers can never cause damage.

I like your idea about having the illusory monster always miss, but I think it would still count as Interaction for the purposes of provoking a Will save. Some GMs will permit an illusion to count as a threat for the purposes of flanking, others won't. Personally I would as it already comes with the Will Save each round whilst being interacted with.

Illusions are best used where there is no interaction and therefore no Will Save. Cast Silent Image as though it were Create Pit and very few people will interact with it to see if it is real, they will simply avoid it through fear of falling in.

This raises a question I've had for a while.
Wizard casts create pit, and Sorcerer casts Silent Image over it to appear as the original floor.
When Fighter walks onto the illusion he makes a Will Save to disbelieve it because he feels the floor sloping away, as per Create Pit, but does he also make a Reflex save?
More importantly, when he fails his Will save, does he get a Reflex save?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
OberonViking wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
I think Mirage Arcana is the only illusion that really works, whereas all the others are broken and in need of fixing.
Whilst I don't think that all the Illusions are in need of fixing, I would like to see the addition of some more that include tactile elements. I would like to cast illusory bugs in an ogre's nose and ears.

You're right. My statement was a little too broad of a blanket statement. There are a few illusion spells outside of Mirage Arcana which work just fine.

OberonViking wrote:
Mosaic wrote:

So here's an inexpert question: illusary damage - if someone were to take damage from an illusary creature (plus a failed Will save), would they a) automatically disbelieve 'cause the bite didn't hurt, or b) feel illusary pain and take illusary hp damage, which would disappear one he succeeds a Will save?

If it's "a," should the person controlling the illusion make it so the creature always misses, so as to avoid the auto disbelief?

And if it's "b," what would happen at 0 hp? Would you pass out, thinking you were dead?

Figments and Glamers can never cause damage.

I like your idea about having the illusory monster always miss, but I think it would still count as Interaction for the purposes of provoking a Will save. Some GMs will permit an illusion to count as a threat for the purposes of flanking, others won't. Personally I would as it already comes with the Will Save each round whilst being interacted with.

I totally agree on all points. I've always believe that interaction, at a minimum, required an action to be spent. Therefore, fighting an illusion is most definitely interaction, whether or not you hit or miss and therefore allows a save.


So here's a question I've had with my players.

Two spellcasters square off, Evoker and Illusionist, both with (not surprisingly) high spellcraft.

When only using their specialities, the Evoker crushes the Illusionist as each round he makes his spellcraft roll and knows they are illusions, thus auto-disbelief.

Is it really that simple?

If it is that simple, (which I disagree with), does that mean instead of a will save vs. shadow spells I'd get a spellcraft check and/or will save?

Seems an incredible nerf to illusions and illusionists, though it might explain the need for a high bluff.

Thoughts?


As far as Hallucinatory Terrain and Mirage Arcana go I've always interpreted them as being disguises, not emulations of actual things. Once you pierce the disguise (by making a Will save or physically interacting with the area) you see the actual area in question beneath the disguise.

I would use Mirage Arcana to make my "magical laboratory" look like a "bakery". This would include the sounds, sights, and smells of a bakery from the outside. Once you reached for the door handle you would get a Will save. Regardless of the results if you find a door, open it, and look in you see my magical laboratory, not a fake bakery. The point of the spell is so that, for example, if an assassin is sent to murder me in my magical laboratory in the city of Killsburg when they got there they would not causally be able to find my laboratory since I would use Mirage Arcana to make it look like some other kind of building or even part of an existing building.

With Hallucinatory Terrain I would make my desert spring oasis appear like the rest of the surrounding desert. Once you walked through the area of the Hallucinatory Terrain you would get a Will save. If you failed it and kept walking your would splash into the spring and see the illusionary cover of a desert over a spring oasis. However if you flew over a desert looking for a lush oasis you would never see it due to the Hallucinatory Terrain.

The point here being these spells can easily be foiled by even casual physical interaction but observation or reconnaissance from a distance would be completely fooled or severely hindered.


Coriolis Storm wrote:

So here's a question I've had with my players.

Two spellcasters square off, Evoker and Illusionist, both with (not surprisingly) high spellcraft.

When only using their specialities, the Evoker crushes the Illusionist as each round he makes his spellcraft roll and knows they are illusions, thus auto-disbelief.

Is it really that simple?

If it is that simple, (which I disagree with), does that mean instead of a will save vs. shadow spells I'd get a spellcraft check and/or will save?

Seems an incredible nerf to illusions and illusionists, though it might explain the need for a high bluff.

Thoughts?

Your hypothetical fight is silly... of course the evoker is going to win.

Evokers have firepower. That is what they do. Illusionists (primarily) manipulate and deceive. Making the two square off against each other with the evoker knowing his opponent is an illusionist, and then forcing the illusionist to only use illusions is like having a fighter combat a rogue and announcing "you two will fight and he's hiding in the bush there."

It would be incredibly lame if in a contest of raw power the evoker would lose to an illusionist. What would be the point of being an evoker if an illusionist could do it just as well?

Edit: And yeah, if you succeeded spellcraft checks to identify what the guy was casting, and identified it as illusion spells, and saw the illusion come into being, that would justify an auto save in my book.


Ravingdork wrote:


You're right about the bridge, but if you fail your save when stabbing an illusion, it tricks you into thinking nothing is wrong. Perhaps it "dodged" your attack.

A Figment has an AC of 10 plus size modifier. If someone rolls well enough on an attack against one to hit it, then it obviously doesn't dodge your attack in which case they have interacted with it and its automatically dispelled. If the miss it, then I would alow the caster to have the figment dodge the attack


Quick question spawned by this discussion... So figment creatures can't cause damage. But could, say, a high level illusion of a dragon (or something similar) make an intimidate check against folks to demoralize them? If it's one of the movable illusions created through the concentration of a caster, I could easily see it roaring and trying to look intimidating. But could it actually make a skill check to cause the shaken condition if it's not real?


Deranger wrote:
Quick question spawned by this discussion... So figment creatures can't cause damage. But could, say, a high level illusion of a dragon (or something similar) make an intimidate check against folks to demoralize them? If it's one of the movable illusions created through the concentration of a caster, I could easily see it roaring and trying to look intimidating. But could it actually make a skill check to cause the shaken condition if it's not real?

I'd allow it. First since it's an interaction the target would get a will save to disbelieve. If he doesn't, then the 'dragon' makes a check, probably Caster Level +4 bonus because the dragon is larger than its target. It's an illusion, so it should be based off of how good the illusionist and not use the dragon's stats in any fashion.


My question is more of the spellcraft roll.

Similar to that question...

Invisibility is a 2nd level spell (Glamour). I'm a fighter and have a spellcraft of 1 and a 10 int. I see a mage cast invisibility, and due to the gods of luck being kind, I roll the needed 16 (15+spell level). And now the would be invisible creature is revealed.

So...are all illusions auto-disbelieved with that comparatively simple a roll?

Seems to take away any active ability to use illusions, except in advance of the encounter.


Coriolis Storm wrote:

My question is more of the spellcraft roll.

Similar to that question...

Invisibility is a 2nd level spell (Glamour). I'm a fighter and have a spellcraft of 1 and a 10 int. I see a mage cast invisibility, and due to the gods of luck being kind, I roll the needed 16 (15+spell level). And now the would be invisible creature is revealed.

So...are all illusions auto-disbelieved with that comparatively simple a roll?

Seems to take away any active ability to use illusions, except in advance of the encounter.

That only works with illusions with a 'save to disbelieve', which invisibility does not have. You'd realize he was casting invisibility, but he would still be invisible.

Interestingly, it would protect you handily from phantasmal killer. Not a bad reason for a fighter to put some points in spellcraft.

Plus that's not an easy roll... DC 16 how much int is your fighter going to have, and it's not a class skill.


Coriolis Storm wrote:

So here's a question I've had with my players.

Two spellcasters square off, Evoker and Illusionist, both with (not surprisingly) high spellcraft.

When only using their specialities, the Evoker crushes the Illusionist as each round he makes his spellcraft roll and knows they are illusions, thus auto-disbelief.

Is it really that simple?

If it is that simple, (which I disagree with), does that mean instead of a will save vs. shadow spells I'd get a spellcraft check and/or will save?

Seems an incredible nerf to illusions and illusionists, though it might explain the need for a high bluff.

Thoughts?

The CRB for Spellcraft states: Identify a spell as it is being cast.

I got the impression perhaps you thought a spellcraft check could disbelieve illusions that were cast hours (or even just 6 seconds) ago.


The situation is, if you know an illusion isn't real you can see through it. From the PRD:

From the PRD wrote:

Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

Thus, a fighter (using the class normally least likely to take it), could see through any illusion. Of course I initially missed the key line being figment or phantasm.

And with the DCs being so low for spellcraft(max DC 24 for level 9 spell), it is easy enough for non-caster to completely defeat any illusion that is cast in your area. As an example,a level 7 fighter with 10 int would have spellcraft of 7, so able to see through a 7th level illusionist's spells 50% of the time. Reducing the shadow evocation or conjuration spells to being spellcraft check, then save. Either success reduces damage to 20%.

Not sure that is RAI, but appears to be RAW.

Lantern Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:
OberonViking wrote:
What about a sense of temperature?

Temperature isn't a sense, it is a state. You would use your sense of touch to determine temperature.

...

Temperature is both. The state of temperature can be sensed by feel or by sight if the creature has the right optic "cones" in their eyes to see the correct(usually infrared) spectrum.

Darkvision is heat vision, basically a particular color that it emitted by everything within a certain temperature range thus allowing one to see in that monochrome color when other spectrums of light(IE, what we see) are absent.


This is why I gave up on using Aboleths...I cannot wrap my head around what I can and cannot do with illusions.

If we go back to the illusory staircase scenario. A PC steps on the stairscase which has cannot support weight I assume he foot goes right through the stair correct?

Would he even get a save at that point or would he immediately know the entire tower is an illusion?

If he does get a save and fails it so he doesn't know the stairs are an illusion what then? Does he stand there with his foot inside the staircase going "whats this all about?"?

Also illusions with the ability to emulate temperature, now I understand an illusion cant hurt you (yeah shadow ones can but I don't think anyone is really having any confusion on the shadow ones) but what if I emulated something that was tens of thousands of degrees? Like an illusion of a rd dragon breathing fire on you. Would you feel it and be in immense pain but not take any HP damage? You you not feel it even though its thousands of degrees?

Illusions make my head hurt, I would LOVE to listen to someone who is creative and a rules no-it-all demonstrate the power of illusion spells. Especially as a BBEG or monster using it against players.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BuzzardB wrote:
A PC steps on the stairscase which has cannot support weight I assume he foot goes right through the stair correct?
Yes.
Quote:
Would he even get a save at that point or would he immediately know the entire tower is an illusion?
If his foot does indeed go through the step - the illusion does not make it seem he's climbing up, and it isn't responding by making it seem the step broke and crumbled under his weight, then he immediately knows the stairway is an illusion and the whole building (being a single illusion) vanishes before his eyes. No save.
Quote:
If he does get a save and fails it so he doesn't know the stairs are an illusion what then? Does he stand there with his foot inside the staircase going "whats this all about?"?
If he doesn't auto-disbelieves and fails his save, then yes: his brain will have to come up with some sort of rationalisation. Which is why he shouldn't get a save in this case.
Quote:
what if I emulated something that was tens of thousands of degrees?
If you'd pick the illusion of a heat so severe everything would just melt, then the targets should get proof the whole thing is fake easy enough.
Quote:
Like an illusion of a rd dragon breathing fire on you. Would you feel it and be in immense pain but not take any HP damage? You you not feel it even though its thousands of degrees?
It depends on the particularities of the specific illusion, but you would indeed feel the heat, see your skin blister and then blacken and hear the sizzling of your hair. And all the while not lose a single hitpoint.
Quote:
Illusions make my head hurt, I would LOVE to listen to someone who is creative and a rules no-it-all demonstrate the power of illusion spells. Especially as a BBEG or monster using it against players.

Game-wise, illusions are a nightmare! They're save-or-suck, taken to eleven. A well places first level illusion could negate complete encounters. Or accomplish nothing at all. The best way to deal with them as a GM or player, is to read the spell description. Don't think, don't reason and for the love of Desna don't bring science into it, just read. The spells do what their description says they do. No more, no less and no matter how weird.

Liberty's Edge

I've always gone by Skip Williams' All About Illusions, an article from the 3.5 days. Everything in it holds up for the Pathfinder era.

Illusions, like enchantments, are something I love out-of-game, but are difficult as heck to pull off in-game (as a player or a GM). Part of this is due to the way the rules are set up, part of this is due to a dependence on the participants creativity. Both work far better in the rare, but doable, campaign that focuses on urban living and social situations.


VRMH wrote:
*stuff*

Thank you for breaking that down and answering those. Some of those questions have been on my mind for quite a while heh.


Actually, it is NOT really that simple regarding spellcraft and auto-disbelief. For the very simple reason that identifying a spell with spellcraft requires one to SEE the spell as it's being cast. Which allows for the use of any number of means (e.g. obscuring mist, fog cloud) to hide the nature of the spells used.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/skills/spellcraft.html#_spellcraft

PRD wrote:
Action: Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors.

Knowledge (Arcana) on the other hand...


The use of skills such as perception is an obvious example of "interaction" with the illusion which would prompt a will save.
However, I believe that using any opposed skill against the illusion would prompt such an interaction. For instance attempting to use stealth, intimidation, sense motive, disguise etc. would prompt a save. For one thing, all these skill assume a certain level of focused observation of the target’s reaction which is beyond the normal observations of simply seeing an object.

The description of Major Image includes this as part of the spell description:
"The image disappears when struck by an opponent unless you cause the illusion to react appropriately."
I can think of two ways for this to work.
One. If the image displays the effects of the attack, such as an arrow sticking out of the illusion of the Dragon.
Two. The illusion avoids the attack, as in the orc guard ducks as the arrow passes by.

I think that any successful melee attack would cause the illusion to disappear as there is no way for the caster to cause the weapon to react to hitting a mass.
As an aside, I use the casters int or cha as a bonus to AC, but that's a house rule. I also use concealment miss as only prompting a saving throw to disbelieve. Reasonable minds may disagree with this of course….

However, any range attack, based on this rule, would not necessarily auto-detect the illusion, even with a successful to-hit, based on the notion of reading a spell description as simply as possible.

Hearing and/or seeing the arrow bounce off the dungeon wall is another matter altogether which would fall under the same rule as a sword not meeting the resistance of mass.

Getting away with causing the illusion to react appropriately as the spell caster is a difficult proposition at best, which is as it should be.


To the OP: Those illusions should count as Magic traps. Since trapshave nice CRs and give lots of XP, I wouldn't mind blowing out my ressources on them.

Just remind your GM that you still should e rewarded even though you just fought some Illusions.


Is there any way to have an illusion without making it obvious that something is an illusion? I love the idea of the illusionist in theory. But having a player constantly making saving throws seems to defeat the purpose. It makes it obvious that it is an illusion. As much as it would be nice to have everyone avoid any kind of meta gaming, that isn't realistic. If every time someone does something, you make them roll a saving throw, doesn't it defeat the purpose of the illusion and make players more likely to simply test the limits of there will until they can make the saving throw?

I mean if I try to open a door, and someone asks me to making a will saving throw, it kinda tips me off that the door is an illusion. It isn't like there are a whole lot of options about that. Is there anyway around this or is the illusionist just doomed to be seen through in a meta sense and thus ultimately seen through by all parties rather easily...

In that vein of questioning, if you cast illusions on real things, can you avoid making people cast saving throws all the time. When would the first saving throw initiate. If I have an abandoned building, and i cast an illusion on it. The player can open the door, even if there is an illusion on it, without setting off the will save right? Or do they still get it, since they are interacting with the illusion? If a man with a sword is attacking you, but you see a giant, when you get hit, does your mind take the blow as getting hit by the giant, even if a normal size sword struck you, instead of a giant one? Or do you get a will save?

I really like them in theory, but it seems really hard to pull off, as making it obvious something is an illusion removes the whole point of it. By making a character constantly roll will saves, doesn't it defeat the overall purpose?


ElegantBuffalo wrote:
Is there any way to have an illusion without making it obvious that something is an illusion?

Sure. Avoid requiring (much) interaction. Illusions shouldn't be flashy or eye-catching if they want to be effective. Go for the mundane, the dull and the uninteresting instead.

Quote:
having a player constantly making saving throws seems to defeat the purpose. It makes it obvious that it is an illusion.

True, and as a player it's really hard to ignore that meta-information. Which is why the GM should be making these rolls, in secret. Or... have people roll Will saves when there's nothing to save against, just to desensitise the players.

Quote:
I mean if I try to open a door, and someone asks me to making a will saving throw, it kinda tips me off that the door is an illusion.

Or cursed. Or someone casts a Charm Person spell at that precise time. Or your GM is messing with you again, to make sure you waste a lot of time in this completely uninteresting building while the NPC assassin gets away.

Quote:
can you avoid making people cast saving throws all the time.

You get one save. One. If a whole building is under the effects of a single glamour, then you get a single save against that single spell.

Quote:
The player can open the door, even if there is an illusion on it, without setting off the will save right?

Right, unless the specifics of the illusion involve "interacting" when opening said door.

Quote:
Or do they still get it, since they are interacting with the illusion?

They're interacting with the door (which I assume is real). If the illusion involves colouring the door purple, then opening the door doesn't involve interacting with the illusion. If the illusion makes the door creak, then they get a save.

Quote:
If a man with a sword is attacking you, but you see a giant, when you get hit, does your mind take the blow as getting hit by the giant, even if a normal size sword struck you, instead of a giant one? Or do you get a will save?

You get a save. Fail, and you think you got hit by a giant. The purpose of that illusion is to make you think twice about starting the fight in the first place.

Quote:
making it obvious something is an illusion removes the whole point of it.
Not necessarily.
  • Make an illusionary haystack in the middle of a city alleyway, and it'll be a rather obvious illusion. But it'll draw attention, allowing you to hide somewhere else.
  • Use Disguise Self, and appear to be a random person. Then disguise yourself mundanely. Whoever sees through the illusion will think they know what you really look like.

    Just because they allow saves, doesn't mean illusions are hopelessly feeble. They do require a GM who'll reward creative thinking, and a player who knows how to handle the extreme versatility that illusions provide.


  • DON'T STOP BELIEVIN'! HOLD ONTO THAT FEELIN'!


    ElegantBuffalo wrote:
    Is there any way to have an illusion without making it obvious that something is an illusion? I love the idea of the illusionist in theory. But having a player constantly making saving throws seems to defeat the purpose. It makes it obvious that it is an illusion.

    Best illusions are of inanimated objects. A Silent Image of a wall of stone often works as well as the spell Wall of Stone itself. Same goes with an illusion of a heavy mist: it'll block the sight just like an Obscuring mist does. An illusion of a pit or chasm will probably force the enemy to surround it, working as a deterrant or battlefield control


    VRMH wrote:
    True, and as a player it's really hard to ignore that meta-information. Which is why the GM should be making these rolls, in secret.

    Secret roll or not, the player knows something is wrong.

    "Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells."


    Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

    That is only against a targeted spell, such as Charm Person, most illusions, such as Silent Image, are not targeted spells.


    gustavo iglesias wrote:
    VRMH wrote:
    True, and as a player it's really hard to ignore that meta-information. Which is why the GM should be making these rolls, in secret.

    Secret roll or not, the player knows something is wrong.

    "Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells."

    Wow! That's an official rule? I've been running that for a long time, but I thought I house-ruled it. I guess I just forget the source.


    Hendelbolaf wrote:
    That is only against a targeted spell, such as Charm Person, most illusions, such as Silent Image, are not targeted spells.

    No. The targeted spell thing is that the CASTER of the spell knows if the targeted creature has succeed. The first sentence say nothing about targeted spells:

    "A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack" No mention to the spell being targeted. A creature that saves vs Confusion would notice a tingle too.

    Then the second sentence says:
    "Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed"


    Most folks 'round here run Illusionary damage as subdual, but then all the players are aware of the ruling.

    Shadow Lodge

    gustavo iglesias wrote:
    VRMH wrote:
    True, and as a player it's really hard to ignore that meta-information. Which is why the GM should be making these rolls, in secret.

    Secret roll or not, the player knows something is wrong.

    "Succeeding on a Saving Throw: A creature that successfully saves against a spell that has no obvious physical effects feels a hostile force or a tingle, but cannot deduce the exact nature of the attack. Likewise, if a creature’s saving throw succeeds against a targeted spell, you sense that the spell has failed. You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells."

    If the GM rolls will saves in secret, he only has to tell the PC something is up if the the will save was successful. There's nothing in that section for failing it.


    Key words here: Mind affecting. If you create the tower as mentioned before with silent image, it's affecting the minds of those that encounter the area of effect of the spell. So, they experience all of things a totally silent tower would have, no creaking stairs, no mouse squeaks, no rotting hay smell, the same temperature as the outside world. Anything globally happening in the outside world would detract from the effectiveness of the illusion. So, a two story tower would in all ways to a believing subject be completely accessable IN THEIR MINDS. They may pantomime activities at the point they encounter the illusion, such as walking up stairs, opening doors, etc. Other people believing the illusion would become part of the illusion to each subject. However, the global effects in the world could counter this as the PCs justify the sudden appearance of things not part of the illusion. So if it suddenly started to rain, it might cause the PCs to question why rain is falling indoors. They might justify it (with a failed save) as "boy, this tower is leaky".
    Mentally, humans are lazy and will "fill in the blanks" because to disbelieve everything is madness and as someone mentioned, a pain in the rear to the GM. Go ahead and make your spellcraft check, I will throw real fireballs first to discourage that.

    I think the best way to run combat illusions is to turn it into stat damage. The sneaky way is to divide the players total current hit points by wisdom score, so for every X points of "damage" the illusion does Y temporary stat damage, when it bottoms out they go unconcious. Most people use some variant of this, usually with subdual damage. The stat damage I rule as recovering in minutes versus days. I usually throw the players a bone and have the monster take Black Knight damage and do Hollywood spells, so they at least have a chance to disbelieve.

    So, just to throw a wrinkle, I had a gnome illusionist/assassin cast an illusion of an amazon angel appearing, and casting a healing spell on the barbarian, who had no reason to disbelieve it, but it was a total placebo, and he "gained" hit points he really didn't have, rushed back into a fight, and got creamed. A spellcraft check (if he had one) would have told him (if successful) it really was a healing spell, other than the lack of oomph. It helps to have a creative GM also.

    I think Paizo should look at Illusions and come up with a way to integrate knowledge skills and a Perform: Illusion skill to give a base chance to check for believability, so for once my Knowledge: Dungeoneering would allow a roll to create the perfect dragon and Perform to let him breathe fire. Almost every GM I have ever had would only let us mimic creatures we had encountered in our game history.


    Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

    That sounds much too complicated, Heimdall.


    Heimdall666 wrote:
    Key words here: Mind affecting. If you create the tower as mentioned before with silent image, it's affecting the minds of those that encounter the area of effect of the spell.

    ... except Silent Image isn't a mind-affecting spell. That's a keyword and it doesn't have it.

    Figments-type illusions (like Silent Image) are "real" in the sense that they're something actively in the world, like a hologram or a mirage. That's why multiple people can see them and why they don't typically allow spell resistance. A hot highway is a real effect that produces illusionary water, water that you can't drink or swim in.

    I agree it would be easy enough to design a custom phantasm-type illusion that affects your mind into believing you're actually in a tower as you describe and start pantomiming opening doors,.... or possibly just standing their and thinking that they're moving their arms and legs to open doors. But that spell wouldn't be Silent Image, and I don't think it is currently anything in any of the books.


    Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

    A glamer that produces stairs isn't going to fool anyone under most circumstances. You put your foot on it, it feels real, but when you take a step, you go through it. Further, it doesn't affect the empty space of the room, so there's no way to generate a "holodeck" effect normally. It's usually more useful to put up a glamer of a wall where there is actually a stair than the reverse.

    51 to 100 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / How do Illusion spells work? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.