Illusion Confusion?!

[Lochmonster]

Question #1:

Let's say I use Silent Image to create a brick wall between the party and a group of archers.

One archer shoots at the wall and then realizes it's an illusion and makes his save.

My confusion is this, Silent Image is a FIGMENT and according to the RAW:

"Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. It is not a personalized mental impression."

BUT the enemy archer made his save and as such:

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

So what happens to my wall now? Translucent to some, solid to others?

Translucent to one archer and all my allies? Translucent to all?

QUESTION #2:

Does an illusionist know if someone has disbelieved their illusions?

[Lightbulb]

Best bet is to read this series:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060207a

The rules themselves are not clear.

1) I would say they all get a save if they all saw the arrows going through the 'wall'. But that there would be a modifier to the other peoples saves if someone says "that wall is an illusion".

2) I would say no. You could only tell by their reaction. Possibly bluff vs Sense Motive if they pretended they believe it.

---

The tricky part is if the archer should get to shoot in the first place. If it just suddenly appeared probably. If they ran around the corner and it was just there maybe no save - or a save if they know their is no wall there normally.

[Greycloak of Bowness]

1) Translucent to some, opaque to others. Note: your allies need to save too.
2) No, except through sense motive maybe or their actions.

[Lochmonster]

Yeah it's the whole "Everyone sees the same thing.....except the ones who see something different..." that I'm in need of clarity on and sadly I am at work and can not follow the link.

[Malag]

It's not even translucent I believe. Glamers or some other illusions leave translucent part.

Check the forum topics, there are tons regarding illusions.

[Shalmdi]

Based on my reading, it is exactly as you say. If one archer saves, he sees something like glass between him and the target. The rest still see a solid wall.

EDIT: I forgot about the second part of your question. The core book states:

You do not sense when creatures succeed on saves against effect and area spells.

This would seem to fall into that category. As a GM, I would never rule that you could tell automatically, but as Greycloak suggested, I would probably let you make a Sense Motive though.

[Lightbulb]

It would be translucent to anyone who passes their save and remain solid to others - but probably all would pass their saves with the bonus from someone telling them its an illusion.

I think that its meant to mean that it looks like whatever you make it look like. It does not take on whatever form pops into the persons head. For example a spell that made you appear to be the most beautiful person in the world would make you look different to every one as everyone would have a different opinion on that - this doesn't work like that it looks like what it looks like.

[Dan E]

1#

Detecting an illusion requires an interaction with it. That usually takes the form of an action although not always.

Here I'd give anyone shooting at it a will save. Anyone who succeeds can see through it normally. If they tell anyone else and they subsequently interact they get the bonus to their save. If they fail the wall still looks solid and blocks sight even if they "know" its an illusion. Its still a figment though so I'd rule they could walk through it whether or not they made their save.

Where the rules get wooly (or woolier) is what form the interaction must take (ie can the player stare really really hard at the wall and try and make his check). I'd normally say he has to shoot at it or touch it or something unless he's concentrating on it with detect magic (but thats another can of worms). If everyone can detect illusions just by staring at them it substantialy reduces their practical effectiveness (not to mention it has players saying "I disbelieve" every 5 seconds which is painful).

2#

I don't believe there is anything in the rules that says this specifically. I would say no although its pretty obvious if the illusionist can survey the scene.

[Malag]

That archer would most likely just move into some safe position and wait or go on the side of wall to shoot at his targets.

Shooting an arrow to check if the wall is real is metagame a bit but that's not topic disscusion I guess.

[Ravingdork]

One archer shoots the wall. Do ALL the archers get a save because they all witnessed the arrow going through?

What happens when the second archer shoots? Do they ALL get a save again?

Depending on what interpretation he chooses to follow, a GM can totally trash illusions.

[Greycloak of Bowness]

I usually rule that when something impossible happens (like an arrow passing through a wall), everyone who witnessed it gets an automatic save. After that, once the save is failed, they have to take a disbelieve action to try to see through it.

I think the bigger issue with GMs trashing illusions is having NPCs spend actions to interact with illusionary effects that they wouldn't do against their non-illusionary counterparts.

i.e., why did that archer shoot an arrow at the wall in the first place? Would he have done so if it was Wall of Stone or would he have tried to move around or put his bow away and get out something to break it down or something?

[MC Templar]

Ravingdork wrote:

One archer shoots the wall. Do ALL the archers get a save because they all witnessed the arrow going through?

What happens when the second archer shoots? Do they ALL get a save again?

Depending on what interpretation he chooses to follow, a GM can totally trash illusions.

The interaction rules are singular... so an archer that shoots at a wall (we won't discuss why he chose to) gets a saving throw.

If he fails his will save, he believes the arrow hit the wall.

None of his buddies should receive that save as they are not interacting.

When archer one makes his save, he can use his next action to communicate to allies that he discovered an illusion, they can get a saving throw with a bonus.
"If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus."

IMHO, "proving" an illusion to be unreal is something difficult to do from range. He'd have to walk through the wall to prove it.

[Silent Saturn]

Here's my question. If the first archer hadn't already disbelieved the wall, why was he shooting an arrow at it? What made him think his arrow would go through instead of just hitting the brick and splintering? Or was he trying to sunder the wall?

I've never encountered this myself (nobody in my group has much interest in using illusions) but I've heard a lot of people on these boards complain that GMs don't always make NPCs behave as though they actually believe in the illusion-- having them ignore it or act as though they know it isn't real even when they haven't made their save yet.

[Owly]

Building on what Silent Saturn posted, I'd like to say that illusions ought to provoke disbelief before anyone can disbelieve them. Why is there a brick wall there? There wasn't one there yesterday...?

Even so, it's useful concealment isn't it? Which takes us back to OP's original question. Does it become translucent? (and thus no longer concealment).

I'd give the other archers a +2 to their saving throws if that NPC archer yells out that it's an illusion.

NPC Archer 1: (Fires an arrow that passes through the wall. I allow him a Perception check to notice this. He makes a Will save after that)"Shoot through the wall, it's an illusion!"

NPC Archer 2: (makes his Will save at +2) "Yeah, some kinda magic! I can see through it now!"

NPC Archer 3: (fails his Will save despite the +2) "What are you guys talking about? I can't see 'em? They're behind that wall!"

[aegrisomnia]

To the OP: I think the intent is that it appears the same to everybody who hasn't already disbelieved it. The wording could be better, however.

For many illusion spells, I'd argue that careful study - i.e., staring at it enough - is enough to qualify for a will save to disbelieve. For some kinds of illusion magic, however - [shadow] spells come to mind - the RAW implies that interaction is required, and careful study is not sufficient.

"Proof" such that parties automatically succeed in disbelieving should satisfy a much stricter standard than evidence/testimony that grants a +4 save.

A observes B interact with C in such a way that B automatically disbelieves C: A gets a +4 to disbelieve without any other evidence/testimony.

A observes B interact with C in such a way that B gets a +4 bonus to the will save to disbelieve C: A gets no help.

B tells A that C is an illusion: A gets a +4 bonus on the will save to disbelieve.

A interacts with C: either a +4 bonus to the will save, or automatic disbelief, depending on the interaction.

Frankly, I'm not sure I'd consider "seeing" an arrow go through a wall enough to count as "proof", but I'd consider it evidence useful to the person shooting - enough to get a +4 bonus on a will save.

Now, doing that is strange behavior unless you've already encountered lots of illusions already and expect more. You could have some fun with your players and tell them to roll perception after they shoot to see what happens to the arrow. An arrow is going to be small and hard to see at range, especially in adverse conditions.

Wall is an illusion and the player succeeds on perception check for arrow and the will save at +4: the player successfully disbelieves.

Wall is an illusion and the player fails the perception check for arrow or the will save at +4: the player fails to disbelieve.

Wall is real and the player succeeds on a perception check for the arrow: correctly assumes the wall is real.

Wall is real and the player fails the perception check for the arrow: the player is free to roll a will save, which will apparently fail to reveal the illusory nature of the wall. The player is free to act as though the wall is illusory, although he really has no way of knowing whether the wall is real or he failed his save.