Hello
I come from PF1 environment and would like to try my hand playing a sort of illusionist in PF2.
I'm reading the various illusion spells and their relation to actions and they are a bit confusing as to what they can do - specifically the illusory object. I'd like to hear if GMs agree with my perspective on things.
It says it can create illusory visual image of a stationary object and gives waterfall as an example but what counts as an object?
Normally I'd rule that object is not an effect or a composite. For example a building or a maze is a composite of individual objects where as something like a simple bridge, a sword or even a brazier is not if we follow the rules of natural language. We don't think sword as as a separate hilt and blade objects but we can easily point out individual objects like a door or a window that is part of a building.
This means you could create a door, a cage, or even a simple bridge but not a shed, a maze, or a drawbridge. I wouldn't even allow you to create a wall but you could certainly create a stone slab to block a doorway.
Now the waterfall example confuses me as I wouldn't normally allow creation of a waterfall. It's not an object like for example a fountain. It's part of a scene similar to how a cavern wall or a crystal cluster is and imo it should be something that requires illusory scene. For me an object is something you could pick up and move around even theoretically but I don't see how you could pick and move a waterfall without destroying it. A fountain, a well or a bird bath yes, but a waterfall no... but based on the description I assume this is wrong interpretation?
Effects are not objects but can be part of an object within a reason
You couldn't create an orb of light, a fog cloud or an area of darkness because they are not objects but you could create a flaming brazier, a cage around someone or a fountain with bubbling water. That being said illusion only creates illusion and not actual effect so a lit brazier would not illuminate a room. It wouldn't even show up in a room without sufficient ambient light for that reason.
Dousing yourself in illusory fountain would not extinguish any flames because while it might (heightened 2nd level) feel and sound like water, it wouldn't actually make you or your clothes wet or even quench your thirst.
I would also rule that a two-way mirror doesn't work for this reason. A normal mirror with ability to reflect a scene are still within reason since it's part of what makes the mirror appear real. Not extra functionality.
I assume this is pretty much the correct interpreration cause otherwise it would be something more in line with a creation spell.
Illusory objects fool senses but have no physical presence
Illusory object creates something perceivable within limits of your senses even if you disbelief them. You can't perceive any more than your senses normally allow but they can fool senses only if you could perceive them in the first place (i.e. a person who can't see visual illusion because they are in a dark room is immune to visual illusion because they can't see it - even if it's illusion of a flaming brazier cause it doesn't actually shed light to illuminate the room).
Disbelieving the illusion doesn't make it go away
Now here it gets a bit confusing because this wasn't said anywhere in the spell or illusion descriptions (that I found), but seems to be something people have consensus on. Basically the summary of all of it is that if you can perceive the illusion, you can disbelieve it, but that merely tells you it's not real. It doesn't make it disappear because it's actual false sensory input and not a phantasm in your mind.
This apparently means that a door still obscures your vision but doesn't block your movement through it, a disease ridden rotting corpse still smells rotting but wouldn't make you nauseated, and you still feel the pricks and pain from a thorny rose or from falling on an illusory spike but not take any damage. None of that would have happened in the first place anyway because illusory objects don't have physical presence.
I get that some of this functions as a limitation because while your enemies can't know how many people are behind the illusory door, neither can you. The best you can do is lob fireball through and hope it hits someone. I also get it works as a deterrent so people don't try stupid stuff such as running face first to a door or across a slab of spikes covering a corridor. I mean even if they disbelief all that, the pain is still there.
My problem is that I feel there should be some effect from perceiving the effect even if it's illusory. If you force yourself through an illusory door and still feel the impact, shouldn't that at least make you clumsy or stupefied 1 or something for a turn?
Who disbeliefs and what and why?
Here it gets more confusing because "Any creature that touches the image or uses the Seek action to examine it can attempt to disbelieve your illusion".
Does this mean that under all conditions illusory objects are disbelieved personally? Including the caster and his allies? I'd assume the caster automatically disbelieves but I didn't find anything concerning that.
Also there seems to be a strong indication you have to disbelief before you can act. Why would you need to disbelieve existence of an illusory door if... say... a barbarian decided to bash down a door without investigating it first. It's perfectly reasonable action when facing a door so where does the disbelieving come in?
She would merely charge and pass through it without apparently affecting the door in any way. I mean the door could not stop the charge since it has no physical presence. It merely feels solid. It's not actually solid.
Wouldn't any normal person in that case just think "gee, there's something odd going with that door/wall" and since the illusory objects don't block sound or anything else, couldn't the the barbarian just shout "What the hell happened, I just went through!?" and everyone else goes "oh, so it wasn't a teleport trap or barbarian getting disintegrated by touching the door, guess I can walk through!"
I'd more or less judge at that point that everyone disbelieves or at least can act whichever way they want such as try to run through the door, BUT if they do, they would be stupefied or something along those lines because disbelieving doesn't actually remove the sensation (as mentioned above).
Otherwise forcing creatures (and players) to spend multiple actions to discern the true nature before they can act sounds (to me) way too powerful. I could see myself destroying entire encounters and overshadowing others with a few convenient illusions. In my head illusions are more to sow confusion and act as deterrent rather than something that actually eats up actions from entire groups of eniemies.
I mean why pick for example slow when you have a first level spell that can do the same? At the same time I don't feel it would be fair or fun if the GM just said "oh they know it's an illusion and just ignore it".
TL;DR; How do GMs deal with illusions and disbelief?