Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive a saving throw to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or iteract with it in some fashion. For example, if a party encounters a section of illusory floor , the character in the lead would receive a saving throw if she stopped and studied the floor or if she probed the floor." Them later, the PHB also says "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. A character who falls through a section of illusory floor into a pit knows something is amiss, as does one who spends a few rounds poking at the same illusion
The other night in a friend's campaign, the party removed a gem from an altar and the room started sealing a la Indiana Jones. My wizar and the cleric, who suspected a trap and stayed in the hall, were cut off from the rest of the party. Each of the divided groups yelled for the other, but were told that they heard nothing through the "stone" door. Physical probing followed. I think the DM rolled our saves and we blew them. The ones in the room then had a fight with some animated statues, but halfway through my wizard realized his staff passed right through the door. I informed the cleric it was an illusion and we rejoined the others and easily won the fight. I'm guessing the DM kept rolling our saves, and I happened to make that one.
I'm not sure if this encounter was handled right or wrong. I think our hands and probes should have passed right through the door, and certainly our voices, even though we failed our saves (as opposed to the door acting in all ways as a real stone door because we failed our saves). But wouldn't that count as proof the illusion wasn't real, and therefore cancel any need for a save? Or would it simply entitle us to a save in the first place? The wording in the PHB is unclear.
|
A} I think the best way to answer these questions is to torture the DM.
Or, failing that (since your group rotates DMs), the group should have out-of-session conversations about some of the in-game decisions.
B} This is a major help to DM/Player trust. After that night's session did you guys all go to Starbucks or Borders (or some-such) to chit-chat about the game? You can say, hey DM, why didn't we figure out it was an illusion when we pounded on the door? and see what his response is. If it's something like "oh crap, I blew it," then that's okay. If he says "well I designed the illusion so that it would only..." then that will probably also be okay. If he says, "well 'cuz I'm the DM, that's why," then you should consider solution "A" mentioned earlier.
Really, you'd be surprised how just an occassional conversation like this with your Players (speaking as DM here) adds tremendously to Player/DM trust. I can't count how many times where, outside of game, I have explained a few decisions and/or admitted DM blunders and how it immeasurably helped the game.
The time I had to preempt a Bard's spell -- Bards suck as PCs and this guy's spell selection left quite a bit to be desired making it worse (from a playability standpoint, the character concept was great). He cast silence in "The Whispering Cairn" to solve a problem with some Grimlocks
-W. E. Ray
The DM's fairly new. He's been a player as long as we've been doing D&D, but has relatively little experience in "The Chair." He didn't have much prep time for this, and I was actually quite impressed: it was the best session I've ever seen him run, and he did it all without any notes save the monster entries in books. No one else at the table has a clue what's going on. They're all new players; as in still-asking-how-they-roll-a-saving-throw new. But nothing adverse happened; we won the fight and were able to rest immediately afterwards. So I didn't feel it was important enough to bring up in game (I had already corrected him on another rules issue immediately prior to this, and since he was doing this all out of his head, I didn't want to shake him too much or unnecessarily undermine his DM's authority in front of the new players). There were a few other issues that I did discuss with him after the game, but in doing so I forgot this particular one. I planned to e-mail him about it, but in looking up the exact rules in the PHB, I myself became confused and am no longer certain that anything was actually handled wrongly at all.
|
Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive a saving throw to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or iteract with it in some fashion. For example, if a party encounters a section of illusory floor , the character in the lead would receive a saving throw if she stopped and studied the floor or if she probed the floor." Them later, the PHB also says "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. A character who falls through a section of illusory floor into a pit knows something is amiss, as does one who spends a few rounds poking at the same illusionThe other night in a friend's campaign, the party removed a gem from an altar and the room started sealing a la Indiana Jones. My wizar and the cleric, who suspected a trap and stayed in the hall, were cut off from the rest of the party. Each of the divided groups yelled for the other, but were told that they heard nothing through the "stone" door. Physical probing followed. I think the DM rolled our saves and we blew them. The ones in the room then had a fight with some animated statues, but halfway through my wizard realized his staff passed right through the door. I informed the cleric it was an illusion and we rejoined the others and easily won the fight. I'm guessing the DM kept rolling our saves, and I happened to make that one.
I'm not sure if this encounter was handled right or wrong. I think our hands and probes should have passed right through the door, and certainly our voices, even though we failed our saves (as opposed to the door acting in all ways as a real stone door because we failed our saves). But wouldn't that count as proof the illusion wasn't real, and therefore cancel any need for a save? Or would it simply entitle us to a save in the first place? The wording in the PHB is unclear.
My understanding is that he was correct, and not just because he's the DM.
As you failed your saving throw, you thought the walls were real and so didn't push through them because you knew you couldn't. The proof is where you have no alternative but to go through the wall, such as when you're thrown violently through it. So in future, if you think you're dealing with an illusion, throw the halfling at the wall. Just remember to apologise and give him a cure light if it turns out you were wrong.
When he rolled a successful save for you, he described how you saw through it. To my mind, that worked pretty well.
This has been an issue since 2nd Ed. and the Illusionist class. But I think your DM handled it very well. It's a tough balance between allowing for a save and not making illusions worthless. I was stunned it wasn't clarified in 3.5. I just hope 4e and Pathfinder iron out these wrinkles some. (*cough*HINT*cough*)
That all makes sense... but doesn't it also make sense that if one could fall through the thing at all, save or no, that one's hand or any other probe would also pass right through, save or no? Thus my confusion.
The interpretation I had held previously was that yes, probing would reveal that the "door" (or wall, floor, whatever) could be passed right through. The save was to indicate whether you realized it was an illusion, as opposed to knowing "something funny is going on here" and not being able to put your finger on it. Of course, from a metagame standpoint, almost every player would immediately know it was an illusion. The next step would likely be "testing" the door by walking through it, thus delivering the incontrovertable proof and bypassing the spell without a save and rendering it nearly useless. More confusion.
It doesn't get any better if you factor in Spellcraft or detect magic. I.e., what happens if you recognize an enemy's spellcasting via Spellcraft, and it's an illusion? Do you need a save or not? What if detect magic registers the illusion? Is that enough proof to obviate the save, or simply allow you one in the first place?
|
|
That all makes sense... but doesn't it also make sense that if one could fall through the thing at all, save or no, that one's hand or any other probe would also pass right through, save or no? Thus my confusion.
The interpretation I had held previously was that yes, probing would reveal that the "door" (or wall, floor, whatever) could be passed right through. The save was to indicate whether you realized it was an illusion, as opposed to knowing "something funny is going on here" and not being able to put your finger on it. Of course, from a metagame standpoint, almost every player would immediately know it was an illusion. The next step would likely be "testing" the door by walking through it, thus delivering the incontrovertable proof and bypassing the spell without a save and rendering it nearly useless. More confusion.
It doesn't get any better if you factor in Spellcraft or detect magic. I.e., what happens if you recognize an enemy's spellcasting via Spellcraft, and it's an illusion? Do you need a save or not? What if detect magic registers the illusion? Is that enough proof to obviate the save, or simply allow you one in the first place?
** spoiler omitted **
Heh, this is one of those times where it falls upon the DM to perform the saves for the players without their knowledge. In a situation like this, it is also likely the best solution to Take 10 for each player, and add their saves in appropriately(just as you would for Spot/Listen checks to find someone Hiding and Moving Silently without actually tipping off the players), as no character has specificly said they think something smells fishy. For the first time, anyway. Once combat starts, it would be proper to roll them in ernest.
|
as for the sounds, we have walking,talking major illusions in both pathfinder paths, at lease one of which the players hold in their hand, so illusions can have texture as well (at least major ones) and can emit sounds... maybe the door ws emitting a 'empty cavern noises' sound, sort of like the nature sounds tapes? or if it was a less powerful illusion, maybe ghost sound was triggered the same time the illusion was?
edit from the SRD if t was a 'glamor' type spell: "Glamer
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."
Lets not forget that the shadow conjuration and evocation spells are illusion spells, but they are partially real. So any good spellcraft check against an illusion effect could also bring the knowledge that "some illusion magic is so strong that it can never be fully disbeleived and can actually cause real effects upon the world around it, as reality itself 'accepts' the deception!"