If a character uses Shadow Evocation to cast Darkness, do creatures receive a Will Save against the Darkness? A strict interpretation of the rules leads me to believe that the answer is yes, but common sense leads me to believe that the answer is no. Disbelieve a shadowy illusion of Darkness all you want, it's still dark because it's made out of shadow...
Also, does the effective spell level become 5, so that Daylight or Continual Flame can no longer dispel the Darkness spell, as per the spell level of Shadow Evocation? Or does the spell level of Darkness supercede the spell level of Shadow Evocation, keeping it at "light level" 2? I am confused because Shadow Evocation raises a spell's DC to that of Shadow Evocation (5), in essence making the mimiced spell's spell level 5, but Darkness is a bit of a unique case, as light spells have varying degrees of power with relation to each other based on their spell level. For that matter, would a Heightened level 6 Darkness spell dispel Daylight?
The (shadow) subschool does not equal darkness, rather it consists of extradimensional energy that can be shaped by force of will and magic.
The spell will still be able to be negated for a creature with a succesful will save.
I think the spelllevel should be treated as level 5 for most purposes, it will be able to penetrate a globe of invulnerability and it will also be able to dispel lower level light spells.
I do have doubts about the ability to counterspell with spells from the (shadow)subschool, can a mimic "fireball" counter a fireball, or for that matter can a "deeper darkness" counter a continual light ?
I'm still not entirely convinced that disbelieving a Shadow Evocated Darkness spell would enable someone to see through it 80% of the time.
Perhaps I did not voice my reasoning very clearly. I'm going to state 3 logical steps to explain why I think it would never be possible to see through a Shadow Evocated Darkness spell.
1. Illusions are physical manifestations that cannot be seen through upon disbelief.
Shadow Evocation creates an illusion. Disbelieving an illusion does not inherently grant the ability to see through that illusion. In real life, you can recognize that the image reflected off of a convex mirror is an illusion, but that doesn't somehow force the mirror to reveal your true dimensions. If you notice the lines on a man's bald-cap, you still have no idea what the top of the man's head looks like underneath the cap. If a moviegoer recognizes CGI, he doesn't actually see the green screen that was filmed behind the image. Disbelief =/= X-ray vision.
2. Darkness has to have a physical manifestation.
If the illusion attempted to manipulate a creature's thoughts directly, somewhat like a dream, then there would be no physical manifestation. But Darkness is not a targeted spell, it is an area spell. An area illusion spell would require some physical manifestation, however unbelievable, in order to affect space. So physically, there has to be some material from the Shadow Plane occupying the 20-foot region of the simulated Darkness spell.
3. The material comprising this manifestation cannot be transparent.
The only way a creature would possibly be able to see through this material is if the material was transparent. Clearly, since it blocks the vision of creatures who fail their will saves via some physical manifestation, it is not transparent. Believing that something is fake does not make it any less opaque.
Does anyone disagree? Do people even have opinion on this? I am open to alternate interpretations, but I need a way to logically cope with them.
|
I've always disliked the entire "shadow" subschool. How real is 20% real?
For example, unlike all other subschools of illusion it does not specify whether the fake portion is in the character's mind or a part of the environment. An area spell can affect the minds of each creature in the radius separately, so that doesn't help.
Since the spell is only 20% real it should only have enough energy to have 20% of the effect (hence taking only 20% of the damage of a damaging spell if disbelieved).
With this in mind there would be one of two possibilities for what portion is the "real" portion:
1) The whole area is filled with 20% of the normal amount of darkness, only lowering the area's light level by 1/5th of a stage and (at worst) causing a small minus to perception for those who do not have dark vision.
2) 20% of the area is darkened (as the spell) but the other 80% is completely normal.
I would (personally) go for the first option as the second option has a somewhat block and unrealistic feel to it.
Really the spell should be considered two different spells mixed (counted as one for most purposes, such as dispelling or counterspelling). One is a 20% potency evocation, the other a full potency illusion that is granted a subschool indicating whether or not it is mind-affecting (among other properties). Oh well.
Interesting arguements all. I believe this can be answered on PFRPG Core page 340. Under the spell desciption Shadow Evocation
It states;
"Non damaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect."
So in the case above darkness has no effect as it does no damage.
Thank you,
Wasgreg
|
|
Somehow missed that part... Oops.
Either way, in order to be non-functional upon disbelief the spell would have to be in your mind, which makes it mind-affecting. And yet the spell is never listed as mind affecting... BAH! Of course, this only applies to spells that are purely cosmetic anyway (such as light, daylight, darkness).
Here are some other weird examples that further make me dislike the shadow spells:
Does an item get a will save if you use Floating Disk? If so, does that particular item fall through the disk?
Or how about Tiny Hut? If the creature fails the save the illusion somehow shelters them? But if they make it the hut never existed, but still does for the other 9 creatures?
How about Wall spells? The Wall is both there and not at the same time? Can the guy next to you walk through a wall that you can't shoot an arrow through because you didn't make your save (such as with wind wall or wall of ice)?
Some spells defy logic (even pseudo-logic) to the point of ridiculousness.
Disbelieving an illusion does not inherently grant the ability to see through that illusion.
In D&D/PFRPG it can:
"A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline."
So my interpretation is that you end up with some translucent darkness (even though "shadow" isn't specifically mentioned in the above sentence).
|
|
I would agree, if it was defined as a figment or phantasm. It isn't described as any other type of illusion, it is only "shadow". It is the only illusion that can have real effects without affecting your mind. And yet, when you disbelieve it sometimes those real effects never happened. Ignorance is bliss?
The phantasms you mention are mind-affecting, so of course they can at least seem real. Same goes for patterns (whose visual portions are described as figments). Figments and glamers are not mind-affecting, everyone sees the same thing, and disbelieving it doesn't make it go away.
All illusions (other than shadow) have a well-defined nature. How the spell has an effect, what happens when you disbelieve and the overall limits of the subschools are all well defined.
It is clear from the description that shadow spells are formed from extradimensional energy, but that is all that's clear. How that vaguely described energy becomes the effect it does.. doesn't matter I suppose, but what does matter is how that effect works. If a single effect isn't clear enough in its function to be able to even vaguely make sense with some of its effects then I have a problem with it.
I would agree, if it was defined as a figment or phantasm. It isn't described as any other type of illusion, it is only "shadow". It is the only illusion that can have real effects without affecting your mind. And yet, when you disbelieve it sometimes those real effects never happened. Ignorance is bliss?
My (non-canonical) take on it is that 80% of the Shadow Evocation/Conjuration is a figment, and 20% is "real" material from the Plane of Shadow. That at least jibes with the spell description.
The phantasms you mention are mind-affecting, so of course they can at least seem real.
Figments are not mind-affecting.
If a character uses Shadow Evocation to cast Darkness, do creatures receive a Will Save against the Darkness? A strict interpretation of the rules leads me to believe that the answer is yes, but common sense leads me to believe that the answer is no. Disbelieve a shadowy illusion of Darkness all you want, it's still dark because it's made out of shadow...
Darkness doesn't target creatures. You cast the spell on an object. Objects automatically pass the disbelief check. There is an 80% chance that the spell *will not work* on the object. If the spell *does* work, then it's like someone cast darkness on the object. If the spell *doesn't* work, then nothing happens.
The effect from the darkness spell is to lower the illumination level in the area. Creature's don't disbelieve if the illumination is lower -- it is literally lower if the spell takes effect. Creatures never get a disbelief check from darkness.
|
|
Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can.
Sorry, but it can't be a figment because this illusion can have real effects. Since glamers can't either, it has to be either phantasm or pattern. But since those are mind-affecting and shadow spells are not, then it can't be those either. Hence my predicament.
Darkness doesn't target creatures. You cast the spell on an object. Objects automatically pass the disbelief check. There is an 80% chance that the spell *will not work* on the object. If the spell *does* work, then it's like someone cast darkness on the object. If the spell *doesn't* work, then nothing happens.
That would be true if it weren't for a previous quote from the shadow evocation spell:
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers they have no effect.
Which means that (if objects auto-disbelieve), this spell simply fails if you attempt darkness or similar effects (something I didn't catch before). This doesn't undo problems with spells such as tiny hut, which would work for a creature unless they touched it, in which case they'd get a will save and it could stop having an effect (which makes no sense).
At any rate, Shadow Conjuration is clear what happens if you succeed on your save:
"A creature that succeeds on its save sees the shadow conjurations as transparent images superimposed on vague, shadowy forms."
Now it doesn't explicitly say that works for Shadow Evocation, but it seems reasonable to assume so.
Darkness doesn't target creatures. You cast the spell on an object. Objects automatically pass the disbelief check. There is an 80% chance that the spell *will not work* on the object. If the spell *does* work, then it's like someone cast darkness on the object. If the spell *doesn't* work, then nothing happens.That would be true if it weren't for a previous quote from the shadow evocation spell:
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers they have no effect.Which means that (if objects auto-disbelieve), this spell simply fails if you attempt darkness or similar effects (something I didn't catch before). This doesn't undo problems with spells such as tiny hut, which would work for a creature unless they touched it, in which case they'd get a will save and it could stop having an effect (which makes no sense).
I think that's fair -- the spell fails to work on objects. My original assessment was based on the fact that shadow conjuration does not contain the line you quoted. Since evocation spells typically do not have effects that are nondamaging, I assumed it worked the same way. . . however it doesn't.
These two sentences are at odds semantically (even in 3.X):
If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur.
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.
So lets say someone cast shadow evocation (shout) on my character. He disbelieves. I take 5d6/5 sonic damage with a fortitude save for half. But can I become deafened by failing that save? Is there a 20% chance I'll be deafened or a 0% chance?
Thanks for the replies everyone, it's nice to read your thoughtful insights on this. It's a very tricky issue that I don't feel comfortable deciding on my own.
Interesting arguements all. I believe this can be answered on PFRPG Core page 340. Under the spell desciption Shadow Evocation
It states;
"Non damaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect."So in the case above darkness has no effect as it does no damage.
Thank you,
Wasgreg
Greg I noticed this too, but before that it says, "If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur." These two things directly contradict themselves, and they're both official, right in the spell description... Is it supposed to mean that a non-damaging evocation effect originating from a spell that also deals damage retains a 20% chance to work against disbelievers, whereas non-damage effects from spells that do not also deal damage never work? This is the only conclusion I can draw while adhering to both rules... but that's just plain ridiculous...
Darkness doesn't target creatures. You cast the spell on an object. Objects automatically pass the disbelief check. There is an 80% chance that the spell *will not work* on the object. If the spell *does* work, then it's like someone cast darkness on the object. If the spell *doesn't* work, then nothing happens.
The effect from the darkness spell is to lower the illumination level in the area. Creature's don't disbelieve if the illumination is lower -- it is literally lower if the spell takes effect. Creatures never get a disbelief check from darkness.
I can't argue with your logic, and I love how binary this makes the illusion - either it worked and everyone sees it, or it isn't there at all. It's concise, practical, and above all technically correct. Thanks for pointing out that bit about objects, it really clarified this dilemma for me. One small thing I have to add is that objects don't actually pass their saving throws by default, they fail them.
"Nonmagical, unattended items never make saving throws. They are considered to have failed their saving throws, so they are always fully affected by spells and other attacks that allow saving throws to resist or negate. An item attended by a character (being grasped, touched, or worn) makes saving throws as the character (that is, using the character's saving throw bonus)."
Attended nonmagical items use the wielder's saves, unattended magical items have saves of 2 + CL/2, and attended magical items can use the higher of the 2 (2 + CL/2 or wielder's).
So the opposite is true. If you cast the spell on an unattended object, it automatically works, and the darkness affects everyone, even a creature whose base save is so high that he would have exceeded the DC on a roll of 2. So all you have to do is drop something as a free action, cast the spell as a standard action, and pick the object up as a move action. Viola, Shadow Evocated Darkness never fails.
I have to ask though, does an area automatically fail/pass its save as well? Or does every character that interacts with the illusion in that area receive an individual save. If the area itself made a save, this would clear that magic hut nonsense right up.
At any rate, Shadow Conjuration is clear what happens if you succeed on your save:
"A creature that succeeds on its save sees the shadow conjurations as transparent images superimposed on vague, shadowy forms."
Now it doesn't explicitly say that works for Shadow Evocation, but it seems reasonable to assume so.
This goes back to my original point. You have transparent, illusory Darkness cast on vague, shadowy forms. The forms themselves are not transparent, only the illusion of Darkness is. Aren't shadowy forms themselves dark enough to lower the light level in an area by 1 step? Again, the rules say one thing, but my common sense says another. I guess I just have to ignore it and accept that this isn't supposed to be fiction, it's supposed to be a system of rules.
I still have questions pertaining to the Shadow subschool, but they don't specifically address Shadow Evocation and Darkness, so I'll save them for another topic.
The effect description for damaging and non-damaging spells are distinct and should not be mixed:
Damaging Spells
Spells that deal damage have normal effects unless an affected creature succeeds on a Will save. Each disbelieving creature takes only one-fifth damage from the attack. If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur. If recognized as a shadow evocation, a damaging spell deals only one-fifth (20%) damage. Regardless of the result of the save to disbelieve, an affected creature is also allowed any save (or spell resistance) that the spell being simulated allows, but the save DC is set according to shadow evocation's level (5th) rather than the spell's normal level.
The sentence "If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur." specifically applies to effects that both deal damage and do something else. So a shadow ice storm when disbelieved would deal 20% of the 3d6 points of bludgeoning damage and 2d6 points of cold damage to every creature in the area. Creatures inside the area would then take 20% of the –4 penalty (0.8, with the "always round down" rule leading to a -0 penalty) on Perception skill checks and the entire area is treated as difficult terrain (20% effect means that every square of difficult terrain counts as 1.2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 1.8 squares.).
Non-Damaging Spells
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.
Reading anything more into this due to connections with the Shadow plane is not necessary. The spell type/descriptor--Illusion (shadow)--only states "Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real." Darkness is a non-damaging spell, so the first block of text is entirely irrelevant to the determination. That leaves the simple answer, "Against disbelievers, they have no effect." Thus if a target "interacts" with the spell and makes the Will save, the spell has no effect.
For the object issue, the darkness spell does not allow a save and the shadow darkness only allows a save when interacted with. Rocks can't interact with a spell, and thus never get this save. People can interact wit the darkness, and this get a save when entering the area of effect.
The effect description for damaging and non-damaging spells are distinct and should not be mixed:
Damaging Spells
Spells that deal damage have normal effects unless an affected creature succeeds on a Will save. Each disbelieving creature takes only one-fifth damage from the attack. If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur. If recognized as a shadow evocation, a damaging spell deals only one-fifth (20%) damage. Regardless of the result of the save to disbelieve, an affected creature is also allowed any save (or spell resistance) that the spell being simulated allows, but the save DC is set according to shadow evocation's level (5th) rather than the spell's normal level.The sentence "If the disbelieved attack has a special effect other than damage, that effect is one-fifth as strong (if applicable) or only 20% likely to occur." specifically applies to effects that both deal damage and do something else. So a shadow ice storm when disbelieved would deal 20% of the 3d6 points of bludgeoning damage and 2d6 points of cold damage to every creature in the area. Creatures inside the area would then take 20% of the –4 penalty (0.8, with the "always round down" rule leading to a -0 penalty) on Perception skill checks and the entire area is treated as difficult terrain (20% effect means that every square of difficult terrain counts as 1.2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 1.8 squares.).
Non-Damaging Spells
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.Reading anything more into this due to connections with the Shadow plane is not necessary. The spell type/descriptor--Illusion (shadow)--only states "Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a...
Thanks Erian. That's a clear explanation that confirms what I thought, but it's still ridiculous... This spell shouldn't have components, it should just require the Leadership feat with at least 3 accountants in your entourage... Thank god the object is the only thing making a save on Darkness. That's nice and neat :D
I still have 2 questions pertaining to Shadow Evocation:
Who or what makes a save against a shadow evocated spell that targets an area?
Are evocation spells that don't necessarily deal damage, but have the potential to (Wall of Ice, Wall of Fire, etc) classified as damaging spells or non-damaging spells?
Does Wall of Ice fall under non-damaging until it deals damage? At that point, what happens to the non-believer standing inside a wall space when the wall becomes 20% real and he rolls that it does affect him. Is he pushed as per a teleporting wizard that lands inside of a solid object? If the wall is thick enough, could it potentially kill him this way? By the way I am beginning to think that this spell is altogether ridiculous.
Who or what makes a save against a shadow evocated spell that targets an area?
Anyone that interacts with the spell makes a Will save vs. the illusion (and if failed, may also need to make saves vs. the illusory spell). As noted under 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."
Are evocation spells that don't necessarily deal damage, but have the potential to (Wall of Ice, Wall of Fire, etc) classified as damaging spells or non-damaging spells?
If the spell has a listed damage, it is damaging. So, both the fire and ice walls use the "damaging" rules.
Does Wall of Ice fall under non-damaging until it deals damage? At that point, what happens to the non-believer standing inside a wall space when the wall becomes 20% real and he rolls that it does affect him. Is he pushed as per a teleporting wizard that lands inside of a solid object? If the wall is thick enough, could it potentially kill him this way? By the way I am beginning to think that this spell is altogether ridiculous.
It's always a damaging spell, so no need to switch. Note that for illusions, one person saving does not mean the spell is negated for everyone--just that person. Specifically, "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." A person thus saving against a shadow wall of ice could tell his friends about the wall and grant them a +4 to their saves, but if they fail the wall is still "real" to them.
As for what happens when one makes the save, the wall becomes 20% effective, i.e. 20% of the 1d6 points of cold damage + 1 point per caster level (no save) and the wall is only 20% as thick (better make it at least 2" thick or the HP reduces to 0). This is all on an individual basis, per person that makes the save.
The effect description for damaging and non-damaging spells are distinct and should not be mixed:
That's a fair assessment -- that there's two sections of rules involving damage spells (or damage spells with secondary non-damaging effects) versus nondamaging spells.
For the object issue, the darkness spell does not allow a save and the shadow darkness only allows a save when interacted with. Rocks can't interact with a spell, and thus never get this save. People can interact wit the darkness, and this get a save when entering the area of effect.
But the darkness spell never actually goes off. To cast darkness, you must cast it on an object. If the object automatically passes the disbelief check, then the spell never goes off. It has no effect.
So, you can't do shadow evocation: darkness. It simply won't happen.
But the darkness spell never actually goes off. To cast darkness, you must cast it on an object. If the object automatically passes the disbelief check, then the spell never goes off. It has no effect.
So, you can't do shadow evocation: darkness. It simply won't happen.
The rock succeeds on its Will saving throw and so is entirely unaffected by the spell, yes. So just as a rock is not normally affected by darkness, there is no consequence, but the rock saving against the spell does not cancel the entire spell. It cancels any effects from the spell on the rock. For a better example, consider a shadow fireball with an area that touches a clothe curtain. That curtain automatically only takes 20% damage from the spell (the curtains normally get no save at all), but the shadow fireball still exists. The saving throw negates the effects of the spell, not the spell itself.
The saving throw negates the effects of the spell, not the spell itself.
If a spell has no effects, does it do anything?
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.
This spell causes an object to radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius.
If an object doesn't radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius, does the shadow evocation: darkness spell do anything?
I had overloooked something.
The last line of Shadow Evocation states that, "Objects automatically succeed on their Will saves against this spell."
So this overrides the fact that unattended non-magical objects automatically fail saving throws. You guys are right and I was wrong, the object saves.
So let me recap SE Darkness so far. Correct me if anything here is wrong.
1. Effective darkness level: Since Shadow Evocation boosts the spellpower of its emulated spells to level 5 by boosting the saving throw DC to that of a level 5 spell, it is reasonable to assume that the effective darkness level of the spell is 5. A caster would need a metamagic Daylight spell, or any other metamagic light-shedding spell, to dispel it, cast at or above level 5.
2. Target: The spell targets a touched object, which automatically makes its save. I assume this means that if you pick an unwilling creature as an effective target, you must succeed on a touch attack to put the spell on one of their items.
::Off topic:: Can someone reference the rule that states that objects cannot interact with spells? It seems like objects must be able to interact with spells, or spells like Mending and Obscure Object would be moot ::End off topic::
3. Effects: So long as you successfully touched the object, illusory Darkness is still cast. The sword you cast it on disbelieves the spell and is unaffected, but it still radiates illusory Darkness in a 20 foot radius. Creatures that interact with the SE Darkness make a saving throw. On a failed throw, the Darkness is simply a level 5 Darkness spell; on a passed throw, the creature is entirely unaffected.
4. Defining interaction: Skip Williams covers this in All About Illusions (Part Three). To summarize - attacking and actively observing something with a move action are considered interaction. You receive your Will Save immediately after completing the interactive action. Speaking may or may not be interaction; it is only interaction if there is an exchange, simply speaking at something does not constitute interaction. Skills that could affect the illusion are interaction. I would assume this to mean Intimidate or Sleight of Hand constitute interaction. Skills that could not affect the illusion are not interaction. It is clearly stated that stealthing past something does not constitute interaction.
5. Extrapolating interaction into our SE Darkness scenario: Using a move action to find something hidden in SE Darkness is interaction. Peering into the Darkness and deciding that you can't see anything, without at least making a perception check as a move action, is not. Trying to attack a creature through the Darkness is interaction - the first attack would grant concealment, but the attacker would receive a Will Save immediately after the attack resolves. Basically, unless the Darkness would react to your action somehow, it is not interaction.
::Off topic again:: What if a Silent Image tried to Sleight of Hand something away from you, and intentionally failed as per your design? Because it failed, you would notice the attempt, but you wouldn't react to it, at least until your turn. It also wouldn't really affect you, because nothing was taken. Does this constitute interaction? ::End off topic again::
Does this summarize Shadow Evocation Darkness correctly?
The saving throw negates the effects of the spell, not the spell itself.If a spell has no effects, does it do anything?
Nondamaging effects have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them. Against disbelievers, they have no effect.This spell causes an object to radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius.If an object doesn't radiate darkness out to a 20-foot radius, does the shadow evocation: darkness spell do anything?
I can see how you might come to that conclusion. The reason I take the position I do is that the save is "Will disbelief (if interacted with)" rather than "Will negates." This is important because a save that results in disbelief "lets the subject ignore the spell's effect" while a save that negates means the spell "has no effect on a subject." Specifically, disbelief does not stop the effect, but allows the "savee" to act as if it had no effect.
As such, the object is indeed automatically successful in disbelieving the shadow spell, but that disbelief does not negate the spell itself.
All the quotes are from the Magic section, for reference.
::Off topic:: Can someone reference the rule that states that objects cannot interact with spells? It seems like objects must be able to interact with spells, or spells like Mending and Obscure Object would be moot ::End off topic::
You summary covers how I see the spell working, but that assumes you allow it to affect objects (thus the discussion with meabolex above).
For this off-topic, can you be more specific? I'm not sure what rule you mean, and in general objects do interact with spells (thus the rules for objects (see below). A fireball will ignite combustible material, a gust of wind can move objects, etc.
Under Saving Throws in the Magic section, if the Saving Throw entry of a spell has the (object) descriptor:
(object): The spell can be cast on objects, which receive saving throws only if they are magical or if they are attended (held, worn, grasped, or the like) by a creature resisting the spell, in which case the object uses the creature's saving throw bonus unless its own bonus is greater. This notation does not mean that a spell can be cast only on objects. Some spells of this sort can be cast on creatures or objects. A magic item's saving throw bonuses are each equal to 2 + 1/2 the item's caster level.
For this off-topic, can you be more specific? I'm not sure what rule you mean, and in general objects do interact with spells (thus the rules for objects (see below). A fireball will ignite combustible material, a gust of wind can move objects, etc.
Earlier you said that, "Rocks can't interact with a spell, and thus never get this save." It's not relevant to the discussion anymore, but just to clarify this in my head, objects can interact with spells, correct?
Earlier you said that, "Rocks can't interact with a spell, and thus never get this save." It's not relevant to the discussion anymore, but just to clarify this in my head, objects can interact with spells, correct?
For this off-topic, can you be more specific? I'm not sure what rule you mean, and in general objects do interact with spells (thus the rules for objects (see below). A fireball will ignite combustible material, a gust of wind can move objects, etc.
Ah, I see. A poor choice of words on my part. Basically I was referring to the "disbelief" aspect of this save. Rocks can't disbelieve anything, having no cognitive ability, and so the save is irrelevant to the rock. It does indeed automatically make the save, it justs doesn't matter to the rock.
Illusions as a whole are tricky to work with, but I have a particular liking for them as both a player and GM and so have studied the mechanics for years (well, 10+ now considering how long d20 is around, plus my earlier delvings into AD&D and OD&D). I don't necessarily think I've got all the answers, but I have put a lot of thought into the subject.
Cool, thanks for all the clarification : D
If a character uses Shadow Evocation to cast Darkness, do creatures receive a Will Save against the Darkness? A strict interpretation of the rules leads me to believe that the answer is yes, but common sense leads me to believe that the answer is no. Disbelieve a shadowy illusion of Darkness all you want, it's still dark because it's made out of shadow...
Shadow Evocation states that nondamaging spells have a normal effect except against those who disbelieve. Yes, it takes a successful Will Save to disbelieve in the effect but what does it take to provoke that Will Save? In the "Magic" section of the PRD under Illusion there is a specific sentence that talks about this:
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.
Even in the Saving Throw section of the Shadow Evocation spell it specifies: "Saving Throw Will disbelief (if interacted with)." Now if you were to cast a Silent Image, any creature could try to interact with it and in so doing possibly realize that it is an illusion. But in the case of a Darkness effect created by Shadowstuff from the Plane of Shadow what interaction could you possibly undertake to realize that this Darkness is only an illusion? You can't touch it to measure the difference between real Darkness and this Illusion, you can't smell it or taste it either. And visually it is identical to true Darkness, that's the point of visual illusions they trick the eyes and by doing that trick the mind. I would rule that there is no Will Save to avoid the effect of the illusory Darkness spell. The only tool you have to measure the Darkness is visually and there is no difference between real Darkness and an illusory Darkness so there can be no Will save to ignore the effect.
However, anyone with a good enough Spellcraft check to determine that Shadow Evocation is being cast would automatically know it is an Illusion and would thereby gain a Will save (with the +4 for knowing it is an Illusion) to ignore the effect. Even if the check is failed it will only be 20% dimmer in their eyes so likely not enough to effect their vision anyway.
Also, does the effective spell level become 5, so that Daylight or Continual Flame can no longer dispel the Darkness spell, as per the spell level of Shadow Evocation? Or does the spell level of Darkness supercede the spell level of Shadow Evocation, keeping it at "light level" 2? I am confused because Shadow Evocation raises a spell's DC to that of Shadow Evocation (5), in essence making the mimiced spell's spell level 5, but Darkness is a bit of a unique case, as light spells have varying degrees of power with relation to each other based on their spell level. For that matter, would a Heightened level 6 Darkness spell dispel Daylight?
I would say the effective spell level should be the level of the actual spell being cast not the spell being mimicked. You are casting a 5th level spell so it becomes a 5th level Darkness effect. Yes, a Heightened Darkness spell of 6th level would overpower a normal Daylight spell. It is a Darkness spell of 6th level at that point.
As such, the object is indeed automatically successful in disbelieving the shadow spell, but that disbelief does not negate the spell itself.
If the spell is disbelieved, it has no effect *on its target*.
The target of the spell is an object.
The object disbelieves the spell because it is an object. Objects auto-disbelieve a shadow spell.
The spell has no effect on the object because it disbelieved. Any non-damaging shadow evocation spell has no effect if its target disbelieves.
The normal effect on the object is: radiates shadow 20 ft. from the object.
There is no effect on the object if it disbelieves.
Since the spell has no effect on the object, it does not radiate shadow.
So yes, the spell isn't negated. However, it also has no effect on its target.
I understand the logic, and do believe yours is a valid interpretation for a GM to use. However, I disagree with the conclusion based on my understanding of illusions and the relevant saves (and thus also believe mine is a valid interpretation for a GM to use) since having no effect is not the same as negation.