This has probably been discussed before somewhere, but I have a lot of questions and I don't manage to find the, or a, answer. I absolutly love Illusions (and Enchantments) in DnD and Pathfinder because of the freeform uses of it and the ability to be really creative, but often, these are also the spells that create discussions and either imbalanced results (compared to similar elvel spells) or disappointment for players for not working the way they imagined, or 'unjustified' uses by DMs.
Recently, when I DM-ed RotRL part4:
Then I made one of the clerics (still on the other side of the corner) cast Major Image (Lamia power) of an Huge red dragon, roaring angerly and also showinging himself around the corner. (Should have seen the look on their faces!! "It's the mother!")
When the creature showed up, I didn't ask for a Will Save, because there was no interaction (or is the roaring an interaction?). When the Paladin valiantly charged the illusion I called for a Will Save. This and the fact that they weren't asked for a Save vs. Fear made it an obvious illusion and despite them all failing their saves, they just ignored it. I didn't really like it as it was delibaratly meta-gaming to significantly alter the encouter, but I wouldn't really have known how to handle this as a player myself (probably done the same).
In hindsight I probably should have called for a Will Save when the illusion showed, and use that result as their save on interaction (thus 'faking' the frightful presence).
This made me think, how are illusions -and specifically: illusions of creatures or hazards- supposed to interact with the PCs?
The *Image spells are Figments, from the PRD:
Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.
What if the creature attacks a PC? Should you:
-Roll for attacks, and what bonus should you use? (Illusionist base attack + Int?, 'summoned'-creatures attack as in the beastiary?)-Roll for damage? (Result = always 0?, damage vanishes as soon as the illusion is dispelled?, standard damage but as if with STR 0?)
-Use special abilities of the illusion? (frightful presence, breath attack, elemental damage, web attacks?)
Perhaps also important is to note that figments cannot make something seem something else, so you can't 'produce' wounds or bitemarks etc.
Some of these occured in a Paizo-published adventure:
Can we take this as an example to model our illusive creatures? If so, is there a limit to the power of the summons? A Huge Red Dragon is not really the same a an Orc, despite them fitting both in the area the spell gives you. Perhaps taking Shadow Conjuration as example: an 4th spell which mimicks 3rd level conjurations. So [i]Major Image[i/] (3th level) can create 2th level summonable creatures?
And last, what is this 'force' I can use with the *Image spells? The clobbering of my illusions, the searing heat from illusive fire, or the illusion the fighter is suddely pulled to the ground as if in a super-heavy gravitational field?
To summarize, with any (and which) Image-spells can I:
-Create an monster to fight the party/enemy? (how?)
-Create hazards; fire, smoke, molten lead streaming from grates in the walls? (And use these rules?)
-Incapacitate an PC/enemy in any other way? Illusive thick fog around one character making him efectivly blind, or deaf with illusions of very loud bangs (so not able to hear anything else), Illusive gravitation/slipperiness dropping characters prone? (what will the CMB/CMD be?)
Thank you for your insight
Just a friendly bump. Will play again in a few day and I'm still curious about this.
I really dont have an answer for your question here man, sorry about that.
Edit: Was the will save for the image or for fear?
You were right not to call for a will save to disbelieve. If the metagaming came *after* the Paladin charged, I don't see anything wrong (from what I read of your description anyways). He rallied bravely and it solved the illusion issue. If that's *why* the Paladin charged, it's terrible metagaming, especially since the Paladin wouldn't have had to roll a save against fear *anyways*.
If the latter is true, I suggest you use the tactic again, big dragon, big roar, and no fear save. If that makes them charge, wallop them with the real dragon - using it's frightful presence is a *choice*.
When the creature showed up, I didn't ask for a Will Save, because there was no interaction (or is the roaring an interaction?).
The only two figments that have a will save from an audible source (you hear a sound, you make a save) is the ghost sound spell and the ventriloquism spell. All other figments (from minor image and up) do not grant saves for the audible effects.
When the Paladin valiantly charged the illusion I called for a Will Save. This and the fact that they weren't asked for a Save vs. Fear made it an obvious illusion and despite them all failing their saves, they just ignored it. I didn't really like it as it was delibaratly meta-gaming to significantly alter the encouter, but I wouldn't really have known how to handle this as a player myself (probably done the same). In hindsight I probably should have called for a Will Save when the illusion showed, and use that result as their save on interaction (thus 'faking' the frightful presence).
Wait, who is metagaming? You shouldn't call for a save when the illusion showed -- there was no interaction with it. Frightful Presence is an ability that a creature has. Since major image doesn't create a real creature, it can't have real effects.
If the paladin was metagaming ("heh, no saves, imma charge cuz its an illusion"), then yes, that's bad. Very bad things would happen to him in my games (:
-Create an monster to fight the party/enemy? (how?)
You can make a figment that looks like a monster to fight the party. It's not really practical to do this without a major image (or more powerful) spell. Major images can react appropriately to being hit (they can take damage with a sword going through the illusion) if they're hit as long as the caster is concentrating on it. If someone hits a minor image, everyone automatically disbelieves the illusion (the sword noticeably goes through it without corresponding gore).
The illusion has no special effects that can cause any damage, render any damaging force, or create specific real world effects (fear, confusion, etc). However, the illusion can *pretend* to make these effects. A major imaged dragon can roar for frightful presence -- and you as a GM can call for will saves -- but it's not a real effect -- it's also not an interaction. An illusory dragon can breathe fire (and it can feel hot -- but not damagingly hot), but if a PC enters the flame, everyone automatically disbelieves the illusion (it's obviously not real fire). A GM can freely call for saving throws even in situations where there are no saves to be made -- I use this occasionally to build suspense in an encounter.
If a PC spends an action to listen to the dragon, to study the dragon's fire breath, or attacks the dragon with a spell or melee hit -- the PC gets a save. If the illusion "attacks" the PC, the PC gets a save. There is no required attack roll (although you can use a fake roll) in having a dragon attack a PC, but the dragon can never deal damage of any type. For each attack, I would have the PC roll a saving throw. From the PC's perspective, the dragon is missing constantly. You as a GM still roll the (fake) attacks, but the figments don't make actual attack rolls.
-Create hazards; fire, smoke, molten lead streaming from grates in the walls? (And use these rules?)
Sure. Fire feels hot, but it deals no damage. Molten lead streaming from grates in the wall looks real, smells real, feels hot (when you put your hand near it) -- but it can't deal damage. Putting your hand through illusory fire/molten lead (like most figments) will cause an auto-disbelief.
Smoke and fog are quite a bit trickier. Both smoke and fog are effectively clouds of particles. Major image lets you make one object -- so you can't make a cloud of tiny water droplets or smoke particles. But just like moving through any other figment, moving through a smoke figment would trigger automatic disbelief. Thus, anything moving through a smoke/fog illusion automatically disbelieves it.
deaf with illusions of very loud bangs (so not able to hear anything else), Illusive gravitation/slipperiness dropping characters prone? (what will the CMB/CMD be?)
Illusions cannot make real effects. No deafness. No gravity or slipperiness. No dropping prone.
An illusory brick wall can grant someone concealment, but it can't actually stop an attack like cover can.
Your players metagamed in the worst possible way IMO. I have knowingly blown powerful spells and abilities on illusions before after failing a will save. I think in your case, I would have made it a real demon that was casting immediate action spells, and then beat them when they ignored him. If the players want to cheat, so can you. Perhaps you should ask your players for their save bonuses and roll them yourself for enchantments and illusions from now on.
Illusions can't make objects look like other objects, but they can overlay images over other objects. So if your illusion has greater dimentions than the other object, your good to go. This allows you to be creative with the illusionary woulds you give opponents. Blistering boils poping out of their skin, blood soaking through their mail starting to drip. A bloody nose or coming out of their mouth.
My group has the caster make touch attacks to have the illusion attack. But since they get a will save every time you have the illusion hit them, I have found it much easier to have them intentionally swing and miss. Trumps up player's ego to have that dragon's full attack miss them. They gloat a little, waste a couple rounds, and then humiliate themselves once everyone realizes its not real.
Illusions do not deal damage. They make the person think they are taking damage tough. I would handle this by keeping track of how much damage the illusion does before the player succeeds their will save. when they pass the save, the damage goes away. If they hit 0 or -, tell them that they are still up and can act normally, but do not know why, they should have gone down by now. Then give them a new will save.
Illusionary forces are only percieved by people, not by objects. You can create a tremendous wind that blows nothing, but the PCs arch into because its a driving gale they must fight against. Its tricking their sense of touch, and then they mentally compensate for it. Create some illusionary things blowing in the wind to add to the effect. Your examples are all prety much good examples of force, but are on the extreme end.
Quote:
-Create hazards; fire, smoke, molten lead streaming from grates in the walls? (And use these rules?)Sure. Fire feels hot, but it deals no damage. Molten lead streaming from grates in the wall looks real, smells real, feels hot (when you put your hand near it) -- but it can't deal damage. Putting your hand through illusory fire/molten lead (like most figments) will cause an auto-disbelief.
Smoke and fog are quite a bit trickier. Both smoke and fog are effectively clouds of particles. Major image lets you make one object -- so you can't make a cloud of tiny water droplets or smoke particles. But just like moving through any other figment, moving through a smoke figment would trigger automatic disbelief. Thus, anything moving through a smoke/fog illusion automatically disbelieves it.
There is no such thing as auto-disbelief. Its not mentioned anywhere I have found in any of the rules. You believe that you are putting your hand through molten lava and not getting burned. A bonus to the will save, certainly, but not automatic.
There is no such thing as auto-disbelief. Its not mentioned anywhere I have found in any of the rules. You believe that you are putting your hand through molten lava and not getting burned. A bonus to the will save, certainly, but not automatic.
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
The basic rule when working with a figment, is that a figment can cause no direct harm.
As mentioned already in this post, a character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
A player hit with a fireball created with a major image spell, needs no save and takes no damage. The same applies to a monster created with a major image spell, the monster hits, the player knows its an illusion, no save needed.
If you want to create illusions that can cause harm, you need to use the shadow conjuration and shadow evocation lines of spells.
That doesn't mean that figments aren't useful. One of my favorites is the illusionary bridge or ledge.
Create a broken bridge over a chasm (or a ledge on the far side)where the players need to jump a short distance to reach the illusion. Unless someone takes the time to study the bridge before making the leap, the first player to make the leap will be in for a fall. (He'll know its an illusion as soon as he passes through the bridge, but its already too late)
Surkin
There is no such thing as auto-disbelief. Its not mentioned anywhere I have found in any of the rules. You believe that you are putting your hand through molten lava and not getting burned. A bonus to the will save, certainly, but not automatic.
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
Define proof. You stick your hand into the lava. I create the feeling of heat (force) and illusionary boils on your hands, culminating in a fire. This would cause you to pull back well before you realized you were not actually getting hurt. Now, if someone who passed their save did and showed it not burning them, it would be different. Alternatively, I could have the illusion flow arround your hand. Obviously magic is at work, but it is not obvious that it is an illusion.
In response to Surken
As for a player hit with an illusionary fireball, they don't automatically know its not a real fireball. What they know is that it didn't hurt them. If they failed their save, they don't know it was just an illusion and see through it... Evil GM thought, use illusionary fireball traps and then when they get cocky use real fireballs.
If the monster hits, the player knows it did not hurt him. It feels the force of the blow and his mind reacts. Its not proof that it is illusionary.
Taking time to study something will not reveal if it is an illusion, unless you have something interact with it. Even once they fall through, you can just have it crumble as they hit it, using an illusionary force to provide resistance that they feel (their trajectory is not altered in the slightest). They get a saving through, but its really easy to not have proof.
Did the PC's have to save vs fear for the other two dragons that were real and were roaming around?
If so- and then if this new one Didn't provoke that same fear, it is Not unreasonable for them to, IC, conclude "huh, something isn't right..".
What happened when the Paladin charged? Did he hit? Miss? Try to swing at all? Did you mean charge in the "action type" sense or just, he moved towards it in a general manner?
From PRD:
Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding foes, but useless for attacking them directly.
and
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
ergo:
If Paladin "charged" the Dragon and swung at it and hit it and the blade passed through empty space meeting no resistance- then that coupled with the fact that there also was no fear for him or the group could very well lead them all to the conclusion that it is indeed an illusion.
This does not mean they are *right*. (it could also be an incorporeal dragon with its fear turned off..) but its still a logical conclusion.
Myself I don't necessarily think the group did anything wrong, nor did the Pally. The PC's are free to make logical deductions about the game world. The fact that the dragon was in fact an illusion just means their logical deduction was correct..
-S
In response to Surken
As for a player hit with an illusionary fireball, they don't automatically know its not a real fireball. What they know is that it didn't hurt them. If they failed their save, they don't know it was just an illusion and see through it... Evil GM thought, use illusionary fireball traps and then when they get cocky use real fireballs.
If the monster hits, the player knows it did not hurt him. It feels the force of the blow and his mind reacts. Its not proof that it is illusionary.
Taking time to study something will not reveal if it is an illusion, unless you have something interact with it. Even once they fall through, you can just have it crumble as they hit it, using an illusionary force to provide resistance that they feel (their trajectory is not altered in the slightest). They get a saving through, but its really easy to not have proof.
The fireball probably isn't the best example, it really makes no difference if the player knows it is an illusion or not, it will do no damage.
As for the monster, if it hits, the player knows it did not hurt him, if the illusion has touch, than the player will feel the monsters claw slide across his arm, but there is no force or impact behind it.
Figments don't transfer energy, figments also have no direct effect on the players mind. They only change what the player can sense. If a figment punches a player in the face, the player would see the fist coming, could hear the noise made when the punch lands, would feel it touch his face. The illusionist could adjust the image, so the player saw blood spray from his nose, could even have him feel the blood trickle down his face, and taste it at the corner of his mouth, but there would be no impact, the players head wouldn't move when the punch landed, there would be no pain.
In the above situation, depending on the figment used to create the illusion, I would either give the player a save to disbelieve as soon as the punch landed (if the spell applied against most of the senses mentioned), or simply tell the player he realizes it is an illusion if the spell only applied to one or two senses.
As for taking time to study an illusion, there was a really good series of articles on the WoTC 3.5 site that discussed illusions. It proposed spending an action studying an illusion as a method to allow a saving throw. The time studying would qualify as interaction and allow a save. (The key being that the player needs to spend an action to get the save.) I use that in games I run to help balance the power of illusions.
Illusions are tricky things, they can be incredibly powerful or incredibly weak, all depending on how the GM interprets the rules. All that really matters is that the GM and the players know how the rules are being interpreted. And the GM is comfortable using those interpretations in his/her game.
Surkin
Take 2, electric boogaloo (hate post monster)
The fireball probably isn't the best example, it really makes no difference if the player knows it is an illusion or not, it will do no damage.
As for the monster, if it hits, the player knows it did not hurt him, if the illusion has touch, than the player will feel the monsters claw slide across his arm, but there is no force or impact behind it.
Figments don't transfer energy, figments also have no direct effect on the players mind. They only change what the player can sense. If a figment punches a player in the face, the player would see the fist coming, could hear the noise made when the punch lands, would feel it touch his face. The illusionist could adjust the image, so the player saw blood spray from his nose, could even have him feel the blood trickle down his face, and taste it at the corner of his mouth, but there would be no impact, the players head wouldn't move when the punch landed, there would be no pain.
In the above situation, depending on the figment used to create the illusion, I would either give the player a save to disbelieve as soon as the punch landed (if the spell applied against most of the senses mentioned), or simply tell the player he realizes it is an illusion if the spell only applied to one or two senses.
Flinching. The person reacts to the the feeling that they recieve of getting hit by moving as if they are getting hit. By failing the save that they get, they don't separate the 2 feelings in their mind.
As for not having all the senses covered, they would know something is off, but not necessarily that it is an illusion. There are many ways to create things that impart no force but still wound, just look at ghost touch or brilliant energy. Sound is easy, with silence spells. In a world with magic, illusion is not the only thing that can trick your senses. A save is appropriate, but something wierd is not proof that its an illusion, just that something wierd is going on.
As for taking time to study an illusion, there was a really good series of articles on the WoTC 3.5 site that discussed illusions. It proposed spending an action studying an illusion as a method to allow a saving throw. The time studying would qualify as interaction and allow a save. (The key being that the player needs to spend an action to get the save.) I use that in games I run to help balance the power of illusions.
I don't like this system because it assumes that the illusionist made a mistake that can be easily percieved to allow a will check to overcome.
I have seen systems I like that use craft:illusion as the base DC for the perception check. Then, if they overcome the DC, the illusionist wasn't god enough to fool them. The problem is that the skill becomes a tax for casters, who already get too few skill points.
Illusions are tricky things, they can be incredibly powerful or incredibly weak, all depending on how the GM interprets the rules. All that really matters is that the GM and the players know how the rules are being interpreted. And the GM is comfortable using those interpretations in his/her game.
Surkin
I am coming to the realization that illusions are much more powerful in my group than in others. It makes me sad, because this is my favorite school of magic, and IMO the best written.
Define proof. You stick your hand into the lava. I create the feeling of heat (force) and illusionary boils on your hands, culminating in a fire. This would cause you to pull back well before you realized you were not actually getting hurt. Now, if someone who passed their save did and showed it not burning them, it would be different. Alternatively, I could have the illusion flow arround your hand. Obviously magic is at work, but it is not obvious that it is an illusion
You can't use a figment to make something look like something else, so you can't create figment boils on someone's hand.
Heat is also energy, not force. And finally, the heat is such that it fools your senses, but it's not actual heat.
Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements
If it were real heat, it could help provide protection from the elements (that is, keep you alive in extreme cold). But, figments only try to fool your senses -- they don't actually have a real effect -- like generating heat. If you found a figment fire while trapped in a deeply cold dungeon, you'd feel warm -- but you'd begin to freeze to death. Now that's confusing (-;
Sticking your hand into a box of figment lava would be like sticking your hand into a very warm empty box. There's no substance to figments -- it's effectively trying to fool your senses, but it's not really there. Sticking your hand in it is proof that it's not really there. While the thermal effects of lava are confusing the issue, replace lava with dirt. If you stick your hand in an illusory pile of dirt, there's obviously nothing there -- your hand just moves right through it as if nothing were there. Moving your hand through a pile of dirt without actually feeling dirt is pretty definitive proof something is wrong with that pile of dirt.
Define proof. You stick your hand into the lava. I create the feeling of heat (force) and illusionary boils on your hands, culminating in a fire. This would cause you to pull back well before you realized you were not actually getting hurt. Now, if someone who passed their save did and showed it not burning them, it would be different. Alternatively, I could have the illusion flow arround your hand. Obviously magic is at work, but it is not obvious that it is an illusionYou can't use a figment to make something look like something else, so you can't create figment boils on someone's hand.
Heat is also energy, not force. And finally, the heat is such that it fools your senses, but it's not actual heat.
I can't make your hand look like its not a hand. I can, however put boils between your hand and your eyes so it looks like your hand has boils. I can't, however make your hand look like a stump. You can add material with illusions, you just can't take away. Otherwise I could never make air look like a dragon.
Figments and glamers cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elementsIf it were real heat, it could help provide protection from the elements (that is, keep you alive in extreme cold). But, figments only try to fool your senses -- they don't actually have a real effect -- like generating heat. If you found a figment fire while trapped in a deeply cold dungeon, you'd feel warm -- but you'd begin to freeze to death. Now that's confusing (-;
Sticking your hand into a box of figment lava would be like sticking your hand into a very warm empty box. There's no substance to figments -- it's effectively trying to fool your senses, but it's not really there. Sticking your hand in it is proof that it's not really there. While the thermal effects of lava are confusing the issue, replace lava with dirt. If you stick your hand in an illusory pile of dirt, there's obviously nothing there -- your hand just moves right through it as if nothing were there. Moving your hand through a pile of dirt without actually feeling dirt is pretty definitive proof something is wrong with that pile of dirt.
You stick you hand in illusionary lava, you feel the heat. You have no way of knowing that is not normal heat. It wont sustain you, but you will still feel it. You stick your hand in dirt, you will still feel the weight of the dirt. You just wont actually be in any danger of your hand being crushed by that much weight. Illusions provide tactile feedback. Thats how they trick your sense of touch.
When the creature showed up...
Judging on the reactions thus far, it would seem that a more detailed description of the combat situation might be helpful. As a player in this group, I'll try to do so.
As mentioned, we were exchanging blows with a pair of young dragons in a small cave. There wasn't an awful lot of room to move in, so with our party of three having taking some burns and scratches, we opted to make a tactical retreat around the corner when the pair of spellcasters showed up.
As soon as we had retreated and were preparing to mend some of the damage taken, the big illusionary dragon showed up. Having encountered the young dragons just then, and having encountered this big dragon earlier, we initially assumed it was very real. We put some more distance between our party and the big nasty, and proceeded to patch up our paladin, who primarily serves as the tank. Sure, something was odd about the dragon just standing there roaring, but we still assumed it was real. When the paladin was back up to full health, we did what we usually do - we threw him at the biggest monster in sight. He charged the illusionary dragon, spending his last smite evil, swung at it, and then noticed something was amiss as his sword didn't seem to pass through scales and flesh. He was given a save, which he did make.
In the meantime, one of the enemy spellcasters had used Dimension Door to teleport behind our position, and just prior to the charge, put down a carefully placed Silence, which foiled our initial plan that involved heroically teleporting the hell out of there. In addition, the silence prevented us from hearing our paladin yell that the dragon was an illusion. On his turn, our wizard moved out of the silence and threw a lightning bolt at the illusion. The bolt obviously did nothing, and the wizard was given a save, which he failed. I, being the cleric, was also facing the dragon, but was not given a save after I saw the bolt pass through it.
The next turn started, and our paladin, now disbelieving the illusion, moved straight through it and attacked the Lamia that had by now moved around the corner. When we witnessed our paladin ignore this super massive dragon that appeared out of nowhere and was curiously nonaggressive, the two of us decided, in character, that the dragon must have been an illusion, and instead focused on the other spellcaster, much to the chagrin of our GM.
I still feel that we acted reasonable, despite his complaints.
When we witnessed our paladin ignore this super massive dragon that appeared out of nowhere and was curiously nonaggressive, the two of us decided, in character, that the dragon must have been an illusion, and instead focused on the other spellcaster, much to the chagrin of our GM.
You both decided the same thing in a silence field? How did you discuss this in a few seconds?
Also, maybe the paladin was simply making a tactical error. It seems too much of a stretch to simply decide, "oh, that's not real -- even though I think it's real. . ."
I understand the GM's consternation. He seemed to be pretty sneaky to use the dimension door/silence, so I understand that it was foiled by metagaming.
(BTW, I assume he had several rounds to do this combo. Using dimension door prevents you from doing anything else that round -- plus silence has a 1 round cast time. I'm not sure how many rounds had elapsed, but this will take at minimum 3 rounds without a quickened spell. . .)
It would have made more sense for the GM to say the dragon was fried by the lightning bolt and let you roll damage. . . assuming the caster of the major image was concentrating on making the dragon look like he took damage. If the caster wasn't concentrating, then the lightning bolt would pass through the dragon as if it weren't there; if a lightning bolt just passes through a dragon with no effect, there's no dragon there -- it should be proof it's an illusion and automatically disbelieved (a weapon passing through an unconcentrated-on major image does the same thing).
... He was given a save, which he did make....
The OP said that everyone failed their will save, so I assumed it was horrible metagaming. If you passed the save, I have no problem with you completely ignoring it.
Now that one of my players seems active on this message-board, I want to state that the reason I started this thread, was because of the unclearness (to me) of the rules regarding the active interaction of non-static, hazardous Figments with PCs in general. While the specific example in the OP was just a prologue leading to the actual questions, not something I wanted to uphold on these boards for judgment. Whether this particular situation was handled correctly or not is irrelevant for this discussion.
Thanks everyone for the feedback! Although I still have some ambivalent feelings towards the execution of these spells, as there doesn't really seems to be a proper answer, your insights have helped me a lot! Perhaps it is this ambiguity that defines role-playing games in general, as it forces participants to be creative and stimulates pro-active engagement with the rule-system.