| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly is allowed with this spell?
What if you make an image of darkness, can you hide in it?
What if you create an image of a tree, can you use it as cover to make a Stealth check?
I assume if you make an image of a wall you have "total cover" and cannot be seen (but not really cover, since it's not real).
Just curious on the clarification.
|
Of course I can't remember the difference at the moment but I would guess that a figment gives you concealment and not cover because it is not real. Thus it would act like displacement or blur rather than a wall or tree.
You would however, run up against the problem of using a lower level spell to duplicate the effects of a higher level spell which I am pretty sure you can't do.
In the case of the image of a tree you would have total concealment if it were large enough to block line of sight to you from all foes, facilitating a stealth check, though it would provide no cover as it can't actually stop any incoming force. The same is true for the wall; you would have total concealment as the enemy could not see you until they disbelieved the illusion or gained line of sight to you in another fashion, but no cover.
The PRD gives a pretty good breakdown of what figments aren't allowed to do.
Generally, as figments aren't real they can't create any real effect (i.e. no damage, sustanence, weight, protection, and so on). For the most part you are only limited in your creativity past that.
|
This is one that really relies a lot on your DM's style. Silent image can be excellent for creating diversions, scaring enemies, or a whole host of other options (your creativity can really go nuts here).
The style part comes in when, let's say, you set up an ambush and use a silent image to create a decoy to lead your opponents into your midst.
Case A: Your DM figures this is interesting, has your opponents give chase as they only caught a glimpse and didn't have the time to really examine it (thus allowing a save), and you earn the advantage.
Case B: Your DM has the targets all make saves since they "saw" the illusion, and unless you're sporting a stupidly high casting stat and have used heighten spell to make this level 10, they are going to succeed, know something is up, and turn the tables on you.
Silent image is a wonderfully protean spell, though its effectiveness can vary wildly from DM to DM. Hence, I hope yours indulges you somewhat.
So I have a player who is playing a gnome Beguiler. According to Disguise Self, it can't really change your body type and only puts on minor details. Which sucks, because he really wanted to appear as if he were a kobold, to trick some kobolds.
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
|
|
That one, thankfully, is pretty straightforward, though not in the gnome's favor. The idea is good (creative way to get what he's after), but since the spell is duration 'concentration', he would basically be a silent, unmoving (so as to cover the gnome, otherwise he could move), wrong smelling/feeling kobold that his opponents would all likely get saves against as they would be examining him due to to his odd behavior.
To pull this off he'll likely need to hang on until he can cast alter self.
Ooh! A creativity thread! I love these!
In order to promote new ideas for this spell, here are the icky rules limitations for easy referance:
Illusion spells deceive the senses or minds of others. They cause people to see things that are not there, not see things that are there, hear phantom noises, or remember things that never happened.
Figment: A figment spell creates a false sensation. 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. Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the figment produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like (or copy another sense exactly unless you have experienced it).
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.
A figment's AC is equal to 10 + its size modifier.
Also, I don't believe interacting with something means merely seeing it. At the very least, "interacting" should mean spending an action.
|
What exactly is allowed with this spell?
What if you make an image of darkness, can you hide in it?
What if you create an image of a tree, can you use it as cover to make a Stealth check?
I assume if you make an image of a wall you have "total cover" and cannot be seen (but not really cover, since it's not real).
Just curious on the clarification.
A creature can't see through a figment unless it succeeds on its save. If you make a figment of a tree or a wall, you can hide from affected creatures behind it. If you make a figment of a dense vapour, affected creatures can't see you inside it.
It doesn't make you invisible - that's a different and higher-level spell - so you can't make a figment of objects on the opposite side of an empty area to make creatures think they can see through it.
Basically, it can affect vision in most ways that creating a solid physical object (without altering any real objects) at that location could accomplish.
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
This generally wouldn't work, especially for a creature of the same size, because the caster's body would stick out of the figment at various places. I agree with Verse that, if he can do it at all, it should take total concentration (full round actions), as little movement as possible and not be particularly convincing. It's simplest to say that it doesn't work because it duplicates another spell's effect.
I can't find anything in the Pathfinder rules that keeps you from continuing to use an illusion as concealment (even total concealment) when the enemy saves against it. Just because they know it's fake doesn't necessarily mean they can see through it.
|
|
I can't find anything in the Pathfinder rules that keeps you from continuing to use an illusion as concealment (even total concealment) when the enemy saves against it. Just because they know it's fake doesn't necessarily mean they can see through it.
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.
"Translucent" could imply a range of continuing blockage (edit:) What am I saying? An "outline" can't conceal anything behind it. It only allows the creature to see that the figment is there and what it's meant to represent.
|
|
Also, I don't believe interacting with something means merely seeing it. At the very least, "interacting" should mean spending an action.
"Studying carefully" should be at least a move action, as per the Perception skill, but that's still probably not enough.
"Interacting" should require either bodily contact by moving into its space, or hitting it with something, which would almost always require some kind of standard action.
Hm. To continue the hypothetical examples, how about this situation...
A Wizard/Shadowdancer in the middle of an open field at noon casts Silent Image to make a large, flat ceiling at forehead height. It obviously must appear to block the sunlight and create several map-squares of shadow, or it would not be a convincing illusion.
If everyone believes the illusion, can the character make use of the shadow to hide?
If someone successfully interacts with and disbelieves the illusion, does this change the caster's ability to use the shadow to hide?
I need to stop posting in the early AM. I make too many mistakes.
I simply didn't read down far enough.
|
|
We most recently used silent image to fill our wagon with treasure. All of us but the wagon's driver we actually sitting on the empty wagon, but as far as the bandits knew it was as good. It got us through the palisade, and might have failed under worse conditions, but we sprung our trap before they could look closer.
|
|
Hm. To continue the hypothetical examples, how about this situation...
A Wizard/Shadowdancer in the middle of an open field at noon casts Silent Image to make a large, flat ceiling at forehead height. It obviously must appear to block the sunlight and create several map-squares of shadow, or it would not be a convincing illusion.
This would require the silent image to change the appearance of real objects (the ground and the shadowdancer) to an extent that it has a game effect. A figment can't do that. Also, I would say that blocking light is a real effect (not allowed) and duplicates the darkness spell (a further reason not to allow it).
edit: It might make affected creatures see the area as shadowed, but not actually make Perception checks against the shadowdancer more difficult.
It definitely wouldn't create a real area of dim light, as required for Hide in Plain Sight. As discussed in other threads for low-light vision and darkvision, the shadowdancer's ability has nothing to do with the perceptual capacity, real or false, of other creatures.
Hm. To continue the hypothetical examples, how about this situation...
A Wizard/Shadowdancer in the middle of an open field at noon casts Silent Image to make a large, flat ceiling at forehead height. It obviously must appear to block the sunlight and create several map-squares of shadow, or it would not be a convincing illusion.
This would require the silent image to change the appearance of real objects (the ground and the shadowdancer) to an extent that it has a game effect. A figment can't do that. Also, I would say that blocking light is a real effect (not allowed) and duplicates the darkness spell (a further reason not to allow it).
edit: It might make affected creatures see the area as shadowed, but not actually make Perception checks against the shadowdancer more difficult.
It definitely wouldn't create a real area of dim light, as required for Hide in Plain Sight. As discussed in other threads for low-light vision and darkvision, the shadowdancer's ability has nothing to do with the perceptual capacity, real or false, of other creatures.
I disagree on most every point. An visual illusion would most definitely block light, or at the very least, create the illusion of blocked light.
In the past, I have seen Silent Image used to create a wall 5' from another wall, so that the PCs could move thru the large and heavily guarded room without being seen by the guards/enemies in the room.
I have also seen it used to make a "bridge" across a chasm, sending a few opponents tumbling down a chasm when the tried to charge across it.
A variant of that is placing an illusionary floor over any of the pit spells, preferably with obscuring mist or other spell that limits visibility, so that multiple enemies are affected by the pit. If there is a cleric in the group who can also cast silence in the bottom, it's even better.
|
|
Concentration is a standard action, he can continue to take move actions and presumably speak.That one, thankfully, is pretty straightforward, though not in the gnome's favor. The idea is good (creative way to get what he's after), but since the spell is duration 'concentration', he would basically be a silent, unmoving (so as to cover the gnome, otherwise he could move), wrong smelling/feeling kobold that his opponents would all likely get saves against as they would be examining him due to to his odd behavior.
To pull this off he'll likely need to hang on until he can cast alter self.
I presume that concentration provokes an AO and is subject to all the other various causes that require a concentration roll?
So you can move and maybe speak a little, but anything vigorous and your rolling some dice.
|
|
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
... Figments cannot make something seem to be something else...
So no, you can't use Silent Image as a 'disguise'.
I disagree on most every point. An visual illusion would most definitely block light, or at the very least, create the illusion of blocked light.
Illusions can't generally simulate light - an illusion of a torch, for example, doesn't actually produce any light. The [light] and [darkness] descriptors are generally for evocation spells. That's why Dancing Lights (an evocation [light] effect) is such a vital cantrip for any budding illusionist - it can be moved without concentration, so you can use it to add those lighting effects to your illusions.
Illusions don't produce natural shadows (so an illusion of a ceiling doesn't block sunlight, no) - which is one way people probably notice the things. With enough of an area of effect, and some effort with the details, you can produce an 'illusion of shadows' (darkening the floor where the shadow would be cast, for example) - but that's a deliberate part of the illusion, rather than a 'natural result' of the illusion being there, and has to conform to the normal limits of the spell generating the illusion (e.g. 5x 10ft cube areas for a 1st level Silent Image). It's a subtle, but important, distinction.
Illusions can't generally simulate light - an illusion of a torch, for example, doesn't actually produce any light. The [light] and [darkness] descriptors are generally for evocation spells. That's why Dancing Lights (an evocation [light] effect) is such a vital cantrip for any budding illusionist - it can be moved without concentration, so you can use it to add those lighting effects to your illusions.
I don't see any support anywhere for this interpretation.
Illusions don't produce natural shadows (so an illusion of a ceiling doesn't block sunlight, no) - which is one way people probably notice the things. With enough of an area of effect, and some effort with the details, you can produce an 'illusion of shadows' (darkening the floor where the shadow would be cast, for example) - but that's a deliberate part of the illusion, rather than a 'natural result' of the illusion being there, and has to conform to the normal limits of the spell generating the illusion (e.g. 5x 10ft cube areas for a 1st level Silent Image). It's a subtle, but important, distinction.
Despite my assertion above, this is likely how I would run it in my games too.
So I have a player who is playing a gnome Beguiler. According to Disguise Self, it can't really change your body type and only puts on minor details. Which sucks, because he really wanted to appear as if he were a kobold, to trick some kobolds.
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
Disguise self would totally be able to make a gnome look like a kobold. You are staying roughly the same size (small), are staying the same creature type (humanoid), but changing subtype, which is specifically allowed.
Illusions can't generally simulate light - an illusion of a torch, for example, doesn't actually produce any light. The [light] and [darkness] descriptors are generally for evocation spells. That's why Dancing Lights (an evocation [light] effect) is such a vital cantrip for any budding illusionist - it can be moved without concentration, so you can use it to add those lighting effects to your illusions.I don't see any support anywhere for this interpretation.
Illusions don't produce natural shadows (so an illusion of a ceiling doesn't block sunlight, no) - which is one way people probably notice the things. With enough of an area of effect, and some effort with the details, you can produce an 'illusion of shadows' (darkening the floor where the shadow would be cast, for example) - but that's a deliberate part of the illusion, rather than a 'natural result' of the illusion being there, and has to conform to the normal limits of the spell generating the illusion (e.g. 5x 10ft cube areas for a 1st level Silent Image). It's a subtle, but important, distinction.Despite my assertion above, this is likely how I would run it in my games too.
+1
Any light provided by the illusion would just cover up the darkness, not reveal what is in the darkness. That does not mean an illusionary torch wont cast light. It does mean that the light it casts wont do anything outside the spell, or reveal the creature hiding in the darkness. People would still be able to see the light, but outside the area of effect the lighting effects would be incorrect and would be what perception checks are looking for.
|
|
I don't see any support anywhere for this interpretation.
It's spelled out in Gnomes of Golarion (page 26) if that helps, otherwise it's just the logic that light and darkness effects generally require spells with those descriptors, and that evocation spells produce these, rather than illusions.
Any light provided by the illusion would just cover up the darkness, not reveal what is in the darkness. That does not mean an illusionary torch wont cast light. It does mean that the light it casts wont do anything outside the spell, or reveal the creature hiding in the darkness. People would still be able to see the light, but outside the area of effect the lighting effects would be incorrect and would be what perception checks are looking for.
Although a figment specifically can't make one thing look like another thing, so can't be cast 'over' things hiding in darkness in this manner.
|
|
So I have a player who is playing a gnome Beguiler. According to Disguise Self, it can't really change your body type and only puts on minor details. Which sucks, because he really wanted to appear as if he were a kobold, to trick some kobolds.
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.
I don't see any support anywhere for this interpretation.It's spelled out in Gnomes of Golarion (page 26) if that helps, otherwise it's just the logic that light and darkness effects generally require spells with those descriptors, and that evocation spells produce these, rather than illusions.
Any light provided by the illusion would just cover up the darkness, not reveal what is in the darkness. That does not mean an illusionary torch wont cast light. It does mean that the light it casts wont do anything outside the spell, or reveal the creature hiding in the darkness. People would still be able to see the light, but outside the area of effect the lighting effects would be incorrect and would be what perception checks are looking for.Although a figment specifically can't make one thing look like another thing, so can't be cast 'over' things hiding in darkness in this manner.
If you take that interpretation, you can't cast the spell anywhere, because you can't make air look like not air.
|
|
If you take that interpretation, you can't cast the spell anywhere, because you can't make air look like not air.
Ah... 'The Science of Golarion'... ;)
... Figments cannot make something seem to be something else...
RAI I seriously doubt they're talking about air molecules... but I suspect they are talking about 'making something seem to be something else'... such as covering a room in darkness with a 'fake room' in 'light' with a 1st level spell...
If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.
Disguise Self, not alter self. An 1800gp item that gave a constant +2 Str or Dex that stacked with magic belts would be broken.
I don't see any support anywhere for this interpretation.It's spelled out in Gnomes of Golarion (page 26) if that helps, otherwise it's just the logic that light and darkness effects generally require spells with those descriptors, and that evocation spells produce these, rather than illusions.
Any light provided by the illusion would just cover up the darkness, not reveal what is in the darkness. That does not mean an illusionary torch wont cast light. It does mean that the light it casts wont do anything outside the spell, or reveal the creature hiding in the darkness. People would still be able to see the light, but outside the area of effect the lighting effects would be incorrect and would be what perception checks are looking for.Although a figment specifically can't make one thing look like another thing, so can't be cast 'over' things hiding in darkness in this manner.
I don't typically buy paperbacks aside from the occasional module, so I'm not surprised I missed that.
Most interesting. I find it ironic how it clearly breaks the core rules of "figments can't make something look like something else."
|
|
Most interesting. I find it ironic how it clearly breaks the core rules of "figments can't make something look like something else."
Oops - I think I may have confused you there. The second quote was from Caineach's post (above mine), not the Gnomes of Golarion - I was responding to two posts, not just yours...
If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.
Do keep in mind that it's a command word item with a duration of 10 minutes. Hope you have a way to explain why you're shouting magic stuff every ten minutes.
|
As far as I can tell, the rules outlined above are spot on.
Basically, figments make "holograms" of imaginary objects.
Some fun stuff to pull off here:
Walls. It may only block off that doorway for a round, but that could very well be the time needed for your Rogue & Fighter buddies to get on either side and ready attacks.
Doors. Combine with invisibility for great effect. Poof, door goes invisible while illusory door stays right where it "was," you can see through just fine, enemies have no idea about that. Open you illusory "door" and have those orcs running into a wall of force type effect.
Fake spells. Sure, you can't really cast gate, summon monster IX, or similar effects. The peasants/orcs/enemy soldiers don't know that, though, do they? Make them big, dramatic, and very very obvious, and pull attention off the real threats.
Signage. "Eat At Joe's," "Enemies Coming Now!," or "FLEE, DRAGON!" are all good things to communicate to others. When you can generate a quite large, very obvious sign in the air, it becomes easy.
Finally, Bait. Our Serpent's Skull game has already seen quite good use of our "greased up deaf guy." My gnomish Illusionist & the Bard team up quite regularly to have dancing lights, silent image, and ghost sound running simultaneously.
Lights, camera, action!
Effortless Trickery
Your natural knack for illusion allows you to maintain at least one illusion spell with little effort.
Prerequisite: Gnome.
Benefit: You can maintain concentration on one spell of the illusion school as a swift action. This has no effect on spells of other schools or on illusion spells with durations that don’t depend on your active concentration. While you may only maintain one spell as a swift action, you may take your move and standard actions to maintain other spells normally, if you wish.
Normal: Concentrating to maintain a spell is a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
|
|
If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.Do keep in mind that it's a command word item with a duration of 10 minutes. Hope you have a way to explain why you're shouting magic stuff every ten minutes.
You never have to show command words. You can always whisper them. Also it can be house ruled that it lasts longer.
|
|
You never have to show command words. You can always whisper them. Also it can be house ruled that it lasts longer.If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.Do keep in mind that it's a command word item with a duration of 10 minutes. Hope you have a way to explain why you're shouting magic stuff every ten minutes.
So I'm not sure if command words are different from spell casting, but with spell casting it says:
To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice
The description of Command Word is vague on how you must speak it, other then you must speak it. As it is magic, I'd be inclined to say you must do it authoritatively.
But there is no raw
So I have a player who is playing a gnome Beguiler. According to Disguise Self, it can't really change your body type and only puts on minor details. Which sucks, because he really wanted to appear as if he were a kobold, to trick some kobolds.
So he thought of using Silent Image to superimpose the image of a kobold over himself. Would that work? Or would he still be seen over the image?
I just wanted to point out something Caineach said which I think got lost in the shuffle.
A gnome CAN use disguise self to make himself look like a kobold.
You make yourself—including clothing, armor, weapons, and equipment—look different. You can seem 1 foot shorter or taller, thin, fat, or in between. You cannot change your creature type (although you can appear as another subtype). Otherwise, the extent of the apparent change is up to you. You could add or obscure a minor feature or look like an entirely different person or gender.
A gnome is a Small humanoid with the subtype (gnome). A kobold is a Small humanoid with the subtype (reptilian).
Ergo, since all the gnome is doing is changing the appearance of his creature subtype, the spell will work.
Therefore, even if silent image did allow you to take on the appearance of something else (which it doesn't as noted by other posters), disguise self would still be the better spell to use as it's got the better duration and application, etc.
Carry on.
You never have to show command words. You can always whisper them. Also it can be house ruled that it lasts longer.If he wants to do this I recommend a Hat of Disguise. 1,800 gold and he can use alter self at will. Great toy for rogues and illusionists.Do keep in mind that it's a command word item with a duration of 10 minutes. Hope you have a way to explain why you're shouting magic stuff every ten minutes.So I'm not sure if command words are different from spell casting, but with spell casting it says:
To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voiceThe description of Command Word is vague on how you must speak it, other then you must speak it. As it is magic, I'd be inclined to say you must do it authoritatively.
But there is no raw
Even if those rules did apply to magic items, you can easily whisper something in a strong voice. A strong voice is not a measure of volume, but a measure of certainty, of not tripping up over and mispronouncing the arcane words.
|
|
Even if those rules did apply to magic items, you can easily whisper something in a strong voice. A strong voice is not a measure of volume, but a measure of certainty, of not tripping up over and mispronouncing the arcane words.
To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice...
Obviously this is not "RAW" but:
One of strong's definitions:
9. clear and firm; loud: He has a strong voice.
Which is how I've always read that rule, reading it otherwise introduces a fair number of stealth advantages that a wizard shouldn't enjoy without silent spell (feat or rod.)