There was some discussion about this in a GM reference for a pathfinder module a while back, but I don't feel like it was satisfactory.
Figments can't cause damage, but they can cause sensations. A figment created with a Major Image spell is a full-fledged figment that can do it all, unlike a silent image, which is a limited "visual" figment only.
"An object" is very loosely defined by the spell. If by RAW you could really only create the illusion of "an object", you could only create the illusion of the smallest particle of quantum energy that can exist. However, if you can create "an object" in the sense that such a definition includes a banquet table... this extends the definition of "an object" to many, many, objects... even if we aren't getting ridiculous about particle physics, there is the table, the table-cloth, plates, bowls, silverware, etc. etc... so it seems that you can really create as many objects as you want, as long as they are all related objects to the illusory scene you are trying to create. Otherwise... we'd have to be so nit-picky as to say you could only create an illusion of a doorknob, OR a door, not both... or just one stone in a stone wall illusion instead of the whole thing made of multiple stones... etc.
You can also say that you could create the illusion of air. Its not visible, but not because you are using a figment to make something invisible... you are using a figment to produce the sensation of something that is invisible to the naked eye normally. Based on this, if you keep the "space" between objects in mind in your illusion as the fluid between them, the objects don't need to be touching each other visually to the naked eye... because the object is all touching itself in the sense that the figment fluid is bridging the gap between the naturally visible parts and the illusion is all one "object" in that sense as it is contiguous.
So, this means that within the radius of the allowed space (which by the time you get Major Image you are level 5 and can make an illusion in a 9x10 foot cube) you could theoretically, by RAW, create any number of "objects" as part of "an object" in a space that is 9 10-foot cubes wide. Let's say then that you decide that you would like to create the illusion therefore of 90 flying creatures all stacked in a big cube together flying toward your opponents.
Assuming that none of your opponents succeed at their will save, they now have to interact with the figment believing it to be real. Let's say they attack it... it only has an AC of 10+its size. So, in the case of the big cube, its a pretty low AC as it is at least a "colossal" creature since there aren't rules for things so big. This would mean that its virtually impossible that your opponents won't hit it.
So, your opponents hit it and still don't disbelieve. Major Image says it should disappear... UNLESS you make it react as if it was hit. So, you make it react as if one of the creatures was hit and possibly slain, thereby making the rest of the illusion remain a bunch of unwounded, still living creatures.
Now, the illusion gets to attack... does it get 90 attacks? Does each attack offer a new save? When your opponents believe they are being hit, they can't be damaged, but they'd believe they are being damaged... and feeling the pain of being damaged, sight of wounds on their body as though they are damaged, etc. since figments cause sensations. What happens when they get to the point where they BELIEVE they have been knocked out or killed? They'd be in as much pain as if that were the case, so it seems that they'd at least go unconscious because they still BELIEVE they've been knocked unconscious, if not actually be able to die from their "wounds" simply from "believing" themselves to be dead... because you can't believe anything once you are dead this is a catch-22... but unconscious sounds legit.
I know this sounds a bit much and is very long... but crazy as it sounds, I see no reason why this is not RAW.
Even if it does not disappear they know it is fake if they make the save, and any party members get a +4 to their save once one person points it out.
Where does it say the figments cause pain(even fake pain)?
Quote: 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. I would say that pain is not a sensation they can cause.
There is also this line.
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. That means that the figment is the same to everyone all the time. It can't be used to make just one person feel pain. It can, in theory, produce an odor that everyone smells, or a color that everyone can see.
wraithstrike wrote: Even if it does not disappear they know it is fake if they make the save, and any party members get a +4 to their save once one person points it out.
Where does it say the figments cause pain(even fake pain)?
Quote: 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. I would say that pain is not a sensation they can cause.
There is also this line.
Quote: 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. That means that the figment is the same to everyone all the time. It can't be used to make just one person feel pain. It can, in theory, produce an odor that everyone smells, or a color that everyone can see.
Hm, perhaps you are right... seeing as the spell does list exactly what types of sensations it can produce, and pain isn't listed. In that case, if the spell were used to "attack", it would automatically cause the person it attacked to disbelieve.
However, consider the following:
It CAN cause thermal illusions. What if you used the spell to create the illusion, with the heat, to make the subject believe he was on fire and feel the heat of it? It wouldn't be isolated to the subject, because the other observers would feel the same heat, but as they are from a greater distance away, per the nature of heat and heat source, they wouldn't feel it as intensely.
I think its valid because "the same" sensation for all observers applies in the same sense that the angle that an observer looks at an object, or distance from the object, affects the particular EXACT sensation of perception of the object due to being at a different angle/distance... just like how much heat you would perceive due to distance.
Now, "heat" is not pain. So, the sensation of pain is not caused by the heat. However, when you feel heat above a certain degree, you then feel pain. The spell isn't directly causing pain, its causing heat, which INDIRECTLY causes pain. Its not as if the spell is causing "pain" to be directly inflicted like a phantasm, or "conjuring" a "unit of pain" to inflict in the illusion... pain is a byproduct of the heat.
So, the same logic could be used to apply to another force besides heat. A blow from an axe doesn't "contain" or "impart" pain directly. Pain isn't a thing that exists externally that can be imparted. When the force applied to your nerves becomes great enough due to the amount of force being enough to injure you, your nerves then alert you to that injury with a signal of pain. In this sense, just like the fire causes pain when you feel the illusory heat, and believe it, hot enough such that your brain interprets the level of heat to be a level that causes pain... so to would being struck by force.
However, Silent Image says that the force effect is only visual, and Major Image doesn't outline that the force effect can become tactile. But, what else would it mean to "believe" the effect or not if not that the effect felt real? That's the whole point of the effect.
So, as far as force, like getting struck by a physical blow is concerned, its I guess, dubious. However, the heat of believing you are on fire causing pain and the belief that you are being damaged being enough to knock you out still seems very plausible to me.
Nope. If a spell cause pain, even through it is an attack by the rules so no hit point damage can be done. The intent is clear. If you are just trying to argue RAW then a lot of things fail by RAW. Heat is not pain, but it cause pain, just like it is assumed that heat from a magical fire causes damage. If the fire were not hot it not burn anything.
I will also add that heat is fire damage, by the rules anyway.
Quote: Heat Dangers
Heat deals nonlethal damage that cannot be recovered from until the character gets cooled off (reaches shade, survives until nightfall, gets doused in water, is targeted by endure elements, and so forth). Once a character has taken an amount of nonlethal damage equal to her total hit points, any further damage from a hot environment is lethal damage....
Quote: When the force applied to your nerves becomes great enough due to the amount of force being enough to injure you, your nerves then alert you to that injury with a signal of pain. In this sense, just like the fire causes pain when you feel the illusory heat, and believe it, hot enough such that your brain interprets the level of heat to be a level that causes pain... so to would being struck by force. You can't really bring real word logic into the rules. The intent is quiet clear.
If you want to bring real world logic into it trying to block a giant or dragon's attack with a shield would most likely break your arm, and possibly the shield also. You can use real world logic to try to make things realistic, but in doing so the game falls apart.
Another example of is that by the rules a paralyzed character gets a reflex save.
I guess the reason for me to go into all this is two things:
1) If everything you are saying is true, what does it even mean to "believe" or "disbelieve" the illusion? It's pretty hard NOT to base the assumptions about the fake world at least loosely on real logic. If you have to "interact" with something to disbelieve it... and the illusion cannot cause you pain, move you, etc... then what is the point of the Will save? All interaction then would lead to auto-disbelief.
2) In the adventure I'm running next for a start-up group:
1. Logically maybe, but in the game you still have to make the will save. The other issue is that you were trying to go beyond the "intent" of the spell, by making it do damage, which it is clearly not supposed to do.
As an example if you want to make an illusory wall that would be ok, since they might fail, the will save, and think it is real. If you have a creature that might seem real. You just can't use the creature to attack anyone.
2. I saw that. I have the same adventure. That is an error on the writer's part. It is not the only adventure with rules based errors though. There is an adventure with a paladin of Asmodeus. There is another adventure that has vital strike being used in an illegal way.
It is good for the story so I would allow it, but by the rules that illusion can't do damage, even fake damage.
wraithstrike wrote: 1. Logically maybe, but in the game you still have to make the will save. The other issue is that you were trying to go beyond the "intent" of the spell, by making it do damage, which it is clearly not supposed to do.
As an example if you want to make an illusory wall that would be ok, since they might fail, the will save, and think it is real. If you have a creature that might seem real. You just can't use the creature to attack anyone.
2. I saw that. I have the same adventure. That is an error on the writer's part. It is not the only adventure with rules based errors though. There is an adventure with a paladin of Asmodeus. There is another adventure that has vital strike being used in an illegal way.
It is good for the story so I would allow it, but by the rules that illusion can't do damage, even fake damage.
Well, I guess you have convinced me it can't do even fake damage... it does leave some strange possibilities in realistic credibility for the world though: Orc is standing there... hero gets slashed by the Orc (or hero slashes the Orc)... nothing happens. Hero fails will save anyway... hero *derp* "Man I'm tough, didn't even feel that, lol"/"Guess I better hit it again" *derp*... I don't think ANYONE is that dumb, but eh... mechanics...
This also leaves me with the conundrum... I want people who are just getting started with the game to experience the rules correctly... so in the case of the adventure, if I run it as written, it'll be inconsistent with how I would run Major Image spells later as used by NPCs or PCs... So, its going to be a very very short encounter that ends as soon as there is one hit, but oh well... no biggie I guess.
Lemme just resurrect this thread for a moment...
wraithstrike wrote:
2. I saw that. I have the same adventure. That is an error on the writer's part. It is not the only adventure with rules based errors though. There is an adventure with a paladin of Asmodeus. There is another adventure that has vital strike being used in an illegal way.
It is good for the story so I would allow it, but by the rules that illusion can't do damage, even fake damage.
Do you have a link where the author and/or Paizo discusses this error? Or is this just a guess on your part? Yes, I am running the same adventure. :)
we just had a 1st level encounter with a major image giant black widow spider. as we attacked it we were not given saving throws. we had to keep track of our damage when the spider hit us. the ac of the spider was 19, possibly 20.... we only got saving throws when somebody said out loud "this is unbelievable", or "I can't believe we are gonna get tpk'ed". after that the dm had us just roll a d20 and not say what it was for or add our will saves(I'm a monk ughhhh). the spider provided cover, threatened squares, and attacked a prone player when after healing tried to stand up. it hit us ..no save we hit and missed on it...no save. the cleric used all of his channels and heal spells on the downed characters but they were told that they were paralyzed. 5 members of the party were "unconscious/dying" when the wizard ran away and noticed the spider phase out once he left the area. needless to say all of the pcs were upset at the first encounter of a dungeon we had spent 2 hours game time in town preparing for. one pc walked back to town frustrated with everything. guess we should go back and get him since were out of spells and heals.
after the night was over I asked the dm if that encounter should of been a haunt. he said no, it was designed to weaken and cause any invaders to use their resources before entering the evil temple. funny thing was after this encounter the paladin was hit with a ray of enfeeblement and a ray of touch of fatigue. this is an original modules created by the dm in the early d&d years updated for pathfinder. having fun with story and pcs, but had to question rules and gut-punch encounter.
just talked to dm and he agreed it should of been a haunt. encounter meant to scare intruders away. "fake damage" make more sense as spooked pcs believe in creepy haunt. other rule questions he dismissed saying it takes away from the flavor of the moment.... hey, were all alive
all is good...but wondering about future 2nd edition conversions.
*cast* Thread Reanimation
I'm also running Crypt of the Everflame, and cannot get a clear answer to this. Does illusions can create creatures and attack? They will cause illusory damage like the one described in the module?
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
