What is "interacting"?
Can the area effect of silent image be moved on your turn when you concentrate on the spell?
If I use silent image to create spheres of blackness around enemies eyes, can they see? Do they get a save?
If I use major image to light enemies on fire(create fire around them), do they get a save? Do they feel the thermal component of the flames? Are they blinded by the flames? Can they hear over the roar of the flames?
Can a major image talk?
Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?
Can you walk on structures in a Mirage Arcana?
If levels went that high:
Can a Simulacrum of a Genie grant its master wishes as they are intended?
Can Shades be used for teleportation, planar binding, and plane shift?
NOTE: I tried asking these questions in 'Rules Questions' board, and the only answer I got was that it depends on the GM.
I tried asking these questions in 'Rules Questions' board, and the only answer I got was that it depends on the GM.This is largely true in PFS as well.
That seems problematic to me. An illusion focused character would have vastly different power from table to table. This seems contradictory to standardized play meta. Having illusions up in the air essentially means that tables have to have house-rules.
|
What is "interacting"?
I am unable to find any raw on this. This is a DM descion. There are no set rules to define this.
Can the area effect of silent image be moved on your turn when you concentrate on the spell?
Yes, "You can move the image within the limits of the size of the effect."
If I use silent image to create spheres of blackness around enemies eyes, can they see? Do they get a save?
I would argue no. The movement of the person would be to erratic for a person to follow. Something this unique would not have rules. Maybe something larger like a black box around them, but this would include interaction and I would give them a save.
If I use major image to light enemies on fire(create fire around them), do they get a save? Do they feel the thermal component of the flames? Are they blinded by the flames? Can they hear over the roar of the flames?
Yes they get a save. They feel the heat, but it would do no damage. The fire illusion would obscure light like a normal fire. They could hear over the flames, but they would get a penalty up to the DM.
Can a major image talk?
No. "A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can." No where does it say major image can do this. You could have someone else cast Ventriloquism to make this appear like your image is talking.
Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?
I do not know what a veiled creature is specificall
Can you walk on structures in a Mirage Arcana?
You can walk on them if they have something solid under them. You can not use it to make a bridge where there is none. You could easy make a hole filled bridge a death trap.
The other two questions I do not care to look up.
|
|
That seems problematic to me. An illusion focused character would have vastly different power from table to table. This seems contradictory to standardized play meta. Having illusions up in the air essentially means that tables have to have house-rules.
IN D&D like games you have infinite ways to do something. Illusions are a great way to demostrate this. No book or series of books can have infinte answers for you. Thats why they have a DM. For those rules that are grey. If there was no dm the group could play this from a script and move th emonsters based on what the party does. Like a choose your own adventure.
Keep in mind the power of your spells. You want a 1st level spell to blind someone like a 2nd level spell? Granted you have to concentrate on it, but with it's other uses it unbalanced to do without greater subjections.
|
I love illusions. One of the really cool things about attending Society games is meeting ppl that see things in ways that I never would have on my own. If you are creative and use illusions to achieve new and interesting things, and I'm GMing your table, I'm generally going to run with it. If you're doing the same trick over and over, I'm going to get annoyed. Other GMs will react differently. Outside of obvious rules questions, illusions are the perfect example of "your mileage may vary".
|
|
i will state again, the only rules that exist are from the 3.5 guidelines i posted before.
this is the closest thing to anything official you will see.
All about illusions part 1
All about illusions part 2
All about illusions part 3
All about illusions part 4
and the rule mentioned in those guidelines is that in order to interact with an illusion, you need to spend an action doing something to it. the simplest thing is using a move action to make a perception check against it, that will allow a saving throw. other options are attacking it, or having the illusion provoke from you for some reason. in the case of images your enemies should never be allowed a free saving throw without doing something first to grant one.
i will state again, the only rules that exist are from the 3.5 guidelines i posted before.
this is the closest thing to anything official you will see.
All about illusions part 1
All about illusions part 2
All about illusions part 3
All about illusions part 4and the rule mentioned in those guidelines is that in order to interact with an illusion, you need to spend an action doing something to it. the simplest thing is using a move action to make a perception check against it, that will allow a saving throw. other options are attacking it, or having the illusion provoke from you for some reason. in the case of images your enemies should never be allowed a free saving throw without doing something first to grant one.
Dude stop it. That is 3.5 material that clarifies rules that are worded differently using spells that are worded differently. None of those links are anymore valid than house rules.
Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?I do not know what a veiled creature is specifically
Veil is a glamour spell that adds touch senses along with appearance
|
Marthkus,
First, this isn’t a PFS specific question. Illusions work the same in PFS as they work in any other game following the Rules as Written (RAW).
Second, there are a couple rules of thumb (common sense) to follow when using illusions.
Interaction: This is the toughest thing to understand. And while there are no rules laid out specifically defining what interaction is, it is actually quite simple to adjudicate. Whenever someone reacts or acts towards something that isn’t what it appears (i.e. is under an illusion effect) they get a save if the spell grants a save. So for example, if you create the illusion of darkness around someone, their sight is affected, and so they get a save. If you create an illusion of someone being on or in a fire, they will get a save. If they fail, they will likely take whatever actions they would normally take should they be on fire (e.g. jump in the water, roll on the ground, run around screaming, not care at all.) If you create an illusion of a floor where a pit is, then you get a save the moment you go to step on the false floor. Everyone else would get a save as soon as you fall through the floor (as seeing someone fall through a perfectly good floor is nonsensical) and will likely get the save at +4 to their roll.
Trying to nail down what constitutes interaction is a bad idea, because every situation is different. If, however, you have a GM who ignores illusions as a matter of course, then they probably don’t understand them.
Marthkus,
First, this isn’t a PFS specific question. Illusions work the same in PFS as they work in any other game following the Rules as Written (RAW).
Second, there are a couple rules of thumb (common sense) to follow when using illusions.
Interaction: This is the toughest thing to understand. And while there are no rules laid out specifically defining what interaction is, it is actually quite simple to adjudicate. Whenever someone reacts or acts towards something that isn’t what it appears (i.e. is under an illusion effect) they get a save if the spell grants a save. So for example, if you create the illusion of darkness around someone, their sight is affected, and so they get a save. If you create an illusion of someone being on or in a fire, they will get a save. If they fail, they will likely take whatever actions they would normally take should they be on fire (e.g. jump in the water, roll on the ground, run around screaming, not care at all.) If you create an illusion of a floor where a pit is, then you get a save the moment you go to step on the false floor. Everyone else would get a save as soon as you fall through the floor (as seeing someone fall through a perfectly good floor is nonsensical) and will likely get the save at +4 to their roll.
Trying to nail down what constitutes interaction is a bad idea, because every situation is different. If, however, you have a GM who ignores illusions as a matter of course, then they probably don’t understand them.
Thank you. I can understand interaction being up in the air with the infinite possibilities that could arise, but my other questions should be pretty straight forward. You actually answered a lot of them indirectly.
|
|
Thank you. I can understand interaction being up in the air with the infinite possibilities that could arise, but my other questions should be pretty straight forward. You actually answered a lot of them indirectly.Marthkus,
First, this isn’t a PFS specific question. Illusions work the same in PFS as they work in any other game following the Rules as Written (RAW).
Second, there are a couple rules of thumb (common sense) to follow when using illusions.
Interaction: This is the toughest thing to understand. And while there are no rules laid out specifically defining what interaction is, it is actually quite simple to adjudicate. Whenever someone reacts or acts towards something that isn’t what it appears (i.e. is under an illusion effect) they get a save if the spell grants a save. So for example, if you create the illusion of darkness around someone, their sight is affected, and so they get a save. If you create an illusion of someone being on or in a fire, they will get a save. If they fail, they will likely take whatever actions they would normally take should they be on fire (e.g. jump in the water, roll on the ground, run around screaming, not care at all.) If you create an illusion of a floor where a pit is, then you get a save the moment you go to step on the false floor. Everyone else would get a save as soon as you fall through the floor (as seeing someone fall through a perfectly good floor is nonsensical) and will likely get the save at +4 to their roll.
Trying to nail down what constitutes interaction is a bad idea, because every situation is different. If, however, you have a GM who ignores illusions as a matter of course, then they probably don’t understand them.
As was my intent. I didn't have the time to individually look up each and every spell.
The answers to your questions should be self-explanatory based on the intent of the spell, and my definition of interact above.
My interpretation of interacting with illusions is that a save is called for if the "perceived" result of an action would not be the actual result if the illusion was not there.
Would someone forced to walk around a wall made by illusion spell then get a will save to disbelief?
My current non-PFS group has been playing that illusions don't get a save if they seem perfectly reasonable. If the illusion seems out-of-place or studied we allow a save. If someone has reason to think it is an illusion they get a +4 to the save and if they have proof that it is an illusion they automatically succeed.
|
@Mahtobedis, how does what I said not cover your example?
@Marthkus, I'm not sure the person would be "forced" to walk around the wall. But if they "saw" a wall and then chose to avoid it without interacting with it, I'd say no automatic save. If they chose to examine the wall and it was not an illusion covering a similar wall underneath, then yes, save.
|
|
Illusions, the hardest school of magic to GM. And that is why you will get different variations per table. I will admit I am weak on knowing how to rule on somethings players will want to do. Example, veil cast on a small creature, to appear huge. A caster wanting to create the illusion of 16 wolfs to scare off attacking force. It all gets confusion. It is why alot of times I take it as an opposite school cause dont know. There are some good threads where SKR explained somethings.
There are some good threads where SKR explained somethings.
I would like those links. Who is SKR, and should I know that?
|
|
What is "interacting"?
Can the area effect of silent image be moved on your turn when you concentrate on the spell?
If I use silent image to create spheres of blackness around enemies eyes, can they see? Do they get a save?
If I use major image to light enemies on fire(create fire around them), do they get a save? Do they feel the thermal component of the flames? Are they blinded by the flames? Can they hear over the roar of the flames?
Can a major image talk?
Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?
Can you walk on structures in a Mirage Arcana?
If levels went that high:
Can a Simulacrum of a Genie grant its master wishes as they are intended?Can Shades be used for teleportation, planar binding, and plane shift?
NOTE: I tried asking these questions in 'Rules Questions' board, and the only answer I got was that it depends on the GM.
Interacting is any point a person utilizes a sense affected by the illusion. thus, if you create an illusion of a goat at the back of a tavern, the guy down the block doesn't get a save until he actually sees the goat. same for smells, sounds, etc. You can make illusions for yourself til your heart's content, since automatically dispelling your illusion by said manner would make all illusion spells moot; you already know it's an illusion.
Edit: Use common sense when adjucating on an individual basis. If the guy knows you're illusion shouldn't be there, then he gets a save (gee, i just saw you do the finger wigglies and jibberjabber. Now there's a wall between us.....hmmmmm.) but if it's feasible, say preliminary placement before any enemy sees it, and it makes sense that it's there, then I wouldn't automatically trigger a save situation.
Unless described in the spell, illusions are static to the location they're cast.
If you use silent image to create black spots around enemies eyes, yes, they get a save. and they also become moot when the enemy moves away in any direction. If you are getting at 'can i use silent image to make a deeper darkness effect?' then no, you cannot duplicate the effects of another spell.
With Major Image. Again, any sentient creature gets a save when spells target them, so yes, they get a save. The feel "hot" but don't take damage so the quickly observant will realize they're not real flames, and you would have to expend an enormous amount of concentration trying to make each separate item appear to be 'burning' as well as the flames. a very complex use of the spell to say the least.
Yes, you can make a major image talk.
You need to not worry about sex issues this detailed. If you're roleplaying that out in a game, leave it to your/your players imaginations and gloss over it. If you must, this gets into repeated checks to detect the illusion since they're excessively interacting with the illusion.
Yes, Mirage arcana does provide tactile sensation and you can craft structures. just hope no one disbelieves halfway across that bridge you put over the chasm.
Simulacrum is a false duplicate of the real thing, and does not state that powers and abilities are included in the duplication. It's just looks and acts mostly like the real thing.
Shades mimics any conjuration so yes, planar binding could be done, but I don't know why you'd want to waste time bargaining with a creature that's 80% real (hehe) or risking teleport/plane shift when there's a 20% chance of failure.
Could 'veiled' creatures have missionary sex even if their base forms lacked the correct pluming do to the touch senses added by veil?
You need to not worry about sex issues this detailed. If you're roleplaying that out in a game, leave it to your/your players imaginations and gloss over it. If you must, this gets into repeated checks to detect the illusion since they're excessively interacting with the illusion.
The question is a specific example that when answered explains the underlining mechanics of how the spell works. In this case it's asking how far does tactile sense go without being an open ended question.
Of course games need not go into this much detail.
|
Because of all the variance in how GMs will run illusions, I always advise players to stick with illusions that do not directly threaten or otherwise illicit a reaction from the enemy.
At least one key example has already been described by people in the thread: walls where they don't actually exist. Another example I like to use is making the ledge of a cliff appear to be three feet farther out than it actually is. The more likely the enemy is to either act directly towards the illusion to either attack or investigate it, the more likely the illusion will trigger almost an immediate save.
I've seen too many players make illusions of giant dragons or spell effects, and those types of illusions are just too heavy handed. Illusions are supposed to be subtle, think real world stage magicians. If a stage magician made an illusion that was supposed to show a huge bomb detonating a whole city block, all but the most naive people would almost instantly disbelieve.
Finally, one more important thing to remember is that your allies are also going to believe that your illusion is real until they interact with it. A giant dragon might cause some of them to flee in terror as much as the enemy.
|
|
shadowmage major image can not legibly speak
"A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can." This is right from the magic section of the CRB in the illusion portion of it.
No where does it say major image can do this. So thus it could babble, but not speak.
|
|
You should seriously read those wonderful "3.5" links posted. Nothing about illusions has changed between 3.5 and PFS. Same spells, same terminology, same separation of figments vs phantasms vs etc. Those links are the best explanation ever given for how illusions work. A lot of people on these boards use that set of published works by Wizards as their basis for how to rule illusions as a GM. I have a veiled illusionist build that I play. I keep a print out of all 4 parts just so if a GM does not know how to deal with illusions I can point them in the right direction.
As a general rule of thumb interacting requires some form a study. I usually rule that a player must spend a move action (Perception check) in order to gain a save. Other cases of gaining a save involve physical interaction (you touch the illusory wall, you hear the ghost sound, etc).
|
|
I am tougher on interaction they just observing it with one of their senses. I feel the PC must do something to count as interaction. If they just see a visual illusion they must do something that would include it as an illusion. Walking by an illusionary wall would not get a free save against it because it is in their field of vision.
I would love to look at those links but they are blocked on this computer.
You should seriously read those wonderful "3.5" links posted. Nothing about illusions has changed between 3.5 and PFS. Same spells, same terminology, same separation of figments vs phantasms vs etc. Those links are the best explanation ever given for how illusions work. A lot of people on these boards use that set of published works by Wizards as their basis for how to rule illusions as a GM. I have a veiled illusionist build that I play. I keep a print out of all 4 parts just so if a GM does not know how to deal with illusions I can point them in the right direction.
As a general rule of thumb interacting requires some form a study. I usually rule that a player must spend a move action (Perception check) in order to gain a save. Other cases of gaining a save involve physical interaction (you touch the illusory wall, you hear the ghost sound, etc).
Those rulings were great, back when I played 3.5. The wording has changed enough that I no longer consider them rules (that and being a separate system). When my group plays we'll sometimes use those as a guideline, but at the end of the day whatever we decide is a houserule. And that is what gets to me. I like playing by the rules. I don't mind a GM using rule 0 whenever they feel necessary, but I like to follow the rules. I don't like bringing unnecessary complication to the table because the rules for what I do are vague or nonexistent. In the end character concept wins out, but that doesn't mean I'm happy about it.