Has PFS ever taken a stand on how illusion spells work?
I'm talking in particular about what constitutes "interacting" for the purposes of the "Image" series of spells.
|
Interaction functions as expect vast amounts of table variation. Seriously, I doubt you'll ever have anything else in PF that has so many variations on how its ran.
I finally broke and am playing an illusionist, I don't think I've ever had a PC with so many different ways the rules work. I tend to ask the big questions like what is interaction and can a place a silent image over a pit ahead of time now, worse case situation I can play another PC, I have bunches.
|
Has PFS ever taken a stand on how illusion spells work?
I'm talking in particular about what constitutes "interacting" for the purposes of the "Image" series of spells.
There is nothing written about how to handle illusions in either the Guide to Organized Play, the Additional Resources document, the FAQ, or any of the stickied posts. AFAIK Campaign Leadership has made no suggestions.
Expect table variation. It's safest to begin with a conservative approach, and take what you can get.
|
|
Also there are tons of mis-information on the rules of illusions.
I have had many DMs say that creatures immune to mind effects are immune to figment illusions.
Sometimes you need to educate your DMs on the rules in general.
If you do something uncommon you should learn to expect DMing griefing without precaution.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What might get you the most bang for your buck as far as your play experience with an illusionist would be this:
Don't ask them what it means to interact. Instead, ask them for the difference between "encountering" an illusion and "interacting" with it. Don't speak the word "interact" except in a sentence that also references "encountering".
I think a lot of the issues with illusions is that people get hung up on "interact" and try to define that term in isolation, instead of in the proper context of being something that's more than encountering but less than proof. If you can get the GM thinking of interaction as something with an inherent relationship to encountering instead of being something that exists on its own, you're much more likely to get a reasonable ruling.
|
A lot of excellent advice here.
Generally, I like to ask my players if they have any special abilities that I need to read up on before the game. I always try to make fair rulings, but it is so much easier if I have read those rules immediately before the game and have that expectation, than trying to look them up during the game, or worse, trying to adjudicate from memory.
If you sat at my table, it would be much appreciated if, before we started the game, you told me you were playing an illusionist and had the section of the Core Rulebook marked so that I could refresh my memory on how different types of illusions function. I would also welcome a discussion on what I considered to be 'encountering', 'studying', or 'interacting'.
|
|
A lot of excellent advice here.
Generally, I like to ask my players if they have any special abilities that I need to read up on before the game. I always try to make fair rulings, but it is so much easier if I have read those rules immediately before the game and have that expectation, than trying to look them up during the game, or worse, trying to adjudicate from memory.
If you sat at my table, it would be much appreciated if, before we started the game, you told me you were playing an illusionist and had the section of the Core Rulebook marked so that I could refresh my memory on how different types of illusions function. I would also welcome a discussion on what I considered to be 'encountering', 'studying', or 'interacting'.
And that is the best answer that can be given.