If the fighter doesn't make his +4 save, he CAN'T / is not allowed to "trust the wizard." He still believes it to be true and acts accordingly for a normal wall.
Wow. No. Absolutely not. You do not tell players how to roleplay their characters. You can control every other aspect of the campaign, but characters will make their own decisions, and that includes who they decide to trust.
False. Illusion magic is not enchantment magic. The image spells are not mind affecting.
In a non technically defined sense? You mean a not in the rules sense? Because that's all that is.
Please give me a rules citation that says figment effects are mind affecting.
So if the fighter is literally standing inside of the wall, he still believes the wall is real? Mmk.
I have rules citations very clearly backing me. You have none backing you. Find some rules, and then come back.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Spellcraft != proof.
Imagine this:
You see a wizard cast major image. Meanwhile, a nearby wizard under an invisibility spell casts a silent Summon Monster. You see a Hound Archon appear.
If you 'auto disbelieve' then does the very real Archon get a free Coup de Grace on you? You are after all ignoring him.
The illusion only becomes transparent when you spend an action to interact with it (or it interacts with you) and then succeed on a will save.
|
This isn't to anyone in particular, just my thoughts on how it's supposed to work.
I think that basically the savings throw goes like this, you make the save, no illusion (for you); don't make the save and presto there is a wall there.
Nothing about that decrees how a PC or NPC has to interact with said illusion. If Mr.Wizard spellcrafts it and then fails his save, he sees a wall but has a pretty good idea that it might not be real ).
In other words, all the failed will save is doing is making you see a wall, nothing about that makes your characters ability to reason go out the door.
Edit: This is only specific to illusions that don't have the mind-affecting discriptor.
I agree that spellcraft does not equal proof, the sort of way that would allow you to see through the illusion.
But if you identify the spell cast as an illusion spell and a wall appears, can a character reasonably think "That's not a real wall". I have hard time saying no to that. Now he might be wrong, a second invisible caster may have cast a real wall spell at the same time. But the character doesn't know.
But he should be able to think "I don't think that's a real wall, I'm going to try walk through it". I can't find a compelling reason to disallow this.
Which does considerably weaken illusion magic, but I can't think of a way to rectify what a character can know/do/think with the illusion somehow forcing him to behave as if they thought it were real.
I just don't know what to do with it.
I agree with the dinosaur above that if you fail the save, you definitely still see the wall. But it shouldn't force him to behave in a specific way.
Come up with some other explanation then about why the fighter believes the wall is real even after being told.
He does not gain the benefit of the image becoming only a transparent outline since he did not make his save. He is in no way magically enchanted or compulsed to act as if the wall is real. His mind wasn't strong enough to see through the illusion, but the trusts the wizard's senses more than his own when it comes to magic, therefore he acts with that information. If you are blind and a person tells you to jump because there are pillows below you, are the pillows not real because you yourself can't see them? No. Reality is reality, no matter what you believe. As it is with the rules, no matter what reality it is you believe in.
If you 'auto disbelieve' then does the very real Archon get a free Coup de Grace on you?
I made no such claim as to "auto disbelieving". All I said was you tell this to your players and let them make of it what they will: "You identify the enemy spellcaster is casting silent image. Now a dragon appears."
You do not tell them "it's an illusion". You simply tell them the facts of the situation. The wizard's spellcraft check allowed him to identify the spell, therefore he knows what spell was cast. A dragon appeared, therefore the wizard sees a dragon. He can make of that information anything he wants.
The illusion only becomes transparent when you spend an action to interact with it (or it interacts with you) and then succeed on a will save.
Very true. As said above, the image would still look real to the fighter since he failed his save.
That doesn't mean you are forced to act as if the wall is real.
|
|
he sees a wall but has a pretty good idea that it might not be real(And same for first part of your post, campincarl:)
That would be in conflict with the rules. "A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss." (CRB)
It is not just the translucency at issue. You are not even allowed to notice anything is amiss. Having a good idea it's not real despite not making your save would thus be leaving RAW.
Reality is reality, no matter what you believe.I agree, and this has nothing to do with the thread. Nobody is arguing that whether the wall actually stops objects has anything to do with your belief.
I AM saying though that you CANNOT distrust its reality if you do not make your save. Full stop.
That doesn't have to mean what you're arguing. Failing to notice anything amiss is perfectly interpretable as "it looks like a real wall, with nothing weird about it". That doesn't mean you can't logic and go "sure it looks real but I have suspicions on the matter."
As Carl is saying, the spell clearly is not mind effecting, ergo however you interpret it, it cannot compel you to do anything mechanically other than seeing a wall (a fine, very solid, looking one at that).
|
I have a few Illusion questions.
What happens if a spell caster first casts fire ball at a group of adventurers and then in the next round casts Major Illusion ( I believe it has thermal components) and creates an illusion of a fire ball which "detonates" in the middle of a group of adventurers?
What happens to those who fail their will save?
Someone only gets a will save if they interact with an illusion spell correct?
Is there any way for the illusionist to make it appear as if he is casting a fire ball ( getting out the sulphur and bat guano) instead of Major Image where he gets out a bit of fleece ( to pull the wool over someone's eyes) so someone with the spell craft skill isn't immediately tipped off that an illusion is coming their way?
Thank you
you need Shadow Evocation to cause real damage
Does anyone know of any sources that have a good discussion on how to handle and run illusion spells?
I feel like the discussion here is really split between two extreme options (of which neither seems completely palatable) of:
1) An illusion spell is cast, and regardless of other factors you will automatically behave as if it's absolutely real and you can't question its reality
2) You identify that an illusion spell is cast and so you can disbelieve it
2a) You identify the spell as an illusion and ignore/walk through/whatever it, which effectively makes it worthless. Excepting that it will continue to block line of sight until you actually disbelieve it.
Disbelieving it requires interacting with the illusion in some way to get a save in the first place.
Neither of these seems acceptable, there has to be some reasonable middle ground.
Even if you are told that an illusion is an illusion by someone you trust the best that that does is net you a fresh save with +4 on the roll, if you fail that save you are convinced your ally is the one mistaken and you will act as though the illusion is real. Even if someone throws an object through a wall if you fail that second save you will believe that the object disappearing is a trick of some kind, because that wall is real to you.
Successfully identifying a spell as an illusion probably is sufficient to get the +4 to the save, you are interacting (albeit with the casting) and you have some evidence to suggest it is an illusion. There should rarely be a situation where you automatically disbelieve an illusion.
Any attempt to bypass the will save by 'logic' or whatever other rationale you want is in breach of the rules and seriously weakens illusions to the point of 'why bother!'.
I was at gen con with my gnome. I cast silent image of a wall of stone around a dumb mook.
Dm: what is the save to disbelieve?
Me: 21
DM: sigh, of course it is...
I was at gen con with my gnome. I cast silent image of a wall of stone around a dumb mook.
Dm: what is the save to disbelieve?
Me: 21
DM: sigh, of course it is...
I'm not sure I get your anecdote.
In any event, how did the GM proceed after that point?
I think a character would try to climb out or attempt to destroy the wall. Upon which it would have been discovered the wall wasn't real.
Unless I misunderstand the rules.
|
|
I was at gen con with my gnome. I cast silent image of a wall of stone around a dumb mook.
Dm: what is the save to disbelieve?
Me: 21
DM: sigh, of course it is...
I've done the same thing at Origins - except I put it around every mook connected by arches. (Though if they're a dumb beastie I make it a cage so that my crew can shoot them.)
It's not a conclusive rules argument, but it is compelling that it flew at the two biggest cons in the country with all the big wig PFS people there.
|
|
I was at gen con with my gnome. I cast silent image of a wall of stone around a dumb mook.
Dm: what is the save to disbelieve?
Me: 21
DM: sigh, of course it is...I'm not sure I get your anecdote.
In any event, how did the GM proceed after that point?
I think a character would try to climb out or attempt to destroy the wall. Upon which it would have been discovered the wall wasn't real.
In my case (at multiple tables) he got a fresh save each round.
In my case (at multiple tables) he got a fresh save each round.I was at gen con with my gnome. I cast silent image of a wall of stone around a dumb mook.
Dm: what is the save to disbelieve?
Me: 21
DM: sigh, of course it is...I'm not sure I get your anecdote.
In any event, how did the GM proceed after that point?
I think a character would try to climb out or attempt to destroy the wall. Upon which it would have been discovered the wall wasn't real.
But couldn't walk through the wall that his hand or weapon passed through when trying to climb/attack it?
Wouldn't it fall under?
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.
I mean if your weapon/hand going through it doesn't count as proof, what does?
There is no "if;then" clauses for handling illusions. It depends on what they do.
If the stupid mook tried to sunder the wall, he would quickly discover it is not tangible.
If. If that is something he would do. He could just as easily give up and sit on the ground in a tantrum that the spellcaster bested him.
It entirely depends on the situation.
Then what is 'interacting'? To me - what you're describing is just 'interacting' - therefore giving them a save.
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.I mean if your weapon/hand going through it doesn't count as proof, what does?
Then what would count as proof? If you see your weapon pass through the wall harmlessly how is that not proof?
As far as interacting, interacting can be as simple as spending an action to study the illusion.
I mean if you see you weapon pass through the wall, couldn't you reasonably think to try walking through the wall?
So help me understand your position Charon's Little Helper.
Are you saying that if you fail your will save, it is impossible for you to learn the wall is not real?
|
|
Then what would count as proof? If you see your weapon pass through the wall harmlessly how is that not proof?Then what is 'interacting'? To me - what you're describing is just 'interacting' - therefore giving them a save.
A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.I mean if your weapon/hand going through it doesn't count as proof, what does?
I don't believe it is. This isn't our world - this is Pathfinder - all sorts of crazy weird magic stuff happens there.
Ex: If I see an incorporeal creature and hit it with a non-magic weapon it will have no effect. Guess it's not real and ignore it so that it gets to hit you flat-footed? I don't think so.
Same thing when you swing at someone and miss due to Blur. By your logic would it work my way if I made the wall appear to be under the effect of Blur? (Since Blur only works on creatures - would it have to be the illusion of a wall of zombies stacked like cord-wood and under the effect of Blur? Maybe a cage of a giant squid's tentacles which is under the effect of Displacement?)
Proof would be much more blatant - like my above example of a Silent Image floor which you fell through.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is how
they handled illusions
in older editions
of the game.
And wouldn't you know it? The rules for illusions have remained exactly the same, word for word, since those articles were written.
Also, Crimeo is right. About everything. Though illusions are not (usually) classified as mind-affecting effects, they clearly have an affect on the mind.
Well here is how I rule it. Lets say an NPC casted a silent image wall of stone around a PC
I would rule any action the player makes VS the wall gives them a save to disbelieve it.
So the PC gets the wall to appear around them. On their turn they try to smash through it. Ok, i have them roll a d20 with me knowing their will save bonus. They fail the save. I have them roll damage on the wall. And I say it appears unharmed from your damage.
Now they can keep hammering on it with new saves and such. Perception= reality. If you perceive a wall in front of you, well your reality is, there is a wall there.
If something happens, lets say another character bullrushes someone into that square and they push that other guy out and through. Well that would break the illusion.
|
I guess I was going to ask what happens if someone sticks their hands in an illusionary fire created by a major image spell.....Say for example from a wall of fire created by a major image spell.
Now I seem to remember a long time ago...say in 2nd edition, I seem to remember that illusions "damaged" you if you believed they existed. and you collapsed when you reached 0 hp. But you were only unconscious.
Could you say use a summoning spell to summon a lion, then use a major image spell to duplicate the lion so your opponents think they are facing two summoned lions?
Thank you.
If you stick a hand into illusionary fire, you will probably (I say probably because it's up to GM) try to reflexively pull it back due to heat, but not suffer any damage in the process. At least, that's how I would rule it, but if character persists and continues to push his hand, he eventually disbelieves it.
The mix of fake and real lion is what illusions are about! That's the best use of spell if used in combat conditions. Even if the enemy caster identifies spell, he might have difficulty in recognizing which is which if visual conditions are impaired for example.
The most lovely illusion that I personally had, was illusion of Mr.Frederick who was my bodyguard (I concentrated on Minor Image permanently for several hours). NPCs still had to hit his AC 10 and disbelieve him, and considering that the spell was cast before actual combat, they had no way of knowing that he was fake.
Malak thank you for taking the time to answer my post. And thank you all for taking the time to post your thoughts.
I do have a couple of more illusion questions.
Lets see..If my gnome sorcerer (specializing in illusions) casts invisibility on himself, then the next round casts a summon monster spell, lets say its a lion, does the summon spell break his invisibility and he becomes visible?
How about if he next casts a Major image spell (with the silent spell feat) and causes an illusionary lion to appear....so they are two lions now......Will casting the major image spell break his invisibility spell? How about if he uses an illusion spell to create a "wall" to seal off a doorway or passage way, would that break his invisibility? How about an illusion to "cover" a pit would that break the invisibility spell?
Thank you
Lets see..If my gnome sorcerer (specializing in illusions) casts invisibility on himself, then the next round casts a summon monster spell, lets say its a lion, does the summon spell break his invisibility and he becomes visible?
How about if he next casts a Major image spell (with the silent spell feat) and causes an illusionary lion to appear....so they are two lions now......Will casting the major image spell break his invisibility spell? How about if he uses an illusion spell to create a "wall" to seal off a doorway or passage way, would that break his invisibility? How about an illusion to "cover" a pit would that break the invisibility spell?
This is more invisibility questions and what break it so below is the text on invisibility.
"The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. "
Does the major image target a foe or include them in the AoE?
Would the cover target a foe or include them in the AoE?