|
Can I generate cover with Silent Image (Soft, partial, total, Improved)?
Furthermore, does the opponent get a save against the illusion when they are targeting not the illusion, but someone or something taking cover behind the illusionary terrain?
For example, I fire a bow at an enemy just visible through an arrow slit in the wall. Unknown to myself, the arrow slit and the wall are actually a silent image cast on an open doorway. I'm not studying the arrow slit or the wall, just trying a tough shot to hit the guy barely visible from within the arrow slit.
The rules don't explicitly define what it means to "interact" with something. I would rule that firing an arrow at (or through) an illusion does not constitute interacting with it. Expect table variation on that one.
Any cover provided by an illusion is illusory, so you would gain no benefit to AC (or reflex saves in the case of total cover) but you'd still gain the bonus to stealth and any concealment since the observer cannot see you clearly.
|
|
Any cover provided by an illusion is illusory, so you would gain no benefit to AC (or reflex saves in the case of total cover) but you'd still gain the bonus to stealth and any concealment since the observer cannot see you clearly.
That's where I'm unclear, because the rules don't seem to indicate what the cover AC represents.
I mean, if Soft cover is created by creatures, then is the AC generated by my ranged attack trying to hit a less visible target? Or does the AC represent trying to hit a target whose is "armored" by another creature?
Given the rules don't seem to support the idea of being able to hit creatures you are not aiming at with normal ranged attacks, I suspect that the visibility of a target, determines the cover value, especially with respect to ranged attacks.
As for shooting through illusions, the question is, are you altering your shot to account for the illusion, or are you trying to shoot as if it weren't there? If you alter a shot into a more difficult shot that avoids the illusion, then the reality of the illusion doesn't affect the difficulty of the shot because you've made the shot more difficult.
Cover represents something that's actually blocking your attack from reaching the target, Concealment represents the inability to see the target clearly. Cover often grants concealment, but they are two separate things.
As for shooting through illusions, the question is, are you altering your shot to account for the illusion, or are you trying to shoot as if it weren't there? If you alter a shot into a more difficult shot that avoids the illusion, then the reality of the illusion doesn't affect the difficulty of the shot because you've made the shot more difficult.
That's a very good point. I think it's something a GM would have to make a ruling on when illusionary cover would and wouldn't apply, because there doesn't appear to be a clearcut answer.
Concealment, not cover.
|
|
Here's where I'm coming from:
From the PRD
Cover
To determine whether your target has cover from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has cover if any line from any corner of your square to the target's square goes through a wall (including a low wall). When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you (such as with a reach weapon), use the rules for determining cover from ranged attacks.
Blocks line of effect, provides cover, or passes through a square occupied by a creature.
I suppose provides cover would just say it provides cover, otherwise it doesn't really make sense in this context. So I don't think this condition can be achieved by a normal illusion.
Line of effect is defined as:
Line of Effect: A line of effect is a straight, unblocked path that indicates what a spell can affect. A line of effect is canceled by a solid barrier. It's like line of sight for ranged weapons, except that it's not blocked by fog, darkness, and other factors that limit normal sight.
You must have a clear line of effect to any target that you cast a spell on or to any space in which you wish to create an effect. You must have a clear line of effect to the point of origin of any spell you cast.
A burst, cone, cylinder, or emanation spell affects only an area, creature, or object to which it has line of effect from its origin (a spherical burst's center point, a cone-shaped burst's starting point, a cylinder's circle, or an emanation's point of origin).
An otherwise solid barrier with a hole of at least 1 square foot through it does not block a spell's line of effect. Such an opening means that the 5-foot length of wall containing the hole is no longer considered a barrier for purposes of a spell's line of effect.
So, as I read it, I'm unclear if an illusion can block line of effect (since the creature thinks it's there).
Obviously, the line of effect is mechanically unaffected by the illusion, but if the firer believes a solid barrier prevents the line of effect, the one could reasonably argue the line of effect to be blocked for the creature.
I could also create an illusion of a creature, which should be able to provide soft cover to another creature, providing the opponent believes the creature to be there. Still, unclear.
|
|
Oh, just to have them all in one space:
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.
Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.
It's not blocking line of effect, it's blocking line of sight.
|
|
It's not blocking line of effect, it's blocking line of sight.
The Choices for cover are: blocks line of effect, provides cover, OR passes through a square occupied by a creature.
Although I'm pretty sure it can block line of effect, I'm curious if you think creature generated by Silent Image is considered a creature for the purposes of granting cover?
An illusion cannot provide cover. Period. You can make people think it's providing cover, but it absolutely does not.
A silent image (or hallucinatory terrain, illusory wall, etc.) does not provide cover (i.e., a physical effect), but concealment. The relevant rules:
To determine whether your target has concealment from your ranged attack, choose a corner of your square. If any line from this corner to any corner of the target's square passes through a square or border that provides concealment, the target has concealment.
When making a melee attack against an adjacent target, your target has concealment if his space is entirely within an effect that grants concealment. When making a melee attack against a target that isn't adjacent to you, use the rules for determining concealment from ranged attacks.
In addition, some magical effects provide concealment against all attacks, regardless of whether any intervening concealment exists.
Concealment Miss Chance: Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally—if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.
Concealment and Stealth Checks: You can use concealment to make a Stealth check. Without concealment, you usually need cover to make a Stealth check.
Total Concealment: If you have line of effect to a target but not line of sight, he is considered to have total concealment from you. You can't attack an opponent that has total concealment, though you can attack into a square that you think he occupies. A successful attack into a square occupied by an enemy with total concealment has a 50% miss chance (instead of the normal 20% miss chance for an opponent with concealment).
You can't execute an attack of opportunity against an opponent with total concealment, even if you know what square or squares the opponent occupies.
Ignoring Concealment: Concealment isn't always effective. An area of dim lighting or darkness doesn't provide any concealment against an opponent with darkvision. Characters with low-light vision can see clearly for a greater distance than other characters with the same light source. Although invisibility provides total concealment, sighted opponents may still make Perception checks to notice the location of an invisible character. An invisible character gains a +20 bonus on Stealth checks if moving, or a +40 bonus on Stealth checks when not moving (even though opponents can't see you, they might be able to figure out where you are from other visual or auditory clues).
Varying Degrees of Concealment: Certain situations may provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly.
Now, a flat 20% miss chance is actually better than the +4 AC for cover in many instances, so it's not a bad use of a 1st-level spell.
Pizza Lord puts forth a reasonable houserule, if your GM chooses to rule that way. But that is not RAW.
I would say an arrow counts as an interaction especially if they full round attack the image or try to shoot beyond the image.
What counts as interaction is normally up to the GM, and I would count the image as soft cover just like a creature would be soft cover.
If you can't see through the illusion, than it would be concealment, as others have pointed out.
Cover is a hard object that physically blocks physical things.
Concealment is for things that block sight, but not the actual projectile or other object.
|
Pizza Lord is mixing -4 penalty for hitting in melee and +4 Soft Cover bonus from nearby target. These are seperate effects and penalties.
An illusion of nearby archer's ally provides -4 penalty for hitting target in melee via ranged attacks, considering that archer has a target that he doesn't wish to hit. This penalty can apply from illusionary target, however tricking archer that illusion is his ally is quite difficult task. You can't just create new ally and claim him to be so. It's too obvious.
The best way to evaluate this illusionary interaction would be similar to mirror image effect; if you miss the target's AC by 4 or more, you hit illusion and may attempt a Will Save to disbelieve it. This is up to GM's interpretation though and is slightly off-topic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Page 158 of Ultimate Intrigue has guidelines on interaction.
Phantasms directly assail a creature’s mind, so the creature automatically and immediately receives a saving throw to disbelieve a phantasm. Figments and glamers, however, have the more difficult-to-adjudicate rule that creatures receive a saving throw to disbelieve only if they “interact” with the illusion.
But what does it mean to interact with an illusion? It can’t just mean looking at the illusion, as otherwise there would be no need to make the distinction, but drawing the line can be a bit tricky. Fortunately, the rules can help to define that difference. A creature that spends a move action to carefully study an illusion receives a Will saving throw to disbelieve that illusion, so that is a good benchmark from which to work.
Using that as a basis, interacting generally means spending a move action, standard action, or greater on a character’s part. For example, if there were a major image of an ogre, a character who tried to attack the ogre would receive a saving throw to disbelieve, as would a character who spent 1 minute attempting a Diplomacy check on the ogre. A character who just traded witty banter with the ogre as a free action would not, nor would a character who simply cast spells on herself or her allies and never directly confronted the illusory ogre. For a glamer, interacting generally works the same as for a figment, except that the interaction must be limited to something the glamer affects. For instance, grabbing a creature’s ear would be an interaction for a human using disguise self to appear as an elf, but not for someone using a glamer to change his hair color. Similarly, visually studying someone would not grant a save against a glamer that purely changed her voice.
|
|
I would rule that shooting an arrow into an illusion definitely counts as interacting. You're going to see the arrow disappear into the illusion rather than bounce off, that's a pretty strong clue it isn't real.
Seems like that would depend on your shot. I mean, if the target is hiding behind "cover" and you hit them, then you've not interacted with the illusion at all.
If you can't see through the illusion, than it would be concealment, as others have pointed out.
Cover is a hard object that physically blocks physical things.
Concealment is for things that block sight, but not the actual projectile or other object.
If cover "blocks things" then why can't I hit allies with ranged attacks if the ally is providing soft cover? The ally isn't "blocking things" as far as I can tell.
|
|
Back up a step, what do you think AC represents in this game?
As I read it, the AC is a measure of the difficulty to hit a target in a vulnerable location. Armor, shields and cover merely decrease the vulnerable locations exposed, which is why the AC increases.
Pathfinder imposes a Hit or Miss system, where attacks that fail to hit their intended target, miss entirely. There exceptions, but this is mostly true.
Now, if an attacker intends to strike the armor or cover, they would attempt a Sunder Combat maneuver or attack an unattended object in the case of cover. The Hardness of said item represents shots bouncing off, while the AC represents the difficulty to hit them in a location which would be able to deal damage.
This is why creatures in the way provide soft cover, despite no actual risk of hitting said creatures - they are just adjusting the difficulty to hit the vulnerable locations of the target.
I would rule that shooting an arrow into an illusion definitely counts as interacting. You're going to see the arrow disappear into the illusion rather than bounce off, that's a pretty strong clue it isn't real.Seems like that would depend on your shot. I mean, if the target is hiding behind "cover" and you hit them, then you've not interacted with the illusion at all.
If cover "blocks things" then why can't I hit allies with ranged attacks if the ally is providing soft cover? The ally isn't "blocking things" as far as I can tell.If you can't see through the illusion, than it would be concealment, as others have pointed out.
Cover is a hard object that physically blocks physical things.
Concealment is for things that block sight, but not the actual projectile or other object.
I am not sure if I understand the question.
Yes, the allies, or enemies are "blocking things." It counts as less cover than normal cover because people move. They do not take up the entire square either. It can also be assumed that the "soft cover" people are also trying to avoid the projectile.
Concealment and Cover are the same as their real-life military counterparts. Cover stops bullets. Concealment makes it harder to see your target, and therefore hit it.
Examples of cover: Cars, trees, brick walls, boulders, and steel ships.
Examples of concealment: Shrubbery, sheetrock walls (typical interior house walls), fog, smoke, rain, snow, and leaves.
An illusion would make it harder to hit the target on the other side. But it would not deflect the projectile fired into it.
Wow, I just realized how poorly the CRB defines cover:
If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or
provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).
It actually lists Cover as one of the things that gives you cover in the definition! No wonder this is a question..
|
|
It actually lists Cover as one of the things that gives you cover in the definition! No wonder this is a question..If any line from this corner to any corner of the target’s square passes through a square or border that blocks line of effect or
provides cover, or through a square occupied by a creature, the target has cover (+4 to AC).
You've hit the issue, cover isn't a very well defined concept in pathfinder.
I've seen lots of player described distinctions between cover and concealment, but I've not found those rules described in a pathfinder product as such.
And on a side note, the CRB description for drawing lines between your square and the target square is unclear regarding if the CHARACTER is drawing the line, or the PLAYER, as a line drawn by the character should be subject to the illusion.
Characters don't draw lines on the map.
The player draws a line between the character and the target. It always favors both sides buy the attacker choosing which corner to start from and the target benefiting from checking each corner of their square.
Line of effect is not blocked by an illusion. If a fireball goes off on one side of it, the fire goes through it. It does not matter if the person launching the fireball thinks it goes through or not, it does go through.
Now, the illusion could affect where the wizard places the fireball because they think a wall is there, but that is different than cover.