|
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's the situation:
A wizard casts "Silent Image".
While casting Silent Image, the opponent does a "Spellcraft" check and identifies the spell as it is being cast.
The Silent Image spell goes off, creating an illusory wall.
Does the successful "spellcraft" check act as "proof" that the illusion is not real:
"A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw."
In other words, is identifying the spell as it's being cast(Spellcraft) act as proof that the illusion isn't real, thus eliminating the need for that character to have to make a saving throw?
Help. :) Thanks!
No, I'd say it grants them the free save with a +4 bonus though, as per the rules. Otherwise you don't get a save at all until you interact with the wall itself. interacting with the spell before its being cast isnt the same thing
Agree with Starglim. Too many people take a successful spellcraft check as automatic proof that a contemporaneous event is the result of the illusion. I'd just give a +4 bonus to disbelief in most cases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My main concern is when using Shadow Enchantment (or Phantasmal Killer) on someone with Spellcraft. They shouldn't auto disbelieve the faux mind control I'm using on them, just get a bonus.
|
|
Additionally....
Example:
Spellcaster A casts "Invisibility" on themselves.
Spellcaster B successfully identifies "Invisibility" being cast. This is Proof that the Spellcaster A isn't really invisible; It's just an illusion.
Result: because spellcaster B successfully identifies "Invisibility" as an illusion,(Proof that Invisibility is only an illusion) Spellcaster A is not invisible to Spellcaster B.
In summary: identifying the illusion as it is being cast negates the illusion, therefore, Invisibility does not work against those who identify it as it is being cast because a successful spellcraft check constitutes proof.
Is that where we're going?
|
Additionally....
Example:
Spellcaster A casts "Invisibility" on themselves.
Spellcaster B successfully identifies "Invisibility" being cast. This is Proof that the Spellcaster A isn't really invisible; It's just an illusion.
Result: because spellcaster B successfully identifies "Invisibility" as an illusion,(Proof that Invisibility is only an illusion) Spellcaster A is not invisible to Spellcaster B.
In summary: identifying the illusion as it is being cast negates the illusion, therefore, Invisibility does not work against those who identify it as it is being cast because a successful spellcraft check constitutes proof.
Is that where we're going?
That only applies against Illusions (not simply Illusion spells, slight difference) that provides a saving throw.
invisibility is not an Illusion in the created and interacted with sense and does not provide a saving throw vs opponents or people interacting with it.
Edit: fixed wording.
|
|
Fair enough.
Let's look at Phantasmal Killer then.
Its spell description states that a Will save is required for disbelief.
So:if the target of a Phantasmal Killer spell did a successful Spellcraft check to identify the spell being cast, would the target of the spell be required to make a Will save for disbelief, or would the successful Spellcraft check be considered "Proof" that the Phantasmal Killer isn't real, thus making the Saving Throw unnecessary?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Telling yourself over and over "Don't be afraid, it's not real, Don't be afraid, it's not real" doesn't always, if ever work.
But... but... that is LITERALLY my only coping strategy left!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Succubus hugs: for when you want to feel safe and secure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*offers hugs*Telling yourself over and over "Don't be afraid, it's not real, Don't be afraid, it's not real" doesn't always, if ever work.But... but... that is LITERALLY my only coping strategy left!
*checks list of coping strategies*
Yup... sorry, hugs from internet strangers was crossed off back in '98 for some reason... back to chanting for me...
|
|
Makes sense. Why have a specific section on disbelief if it could have been covered in the spellcraft entry.
Part of this must also have to do with illusions being mind affecting: even though a creature suspects it's an illusion, their senses are confused...even if they know better...
Also explains why mindless creatures aren't impacted by illusions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it helps, you can think of it as the difference between reflective knowledge (things you know intellectually to be true) and reactive belief (things you act as if they were true in that moment).
For instance, IRL, when I see a magician pull a scarf out of thin air, I know there must be some trick--she doesn't have the ability to actually violate the known laws of physics by producing matter where there was none. But at that instant, I react to it as though that is precisely what had happened. The eyes say one thing, the reason another.
Through that thin crack slither illusions...
They get a spellcraft check before you complete the spell (that's how you counterspell and the skill use is described as identifying a spell "as" it is being cast, not after), so the illusion can't block the spellcraft check. It doesn't exist yet when the check happens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think of it this way:
The caster casts a spell in view of an opponent. That spell is identified as an illusion. Then a wall appears where there was none, in plain sight of the opponent. The opponent can be reasonably certain that wall is an illusion created by his enemy, I would accept that he can act as though he knows it's an illusion. But, he hasn't made the save against it. Because if he does it turns translucent and no longer blocks LOS. However, he could try to walk through it and (if successful) automatically disbelieve.
Against Phantasmal killer, I would probably give a +4 to the save, but not automatically disbelieve if you identified the spell as it was cast. You're pretty sure it's an illusion, because you just saw it cast, but it is awfully scary.
Edit: Actually I'm not sure that the successful spellcraft should give the +4. As a GM I think I would probably rule that the successful identification allows you to act on the suspicion that something isn't real (so you would think to walk through the wall that just appeared) but not that you have "proof" that the wall isn't there.
I mean there could always be an invisible spell caster who actually casts a wall spell as a readied action in response to his friend casting silent image to create some very small feature (like an insect, or maybe just an illusion of the room itself exactly as it is).
|
Edit: Actually I'm not sure that the successful spellcraft should give the +4. As a GM I think I would probably rule that the successful identification allows you to act on the suspicion that something isn't real (so you would think to walk through the wall that just appeared) but not that you have "proof" that the wall isn't there.I mean there could always be an invisible spell caster who actually casts a wall spell as a readied action in response to his friend casting silent image to create some very small feature (like an insect, or maybe just an illusion of the room itself exactly as it is).
Seconded.
Otherwise it would open up a can of worms. What if that invisible caster had instead cast Summon Monster? Would they get to attack the flat-footed AC of the spellcaster user who "knew" that they were just illusions due to their spellcraft check?
etc.
I still think it could use some official clarification to something of the effect of "spell craft can let you suspect they are illusions and take actions as you might if you thought something was an illusion but could have consequences depending on the actions you take".
So you charge run at the wall, turns out the invisible spellcaster was there and did make a wall of iron. You fall prone.
This wont come up often since it's unlikely that someone will be working in concert with an illusion caster to make people do stupid things.
So the takeaway message here is, don't cast illusions where the enemy can see them.
Or take the feats from Ultimate Intrigue that allow you to hide your spell casting.
Yeah do that, that last thing actually really solves the problem.
|
|
So let me pose another question:
My wizard casts silent image in front of the opponent.
The opponent fails their spellcraft check but thinks "something's fishy" and just walks through my silent image. Now they have proof it's not real thus, no need to save.
In other words: by living in a magical world, they "predisbelieve" the silent image and just test it out.
The problem here is, they bypass the need to interact.
Similarly, if the opponent succeeds in their spellcraft check, does that give them the automatic right to walk through the wall without having to convince themselves (via disbelief saving throw) that it's not real?
Those feats are awful though. Don't work well unless the observer has poor perception, and require a full round to cast.
|
|
So let me pose another question:
My wizard casts silent image in front of the opponent.
The opponent fails their spellcraft check but thinks "something's fishy" and just walks through to my silent image. Now they have proof it's not real this no saveIn other words: by living in a magical world, they "predisbelieve" the silent image and just test it out.
The problem here is, they bypass the need to interact.
Similarly, if the opponent t succeeds in their spellctaft, does that give them the automatic right to walk through the wall without having to convince themselves (via disbelief saving throw) that it's not real?
Living in the world of magic would make you do the opposite of "predisbelieve". Just because someone uses magic does not mean it's fake or can't hurt you.
So let me pose another question:
My wizard casts silent image in front of the opponent.
The opponent fails their spellcraft check but thinks "something's fishy" and just walks through to my silent image. Now they have proof it's not real this no saveIn other words: by living in a magical world, they "predisbelieve" the silent image and just test it out.
The problem here is, they bypass the need to interact.
Similarly, if the opponent t succeeds in their spellctaft, does that give them the automatic right to walk through the wall without having to convince themselves (via disbelief saving throw) that it's not real?
Have the silent image be a real creature who dropped Invisibility and gets an AoO. That should bring that nonsense to a halt.
As for the walk anyone can stick a hand out to try to feel through an illusion. Make it cost a standard action to represent the caution of matching speeds checking first.
Your wizard casts silent image, to make it appear a wall is there.
They fail their spellcraft roll. GM says: "You can't tell what spell was cast, but a wall has appeared before you."
They decide, "I've dealt with illusions before, I'm going to walk up to the wall and try to walk through it, since it wasn't here a second ago."
GM says: "Your instincts were right this time, and you go right through the wall."
How is this any different than coming to a dead end in a dungeon, and the rogue saying, "I poke the wall with my 11 foot pole to see if its real."
It wasn't there a second ago, now it is, they have some spellcraft skill, so they know illusions exist, and spells that create walls exist. They can decide if their character is suspicious of a wall appearing in the middle of the fight.
|
|
So youchargerun at the wall, turns out the invisible spellcaster was there and did make a wall of iron. You fall prone.This wont come up often since it's unlikely that someone will be working in concert with an illusion caster to make people do stupid things.
So the takeaway message here is, don't cast illusions where the enemy can see them.
It could be much meaner and not even require a second caster.
Have Silent Image up before someone gets into the room that the bottomless pit across the floor is solid.
When they enter the room, let them see you casting Silent Image again (doesn't matter what you do with it), which drops the illusion over the bottomless pit, which they now think is nothing but a silly illusion, so they walk out 'onto' the 'fake' illusion and fall to their death.
(It'd get more confusing if you start stacking illusions. Say you had Illusionary Wall covering the pit, and then use Silent Image to make an image of the pit. Which save would they take first? Could they fail just one? etc.)
|
|
So if you see an illusion spell cast in front of you, you have the choice to just ignore the need to interact just because you've heard of illusions?
I don't think so.
Knowing it might be an illusion gives you the +4 bonus. Guessing it might be and just testing it removes the need to save entirely.
The question is: even if I know it's an illusion, do I have to interact with it?
So if I cast a silent image of a wall in front of my archer, and I say "it's just an illusion" my archer doesn't need to save? No. she gets the +4 to the save.
I would give the person who spotted and identified the spell cast, the +4 bonus on the save for recognizing the illusion.
For silent image? You can choose to directly interact with the image, such as trying to walk through it.
The wall looks solid. They saw it just appear. They know both illusions and walls exist and can be created by magic in the middle of the fight. They decide to try to walk through the wall, and surprise, they do.
If the archer makes his will saving through, then the wall turns translucent and he can shoot through it clearly.
If he fails the saving throw, and decides to blindly fire at where the enemy was before, because you told him the wall is an illusion, and sees the arrow go through the wall instead of bouncing off, he now has proof its an illusion and can now see through it for future attacks.
|
|
For silent image? You can choose to directly interact with the image, such as trying to walk through it.
The wall looks solid. They saw it just appear. They know both illusions and walls exist and can be created by magic in the middle of the fight. They decide to try to walk through the wall, and surprise, they do.
If the archer makes his will saving through, then the wall turns translucent and he can shoot through it clearly.
If he fails the saving throw, and decides to blindly fire at where the enemy was before, because you told him the wall is an illusion, and sees the arrow go through the wall instead of bouncing off, he now has proof its an illusion and can now see through it for future attacks.
Here's where we disagree:
The archer has been told it's an illusion. If they fire blindly, they no longer need to make the saving throw. The experiment alone is "proof".But that negates the need to interact.
The illusion fools the senses. They must interact with it before experimenting.
If they know it's an illusion and they interact and fail their save, they are confused, "I'm sure they said it's an illusion, but it seems so real". Then they can experiment to test it, not before.
In other words: if the experiment alone is sufficient, what's the point of the +4 bonus? It should be an auto success.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shooting the arrow through it IS the experiment.
If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.
You cast the wall, archer gets a saving throw. He fails.
You free action say, "Hey archer buddy, thats an illusionary wall I cast to protect you, you can shoot through it!"Archer gets another save at +4, because he was told its illusionary. He fails this, still can't see the wall.
Archer still sees a wall there, but his buddy told him its fake, so he can take a shot at a square where the enemy was before. The enemy gets total concealment, but he can attempt to make the shot. Once the arrow goes through the wall (interaction) he automatically makes the save and can now see through it.
Future attacks can be made without concealment from the wall, because it is now translucent for the archer.
Conversely, lets make it a real wall.
Caster casts wall of stone, blocking off the archer.
No save is required, the archer has seen his teammate use illusion tricks before, and thinks this is another one of those walls for him to shoot through.
He tries to shoot through the wall at the enemy, the arrow bounces off the wall, oops; guess its real this time.
I agree. I wouldn't give auto success for successful spellcraft. I would be willing to give the +4 in my game, but RAW you get nothing other than knowing what spell was cast.
|
|
I want to go back to the original situation because something just struck me:
1) My spell caster casts "silent image" in plain view of an opponent.
2) My opponent does a spellcraft check and SUCCEEDS in identifying the spell.
3) RAW, this does not constitute "proof" that the illusion is an illusion, it just means my opponent has identified the spell.
4) Now to explore the problem, let's say my opponent goes to interact with the spell but FAILS their saving throw.
5) Having failed the save, they must accept that the silent image is real, therefore, they can't just walk through it as a test. OTHERWISE, it makes the will saving throw to disbelieve utterly pointless. If they fail the save, they believe (opposite of disbelief is belief, after all) and won't willingly walk into a wall they perceive as being "real" - even if they have a hunch it might be an illusion...otherwise they're auto-disbelieving again!
Disbelief has more effects than just thinking its an illusion.
If you think the wall is an illusion, but haven't made your saving throw, you can try to interact with it to test. You can't see through the wall.
If you make your save, and actually disbelieve the wall, then it appears translucent and you can see through it.
Nothing is stopping you from trying to move through every wall you see on the off-chance ones an illusion. I've had rogues who buy chalk, and draw it down the wall in dungeons, both to prevent getting lost/backtracked, and because they will find a fake wall when their hand goes through it instead of drawing a line.
Depending on how they interact with the spell, they get a saving throw, or disbelief because of the interaction providing proof it is an illusion (hand through wall). If they just stare at the wall carefully, and fail their save, then I would say that yes, they concluded it is in fact a real wall. If they said, "I think its an illusion, I try to put my hand through it" then no save, their hand goes through. This depends on the interaction, and the illusion.
If its a major image, and you are concentrating on it, you can have it react if they try to attack it. In this case, attacking the figment would give you a saving throw for interacting, but not automatic success if you have the illusion react appropriately. If you major imaged a wall, I'd allow you to have the wall react in a manner that makes the throw not automatic. Maybe morphing away from their hand as they reach out. They're still interacting with it, but not in a way that provides proof its an illusion.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing is stopping you from trying to move through every wall you see on the off-chance ones an illusion.
I disagree here. If I failed my save (thus, I believe it's a real wall), I can't just say, "well, just in case it's not real I'll try walking through it anyway". Because I failed my save I believe it's real. By just deciding to try walking through it after I failed my save, I'm intentionally circumventing the rules and ignoring my saving throw failure.
I've had rogues who buy chalk, and draw it down the wall in dungeons, both to prevent getting lost/backtracked, and because they will find a fake wall when their hand goes through it instead of drawing a line.
But why are they drawing a line right up to the wall? :)And if they did, they'd still have to roll to disbelieve their senses because they have minds that can be fooled. If they failed their save, they'd think, "that was weird, I'm losing my mind" not, "It's an illusion!" because that would mean they're getting the benefit of a successful save instead of a failed one.
|
|
If he fails the saving throw, and decides to blindly fire at where the enemy was before, because you told him the wall is an illusion, and sees the arrow go through the wall instead of bouncing off, he now has proof its an illusion and can now see through it for future attacks.
Why? Because there is nothing else in the Pathfinder universe that it could possibly be but an illusion? lol Calling that proof is kinda BS.
Off the top of my head...
1. The wall could be a mimic (teleported there)
2. The wall could contain an extradimensional space.
3. The illusionary wall could look like any number of walls where that would happen naturally. (If you use a higher image spell, my personal favorite is a massive crackling wall of flame, because no one wants to get close to it. Or a latticework mesh of spiked steel glistening with poison.)
etc.
So youchargerun at the wall, turns out the invisible spellcaster was there and did make a wall of iron. You fall prone.This wont come up often since it's unlikely that someone will be working in concert with an illusion caster to make people do stupid things.
So the takeaway message here is, don't cast illusions where the enemy can see them.
It could be much meaner and not even require a second caster.
Have Silent Image up before someone gets into the room that the bottomless pit across the floor is solid.
When they enter the room, let them see you casting Silent Image again (doesn't matter what you do with it), which drops the illusion over the bottomless pit, which they now think is nothing but a silly illusion, so they walk out 'onto' the 'fake' illusion and fall to their death.
(It'd get more confusing if you start stacking illusions. Say you had Illusionary Wall covering the pit, and then use Silent Image to make an image of the pit. Which save would they take first? Could they fail just one? etc.)
It's true that you could do it as a single caster, but it would require preparation (as you mentioned) to pull it off which means that tactic isn't viable in combat as a PC (because you're usually infiltrating and not drawing enemies to you).
The real problem is depending on how you try to run illusions it turns into mind control if you fail the save if you try to say you can't interact and try to disbelieve again.
Personally I think the existence of magic and knowing of the existence of illusion magic would cause lots of people (especially adventurers) to be suspicious of things that just appear. But that's why you have to get inventive with how to use them. Maybe a wall of suppression. People wouldn't want to walk through a wall of suppression to test it and see if it's real, and doesn't have other physical cues that would give away that it's an illusion. Blade Barrier is another one that could work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is SO much misinformation floating about in this thread. For starters, mindless creatures are not inherently immune to illusions. Any creature capable of sensing its environment, that is, any creature with a Wisdom score, is susceptible to illusions.
If it is a mind-affecting illusion, on the other hand, now that's a horse of a different color!
If it is a mind-affecting illusion, on the other hand, now that's a horse of a different color!
Or is it? Maybe its just an illusion that the horse is a different color!
I do agree. Figments (silent image is one) create the actual sensation of a thing. I do think mindless creatures, if the save was failed, would act as though the illusion was completely real and not take any action that would imply otherwise.
Creatures with minds, even while seeing a wall in front of them, can decide that, "I don't actually think that wall is there, because I've seen walls you can walk through before" and test the wall to see. It doesn't matter how much you believe the wall is there, it doesn't stop you from moving through it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But interaction forces a save. Would not "testing the wall" count as an interaction and thus allow a save, rather than being automatic disbelief?
The real debate here is where one draws the line between the two. Add to the never-ending discussion! :D
As I said, it depends on the testing. "I saw the wizard walk through it" would be a save. I got bull rushed through the wall and it didn't stop me would be automatic.
As I said, it depends on the testing. "I saw the wizard walk through it" would be a save. I got bull rushed through the wall and it didn't stop me would be automatic.
In your first example, that wouldn't count as interaction though. It might count as communicating the illusion to an ally if you have a lenient GM I guess. I'm inclined to agree with your second example, however.