Either condition seems reasonable.
|
He’s free to argue that with you, but the spell says no such thing so it’s really up,to,your adjudication. Personally, I wouldn’t create a strict parameter for the Perception check and leave it up to a case by case. As long as you are fair and not overly permissive or restrictive on the Perception check, it’s fine
Thyrax, if you are the DM, perhaps you should let the players enjoy the benefits of this spell for a while, since it's a very cool situation that will enhance their enjoyment of the game.
Your players shouldn't even know whether or not a monster or another adversary gets a perception check or not - unless they act in a way that shows that they disbelieved the illusion.
Personally, I wouldn't grant the automatic perception check except in extreme circumstances. And if there were other enemy combattants still up and fighting, certainly not. Let the monsters concentrate on the most obvious threats before wondering whether that dead guy is really dead or just faking it.
Per strict RAW, there shouldn't be a roll because the character is standing still. So, I would follow the rules and consider that the monster doesn't know that the character is invisible, unless it has some special senses (Tremorsense comes to mind) or if it knows magic and recognize the spell being cast.
Per strict RAW, there shouldn't be a roll because the character is standing still. So, I would follow the rules and consider that the monster doesn't know that the character is invisible, unless it has some special senses (Tremorsense comes to mind) or if it knows magic and recognize the spell being cast.
This statement doesn't make any sense when talking about the clausecond in the spell that states "If the target's death seems absurd—for instance, a barbarian at full health appears to be slain by 2 damage—the GM can grant the attacker an immediate Perception check to disbelieve the illusion."
Per strict RAW, there shouldn't be a roll because the character is standing still. So, I would follow the rules and consider that the monster doesn't know that the character is invisible, unless it has some special senses (Tremorsense comes to mind) or if it knows magic and recognize the spell being cast.This statement doesn't make any sense when talking about the clausecond in the spell that states "If the target's death seems absurd—for instance, a barbarian at full health appears to be slain by 2 damage—the GM can grant the attacker an immediate Perception check to disbelieve the illusion."
Sorry, I didn't understand that the OP was speaking of the absurd clause. The absurd clause speaks of 2 points of damage on a barbarian, which is really absurd. If a character takes a critical hit by a monster of its level, I hardly see how you can bring in the absurd clause.
Agree with SuperBidi. The absurd class establishes the kind of thing that gets you the free perception check: something extremely out of step with what you'd expect to happen.
That's consistent with how other illusion spells work in this system too. Unless something is really out of the ordinary, you generally don't get a free check and have to proactively interact with the illusion to get a chance to disbelieve.
Agree with SuperBidi. The absurd clause establishes the kind of thing that gets you the free perception check: something extremely out of step with what you'd expect to happen.
That's consistent with how other illusion spells work in this system too. Unless something is really out of the ordinary, you generally don't get a free check and have to proactively interact with the illusion to get a chance to disbelieve.
Agreed.
|
At the point of getting the spell, level 9, crits would be doing a significant amount of damage. Creatures don't really KNOW how much damage they are dealing in the form of numbers, it's more of an abstact thing. For example, a Barbarian taking two damage would be like a glancing blow that scratched their arm. It drew blood, but it's not deep and obviously isn't going to slow them down. If a Troll with a Great Axe crits that's a severe hit, and even rolling min damage would be pretty damaging. That would be like the axe going directly into the shoulder, and slashing across the chest. Even if you roll min damage it's still a severe hit and would make sense if the spell triggered.
Unless of course, they had seen that same barbarian get impaled by another creature and shake it off like it was nothing...
In the end, "it's up to the GM" is the rule.
To be more thorough, I think I would handle it that way as a DM:
- If the creature is an unintelligent one, it doesn't understand the concept of absurd. Even 2 points of damage wouldn't trigger a Perception check.
- If the creature has very low intelligence (like an animal), anything that would kill a human would be ok, so 10 points of damage. The creature doesn't know what a Barbarian is.
- If the creature is intelligent but is not humanoid and hasn't succeeded at a recall knowledge check to recognize the party, then anything that would kill a human would be ok, unless the creature has external information that it would be illogical (like Cordell says with his impaled example).
- If the creature is an intelligent humanoid who's clearly aware it is facing a high level Barbarian (because of the rage, the runed weapon and armor, and all these signs of high level), then I may trigger a Perception check on any normal attack delivered when the Barbarian is still quite fresh. But not on a critical hit, as it is by definition a nasty blow.