I have currently run into a disagreement with how illusions work, specifically saves to disbelieve. My GM believes that as figments such as illusory wall do not have "textural" sensations, that someone simply rubbing their hand over the wall not just gets a save to disbelieve as per interaction, but they would instantly be counted as automatically passing by the "proof the illusion isn't real" clause.
He bases his reasoning that an image spell or illusory wall (just a permanent silent image of a wall that remains non see through when you disbelieve) has completely zero tactile response. I disagree with his premise and conclusion respectively:
Images do have some tactile response, they just don't have "textural" response (as per silent image) but you would feel some vague force pushing back (as per silent image also saying you manifest a force) but that fuzziness of an untextured force pushing back from the wall/other image would tell you that you get the save to notice something is off.
Second, while the spell isn't a phantasm directly tricking you into believing the wall is there and apparating a wall that you can see, it is still creating some force which would give you a save because there is a discrepancy, and that save is your ability to simply notice the difference. The difference isn't instantly noticeable as soon as you interact. There isn't another way to interact with the wall short of groping for it's fakeness (as if you were feeling for a real but hidden door anyway) that doesn't greatly tread the line of metagaming.
Obviously illusions are a touchy spot because so much of the rules is still unclear and intentionally freeform, but at least too me this is far too easy of a way to just make all illusions useless if as soon as you lay a hand on them, you instantly know for a fact that it is fake.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have to be more specific because illusions are divided into 5 different types, each one with their own characteristics. For the most part your GM is correct.
Figments create false sensation and list the senses they affect. Silent image does not list touch as one of the senses it affects therefore it anyone touching it will usually be able to tell it is false. This also depends on the nature of the figment. If the illusion is something that would not normally register to touch its lack will not give it away. So the illusion of a stone wall would be revealed when someone touches it, but an illusion of a wall of light would not be.
Glamers change simply change the sensory quality of the affected object but otherwise act as Figments.
Phantasms are completely in the mind of the target so affect all the targets senses. With a phantasm you have to make the save or you consider it real.
Patterns are a like figments but also affect the mind. A pattern would also require a save or it will be considered real.
Shadows actually create semi real creations so again would require a save, but most of these spells specify how they work in the description.
So if the illusion is a figment or glamer it works like your GM is saying. If it is a shadow it works like you are saying. If it is pattern or phantasm it effectively works like you say.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Silent Image does not create a force, it allows you to create a visual image of an object, creature or force. So, you could create a visual illusion of a wall of energy or storm.
Except we have explicit examples of figments create at least the sensation of touch if not outright resistant force. (What we don't have explicitly is texture, but texture isn't the end all of tactile sensation.)
Mirror images will literally shatter upon being struck, to the point they can stop a swing cleave.
Illusory wall literally states that someone who disbelieves can pass through with some but not much resistance and effort.
The example for disbelieving an illusory summon has always been attacking it, your weapon making physical contact with a weapon, and then getting the save if it responds appropriately (how does a wall respond appropriately if not just stay as it is), only if the blow was completely ignored and responded to by the image do you automatically pass.
Again, the text for silent image is you don't get texture, not no touch at all. You may not be able to tell that the wall is rough stone or wood or whatever other material, but you feel something is there, which should be enough to get a save to notice the discrepancy to then disbelieve, but not an outright guarantee based on proof the wall isn't real.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
Figments create false sensations not actual items. They also cannot produce real effects or provide protection from the elements. A silent image that creates an illusion of a wall covering a cave will not keep in heat, nor will it keep out rain or wind. If an illusionary wall cannot keep out air, why would it prevent a creature from walking through it?
Silent Image
This spell creates the visual illusion of an object, creature, or force, as visualized by you. The illusion does not create sound, smell, texture, or temperature. You can move the image within the limits of the size of the effect.
The spell also specifies it creates a VISUAL illusion. It also specifies that it does not create any other sensations. The only way I can feel something is if there is a sensation of touch. Anything I can touch has a texture. Completely smooth is just as much as a texture as a brick wall. Saying you can create something that can be felt with touch that does not have a texture is like saying you can create something that is visible, but has no shape or color.
What you are describing is not a figment it is a shadow.
Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real.
Mirror Image
This spell creates a number of illusory doubles of you that inhabit your square. These doubles make it difficult for enemies to precisely locate and attack you.
When mirror image is cast, 1d4 images plus one image per three caster levels (maximum eight images total) are created. These images remain in your space and move with you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly. Whenever you are attacked or are the target of a spell that requires an attack roll, there is a possibility that the attack targets one of your images instead. If the attack is a hit, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment. If it is a figment, the figment is destroyed. If the attack misses by 5 or less, one of your figments is destroyed by the near miss. Area spells affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments. Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments. Spells that require a touch attack are harmlessly discharged if used to destroy a figment.
An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect (although the normal miss chances still apply).
Nowhere in the description of mirror image does it state the images shatter, it simply says they are destroyed. Mirror Image does not directly stop cleave. It indirectly stops a cleave you can only use cleave when you hit your target. If you hit an image instead of what you are aiming for you have failed to fulfill the condition of the feat. If you want real world justification it could be that because you hit nothing you use too much force and cannot redirect your weapon because you misjudged where it would end up.
In the case of the Illusory Wall spell, your GM is actually correct… sorta. Any physical object that touches an Illusory Wall passes through effortlessly. A creature passing through still gets a will save to disbelieve it as they are interacting with it, but they do so at +2 as they are presented with proof that it is not real. This doesn’t stop them from passing through, but if they fail their save they will be hesitant to pass through again as they still believe the wall to be real.
The spell is 4th level for 2 reasons… 1) it has a permanent duration. 2) unlike other illusions someone who makes their will save cannot see through it, they simply know it is not real. Basically you put everything into making it look real and last forever at the cost of every ounce of substance.
For what it is worth, an illusion can be interacted with without physically touching it as well. If a character takes a standard action to inspect the illusion they are considered to be interacting even if they cannot physically touch it.
One thing to keep in mind about illusions is that you don’t get a save at all unless you interact with it. If I cast silent image on the mouth of the cave to hide the cave, and a group of soldiers ride by they don’t get a save. Even if they were walking past the cave they don’t get a save. If they are carefully searching the area they would probably get a save. If they are probing every foot of the cliff with spears they are going to find it, but that is going to take forever to accomplish.
Figments are far from useless. You just have to understand how they work.
|
An Illusionary Wall put into the middle of a corridor to hide the fact that it continues is easy to discover, as the prober hand passes through it with no resistance.
An Illusionary Wall placed over a flimsy wood barrier work to hide that it can be broken through with ease works way better. The prober feels the resistance, he gets a chance to save to recognize that the feeling is that of wood and not stone.
It works even better if cast on a stone wall to hide a door.
So, your master is generally right, circumstances can change how it works.
Except we also have two examples from one of the first APs (just what I know off the top of my head) where the designers put illusory walls as per Diego's example in the middle of two hallways (well one is specifically the mouth to a smuggler's cave) but still explicitly say "A character that interacts with the wall here can attempt a DC 16 Will save to recognize the illusion for what it truly is." (Curse of the Crimson Throne, book 3, page 46-47 & 55-56; remaster page 175, 180)
What counts as interacting here if not probing/touching the wall for flaws? Or is it not simply that touching it produces the same will save as opposed to an auto-disbelief; that the text "Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface, though such measures do not cause the illusion to disappear." is just introducing the fact that even if you pass, you can't see through it?
Interacting with the wall could be a lot of different things. Hitting it with a ranged attack or an area of effect spells would be interacting with it. You would not even need to be aiming for the wall. If you fired a bow at a target in front of the wall and it missed that would still be interacting with the wall. Examining the area around the wall without touching it would also count as interacting with the wall. Moving towards the wall and stopping because you don’t want to run into the wall would also count as interacting with the wall. What would not count as interacting with the wall would be when the character sees the wall and decides not to bother checking it because it is obviously a dead end.
The illusionary wall at the mouth of the cave is very effective because unless the person has a reason to actually go to the location, they will not get a save. So, unless the party is following tracks of a creature that went into the cave chances are they are not going to get a save. They would have to be carefully searching the area of for an entrance to interact with the illusion. Walking along the cliff where the cave is location is not enough to get a save.
As I pointed out earlier a figment only creates a false sensation. Even if the illusion includes the sense of touch, it does not actually prevent anything from passing through it. The only type of illusion that can do that is a shadow.
|
|
Interacting with an Illusionary wall covering a cave mouth can be as simple as shouting and getting a different echo from the cave mouth. "Interacting" is an extremely large term.
I just checked the actual text of the spell (should have done that before, not only going by memory) and it explicitly says:
"Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface, though such measures do not cause the illusion to disappear."
No save required. You touch it, you discover its true nature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Disbelief and Interaction: All three of the subschools [of illusions] tend to have saving throw lines that say “Will disbelief,” but they differ in how those saving throws apply. 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."
|
You have to be more specific because illusions are divided into 5 different types, each one with their own characteristics. For the most part your GM is correct.
Figments create false sensation and list the senses they affect. Silent image does not list touch as one of the senses it affects therefore it anyone touching it will usually be able to tell it is false. This also depends on the nature of the figment. If the illusion is something that would not normally register to touch its lack will not give it away. So the illusion of a stone wall would be revealed when someone touches it, but an illusion of a wall of light would not be.
Glamers change simply change the sensory quality of the affected object but otherwise act as Figments.
Phantasms are completely in the mind of the target so affect all the targets senses. With a phantasm you have to make the save or you consider it real.
Patterns are a like figments but also affect the mind. A pattern would also require a save or it will be considered real.
Shadows actually create semi real creations so again would require a save, but most of these spells specify how they work in the description.
So if the illusion is a figment or glamer it works like your GM is saying. If it is a shadow it works like you are saying. If it is pattern or phantasm it effectively works like you say.
Where are patterns from? I recognize Glamers and shadows. Phantasm are I assume a higher level of glamer but I've never heard fo a pattern that makes an illusion someone could physically interact with if they fail their save. I thought that was the province of shadowmagic that's only borderline illusion to begin with verging on real.
Pattern is in the core rule book under the section on illusions.
Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.
Where are patterns from? I recognize Glamers and shadows. Phantasm are I assume a higher level of glamer but I've never heard fo a pattern that makes an illusion someone could physically interact with if they fail their save. I thought that was the province of shadowmagic that's only borderline illusion to begin with verging on real.
A prime example of a Pattern is Color Spray.
Don’t forget one thing about patterns is that they are all mind effecting spells. Anything that is immune to mind affecting like undead are also immune to them. They also do not affect the real world so will not stop an inanimate object. The reason you could not walk through a wall created by a pattern is that you mind perceives it as real. I may have given the impression that they create real objects but that is not what they do.
As opposed to an illusory wall which your mind also thinks is real until you disbelieve? Going back further, where is the difference between walking up to the wall and stopping without touching it, and walking clean past it; both cases you have only looked at the wall?
At this point I'll take people's word for it that they can realize its real if they are intentionally touching the wall, but I don't understand how you interact with an inanimate object in any way besides touching it, and if that is the case, why they would still put in the save? Is "looking at it intentionally for a move action or longer" interaction, and if so, what constitutes as specifically looking at the fake portion vs the rest of the real wall? I don't understand sound either, as very rarely will you be in an acoustic environment where you notice a hole in the wall by echo (the only one I can think of is you're against a cliff/wall with nothing to the side or behind you so close you could touch it anyway). Only thing left is to smell the wall, lick it (which is touching it anyway), and normal touch. Besides that, there's maybe Shaw-Shanking a ranged weapon through the illusory wall, but that seems like it would clearly be an automatic reveal if it was intentionally done (but why did you intentionally do it if you didn't know?) or a save if it was somehow an accident/GM-flavored coincidence and people weren't directly paying attention.
Don’t forget one thing about patterns is that they are all mind effecting spells. Anything that is immune to mind affecting like undead are also immune to them. They also do not affect the real world so will not stop an inanimate object. The reason you could not walk through a wall created by a pattern is that you mind perceives it as real. I may have given the impression that they create real objects but that is not what they do.
The pattern wall spells are scintillating wall and wall of nausea, both of which explicitly say you can pass through them for their actual main effect to occur. The wall is literally there, not that it's impassable, like a wall of fire, but the pattern effect is what it does to you, not the wall itself.
|
|
Don’t forget one thing about patterns is that they are all mind effecting spells. Anything that is immune to mind affecting like undead are also immune to them. They also do not affect the real world so will not stop an inanimate object. The reason you could not walk through a wall created by a pattern is that you mind perceives it as real. I may have given the impression that they create real objects but that is not what they do.
No you gave the right impression I just like to have options and being able to create an illusion that affects the senses to an extent but you can't actually interact with or an illusion that effects the mind to make them believe its real and interact with it as if it were because their mind is providing the "this stone statue looks, feels, smells and tastes real" sensations even though they are actually stopping their hand rather than the statue would be useful.
As opposed to an illusory wall which your mind also thinks is real until you disbelieve? Going back further, where is the difference between walking up to the wall and stopping without touching it, and walking clean past it; both cases you have only looked at the wall?
At this point I'll take people's word for it that they can realize its real if they are intentionally touching the wall, but I don't understand how you interact with an inanimate object in any way besides touching it, and if that is the case, why they would still put in the save? Is "looking at it intentionally for a move action or longer" interaction, and if so, what constitutes as specifically looking at the fake portion vs the rest of the real wall? I don't understand sound either, as very rarely will you be in an acoustic environment where you notice a hole in the wall by echo (the only one I can think of is you're against a cliff/wall with nothing to the side or behind you so close you could touch it anyway). Only thing left is to smell the wall, lick it (which is touching it anyway), and normal touch. Besides that, there's maybe Shaw-Shanking a ranged weapon through the illusory wall, but that seems like it would clearly be an automatic reveal if it was intentionally done (but why did you intentionally do it if you didn't know?) or a save if it was somehow an accident/GM-flavored coincidence and people weren't directly paying attention.
Here's an example that might work better than the ones people gave earlier in the thread.
You are in a corridor that halfway along has an archway to the outside and someone casts a major image to make it look like the wall continues uninterrupted. You walk along the corridor wall, wall, wall then as you come in line with the archway you feel a breeze blowing on you bringing the scent of flowers as its blowing the through the archway. You can see an uninterrupted wall but you feel a breeze blowing on you that shouldn't exist. You are now "interacting" with the wall because you don't believe its real since your vision (see a wall) and your sense of touch (feel a warm breeze) and smell (scent of flowers) are in conflict so you can make a save to disbelieve. If you succeed you believe that there's no wall there and your vision is being tricked. If you fail you believe there's a wall there and come up with another explanation "Oh its a magical air spell of some sort to keep the corridor pleasant".
One way to interact with a wall without touching it would be to try attacking the wall. Casting a spell on the wall that would normally bring down the wall would be interacting with it. The same would also be true for using a mundane method. Firing a siege weapon at an illusionary wall would also get you a saving throw. A lot of this is going to be up to the GM’s discretion.
For me the key thing is that the illusionary object has to become the focus of the characters attention. I cannot give you a straight up answer as to what that is because it varies depending on the nature of the illusionary object or creature.
You are in a corridor that halfway along has an archway to the outside and someone casts a major image to make it look like the wall continues uninterrupted. You walk along the corridor wall, wall, wall then as you come in line with the archway you feel a breeze blowing on you bringing the scent of flowers as its blowing the through the archway. You can see an uninterrupted wall but you feel a breeze blowing on you that shouldn't exist. You are now "interacting" with the wall because you don't believe its real since your vision (see a wall) and your sense of touch (feel a warm breeze) and smell (scent of flowers) are in conflict so you can make a save to disbelieve.
The official Paizo clarificaitonn says "interacting generally means spending a move action, standard action, or greater on a character’s part." I think that works perfectly fine here, too: If you pause for a moment to feel where the wind is coming from, that's a move action (based on using Scent "to note the direction of the scent"). If you're in combat, or running from something, i.e. when you actually spend your actions on something else, you might not notice it.
|
|
You are in a corridor that halfway along has an archway to the outside and someone casts a major image to make it look like the wall continues uninterrupted. You walk along the corridor wall, wall, wall then as you come in line with the archway you feel a breeze blowing on you bringing the scent of flowers as its blowing the through the archway. You can see an uninterrupted wall but you feel a breeze blowing on you that shouldn't exist. You are now "interacting" with the wall because you don't believe its real since your vision (see a wall) and your sense of touch (feel a warm breeze) and smell (scent of flowers) are in conflict so you can make a save to disbelieve.The official Paizo clarificaitonn says "interacting generally means spending a move action, standard action, or greater on a character’s part." I think that works perfectly fine here, too: If you pause for a moment to feel where the wind is coming from, that's a move action (based on using Scent "to note the direction of the scent"). If you're in combat, or running from something, i.e. when you actually spend your actions on something else, you might not notice it.
Speaking from personal experience in combat you have other things on your mind. I still remember one 1st ed game where I was running away from Trolls and the DM mentioned a pond because if I hid in it the trolls wouldn't scent me and would not find me. Since I didn't know that and I didn't want to be eaten by trolls I didn't even have my character look at the pond for possibilities they just kept running. Still mildly annoyed the DM had the trolls so determined to eat me they spent hours digging away at the wall I was hiding in a crack of instead of leaving to find easier prey.
One way to interact with a wall without touching it would be to try attacking the wall. Casting a spell on the wall that would normally bring down the wall would be interacting with it. The same would also be true for using a mundane method. Firing a siege weapon at an illusionary wall would also get you a saving throw. A lot of this is going to be up to the GM’s discretion.
For me the key thing is that the illusionary object has to become the focus of the characters attention. I cannot give you a straight up answer as to what that is because it varies depending on the nature of the illusionary object or creature.
All of those are things that you would need essentially meta game knowledge to select the portion of the wall that is illusory over just any other real section of wall a majority of the time.
Speaking from personal experience in combat you have other things on your mind. I still remember one 1st ed game where I was running away from Trolls and the DM mentioned a pond because if I hid in it the trolls wouldn't scent me and would not find me. Since I didn't know that and I didn't want to be eaten by trolls I didn't even have my character look at the pond for possibilities they just kept running. Still mildly annoyed the DM had the trolls so determined to eat me they spent hours digging away at the wall I was hiding in a crack of instead of leaving to find easier prey.You are in a corridor that halfway along has an archway to the outside and someone casts a major image to make it look like the wall continues uninterrupted. You walk along the corridor wall, wall, wall then as you come in line with the archway you feel a breeze blowing on you bringing the scent of flowers as its blowing the through the archway. You can see an uninterrupted wall but you feel a breeze blowing on you that shouldn't exist. You are now "interacting" with the wall because you don't believe its real since your vision (see a wall) and your sense of touch (feel a warm breeze) and smell (scent of flowers) are in conflict so you can make a save to disbelieve.The official Paizo clarificaitonn says "interacting generally means spending a move action, standard action, or greater on a character’s part." I think that works perfectly fine here, too: If you pause for a moment to feel where the wind is coming from, that's a move action (based on using Scent "to note the direction of the scent"). If you're in combat, or running from something, i.e. when you actually spend your actions on something else, you might not notice it.
Do trolls even need to eat? Don't they just regenerate the damage from starvation and thus become immune to the fatigue? To me it seems they just eat for taste, and a screaming, frightened, and cornered Kitsune must be very tasty.
|
|
All of those are things that you would need essentially meta game knowledge to select the portion of the wall that is illusory over just any other real section of wall a majority of the time.One way to interact with a wall without touching it would be to try attacking the wall. Casting a spell on the wall that would normally bring down the wall would be interacting with it. The same would also be true for using a mundane method. Firing a siege weapon at an illusionary wall would also get you a saving throw. A lot of this is going to be up to the GM’s discretion.
For me the key thing is that the illusionary object has to become the focus of the characters attention. I cannot give you a straight up answer as to what that is because it varies depending on the nature of the illusionary object or creature.
Why? What metagaming knowledge is "I think there is a corridor or room on the other side of this wall and I want to cast passwall or break it to get there"?
I recall an adventure where we were shown a picture of the exterior of a building. Simply by having seen that, we did know that there was something behind the wall we were looking at, as the picture did show a tower behind it.Searching for secret doors? You normally search a large stretch of a corridor, the illusionary wall included, and the basic method is tapping the wall to notice differences in sound.
|
|
Do trolls even need to eat? Don't they just regenerate the damage from starvation and thus become immune to the fatigue? To me it seems they just eat for taste, and a screaming, frightened, and cornered Kitsune must be very tasty.
Regeneration doesn't heal starvation damage, death by loss of constitution or asphyxiation,
Attacks that don’t deal hit point damage are not healed by regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, suffocation, or thirst.
All of those are things that you would need essentially meta game knowledge to select the portion of the wall that is illusory over just any other real section of wall a majority of the time.One way to interact with a wall without touching it would be to try attacking the wall. Casting a spell on the wall that would normally bring down the wall would be interacting with it. The same would also be true for using a mundane method. Firing a siege weapon at an illusionary wall would also get you a saving throw. A lot of this is going to be up to the GM’s discretion.
For me the key thing is that the illusionary object has to become the focus of the characters attention. I cannot give you a straight up answer as to what that is because it varies depending on the nature of the illusionary object or creature.
Why? What metagaming knowledge is "I think there is a corridor or room on the other side of this wall and I want to cast passwall or break it to get there"?
I recall an adventure where we were shown a picture of the exterior of a building. Simply by having seen that, we did know that there was something behind the wall we were looking at, as the picture did show a tower behind it.Searching for secret doors? You normally search a large stretch of a corridor, the illusionary wall included, and the basic method is tapping the wall to notice differences in sound.
Why that particular wall? Why not the ones next to it? And then you have Passwall which requires touch, so that wouldn't be interacting so much as the aforementioned automatic reveal. Why does touching it also then do that when swinging a hammer would just get a save as per interacting when if the wall has no substance and stopping power, it would likewise just swish straight through?
Do trolls even need to eat? Don't they just regenerate the damage from starvation and thus become immune to the fatigue? To me it seems they just eat for taste, and a screaming, frightened, and cornered Kitsune must be very tasty.Regeneration doesn't heal starvation damage, death by loss of constitution or asphyxiation,
Attacks that don’t deal hit point damage are not healed by regeneration. Regeneration also does not restore hit points lost from starvation, suffocation, or thirst.
My bad, forgot about that one. But fear is probably still more tasty to a troll.
|
|
No, really? Why they are checking "that wall"?
With the current rules about perception, there is no "searching that wall". You search the area, that wall and this wall included.
Besides that, it can be "that wall" because, apparently, the corridor end without going nowhere, because they know that the building extends in that direction, because they always search for secret doors, because they were following/searching for you and they did know you did go that way.
It all depends on the scenario.
As stated it depends on if you have a reason to be looking or questioning in the first place. If the wall is hiding a doorway in the middle of a corridor but plenty of other paths exist there might not be a reason to search for a hidden doorway. However, if there are muddy footprints leading up to the wall that then vanish as if someone walked into the wall you would have reason to believe there might be a secret passage and start investigating. Or, if while fighting an enemy in the corridor you fire an arrow that missed and you could have sworn it landed somewhere over here but you can’t find it or even any signs of it hitting the wall, you would have reason to search the area and the wall. Chasing a foe around a corner only for them to be nowhere to be seen and nothing more than a wall around the corner, they must have gone somewhere, perhaps there is a secret passage. You had come this way a few days past and saw a cave in this spot, but today you see only a rocky cliff face, did you get lost or is the cave now hidden? All signs say the entrance to the dragons lair should be right here, but to your naked eye there is only the side of a hill, we’re you deceived?
There are all sorts of narrative hooks to give the party reason to search for something to be not quite as it appears. It is just a matter of the GMs narration and the players actions aligning correctly to reveal one. The GM not giving you a narrative hook to search that spot might even be a deliberate narrative choice and the hook will come later as a means to have you backtrack.
In real life most people don’t build dead ends in buildings. So, if I come down a corridor and it dead ends and there are no alcoves, doors or other reasons for a corridor to be there being suspicious of it is not meta-gaming, it is common sense. If it the setting is more natural like an underground cave that is different, but in a man (or other creature) made structure there are going to be very few dead ends. If the building is an above ground structure almost all walls will have something on the other side.
|
|
All of those are things that you would need essentially meta game knowledge to select the portion of the wall that is illusory over just any other real section of wall a majority of the time.One way to interact with a wall without touching it would be to try attacking the wall. Casting a spell on the wall that would normally bring down the wall would be interacting with it. The same would also be true for using a mundane method. Firing a siege weapon at an illusionary wall would also get you a saving throw. A lot of this is going to be up to the GM’s discretion.
For me the key thing is that the illusionary object has to become the focus of the characters attention. I cannot give you a straight up answer as to what that is because it varies depending on the nature of the illusionary object or creature.
Why? What metagaming knowledge is "I think there is a corridor or room on the other side of this wall and I want to cast passwall or break it to get there"?
I recall an adventure where we were shown a picture of the exterior of a building. Simply by having seen that, we did know that there was something behind the wall we were looking at, as the picture did show a tower behind it.Searching for secret doors? You normally search a large stretch of a corridor, the illusionary wall included, and the basic method is tapping the wall to notice differences in sound.
Why that particular wall? Why not the ones next to it? And then you have Passwall which requires touch, so that wouldn't be interacting so much as the aforementioned automatic reveal. Why does touching it also then do that when swinging a hammer would just get a save as per interacting when if the wall has no substance and stopping power, it would likewise just swish straight through?
...Do trolls even need to eat? Don't they just regenerate the damage from
My character wasn't afraid she was snuggled down quietly at the end of the crack snacking on cockroaches. In fact I think I even took a nap to recover somewhat from earlier events and they were still trying to get to me after it.
As for illusions I do feel that any properly done one will be at best gamey and at worst rely on meta knowledge to identify it. A tower is hardly easy to hide but a room in a tower is much more doable. Especially if you set up things to look like there's a reason for that area to be blocked off e.g a staircase.
No, really? Why they are checking "that wall"?
With the current rules about perception, there is no "searching that wall". You search the area, that wall and this wall included.Besides that, it can be "that wall" because, apparently, the corridor end without going nowhere, because they know that the building extends in that direction, because they always search for secret doors, because they were following/searching for you and they did know you did go that way.
It all depends on the scenario.
So then when you decide to search this whole area, how are you interacting with it short of touching/probing for the secret pathway so that you then get the save instead of just the instant reveal? To me that would instantly imply you are just touching which makes the save entry pointless; when then again implies to me that this is the intended point of the save.
|
|
So then when you decide to search this whole area, how are you interacting with it short of touching/probing for the secret pathway so that you then get the save instead of just the instant reveal? To me that would instantly imply you are just touching which makes the save entry pointless; when then again implies to me that this is the intended point of the save.No, really? Why they are checking "that wall"?
With the current rules about perception, there is no "searching that wall". You search the area, that wall and this wall included.Besides that, it can be "that wall" because, apparently, the corridor end without going nowhere, because they know that the building extends in that direction, because they always search for secret doors, because they were following/searching for you and they did know you did go that way.
It all depends on the scenario.
When the PC/NPC search the whole area you roll the save (secretly as the GM, normally) because it is not guaranteed that they will check the exact spot.
If they are specifically checking the right spot, like "the end of the hallway" and the whole end of the hallway is fake, it is guaranteed that they will touch it (unless they specify "without touching it" or somesuch).At this point, it seems that you have a trust problem with your GM or the players. You simply are unwilling to accept that there could be a reason to check your wall without metagaming.
The line “Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface, though such measures do not cause the illusion to disappear.” does not actually negate the save. It provides them a bonus on the save the same as if someone else successfully disbelieves the illusion and communicates that it isn’t real. You are presented with the truth, but you still must succeed on your save to be certain of it. It doesn’t say they automatically save, just that the nature is revealed. Someone else saving and telling you that it’s an illusion is the exact same thing.
So it doesn’t matter if they touch it or not when searching the area, they make a save regardless. If they touch it they just get a +4 on the save.
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.
A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.
The book states that if you have proof the illusion is unreal you don’t need a saving throw, but it does not state that you automatically make your saving throw.
Using that as a basis it would be reasonable to require a save to be able to actually see through the illusion. The illusion will still not stop the character from walking through it even if the failed the save, but they would not be able to see through it.
Illusionary Wall is a special case because it specifically states that even if you make your save you cannot see through it. That is another reason it is a 4th level spell.
So that is the two separate steps beyond just interacting "+4 to the save (and potential resave), and automatic disbelief". My GM thinks touching it sends you straight to the "automatic disbelief" stage so they can still see the wall but know its fake.
Chell now thinks touching it is the same as the receiving of a hint that the thing is fake (i.e. someone else telling you its fake) which normally doesn't count as proof the thing is fake anyway, despite plenty of reason a player might trust their cohorts than their own senses in a magical world.
I still think the whole point of the save is as Stranger says, "a failed save indicates that a character fails to notice [that the wall has no texture and potentially some give]" and thus you do or don't notice the wall is fake when you're searching the area (regardless of how you search it) by your result on the save for interacting once you've taken the time to search.
For the record, while we have had some distrust issues (I gm for him and he gm's for me in multiple solo games), and while this particularly isn't over a specific event that has happened, but I am playing an illusionist and we are trying to head off how these spells work ahead of time.
I personally cannot justify a 4th level spell (that is a spell level higher than stone shape which can let you throw up a very real wall a majority of the time) that is instantly overridden by the default assumption of what interaction is. Even further, the implication from this higher level spell down onto other lower level spells on said standard interaction should instantly prove the spell isn't real, is a major turn off from the ruling for the higher spell. The specific example I used with my gm that sparked the debate even was running down a hall (made of stone) and then "stoneshaping" immediately behind myself a wall which was in actuality an illusion of the wall. Most things wouldn't willing slam themselves into a wall of stone, and the few things that would could likely easily break it down anyway, so for anything that would take it as a casting of the real spell, and not simply try to burst through the wall (not knowing it was fake), they just get the save should they try to test the edge or come to a stop skidding into it (not that there is any mechanic to measure that).
|
|
Making a wall with Stone shape?
1) You need a big stone "Target stone or stone object touched, up to 10 cu. ft. + 1 cu. ft./level". It works in a cave, not in any normal building, castles included (real castles aren't made of big stone blocks, they are made of sones that people can move. Only some tower corners are made of larger ones).
2) A 20th level spellcaster can shape 30 cubic feet (it is not a 10 feet cube plus, it is "10 cu. ft. + 1 cu. ft./level").
A typical passage has a width of 5' and a height of 10'. 50 square feet of surface. Our 20th level caster will make a wall with a thickness of 3/5 of an inch. It will have 9 hit points.
3) It is very easy to spot: "While it's possible to make crude coffers, doors, and so forth with stone shape, fine detail isn't possible." You essentially are working the stone as clay, it will not have a natural shape after you have completed your work.
Illusory Wall can be used to permanently hide things. If you cast this on the mouth of a cave and it is not dispelled it will still be there a thousand years later. That and the fact that even if you make your save you still cannot see through it is what makes it 4th level.
This spell is long term solutions, not a quick short term way of hiding. Cast this over a spiked pit and you have permanently upgraded your trap. In this case makes the trap nearly undetectable. A person who is not carefully searching the area gets no save until they walk on the illusion and fall through. The nice thing about this is that it keeps working no matter how many people fall in the pit.
Illusory Wall can be used to permanently hide things. If you cast this on the mouth of a cave and it is not dispelled it will still be there a thousand years later. That and the fact that even if you make your save you still cannot see through it is what makes it 4th level.
This spell is long term solutions, not a quick short term way of hiding. Cast this over a spiked pit and you have permanently upgraded your trap. In this case makes the trap nearly undetectable. A person who is not carefully searching the area gets no save until they walk on the illusion and fall through. The nice thing about this is that it keeps working no matter how many people fall in the pit.
Eh, if the pit gets full enough that bodies rise above opening of the pit trap it's going to stop being so effective.
To the OP, illusion magic in PF1 is really tricky to adjudicate well. Advice I give is that you should always talk to your GM about how they to intend to run illusion magic, and especially spells you're interested in using regularly. Depending on your particular GM illusions (mostly figments and glammers) can range from pathetically useless to incredibly overpowered.
The other thing is that while figments and glamers sound cool to use in a combat situation, I would generally recommend against it. I always remind people that even if commoners don't understand magic well, they're still aware of it. So people of higher level and higher levels of magical understanding have a reasonable line of logic to attempt to ignore something that's just magical appeared in front on them.
Did that wizard just cast stone wall or did they cast an illusion of it? Well if it's block my main path to get to you I'm going to walk up to it and try to go through.
And I think that's probably another recommendation. Don't try to use figments or glammers in front of anyone you don't want to have be suspicious of it in the first place. Which largely just means, don't use those subtypes of illusion magic in combat. The problem comes that at low levels you don't have too many types of illusion magic that aren't those. So if you're interested in being a master of illusion you don't have great choices.
Making a wall with Stone shape?
1) You need a big stone "Target stone or stone object touched, up to 10 cu. ft. + 1 cu. ft./level". It works in a cave, not in any normal building, castles included (real castles aren't made of big stone blocks, they are made of sones that people can move. Only some tower corners are made of larger ones).
2) A 20th level spellcaster can shape 30 cubic feet (it is not a 10 feet cube plus, it is "10 cu. ft. + 1 cu. ft./level").
A typical passage has a width of 5' and a height of 10'. 50 square feet of surface. Our 20th level caster will make a wall with a thickness of 3/5 of an inch. It will have 9 hit points.3) It is very easy to spot: "While it's possible to make crude coffers, doors, and so forth with stone shape, fine detail isn't possible." You essentially are working the stone as clay, it will not have a natural shape after you have completed your work.
That's still 9 hit points (or even 2-3hp at level 7 when you can cast Illusory Wall) after hardness of damage they aren't going to be able to break through without specialized tools (or bludgeoning weapons) as per damaging objects. Somethings might be able to just burst it, if not even punch through it eventually, but that still falls squarely into "interacting" to me.
There's also the fact that "yes, people know of magic" but they certainly don't have the trivial knowledge down to know that it's impossible for even the strongest of casters to make the stone-shaped wall thicker than 3/5th an inch (it's actually 3/5ths of a foot: 30ft3/50ft3=3/5ft; which is 108 hp (38 at level 7), or 54hp (19) if we are being generous and calling it masonry instead of hewn). The point here isn't that it's easy to spot, but that I can toss it up in a standard action and in can very easily impede most aggressors when in an appropriately sized and material'd hallway. The fact that I am now burning a spell level higher that still has all the trappings of just being an illusion by the GM's ruling and varyingly by the group here's rulings, means that I might as well have not cast the spell, because it at best will stop them for a move action instead of potentially until I decide to bring down the wall myself.
The fact that I am now burning a spell level higher that still has all the trappings of just being an illusion by the GM's ruling and varyingly by the group here's rulings, means that I might as well have not cast the spell, because it at best will stop them for a move action instead of potentially until I decide to bring down the wall myself.
Correct. Don't cast figment and glammer illusions in front on the enemy and expect them to be very effective.
A creative use of illusory wall would be to pair it with something more substantial like stone shape for any one of the following:
1) disguise the rough stone wall to better blend with the surrounding walls. (Still requires a large enough stone surface to shape, so it is most useful in a carved stone dungeon) alternatively you can use something like wall of bone wall of ice, force, or any other physical wall spell. Can even put a damaging wall inside the illusion.
2) create an illusory wall of adamantine hidden inside a real wall. So when someone tries to break through they see an adamantine wall and might hesitate to continue. (Other options in a similar vein are to make it seem like the wall is holding back something they don’t want to break through to.
3) create one real wall then an illusory string of fake walls afterwards. Could even put a real wall at a random point within the string of fake walls.
The best way to use illusions is to hide them amid real things. After all that is the basic premise of Shadow spells. A small bit of the real makes something fake seem more real. The more reality is blended with your illusions the more people distrust their own senses and the more easily they succumb to your illusions.
Hide a wall of flame inside an illusory wall and now ememies might be less willing to charge headfirst into your walls as the last one they jumped through burnt them… the next might be acid or even an actual wall… your illusions are more dangerous when enemies fear they might be hiding something more than just where you’re hiding.
Figments and Glamers may not be very good in combat, but they are very good at avoiding it. You just have to use some subtlety and imagination. Using Silent Image to create an illusion of a wall is probably not going to delay anyone that much. But creating an illusion of a pit in the floor will probably slow them down a bit. Chances are anyone pursuing you that see it is going to waste at least a turn trying to avoid falling in. If the caster is known to use pit spells this becomes even more effective. You could also use it to draw the enemy out of position. Simply cast an illusion of your party where you want to the enemy to go. When they move to attack the “party” they are where you want them. Using Silent Image to create an illusion of a wall is probably the least effective way to use it.
There are a few decent combat figments, but they tend to be defensive. Mirror Image is one of the better defensive spells in the game. Illusion of calm is fairly decent, as is Daring Duplicate.
a fun combat use of illusions is using the spell Auditory Hallucination to cause in-fighting... the wording of the spell may seem very limiting with the "all affected targets hear the same thing" line... but it is far less restrictive than it seems at first glance. After all, the illusion is created in the heads of all who are affected. Their minds create the sounds. So while they all hear the same thing, they don't all hear it exactly the same way. You can use it to make two people hear each other insulting the other, and while they both may hear the same insults, they hear them in the voice of the other.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
a fun combat use of illusions is using the spell Auditory Hallucination to cause in-fighting... the wording of the spell may seem very limiting with the "all affected targets hear the same thing" line... but it is far less restrictive than it seems at first glance. After all, the illusion is created in the heads of all who are affected. Their minds create the sounds. So while they all hear the same thing, they don't all hear it exactly the same way. You can use it to make two people hear each other insulting the other, and while they both may hear the same insults, they hear them in the voice of the other.
Interesting if risky I've known GM's who'd treat it as hearing the exact same thing i.e. they all hear NPC A insulted in NPC C's voice not NPC A hears NPC C insult them and NPC C hears NPC A insult them.
a fun combat use of illusions is using the spell Auditory Hallucination to cause in-fighting... the wording of the spell may seem very limiting with the "all affected targets hear the same thing" line... but it is far less restrictive than it seems at first glance. After all, the illusion is created in the heads of all who are affected. Their minds create the sounds. So while they all hear the same thing, they don't all hear it exactly the same way. You can use it to make two people hear each other insulting the other, and while they both may hear the same insults, they hear them in the voice of the other.Interesting if risky I've known GM's who'd treat it as hearing the exact same thing i.e. they all hear NPC A insulted in NPC C's voice not NPC A hears NPC C insult them and NPC C hears NPC A insult them.
Yeah, if I were the GM I would definitely not be running it as Chell suggest, in fact the wording of the spell suggest against it in my opinion. Everyone hears the exact same thing, is how I interpret it.
Yeah, if I were the GM I would definitely not be running it as Chell suggest, in fact the wording of the spell suggest against it in my opinion. Everyone hears the exact same thing, is how I interpret it.a fun combat use of illusions is using the spell Auditory Hallucination to cause in-fighting... the wording of the spell may seem very limiting with the "all affected targets hear the same thing" line... but it is far less restrictive than it seems at first glance. After all, the illusion is created in the heads of all who are affected. Their minds create the sounds. So while they all hear the same thing, they don't all hear it exactly the same way. You can use it to make two people hear each other insulting the other, and while they both may hear the same insults, they hear them in the voice of the other.Interesting if risky I've known GM's who'd treat it as hearing the exact same thing i.e. they all hear NPC A insulted in NPC C's voice not NPC A hears NPC C insult them and NPC C hears NPC A insult them.
That interpretation ignores the bulk of the spells rules though.
“You cause the targets to believe they hear any sound you imagine. The sound can include intelligible speech. Instead of precisely imagining a sound, you can identify a sound the subjects know and they imagine it doing what you describe as you cast the spell. For example, you could cast this spell on orc warriors and have them imagine the sound of their chieftain calling for help, even if you’ve never heard their chieftain and even if the chieftain speaks in a language you don’t understand. All targets hear the same hallucination.”It is pretty clear in how it works… you have two options when casting it.
Option 1) you define an exact sound, and all targets hear it exactly how you imagined it.
Option 2) you define a sound parameter and each subject hears it as their mind would imagine it.
Using the example the spell provides, how would the spell play out if the targets happen to be of two separate tribes of orcs each answering to a different chieftain? You have no idea what their chieftains sound like, you gave the parameter and the spell runs off the targets imagination at that point… Orc A would hear their chieftain bellowing at them in orcish for help, while Orc B might hear their own chieftain screaming in common. They don’t both hear the same chieftain. Furthermore, what if neither Orc has ever heard the other Orc chieftain before? If we assume the spell picks only one chieftain to use the voice of then once again, because the sound is created by the imagination of the target if you choose to define a parameter rather than an exact sound, Orc B would hear the call in how they imagine Orc A’s chieftain to sound which would be unlikely to match the voice that Orc A hears.
Honestly the last line about all targets hearing the same hallucination just means you can’t tailor the hallucination for each target… they all hear the hallucination as you define it, be it an exact sound or their own imagination. The spell has a lot of freedom when using option 2.