It came up in a completely different thread but is worth talking about from a rules perspective. It feels like the auditory trait is used a little haphazardly on spells like illusory creature.
Generally the auditory trait means the caster needs to audibly make noise to cast the spell and the target has to be able to hear to be affected by it, but in this case it seems more like a flag to say the illusory creature is capable of making noise.
This, to me, is doubly problematic because if an illusory creature can make noise, than a creature that cannot see it should be just as affected by the sound of it as a creature that can see it, right? Or is this some weird “heightened other senses” trope where you have to be able to see and hear the creature to be affected by it?
I am thinking the right errata move is remove the auditory trait but that maybe doesn’t deal with “can’t see the illusory creature can’t be hurt by it” which is maybe intended.
I think your errata proposal makes sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Illusory Creature: "The image can't speak, but you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate. You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM. This is especially likely if you're trying to imitate a specific person and engage with someone that person knows." This is why it has Auditory.
Wouldn’t that be the linguistic trait, not the auditory? It seems like part of the problem here is that the auditory trait includes the need for the caster to be able to make the noise, where as the visual and olfactory traits don’t have that same requirement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn’t that be the linguistic trait, not the auditory? It seems like part of the problem here is that the auditory trait includes the need for the caster to be able to make the noise, where as the visual and olfactory traits don’t have that same requirement.
"You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM."
Lie has Auditory, Concentrate, Linguistic, Mental, and Secret. Performance Act is Auditory, Linguistic, and Visual. If anything, I'd say the spell should add Linguistic, not remove Auditory. The thing to remember is that there is no need to speak in an identifiable language, the requirement for Linguistic. They could grunt, clear their throat, click their tongue, ect that doesn't require a specific language but conveys their meaning and/or fits their character. Linguistic would be a nested optional Trait that is only needed if another nested optional Trait, Auditory, is used So I can't see removing Auditory. The vast majority of things with Linguistic also include Auditory and I'd argue that the few that don't, should.
But does the caster have to be able to speak for the illusion to speak? The caster doesn’t have to be visible for the illusion to be be visible or produce odors for the illusion to produce odors. The auditory trait is more complicated than the other sensory traits.
Like I agree that someone needs to be able to hear the source of the sound, but adding the caster into that feels like a needless complication for a spell like illusory creature.
But does the caster have to be able to speak for the illusion to speak?
"you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate." Looks like Yes, you have to speak, else there would be no reason to disguise your voice. If you're making a voice not your own, there'd be no reason to disguise it.
Now there is the question if the casters voice can be heard while he speaks through the illusion. Unknown and up to the DM. IMO, he can be heard.
Look at Message: "You mouth words quietly, but instead of coming out of your mouth, they're transferred directly to the ears of the target." Note that the spell has Subtle, allowing it to be done stealthily, something Illusory Creature doesn't have. I'd expect something like what's in Message if the caster doesn't have to Speak.
Illusory Creature: "The image can't speak, but you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate. You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM. This is especially likely if you're trying to imitate a specific person and engage with someone that person knows." This is why it has Auditory.
Considering the mess of ambiguity and subjective adjudication that Immunity and complex effects causes, it would be really nice if the spell only tagged this particular piece of the spell's effect with the Auditory trait instead of the entire spell.
Otherwise there are going to be plenty of GMs who rule that if a creature is immune to Auditory effects, that none of the spell affects them.
Illusory Creature: "The image can't speak, but you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate. You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM. This is especially likely if you're trying to imitate a specific person and engage with someone that person knows." This is why it has Auditory.Considering the mess of ambiguity and subjective adjudication that Immunity and complex effects causes, it would be really nice if the spell only tagged this particular piece of the spell's effect with the Auditory trait instead of the entire spell.
Otherwise there are going to be plenty of GMs who rule that if a creature is immune to Auditory effects, that none of the spell affects them.
I don't disagree. However, did you notice all of the traits? Auditory, Concentrate, Illusion, Manipulate, Olfactory, Visual. If you have a Dm that doesn't read and understand the spell, a creature that can't smell, hear and/or see is immune to the spell even if they can sense one of the other traits. So something with no sense of smell would be immune even if the spell never created any scents.
So, the spell should really move the sense Traits off the main spell and add them to the spell text for the individual effects.
EDIT: I will also note that the sense traits do say 'This applies only to [sound-based/olfactory/visual] parts of the effect, as determined by the GM.' So the trait already silos effects from the spell as a whole.
Except that the auditory trait has the extra complexity of the caster needing to be able to make the sound, thus it creates extra complications for the spell itself to have it or for the specific part about creatures making noise.
I think it makes much more sense to remove all of the sensory traits from this spell, and perhaps illusions as a whole because the complexity of multiple senses interacting with each other and how that affects illusions is too complicated. If anything, the illusion tag should clarify all of this without the need for those extra tags.
Except that the auditory trait has the extra complexity of the caster needing to be able to make the sound, thus it creates extra complications for the spell itself to have it or for the specific part about creatures making noise.
Actually, it's spellcasting that requires the caster to make noise as the spell doesn't have Subtle. "Casting a spell requires the caster to make gestures and utter incantations, so being unable to speak prevents spellcasting for most casters." So I'm not seeing anything lost because you might have to make noise after you just made noise. :P
I think it makes much more sense to remove all of the sensory traits from this spell, and perhaps illusions as a whole because the complexity of multiple senses interacting with each other and how that affects illusions is too complicated. If anything, the illusion tag should clarify all of this without the need for those extra tags.
Maybe? Maybe not. After some thought, I like those traits as I can, at a glance, tell what senses the illusions covers without even diving into the text.