RPG Addicts | We Know You're Hooked

It's a tough balancing act between keeping things moving but also staying consistent with the many rules.  I think some of the best moments in a DnD game can happen when the rules are bent a little to propel the story along. For example, I had always thought the "Darkness" spell made an area pitch-black, like a thick milky darkness, until someone pointed out the actual wording of the spell. "This spell causes an object to radiate shadowy illumination out to a 20-foot radius. All creatures in the area gain concealment (20% miss chance). Even creatures that can normally see in such conditions (such as with darkvision or low-light vision) have the miss chance in an area shrouded in magical darkness."  That day I learned it was possible to illuminate a dark cavern with Darkness  If I had followed the description of the spell previously though, the same guy who pointed out how this spell actually works would never had been able to beat the Orc chieftain, taken command of the tribe, reach level 12, and single handedly kill all my big bad bosses!  His character would have died at level 6. 

Pbp is nice for holding multiple conversations while the game still goes on and you have done a great job with keeping a dialogue open to discuss rules.  Sometimes rules lawyering is fun too  But if things get fudged a little along the way I just say that it was Divine Intervention.



About Shanna's illusion, I think it was very clever! I think any movements that are meant as part of the illusion are inherent to the magic of the spell, so if the barrels were meant to move then they move.  If an illusion spell requires concentration then the caster has to make those concentration checks but shouldn't prevent her from casting other spells.  I was worried that illusions don't work on vermin because they are immune to mind-affecting effects, but illusions fall outside those effects  Because the Mantis are interacting directly with the illusion a +2 to disbelieve is within reason but not necessary per the description of the spell. Of course the spell implies that their is no will save unless it is interacted with.  This what makes them powerful if used wisely!  I think any disabling effects from having illusory barrels on your head should be no greater than other 1st level spell effects, like color spray (knocks unconscious, blinds, and/or stuns weak creatures)

Oddly enough, to disbelieve an illusion one has to still see it.  So while the Mantis can see through the illusion they, like everyone else, still see what the illusion is.  Speaking of seeing illusions, the entire party sees barrels on the Mantis heads unless SG is close enough that he's being eaten hehe.

Here's a question for you, if I handed an illusory torch to someone and they believe it is real, does it illuminate a dark place just because they believe it does?

Similar question is whether you can walk across an illusory pavement concealing a pit trap. You believe you can but you don't defy physics.

You hallucinate that you can see at the torchlight but it's either your memory or your imagination that's reflected in your brain. You imitate walking along a corridor while those who can see through the illusion can see you leaning against a wall and attempting to step forward into solid rock.

You think you are walking but then all of a sudden suffer concussion and pierced wounds from the trap, immediately allowing you a new saving throw.

I begin to understand why this (otherwise beautiful) way of handling illusions is ditched in 3E. :-) it's storytelling with lousy rules, freestyle and enjoyable but not really business...

Tapatalkkal küldve az én ALE-L21 eszközömről

(01-17-2018, 03:24 PM)DM Surranó Wrote: [ -> ]I will crosscheck the early conversation but I like the "believe" part providing a false feedforward to the tactile sensors. Conveninently, I can do so because the successful saves prevent this question from aborting the flow of things.
Behind the scenes, recently I've been trying to embrace the "flow with the story, ruling whatever makes sense" way instead of heavy rules-debates.

But there are spells that tick the mind into believing they are real.  But Silent Image doesn't happen to be one of those spell.  When someone tries to touch a silent image their hand goes right through the figment so they automatically know it's not real.  It isn't until the caster gets Shadow Conjuration (5th) does an arcane caster begin to be able to create objects that you can touch and do damage.

Quote:About the barrels being able to move with the heads; I guess the heads have to move for that, and Shanna has to react on that, fast enough, and precisely enough, but (funny as it sounds) she has to see through her own illusion in the first place to be able to do so (shouldn't be that hard but still there's a chance for failure).

The caster is the person creating the Silent image so she knows the silent image is fake so she can automatically see through the illusion.  As highlighted below, once you know it's an illusion you can automatically see through the image.

Rules of the Game: All About Illusions (Part 1) Wrote:Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief ): Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion. For example, if a party encounters a section of illusory floor, the character in the lead would receive a saving throw if she stopped and studied the floor or if she probed the floor.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment [Which is what a Silent Image is] or phantasm remains as a translucent outline. For example, a character making a successful saving throw against a figment of an illusory section of floor knows the "floor" isn't safe to walk on and can see what lies below (light permitting), but he or she can still note where the figment lies.

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. A character who falls through a section of illusory floor into a pit knows something is amiss, as does one who spends a few rounds poking at the same illusion. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.

DM Surrano Wrote:That said, I guess these insects don't bite like mammals, hurling their heads forward. Rather, they use their mandibles in place... or something like that. But truth be told, I never thought about whether moving the objects could be done while it's not your round or not. What do you all think? Should it be immediate like speech, as part of concentration?

I believe that the caster's mind is quick enough to be able to anticipate most movements but I will do more research on this.

(01-17-2018, 04:23 PM)Lugar Wrote: [ -> ]Here's a question for you, if I handed an illusory torch to someone and they believe it is real, does it illuminate a dark place just because they believe it does?

I'm pretty sure Illusions cannot create light.

I've been reading up on illusion disbelief now, like many others I suppose One interesting point of view on automatic disbelief I read was, that in a universe with magic and magical creatures automatic disbelief of the strange isn't so easy. Just because I stick my hand through a wall doesn't mean I know it's an illusion, it could be a number of other weird phenomena, but it would be suspicious. If I created a silent image of a ghostly figure, sticking your hand through it wouldn't be suspicious at all. If I create an illusory ninja that doesn't make a sound, that's possible. Or a double axe weilding barbarian with an assortment of magical looking objects not making a sound doesn't mean I know it is an illusion. Even if I my weapon passed through him doesn't mean I automatically know he's not real. He could be using magic like sculpt sound or silence, blink even! Same goes for ventriloquism and other auditory illusions, so many terrible creatures can become invisible at will! Now I do think characters experienced with magic spells and illusions have a better chance to spot an illusion using other abilities besides will saves, like spellcraft.

(01-17-2018, 05:19 PM)Toot Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-17-2018, 04:23 PM)Lugar Wrote: [ -> ]Here's a question for you, if I handed an illusory torch to someone and they believe it is real, does it illuminate a dark place just because they believe it does?

I'm pretty sure Illusions cannot create light.

Haha, yes. DM Surrano gave some good examples about the physics behind it!  The question did have me scratching my head for a moment or two.

(01-17-2018, 05:27 PM)Lugar Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-17-2018, 05:19 PM)Toot Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-17-2018, 04:23 PM)Lugar Wrote: [ -> ]Here's a question for you, if I handed an illusory torch to someone and they believe it is real, does it illuminate a dark place just because they believe it does?

I'm pretty sure Illusions cannot create light.

Haha, yes. DM Surrano gave some good examples about the physics behind it!  The question did have me scratching my head for a moment or two.

But lets say the caster is in a dark room and has dark vision, could he create an illusion of the room he's looking at with his dark vision but lit up so his companions could see?

I'm pretty sure illusion (as the big school) can create light.
What's more I can't see why even a figment couldn't create light.

Quote: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.

So patterns are like figments, except also mind-affecting. Nowhere mentioning the difference of being able to create lights. Now let's check a random pattern spell.

Quote:Scintillating Pattern
Illusion (Pattern) [Mind-Affecting]
...
Effect: Colorful lights in a 20-ft.-radius spread

Hypnotic Pattern
Illusion (Pattern) [Mind-Affecting]
...
Effect: Colorful lights in a 10-ft.-radius spread

As long as this does not open a loophole (e.g., you could replace Continual Flame with a first level illusion or a cantrip, and maybe it even worked waaaay better) I would say it's possible.
Now that I'm writing this it occurred to me that the opposite is also an interesting question: can you cover a continual flame with a figment of a barrel, effectively suppressing a 2nd level spell? I think you can, since you can do the same by dropping a nonmagical cloak over the light source. Plus, the cloak does not need concentration to maintain

Concerning my past ruling and briefly summarising that conversation; my wording above (like interaction means automatically successful disbelief) was incorrect. It is proof that means automatic disbelief. What we discussed in that conversation is the fine line between the two terms. Sadly, PHB wording is ambiguous and Skip Williams' article to clarify actually leaves no gap for the save. What he wrote effectively means "you either interact and then you have proof and thus no save needed, or you don't interact and thus no save allowed."

On the same note, and I think you are right about the caster and I felt something was fishy here. The caster can see through the figment but not because she's the caster; more because she knows for a fact that it is an illusion (i.e. it is proven to her). On the other hand, if she had some mental condition, like short-term amnesia, so that by the time she'd finished the spell she'd forgotten about what she'd just done, then she would have no proof, thus, not even a chance to save until she interacted with the figment.

The only thing to be clarified is whether Shanna could move the object* along so that the mantises couldn't reach it with their bite attacks. On one hand it's a question of mental agility, sense of balance, your proficiency in your art of magic, and whatnot, raising the question whether this move is continuous (in which case concentrating on the spell should be a full round action, I guess) or only done on the caster's turn. On the other hand, the spell specifically states that the object has AC 10 plus size modifier. If it has an AC but you can simply move it along with concentration so that it dodges all attacks then doesn't it have a Dodge bonus of plus infinity?

Bottom line, I feel I subconsciously did the right thing when rolling Will saves for the critters.

*object: yes, it's a single object: two barrels interlocked by a chain, to reflect the spell description. I made this alteration to Shanna's description to avoid the hassle of having her make up a single object that does the trick (splitting hairs, really. no effect here.)

Re PF ruling of ability penalty / damage / drain: interesting, especially why ToI is an exception. I believe that in our PF game I said that I would like to play damage and penalty affecting things outside pure ability mods, like carrying capacity, AC modifier, hit point modifier, and yes, prerequisites to feats and spellcasting. I will think about it. It just makes sooo much sense that someone with so much strength damage would collapse under the sheer weight of his own equipment, or the rogue suffering from poisonous fumes (con damage) breaks into a coughing fit.

Concerning 3.5, though, I cannot see such difference. The wording in my copy of 3.5 DMG is: (no idea whether there's an errata)

Quote:Various attacks cause ability score loss, either ability damage or ability drain.
(...)
Some spells or abilities impose an effective ability score reduction, which is different from ability score loss. Any such reduction disappears at the end of the spell’s or ability’s duration, and the ability score immediately returns to its former value.
If a character’s Constitution score drops, then he loses 1 hit point per Hit Die for every point by which his Constitution modifier drops.
(...)

Nowhere does the text imply that the reduction would apply only to this aspect of an ability score or the other (modifier, carrying capacity, or feat prerequisites). On the contrary, it explicitly mentions that the score itself (and not some derivative of the score) returns at the end of the effect, and that reduction in constitution affects HP. (fun fact: it does not state whether it's current hp damage or max hp reduction but we can safely assume that both values are reduced at this point)

On the other hand, when you receive a negative level, it's not one level of your everything that's removed. E.g. you lose 5hp regardless whether you are a wizard or a barbarian and independently from your constitution or your last hit die roll. (in 2E there were no negative levels only level DRAINS, dreaded things, and for this purpose we always kept track of all our rolled hit dice. Suffering a single hit from a wight or a spectre was practically end of your career and a trivial reload condition in most computer games.)

I think you're overcomplicating it.  I don't believe the spell allows continuous movement in the sense that it can automatically dodge and weave and scoot out of the way.  But if the illusion that's created is meant to move it will react like any similar object.  If someone dropped a barrel on a mantis's head it would move around as if a real barrel was on it's head.  The mantis can attempt to touch it or attack it just like it was a real barrel and when it does it would get a save throw.  But many animals will relax and go quiet when their eyes are covered.  It would be up to the DM to decide if blinding a creature will calm it down.  If the caster created a barrel with wings then the targets should get a save.  If the caster can do or say something to make the targets think he's using telekinesis then they may not get a save until they try to interact with the barrel. 

RE Light: I agree that it should be able to create light but I'm sure I read somewhere that it just can't.  When I have time I will look for it.  Perhaps it was even in Sage Advice and I know that's a dirty word to some people.  I think the issue with light is that you can create a flaming torch but since the light from the torch is fake, it doesn't actually shed any radiance.  It's kind of like taking a picture of a bonfire.  Sure it looks like a fire but it's obviously not going to shed an light.

There is a spell from a 3rd party source that allows the caster to steal another caster's mirror images and causes all the faces to turn angry.  I believe the images begin attacking the original caster or distracts him.  I've always thought the spell was a cool idea and it could be expanded upon for another wizard to be able to steal another wizard's illusions.  A Phantasmal Killer suddenly turning on the its original caster would be pretty cool.