I want to believe

[Moff_Tarkin]

The argument keeps revolving around the Will save. But we made the claim the body was a fake before the will save was made. Our next logical step, had we not been interrupted by the call for a Will save, would have been to do an investigation to find the real corpse. Detect magic is the first step in any and all such investigations due to its low level and infinite uses. Like I said previously, it’s a spell that always takes up every one of our casters level 0 slots, and always runs out by the end of the day.

There hasn’t been an argument made yet that didn’t involve the implication that we had out of character knowledge of a failed save. “your trying to ignore the save, your trying to disprove the save, etc.” But how would you explain the fact the we decided the body was a fake before a save was called for.

It’s been said a missing kama wouldn’t be enough to convince us the corpse was a decoy, but it was. It’s be argued that we cant know a corpse is a fake without out of character knowledge of a failed Will save, but we did. Can someone at least explain to me why everyone is making the argument that something which actually happened couldn’t happen?

 

[Theroc]

The argument keeps revolving around the Will save. But we made the claim the body was a fake before the will save was made. Our next logical step, had we not been interrupted by the call for a Will save, would have been to do an investigation to find the real corpse. Detect magic is the first step in any and all such investigations due to its low level and infinite uses. Like I said previously, it’s a spell that always takes up every one of our casters level 0 slots, and always runs out by the end of the day.

There hasn’t been an argument made yet that didn’t involve the implication that we had out of character knowledge of a failed save. “your trying to ignore the save, your trying to disprove the save, etc.” But how would you explain the fact the we decided the body was a fake before a save was called for.

It’s been said a missing kama wouldn’t be enough to convince us the corpse was a decoy, but it was. It’s be argued that we cant know a corpse is a fake without out of character knowledge of a failed Will save, but we did. Can someone at least explain to me why everyone is making the argument that something which actually happened couldn’t happen?

I explain it by saying this...

"You came to an illogical conclusion contrary to evidence." You can be wrong you know. Just because you jumped to a conclusion doesn't mean evidence supports it.

You kept saying ILLUSION. If you do a disbelieve check on the illusion, chances are you don't think it's an illusion... since that's the entire purpose of the check.

A Decoy is not necessarily an illusion. You assumed illusion even after the save (Which should have allayed your character's suspicion of illusions, unless he was consistently portrayed as paranoid) and kept trying to find the illusion 'or trick'. But illusion was the phrase you used most in almost all of your arguments.

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

Let me see if I understand the argument people are making. Are you saying that the situation should have played out as follows?

Player: “I think this body is a fake”

{He fails his Will save}

Player: “No, on second thought it looks pretty real.”

If that’s the argument your making, it sounds pretty logical. But I think my counter argument has some validity as well. Let my try to break down my counter argument as simply as I can.

We believed the body a fake with no out of character knowledge and before Will saves were even called for. The key question is “what was the reason for us to believe the body was a fake” The answer is the missing kama.

Now, the failed Will save may help to allay our characters suspicions. But if the reason we initially called the body a fake (i.e. the missing kama) continues to persist. Why would we not continue to think the body was fake?

The only argument I can think of is that our characters initially saw the missing kama as proof of a fake, but after the failed save we were forced to rationalize why it wasn’t there. Which brings us back to the original point of discussion, can a failed Will save force our characters to make such rationalizations.

 

[irdeggman]

Let me see if I understand the argument people are making. Are you saying that the situation should have played out as follows?

Player: “I think this body is a fake”

{He fails his Will save}

Player: “No, on second thought it looks pretty real.”

If that’s the argument your making, it sounds pretty logical. But I think my counter argument has some validity as well. Let my try to break down my counter argument as simply as I can.

We believed the body a fake with no out of character knowledge and before Will saves were even called for. The key question is “what was the reason for us to believe the body was a fake” The answer is the missing kama.

Now, the failed Will save may help to allay our characters suspicions. But if the reason we initially called the body a fake (i.e. the missing kama) continues to persist. Why would we not continue to think the body was fake?

The only argument I can think of is that our characters initially saw the missing kama as proof of a fake, but after the failed save we were forced to rationalize why it wasn’t there. Which brings us back to the original point of discussion, can a failed Will save force our characters to make such rationalizations.

The answer is yes it can - that is the entire point of such things. Your characters must in fact do so. This is not a compulsion effect this is an character knowledge thing. When acting with knowledge that the character does not have you end up with the metagaming claim. The characters have no knowledge (in fact they have knowledge to the contrary thanks to the failed save against illusion) that the body in the coffin is an illusion of the vampire.

The failed will save against the illusion had your characters believe that the body looked and felt (evidently the way your DM rules illusions - which I disagree with by the way, but he has consistently done so in your game so you as players know that is how they should be played) just like the intended illusion (in this case the vampire).

So the characters believe that the body looks and feels just like the vampire.

The only question is what happened to the kama?

Searching for the kama is a logical path and methods used to do so can be logically (and in-character) rationalized - but attempting to prove the body is an illusion can not.

Checking to see if it was polymorphed is not the same as checking to see if it was an illusion - although a tad shaky on justification it is still within the realms of possibilities to the PCs.

I don't think I would have had any problem with the PCs asking for a detect magic to check for trickery (in essence looking for the kama) if they had not specifically mentioned to check for an illusion - that is the one thing they are supposed to be convinced it is not at this point in time.

Although looking at polymorph - it probably wouldn't have been possible to do this. A dead body is not a willing living target - and if the vampire and subsequently killed the creature such marks would have been potentially seen as well as the duration of the spell itself (1 min/level) makes it an unlikely possibility.

Polymorph any object on the other hand - but it is an 8th level spell. I don't know what level of character the group is looking at since that information was not supplied.

A spellcraft check could have been used to determine on-going effects also - see Rules Compendium pg 138 for the latest ways to use the skill (a really, really useful skill by the way). It can also be used to determine objects shaped or created by magic when studied.

How long has this group of players gamed together?

How long as this been your DM?

Depending on the real life relationships it might be worth looking for a different DM/group becasue of how this DM runs certain aspects of the game (like illusions) - but that is something different to the subject at hand, the other 2 questions help to lay the groundwork for how long the players have had to get acustomed to how the DM runs his game.

How did the PCs know the kama was magical?

How much experience have the PCs had in dealing with vampires?

These are 2 other questions that are relatable to how much player knowledge versus PC knowledge is being used in the game. All of this can have an effect on how your DM feels the game is going and potentially lead to why he got so adjutated.

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

The vampire was standing right next to his coffin. When we defeated him, his gaseous from traveled strait into the coffin, which we opened immediately. He didn’t really have time to “ditch” the kama anywhere, which is why the missing kama is such a big clue.

I didn’t want to make this argument because its open to the obvious attack of “your characters don know how gaseous form works. But I don’t think it’s too hard to figure out. Obviously, when he turns to gas and goes to reform in his coffin his stuff goes with him. His clothes were on him after all.

But where was the kama? It didn’t fall to the ground when he changed, so he obviously he took it with him. Unless you want to make the claim that it was some sort of “shadow illusion” kama that dissipated. That’s kind of an “out there” idea that I don’t think would have popped into our characters heads. I only just thought of it myself because I was considering possible counter arguments for the one I just made.

And I don’t understand why people were asking how we knew it was magical. I honestly cant remember if we had proof. I think we just assumed it was because when a BEBG is whacking you with a seriously damaging weapon, you tend to think, “It’s got to be magical.” That’s a train of thought that makes since for players and characters.

But the reason I don’t get the question is that I don’t see why it matters. In fact, if the kama was non-magical, it would be harder to explain its disappearance. If the kama was enchanted in some way, it would be slightly easier to believe that it managed to whisk itself way. Not much easier, but slighty.

 

[Foxworthy]

Let me see if I understand the argument people are making. Are you saying that the situation should have played out as follows?

Player: “I think this body is a fake”

{He fails his Will save}

Player: “No, on second thought it looks pretty real.”

If that’s the argument your making, it sounds pretty logical. But I think my counter argument has some validity as well. Let my try to break down my counter argument as simply as I can.

My argument is more like this.

Player: “I think this body is a fake”

{He fails his Will save, The character as such, doesn't believe anything is amiss in regards to an illusion}

Player: “Ok, it's not an illusion. Is there any other way for the vampire to have a fake body that looks like him? Could it be under the effects of gentle repose? What do the rest of you think?”

 

[irdeggman]

And I don’t understand why people were asking how we knew it was magical. I honestly cant remember if we had proof. I think we just assumed it was because when a BEBG is whacking you with a seriously damaging weapon, you tend to think, “It’s got to be magical.” That’s a train of thought that makes since for players and characters.

But the reason I don’t get the question is that I don’t see why it matters. In fact, if the kama was non-magical, it would be harder to explain its disappearance. If the kama was enchanted in some way, it would be slightly easier to believe that it managed to whisk itself way. Not much easier, but slighty.

Well, you do know that base vampire with any sort of weapon does a ton of damage to start with right? So the seriously damaging part is a stretch to begin with. It gets a base +6 Str just by the template, not even counting any base racial modifiers or level boosts.

So locking on the fact that it was the weapon itself that was so magical that it was behind it is pretty "out there".


Was this the first time you've come across a vampire or did you not know how strong they were as a base vampire?

 

[Rafe]

Though this thread may have run its course already, I think the bigger picture has been missed in the discussion ranging over these 9 pages.

We opened a door in this dungeon to reveal a vampire sitting on a throne, next to a stone coffin. We kill the vampire, whose gaseous form travels into the coffin. Upon opening the coffin we find the body

There's a sarcophagus next to him. The party and the vampire fight. The vampire clearly doesn't "die" (as said above) since it went into gaseous form to go into the sarcophagus.

Here's the real thing: The DM didn't screw up the Will save stuff (though it should never have come to that), and metagaming shouldn't have even become an issue. The DM should have played the vampire as being clever, which vampires are. He didn't. The DM metagamed, or gambled in the hopes to do so.

What creature, sentient or not, would escape by traveling five feet, into a stone box and lay down to be killed? Forget the kama. It would have been an additional piece of proof, but the real issue was that the DM wanted the players to get screwed by the illusion even though no one would have been.

The obvious assumption is that the vampire's not in the coffin. No Will save for the illusion. It's completely ridiculous for the DM to have thought the PCs would be fooled. They all had a huge reason to be disbelieving.

Had the DM wanted to mess with them via an illusion, he'd have had the vampire escape in gaseous form into a room under the throne (holes in the floor or a grate). The vampire can get down there faster than the PCs can, easily. When the PCs get down, the room is empty, but there's a poorly concealed secret door (low DC). The PCs go through it. Too bad the vampire went through a second one in the room that was actually well hidden. At the end of a short corridor the PCs have gone into via the secret door is a small room with a sarcophagus. In that is the illusion. That would be believed, until interacted with. However, by that point, the vampire is way ahead of the party, and the party still has to find something they missed, which could have been nothing more than a crack in a wall. No secret door, nothing. Just a crack through which the gaseous vampire could pass. The PCs have no clue and the DM hasn't given any hints.

The scenario the DM gave was simply not believable. No Will save. No metagaming. The PCs had great reason to think it was fake. The players thought it was fake. The DM started blocking their attempts to discover what was happening because he failed to plan and wanted mechanics to screw the players, hoping for failed Will saves to cover him. Hell, he didn't even want to allow Will saves initially.

What proceeded from that was players vs DM, not player info vs PC info.

 

[Starbuck_II]

That is a good point. Why would he hide a few feet away from him to rest...

The vampire's scenerio seems less likely to make sense.

So the clues without metagaming:
a. Kama missing (big clue)
b. Vampire gaseous forms only 5 feet to rest (bigger clue)
c. Body is defeated too easily (minor clue)

 

[irdeggman]

All true - assuming that the PC's know about vampires and what they do and how they behave.

But since there was a disbelief save (and this DM has by the OP's description) run illusions in a very non-RAW method things are different.

Once that path was gone down, well that is how we got where we are.

The question is not, not whether or not the DM ran things properly (based solely on the OPs posts) I pretty much think all of us believe he did not.

The question asked was in essence what does a disbelief saving throw mean?

What does it mean when you pass and what does it mean when you fail?

If the OP had asked us whether or not we thought there should have been a saving trhow required or whether or not the DM ran things properly would have yielded, IMO, much different answers then the ones he got for the question he asked.