D&D 5E How does the Phantasmal Force spell work correctly?

[CapnZapp]

My view is that you CAN chain someone, however if they take an action to break out of the chains, their strength check would automatically succeed. If they're determined to strain against the illusion, it cannot hold them, so their mind will rationalize that as the chains breaking.

The problem with this is that the spell doesn't let you off the hook without making that Int check.

They taking an action to break out of chains that does not really exist would not be a strength check, it would count as the Investigation check in my book. But it wouldn't be automatic. Failure would mean the target would rationalize how he could move his arms despite being chained up.

 

[CapnZapp]

[*]The target can suffer status effects, if the illusion forces them (e.g. black container around head = blinded; chains around arms/legs = prone/stunned, etc.). These status effects are suffered, because the target acts like they would be real (analogous to getting damage, because of fighting a monster that doesn't exist -> spell description).

What I don't understand is, how doesn't this make the spell the best 2nd level debuff spell in the PHB?

By far. I mean, to me, it would be natural to question any interpretation that so clearly goes outside what a 2nd level can normally do.

 

[lkwpeter]

Yeah, to make that happen the actual floor has to disappear. You could not see "the floor going down" because the actual floor would still be there.

I changed my mind. Your arguments sound reasonable to me. The rules say "On a failed save, you create a phantasmal object, creature. or other visible phenomenon of your choice..." (PHB 264). I believe that makes it quite clear. Otherwise, I would have no problems, if my DM would allow things like an illusion of a pit, because it's simply not game changing.

Furthermore I found some very interesting argumentation on reddit concerning chaining/caging creatures with PF:

Yeah, you kind of can. The creature rationalizes inconsistent stuff that happens with the spell. So it probably wouldn't work well with chains...when they pushed their arm against the chain, their arm would phase through it. They would rationalize this as having been able to somehow free their arm, and would be able to slip out of the chains pretty easily, since nothing was actually restricting them.

On the other hand, if you made a cage of red-hot spikes surrounding them, they would feel the heat and probably not be testing whether they could just walking right through them. They would probably inspect it pretty quickly though, since they're kinda stuck there with nothing better to do.

The illusion can't directly affect the target other than the psychic damage. You won't be able to tie a dragon's wings together because that would require moving them. You can create an illusionary cage around someone, but it will only work if they don't even attempt escaping. If they try to, they'll just pass through the bars. They'll still think the cage is there, but they just rationalize how they escaped it.

So, to sum this up I believe the key is that you can't directly affect the target phyiscally. Instead, you need to create something, so that the creature acts the way you want it to. The example of the fire cage above is the best way to describe it. That also means that chaining a person is not possible, because its arms/legs would simply go through the illusion. The creatrure would afterwards rationalize its escape in some way - but it would be free.

I think concerning this makes the spell suitable for level 2. Otherwise it would be too powerful and overlap with other spells.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The problem with this is that the spell doesn't let you off the hook without making that Int check.

They taking an action to break out of chains that does not really exist would not be a strength check, it would count as the Investigation check in my book. But it wouldn't be automatic. Failure would mean the target would rationalize how he could move his arms despite being chained up.

Why does he have to remain chained up? You created an illusion of the chains. The target won't disbelieve the illusion unless he makes his check.

However he CAN rationalize moving his arms while the chains exist: He broke free of them.

What I don't understand is, how doesn't this make the spell the best 2nd level debuff spell in the PHB?

By far. I mean, to me, it would be natural to question any interpretation that so clearly goes outside what a 2nd level can normally do.

Because you interpret it how I have above: you can slap almost any status effect you want on someone... but they can typically take actions to free themselves, and you cannot make them remain constrained, even if they never succeed at their investigation check. The spell only really works if the subject thinks they cannot just walk out of their restraints.

So instead of creating a set of manacles with no way out, create a set of manacles with a puzzle. The manacles are loose and go into some unknown mechanism in the wall. In front of the subject is a key on a pedestal. Pulling on the manacle chain causes a bladed cover to descend over the key. You can juuuuust get your fingers into the path of the blade by reaching.

There: an intelligent subject will try to puzzle their way out, probably taking damage from the illusion a few times, and certainly wasting more than 6 seconds trying to work out what's going on. I wouldn't expect most adventurers to immediately
a) try to muscle their way out of the chains (which will work immediately)
b) carefully inspect the trap (which grants an investigation check)

I'd expect them to try to reach the key, withdraw when the blade comes down, try again and get hit by the blade, look for an item on their person that they can knock the key down with and then attempt that, etc etc. Eventually they'll stop and just inspect the mechanism or get sick of it and try to break out: but you've bought yourself a few rounds of the illusion working by making them think they can get out in some specific way.

 

[ThePolarBear]

I changed my mind. Your arguments sound reasonable to me. The rules say "On a failed save, you create a phantasmal object, creature. or other visible phenomenon of your choice..." (PHB 264). I believe that makes it quite clear. Otherwise, I would have no problems, if my DM would allow things like an illusion of a pit, because it's simply not game changing.

Absolutely not game changing, i agree. I find it's just more consistent to rule it that way for any illusion that does not specifically allow such a change. It helps avoiding possible problems.

Furthermore I found some very interesting argumentation on reddit concerning chaining/caging creatures with PF:


So, to sum this up I believe the key is that you can't directly affect the target phyiscally. Instead, you need to create something, so that the creature acts the way you want it to. The example of the fire cage above is the best way to describe it. That also means that chaining a person is not possible, because its arms/legs would simply go through the illusion. The creatrure would afterwards rationalize its escape in some way - but it would be free.

I think concerning this makes the spell suitable for level 2. Otherwise it would be too powerful and overlap with other spells.

It is impossible to restrain physically a person with an illusion. It's not however force it to make her believe to be restrained. If you allow the bucket on the head - blindness - then you should consider that the illusion somewhat follows the person in his movements - a creature in combat or... well... pretty much always is in motion - and said motion would VERY likely make the person see the flying bucket from the outside, causing a rationalization of what happened, even before his turn could come up. That, or the "chains at feet/hands" behave in the same way: Until out of the area, the chains would follow. There's no resistance - well, minimal: there is tactile feedback - but the fact that the chains are still there should follow as much as the bucket should follow.

That is why i proposed "red hot chains" and not common chains. The idea is to cause what would be the most normal reaction: Take the chains off since those are searing hot. It's a check to see throug the illusion? Ok, good. It's still 1d6 damage and the possibility to somewhat control what the person would do. If said chains are at the feets, it's very likely for that person to be panicking on the ground trying to take the chains off since "those things hurt".

By the way: Still my opinion. Most likely the spell was intented as an "area denial", since the effect is limited in a 10 by 10 cube and even the damage can't extend more than 5' outside said area. I just prefer giving a little freedom to a player to come up with something nice ("spice it up and it's ok for me") while still having some limits to adhere to (number of items, creatures, no disappear when there's no text for that and so on). Make your intent clear, short 1 - 2 of "can i?" "too much, prehaps this?" "Yes/no". My table can make it work but i can see how other tables might not be able to for a whole lot of reason (and none of those being bad players/bad dm)

edit: I can see the point made. It would not change the outcome to have a small cage with many pointy edges. While the creature is really not going to be kept inside between the appearing of the cage and his turn it would probably try not to move uncautiously to avoid being impaled. Even with a sword falling on them. "It's not going to be able to strike me from that angle, it's going to hit the cage! Oh my, i'll have to pay attention to possible vibrations or movements of the cage!!!"

It's really about what you place as limits and how much you want the illusion to screw up with the person. An illusionary pool of lava would not burn the person, but the person would still believe to be burning. A bear would still maul the person, a ringing bell would still ring. Why manacles should just slip off?

So instead of creating a set of manacles with no way out, create a set of manacles with a puzzle. The manacles are loose and go into some unknown mechanism in the wall. In front of the subject is a key on a pedestal. Pulling on the manacle chain causes a bladed cover to descend over the key. You can juuuuust get your fingers into the path of the blade by reaching.

Isn't that a little bit too much for "an object" ?

 

[Saeviomagy]

Isn't that a little bit too much for "an object" ?

As soon as you make a chain, you've already got multiple discrete groupings of solid matter.

Would you deny me a door?
Would you deny me a wall?
Would you deny me a wall with a door in it?

etc etc.

In short: there's not really a logical reason not to allow a complex trap if you're going to allow any object with interlocking parts (a chain, a door) or you need to specify that the maximum dimensions of the illusion is a 10' cube.

Also, if what I describe is not an object, and it is not a creature, then it qualifies as "any other visual phenomenon".

 

[Undrhil]

I prefer to just "conjure" a Gelatinous Cube on the target and be done with it. As a Wizard, it's well within the realm of possibility that I could do such a thing, so they should first try to fight not being grappled by it and suffocating, before thinking to investigate it.

 

[CapnZapp]

Why does he have to remain chained up? You created an illusion of the chains. The target won't disbelieve the illusion unless he makes his check.

However he CAN rationalize moving his arms while the chains exist: He broke free of them.

You sure you responded to the right post?

I am saying exactly what you are saying: that the target doesn't get anywhere without disbelieving.

I made my comment as a response to somebody saying you could attempt a "break chains" strength check, and when you realized your arms moved (since there aren't any real chains), you automatically made your strength check and was free of the phantasmal force.

 

[CapnZapp]

More generally: I'm only interested in one thing and one thing only:

Can you use the spell to take a creature out of a combat? In a way that is more persistant than, say, Hold Person? That is, in a way that is more difficult (or time-consuming) to shake off than making the listed Investigation check?

If yes - then sorry, your interpretation is broken: that's far too powerful for a mere level 2 spell, especially considering that
1) Phantasmal Force targets Intelligence (often the weakest save/check)
2) Phantasmal Force lacks any harsh restrictions (such as a language-barrier or working on humanoids only). The no undead/constructs limit is comparatively a minor one.

I mean - these factors ALREADY make the spell more powerful and flexible than most alternatives.

I'm sure its fun to think of clever ways to confound foes. I'm just convinced the issue of combat and hostility needs to be front and center, for gameplay balance issues. That is, BEFORE a combat starts, using illusions like this spell is fair game. As soon as hostilities commence, this spell can't be far superior to a similar "save or suck" spell like Hold Person or Blindness/Deafness or the like.

 

[ThePolarBear]

As soon as you make a chain, you've already got multiple discrete groupings of solid matter.

Would you deny me a door?
Would you deny me a wall?
Would you deny me a wall with a door in it?

etc etc.

In short: there's not really a logical reason not to allow a complex trap if you're going to allow any object with interlocking parts (a chain, a door) or you need to specify that the maximum dimensions of the illusion is a 10' cube.

Also, if what I describe is not an object, and it is not a creature, then it qualifies as "any other visual phenomenon".

I hope you got that i was joking.

Anyway: No, i would not deny it. I would deny you putting a pedestal with a key on it. Those are distinct objects. And while i agree that a complex objects can be made of different parts (you could make a balista, for example, made of different wooden, metal, fiber parts) and that balisa could be loaded, the stack of ammo beside it would be a different illusion.

And phenomena do not apply to objects, those are still objects. A fire is a phenomenon, as is rain. Or fog. You can create those with Phantasmal Force because you can create phenomena while you can't create them with minor illusion. I think there's also a tweet about it, i'll see if i can find it, just for reference...

There. Sort of what i mean, even if it's not 100% clear. http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/10/15/could-minor-illusion-create-a-fog-cloud/

Little edit: Prehaps we simply have a different image on how the contraption is actually built. Prehaps having you in front of me, describing the object while using your hands and prehaps a scrap of paper i would change my mind. I'm honestly not trying to say "that's the way", just that is "my way". No offence meant if it was somehow percieved.