Bizarre Tactics & Combos

[AuraSeer]

Now, I point the flashlight directly at you; you now see the end I've painted to appear as if it's on. (a bright, cheery yellow, I might add) You're still quite a distance away from me, in a brightly lit room. Would you ever be fooled into thinking it was on?

If we were standing in bright sunlight, I would expect the light from a small bulb to be barely visible. From a distance it'd be impossible to tell whether the light were on or off, and thus a lack of light would not immediately give away the illusion.

The same goes for a torch, to a lesser extent. If you've ever watched a campfire during the daytime, you know that the flames are translucent and rather dim, and not easy to see. A character seeing an illusionary torch, in an otherwise bright area, could potentially be fooled by translucent images of a flame.

Anyway, you seem to be going at the point backward. You claim that figments must be able to shed light, because otherwise the illusion of a light source wouldn't work. Even granting that assertion, the rule is that figments cannot shed light; if that means an illusionary light source is unbelievable, then fine, so be it. In a medieval setting, the only things that shed light are fire and magic, but you can still make illusions of everything else on the planet.

 

[Saeviomagy]

It doesn't say that. THe AMF is centered on you, you don't have to be centered on it. Centered on your claw is still centered on you. Unless you don't consider your claw part of you (assuming, of course, that you have claws ).

Have you ever noticed that if you say a phrase over and over it starts to sound strange? I may never be able to type "centered on" again.

PS

"I cast my AMF on the end of a pole I'm carrying". After all, most of the time your equipment is considered just to be a part of you. Alternately you could use one of the body-shape changing spells and do the same thing.

I'm pretty sure that centring something on something else means that the two things have a common centre, and it's certainly much easier if you work that way.

 

[Storminator]

"I cast my AMF on the end of a pole I'm carrying". After all, most of the time your equipment is considered just to be a part of you. Alternately you could use one of the body-shape changing spells and do the same thing.

I'm pretty sure that centring something on something else means that the two things have a common centre, and it's certainly much easier if you work that way.

I think you've put up a straw man to make your point. It's not convincing me. Why does the spell have a range?

PS

 

[Victim]

Because the effects of a spell can't extend beyond it's range.

 

[Nail]

Hmm.

No, I'll agree that having a 'light source' included in your illusion is a Bad Idea, and that there would be a bonus to the save.

However, I maintain that when the ambient light is bright enough, that bonus would be a small one.

As soon as there is any sort of dimness in the surrounding light, that bonus would become far more substantial. In anything even vaguely approaching darkness, I wouldn't require a save at all.

-Hyp.

At the risk of being flip: Hyper's take sounds fine. It's all rule-compliant an' everything!

But seriously: would any of you have chosen to insert this rule into 3e? (raises eyebrows) Really?

 

[Pielorinho]

At the risk of being flip: Hyper's take sounds fine. It's all rule-compliant an' everything!

But seriously: would any of you have chosen to insert this rule into 3e? (raises eyebrows) Really?

I dunno. It does get into weird situations.

On the one hand, if illusions can make light, then they might make the actual light spells obsolete. I think they didn't want figments to be quite this powerful.

On the other hand, one of the standard illusions I (and my players) have used is a wall of fire. It's real effective against animal-intelligence creatures, especially if it's got a thermal component. But if the fire doesn't give off any light, then the illusion is obviously, well, illusory, even beneath a cloudy daytime sky.

I think they could have used a different rule: minor image can create light equal to a light spell, major image can create light equal to a continual flame spell. Change the various light spells to illusions themselves, probably to glamers.

Basically, figment spell could create light equal to a light spell of one level lower than itself. This, combined with the fact that figments generally last as long as you concentrate (as opposed to light spells, which have an indefinite duration) might work as a balancing tool.

Hm...in fact, I might rule it this way in my campaign. New house rule, coming up!

Daniel