KarinsDad said:
That is one of the biggest problems.
Some problems that really prevent image spells from being useful without special DM allowances are:
1) The one you mentioned. Spellcraft is the bane of image spells being cast without Still Spell and Silent Spell metamagic and even then, someone could wonder if an illusion was cast. It makes image spells virtually worthless if cast during combat, especially for spell casters ("A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw.").
Most opponents do not have ranks in spellcraft. Those who do may well detect it, but then they have to communicate it to others, and the others simply get a bonus to detect it then. Also, spellcasters that specialize in illusions tend to have silent spell (still spell is not as necessary in my opinion). Indeed, the best illusionist PRC comes with silent spell already automatically on all his illusion spells (Shadowcraft Mage).
2) Image spells have no tactile component. It is easy to discover that an illusionary wall is an illusion, just by touching it. The chance of detecting that it is an illusion is 100% because one cannot touch it. ("A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw."). Ditto for all other images like an image of an archer. Put an arrow through him or touch him and you have proof he isn't really there.
How many opponents do you know that take an action in the middle of combat to touch all walls to make sure they are real?
As for the archer, the more advanced figment spells can have the illusion react appropriately to an attack.
3) Figments and patterns totally disappear to someone viewing them (i.e. they just see an outline), hence, the moment one discovers the illusionary wall is the moment he can see whatever is hidden behind it.
Indeed. Not sure why this is a point against figments in general. If you overcome a spell, you overcome a spell. Same for most spells.
4) One cannot really cast an illusion of summoning a creature since image spells are a standard action and summoning spells are one round casting time.
Are you seriously saying your opponents will notice if you take a full round action or a standard action to summon the creature, and therefore will assume it is an illusion if you take a standard action? Wow, now there is a DM that would learn to regret meta-gaming real quick, as there are many ways to get a creature going without a full round action, and assuming that creature is an illusion will generally mean you ignore it and hence lose your dex bonus to AC. In fact, that would be the sort of DM that is begging for shadow illusions that are close to 100% real if disbelieved.
Not to mention, you COULD take a full round action to cast it if you really think this is an issue. But, I think most DMs will not.
5) Image spells do not state that they can be changed on the fly with the exception of language and movement. They can be moved (within their area), but they cannot appear and disappear via concentration. There are no image spells that state that they allow you to change the illusion so that it looks different (such as a halfling becoming a giant or a spell caster disappearing). Changing them might seem reasonable, but they do not actually state that they have this capability. Mistwell is adding that capability to Image spells in some of his examples.
First, I added nothing to nothing. Those are not my examples, and I said that in the post. I just keep a list of other people's examples. Second, it doesn't say you can't, and therefore I list them because some DMs will allow that (and some will not).
6) The rules on illusions are contradictory: "A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.)" and "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." and "A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline." Some illusions are mental and some are not, but both figments and patterns are treated as mental images (i.e. they are not real light and sound and can be seen through). Figments show an image that is not there, Glamers change something that is there, but the translucent rule is not the same for both. Why? It doesn't make sense.
Illusions should be like holodeck images. They should be actual sound and light and force, not fake sound and light and force that can sometimes be ignored with enough willpower and sometimes not. If one makes the save, he should notice imperfections and know it is an illusion, but he should not just see through it.
Not sure why this is a drawback for figments, or addresses how to use figments creatively.
The higher level ones should also have tactile components so that a character can affect the illusion and it can affect him. An illusionary fighter should be able to do damage and be damaged.
They do, however when they become that higher level to do that damage, their type changes from figment to shadow. Shadow Evocation and Shadow Conjuration, and the Shadowcraft Mage power Shadow Illusion, all do this.
The fact that this list was put together shows the extreme lack of utility and lack of good rules mechanics of image spells (non-image illusions like Invisibility have plenty of utility). If the illusion rules (and specifically, the image spells) were better designed, people would come up with thousands of good uses for images, not dozens.
The list doesn't show anything about anything, and I think you know that was a serious stretch. People HAVE come up with thousands of good uses for images, and not dozens. This isn't some comprehensive list. It's just the act of one guy (me) to make a vague half-hearted effort to list some of the interesting uses for a type of spell that he has seen. I mean, what the heck were you thinking elevating this one thread to somehow the level of "this is the totality of all that people have ever been able to do with these kinds of spells, and because this list is not that long, it means the spells have no utility"?
For example, #29 in the list is literally by RAW not allowed which means that the image is known to be non-threatening and hence, known to be an image.
Um, at the time the list was composed there was not RAW on the topic I believe. And it DID say that some DMs will not allow that item, back when it was written. You need to chill out a bit dude. It's just some stuff I have seen people suggest over time that I copied and pasted onto a list and posted in a message. That's it.
PS. #8 is questionable. Technically, illusions have no tactile component and the target should know this immediately if he does not have a helmet on and it should at best be a free action to reach for the sack and have it disappear completely.
I agree, not a trick I would use, but some DMs might make it a move action at least (similar to stowing or retrieving a weapon).
#11 is not really doable. One can move an image, but one cannot (significantly) change it.
I disagree. The text of programmed image and persistent image suggests to me that figments are capable of quite a lot of change. And, I think many DMs allow an illusion to change, particularly if it is in line with the creature that the image is representing. If you make a figment of a dragon, I think a lot of DMs will allow the illusion to breath fire (within the range of the spell of course).
#19 has extremely limited area (i.e. to get a decent range, it takes most of the 10 foot area effects and hence, a target could often be out of range by stepping 10 feet to the side, arrows disappearing is a big clue that it is an illusion).
Four 10-ft. cubes + one 10-ft. cube/level. You really think that is extremely limited area? Not me. Not too hard to guess which general part of the room your opponents are most likely to be in during most of the battle.
The Fighter cannot draw on an image as per #28 and the spell caster cannot make it change.
Again, I disagree, and I think many DMs allow figments to change. This isn't a rules debate KarinsDad, it's a list that some people may find useful for their games. If a particular DM doesn't allow images to change like you don't let them do, they can ignore that item on the list. But some DMs do allow it, hence it is on the list.
Did you have something positive to contribute to the thread?
