-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Glamer-flavored illusions, generally and in combat
- Thread starter Sagiro
- Start date
I'll start by confessing I don't now how this would be by the RAW.
I'll add I care about that only up to a point.
I'll continue by saying two of the posters here are among my greatest SH inspirations (assuming I find the drive to continue writing mine. AND hoping Pkitty updates his own soon) and in general some of my favorite posters here. Piratecat and Sagiro, I'm looking at you. (Total HIJACK:By the way, if I'm not somehow drunk, and I remember correctly, and one of you two has worked on the Freedom Force computer game, kudos!.. I love that game).
So, if something I say is exceedingly silly, chalk that up to fanboyishness and bear with me.
Ahem. Back to topic.
I agree with some of the effects described. The halfling - glamered hill giant who opens a door by acting on a doorknob taller than the illusionary halfling could possibly reach DOES create a problem - I mean, an opportunity for an observer to notice things are amiss.
On the other hand, it seems to me many people see Illusions, in many instances, as some kind of "hologram" covering the "real thing". Maybe that IS how the RAW puts it... but I don't think it is a GOOD way to put it.
Anything following this line is HOW I WOULD DO IT - once again, my RAW-fu is weak.
A fighter glamered to look like a rat, when wounded, would seem to bleed out of wounds made ON THE ILLUSIONARY FLESH. Not from some point up in the air.
A cleric-rogue (just an example, Dranko
) glamered to look like a rat who climbed a rope would, yes, seem to practically fly from the ground to the rope. But once there, he'd look like a rat scurrying up a rope. Not like a bugged videogame sprite, hovering in mid-air next to the rope and levitating upwards.
A fighter glamered to look like a rat who drew a sword and attacked would seem to attack, period. (Of course, in this latter case, someone WOULD wonder at least WHY those inch-long claws are opening foot-long gaps in his belly.)
In general, I believe illusions are made to WORK. As long as nothing is done that would be impossible for the illusionary creature, they work - in that, they fool senses. And I also believe, up to a point, they also work in some instances where things aren't readily explainable. If you trip over a rock glamered to look like a tiny twig, but there are other things on the ground you could have tripped on, I don't think you should have a ST. Your mind will accept it tripped over "something". Totally different if you trip over an invisible halfling crouching on the floor in the middle of a totally empty hall. In that case you WILL get a ST; probably with bonuses. Only if you fail it will you think you somehow clumcily managed to trip on your own feet.
All this rant was just to state a point I deeply care about: Illusions are NOT holograms.
I'll add I care about that only up to a point.
I'll continue by saying two of the posters here are among my greatest SH inspirations (assuming I find the drive to continue writing mine. AND hoping Pkitty updates his own soon) and in general some of my favorite posters here. Piratecat and Sagiro, I'm looking at you. (Total HIJACK:By the way, if I'm not somehow drunk, and I remember correctly, and one of you two has worked on the Freedom Force computer game, kudos!.. I love that game).
So, if something I say is exceedingly silly, chalk that up to fanboyishness and bear with me.
Ahem. Back to topic.
I agree with some of the effects described. The halfling - glamered hill giant who opens a door by acting on a doorknob taller than the illusionary halfling could possibly reach DOES create a problem - I mean, an opportunity for an observer to notice things are amiss.
On the other hand, it seems to me many people see Illusions, in many instances, as some kind of "hologram" covering the "real thing". Maybe that IS how the RAW puts it... but I don't think it is a GOOD way to put it.
Anything following this line is HOW I WOULD DO IT - once again, my RAW-fu is weak.
A fighter glamered to look like a rat, when wounded, would seem to bleed out of wounds made ON THE ILLUSIONARY FLESH. Not from some point up in the air.
A cleric-rogue (just an example, Dranko
) glamered to look like a rat who climbed a rope would, yes, seem to practically fly from the ground to the rope. But once there, he'd look like a rat scurrying up a rope. Not like a bugged videogame sprite, hovering in mid-air next to the rope and levitating upwards.A fighter glamered to look like a rat who drew a sword and attacked would seem to attack, period. (Of course, in this latter case, someone WOULD wonder at least WHY those inch-long claws are opening foot-long gaps in his belly.)
In general, I believe illusions are made to WORK. As long as nothing is done that would be impossible for the illusionary creature, they work - in that, they fool senses. And I also believe, up to a point, they also work in some instances where things aren't readily explainable. If you trip over a rock glamered to look like a tiny twig, but there are other things on the ground you could have tripped on, I don't think you should have a ST. Your mind will accept it tripped over "something". Totally different if you trip over an invisible halfling crouching on the floor in the middle of a totally empty hall. In that case you WILL get a ST; probably with bonuses. Only if you fail it will you think you somehow clumcily managed to trip on your own feet.
All this rant was just to state a point I deeply care about: Illusions are NOT holograms.
Graf
Explorer
Feels a bit weird posting responses to much more experienced DMs. (I am, btw, a DM 90% of the time and focus almost entirely on being one. I also tend to think that people make too much of a big deal out of how powerful illusions are).
I think that illusions are just another kind of spell (i.e. that there shouldn't be some special kind of "because they are illusions what they can do should be limited in a way that other spells aren't" rule about them). Obviously YMMV.
As a general rule I tend to look at five things when deciding incidental/vague/debatable spell effects
1. What level is the spell?
2. How powerful is the effect vs. the other things the spell can do
3. Does the effect, even if logical, seem more like a separate spell?
4. Does the spells description suggest that such an effect would exist or is it simple and extrapolation?
5. Is the existence of this effect (or its lack) going to have an impact on the world around them.
A good example (and one I used when I explained that I wasn't going to have long "logical" conversations about how spells worked with the players): There was a picture, in 2nd ed Dragon magazine article about inventive uses for magic, I think, of a wizard who was climbing up a wall (using spider climb) and using his sticky fingers to pilfer a small orb from an open window.
Applying the test above to the question of "does spider climb allow you to pick stuff up (or hold onto it) better?" I would see the following
1. Spider climb is 2nd level (it was first when I actually made the ruling in a game)
2. Spider climb is a strong spell. While the target's hands are probably adhesive in some fashion while under the effects of the spell giving the spell additional adhesive effects (beyond those listed in the description) isn't really warranted for a 2nd level spell. (i.e. a bonus to slight of hand checks or resist a disarm wouldn't be warranted in my mind)
3. Yes a spell or even a cantrip like "Sticky Fingers" springs easily to mind and would be different enough from Spider Climb to count as its own spell.
4. Nope
5. Yes it would have an impact on the world. Spider climb is a relatively cheap spell, and even a +2 bonus could be important to someone. Gladiators would have it cast on them going into battle (or gloves that gave them similar holding properties), better pickpockets would arrage to get it before plying their trade etc. None of those changes are good or interesting (to me).
I would rephrase the Sagiro’s question as:
"Does veil require an armed party attempting to enter an area with hostile humanoids to jump through lots of hoops in order for it to continue to cloak their identities?"
Specifically to apply the "spell test above" I would say
1. Veil is a high level illusion spell (6th?). It is the best spell of its class in the game.
2. Veil's primary function is to hide the identities of its targets, the spell description seems to suggest that it is through (covering multiple senses) and effective, with no chance given to see through the spell under normal circumstances. This is in line with spells of 6th level (given that invisibility mass is lower level I would want it to do things for the caster and the party that invisibility does not). Particularly invisibility hides the existence of its targets completely and grants significant advantages (initially at least in combat) it seems like veil should be better at what it does (i.e. hide your identity).
3. No. Unless it would be Improved Veil or something similar.
4. Nothing in the description seems to suggest that you need to act oddly for it to work. (i.e. no requirements that people make performance checks to seem like what they are pretending to be, which is basically what walking around on your hands and knees and "acting like a rat" would be). Disguise checks are standard for "duplication of specific creature tests" and made by the caster anyway.
5. Veil not working without lots of acting basically means that no one would take or use the spell for its purpose (allowing armed groups of people to get places they normally couldn't). Not really a big impact on the world but if the spell exists then I tend to presume it works as advertised.
So I would say that the more liberal set of interpretations apply, weaponry is not revealed, etc. Until combat starts they look just like a small pack of aggressive, organized rats. If a character climbs a rope and someone sees them it looks like a rat climbed the rope. If a character attacks someone attacks with a sword then it looks like the rat jumped at them (because it doesn't hide actions so the fact that the rat acted against the target would be clear) and now they have a big bleeding slash wound. Likewise my understanding of spells in DnD is that any spell cast comes from the caster and affects the target is obvious. [With a small exception for victims of charm spells get a bit of a “whammy” effect that prevents them from holding the casting of a spell on them against the caster, basically because I feel it would conflict with #5 above.]
Having said that veiling yourself to look like a pack of rats is not a hot idea. Unless you make successful hide and MS checks you will be noticed. So anyone that gets into visual range of the characters (remember they aren't rat sized so they can't actually crawl through cracks in the walls, under tables, etc) will notice them. They still fill one map square for every small or medium sized creature. A bunch of bold rats hanging out in a hallway is the kind of thing that is usually dealt with quickly. I.e. somebody gets a torch and tries to scare them off or kill them.
In other words: the first person they encounter, and every other person (unless this is a temple to a rat god) is going to notice them and attempt to deal with them, complain about them to somebody, try to step on them, etc.
Since the characters are not "stompable" very quickly it becomes apparent that these rats are not "normal" rats. Ditto when a rat leaps on up a doorknob, turns it and then jumps back down. It looks -just- like a rat opened the door and I wouldn't take that away from the party, but the rat still opened the door.
In normal DnD this leads very quickly to the realization that these are "special magic rats".
The discovery of special magical anything in a camp or whatever of intelligent armed creatures in DnD leads very quickly to a general alarm being raised.
This doesn't mean that people are seeing rats with swords, or carrying wands or hearing rats make spellcasting sounds. They may know that the "frothing brown one*" has been hit by a dozen blows but is still moving around leaving hideous slashing wounds in it's wake but unless they start making saving throws they won't see anything that breaks the illusion of it being a rat (i.e. nothing that would indicate it's really a 6.5 foot tall dual-weilding northman with twin battle axes).
*=Since nothing really suggests that veil would make one affected target look exactly like another affected target I would assume that they could be differentiated by onlookers (with a wizard wanting everyone to look like copies of a specific rat having to make disguise checks for each individual to make them "match" the others).
So I would say: relax and have fun with it!
Not to sound dismissive but DMs changing the way spells work because they are afraid of the ramifications is one of the biggest problems in DnD games. The spells generally work as they are supposed to. If a spell is designed to make a bunch of people look like some other bunch of creatures then they look like that other bunch of creatures. Unless it says "they have to act just a creature would act in that situation or else the spell stops functioning" or the DM has some kind of deeply held opinion about how the spell is overpowered/unbalancing for its level (and the players agree to have the spell changed to maintain verisimilitude) I would let it function as described. If it has a duration then the spell continues to work without the wizard having to concentrate, etc.
Bonus opinion
The tennis racket question is a good one. Honestly, for a sixth level spell that has no combat impact I would say "they look like whatever damn sort of tennis rackets the caster wants". If s/he wants floating the rackets float, if s/he wants dragging they drag (complete with the sound of dragging), they could move around like something from fantasia, or else grow arms and legs to facilitate their activities (complete with eyes and a mouth on the head of the racket). And if they stopped moving they would look -just- like tennis rackets lying on the ground or propped against a wall if that was what the caster had originally intended.
Bonus opinion #2
If the players want to avoid arousing suspicion and actually get further than a room or two into the complex they are better off doing some research and pretending to be something that would naturally be in the area (i.e. if they are invading the inner sanctum of the purple eye then a bunch of purple robed cultists (maybe with a tongues spell to fake any language requirements and charm and detect thoughts to deal with any questions)) is going to get you a lot further than something like a rat.
Feels a bit weird posting responses to much more experienced DMs. (I am, btw, a DM 90% of the time and focus almost entirely on being one. I also tend to think that people make too much of a big deal out of how powerful illusions are).
edit: weird double posting
I think that illusions are just another kind of spell (i.e. that there shouldn't be some special kind of "because they are illusions what they can do should be limited in a way that other spells aren't" rule about them). Obviously YMMV.
As a general rule I tend to look at five things when deciding incidental/vague/debatable spell effects
1. What level is the spell?
2. How powerful is the effect vs. the other things the spell can do
3. Does the effect, even if logical, seem more like a separate spell?
4. Does the spells description suggest that such an effect would exist or is it simple and extrapolation?
5. Is the existence of this effect (or its lack) going to have an impact on the world around them.
A good example (and one I used when I explained that I wasn't going to have long "logical" conversations about how spells worked with the players): There was a picture, in 2nd ed Dragon magazine article about inventive uses for magic, I think, of a wizard who was climbing up a wall (using spider climb) and using his sticky fingers to pilfer a small orb from an open window.
Applying the test above to the question of "does spider climb allow you to pick stuff up (or hold onto it) better?" I would see the following
1. Spider climb is 2nd level (it was first when I actually made the ruling in a game)
2. Spider climb is a strong spell. While the target's hands are probably adhesive in some fashion while under the effects of the spell giving the spell additional adhesive effects (beyond those listed in the description) isn't really warranted for a 2nd level spell. (i.e. a bonus to slight of hand checks or resist a disarm wouldn't be warranted in my mind)
3. Yes a spell or even a cantrip like "Sticky Fingers" springs easily to mind and would be different enough from Spider Climb to count as its own spell.
4. Nope
5. Yes it would have an impact on the world. Spider climb is a relatively cheap spell, and even a +2 bonus could be important to someone. Gladiators would have it cast on them going into battle (or gloves that gave them similar holding properties), better pickpockets would arrage to get it before plying their trade etc. None of those changes are good or interesting (to me).
I would rephrase the Sagiro’s question as:
"Does veil require an armed party attempting to enter an area with hostile humanoids to jump through lots of hoops in order for it to continue to cloak their identities?"
Specifically to apply the "spell test above" I would say
1. Veil is a high level illusion spell (6th?). It is the best spell of its class in the game.
2. Veil's primary function is to hide the identities of its targets, the spell description seems to suggest that it is through (covering multiple senses) and effective, with no chance given to see through the spell under normal circumstances. This is in line with spells of 6th level (given that invisibility mass is lower level I would want it to do things for the caster and the party that invisibility does not). Particularly invisibility hides the existence of its targets completely and grants significant advantages (initially at least in combat) it seems like veil should be better at what it does (i.e. hide your identity).
3. No. Unless it would be Improved Veil or something similar.
4. Nothing in the description seems to suggest that you need to act oddly for it to work. (i.e. no requirements that people make performance checks to seem like what they are pretending to be, which is basically what walking around on your hands and knees and "acting like a rat" would be). Disguise checks are standard for "duplication of specific creature tests" and made by the caster anyway.
5. Veil not working without lots of acting basically means that no one would take or use the spell for its purpose (allowing armed groups of people to get places they normally couldn't). Not really a big impact on the world but if the spell exists then I tend to presume it works as advertised.
So I would say that the more liberal set of interpretations apply, weaponry is not revealed, etc. Until combat starts they look just like a small pack of aggressive, organized rats. If a character climbs a rope and someone sees them it looks like a rat climbed the rope. If a character attacks someone attacks with a sword then it looks like the rat jumped at them (because it doesn't hide actions so the fact that the rat acted against the target would be clear) and now they have a big bleeding slash wound. Likewise my understanding of spells in DnD is that any spell cast comes from the caster and affects the target is obvious. [With a small exception for victims of charm spells get a bit of a “whammy” effect that prevents them from holding the casting of a spell on them against the caster, basically because I feel it would conflict with #5 above.]
Having said that veiling yourself to look like a pack of rats is not a hot idea. Unless you make successful hide and MS checks you will be noticed. So anyone that gets into visual range of the characters (remember they aren't rat sized so they can't actually crawl through cracks in the walls, under tables, etc) will notice them. They still fill one map square for every small or medium sized creature. A bunch of bold rats hanging out in a hallway is the kind of thing that is usually dealt with quickly. I.e. somebody gets a torch and tries to scare them off or kill them.
In other words: the first person they encounter, and every other person (unless this is a temple to a rat god) is going to notice them and attempt to deal with them, complain about them to somebody, try to step on them, etc.
Since the characters are not "stompable" very quickly it becomes apparent that these rats are not "normal" rats. Ditto when a rat leaps on up a doorknob, turns it and then jumps back down. It looks -just- like a rat opened the door and I wouldn't take that away from the party, but the rat still opened the door.
In normal DnD this leads very quickly to the realization that these are "special magic rats".
The discovery of special magical anything in a camp or whatever of intelligent armed creatures in DnD leads very quickly to a general alarm being raised.
This doesn't mean that people are seeing rats with swords, or carrying wands or hearing rats make spellcasting sounds. They may know that the "frothing brown one*" has been hit by a dozen blows but is still moving around leaving hideous slashing wounds in it's wake but unless they start making saving throws they won't see anything that breaks the illusion of it being a rat (i.e. nothing that would indicate it's really a 6.5 foot tall dual-weilding northman with twin battle axes).
*=Since nothing really suggests that veil would make one affected target look exactly like another affected target I would assume that they could be differentiated by onlookers (with a wizard wanting everyone to look like copies of a specific rat having to make disguise checks for each individual to make them "match" the others).
So I would say: relax and have fun with it!
Not to sound dismissive but DMs changing the way spells work because they are afraid of the ramifications is one of the biggest problems in DnD games. The spells generally work as they are supposed to. If a spell is designed to make a bunch of people look like some other bunch of creatures then they look like that other bunch of creatures. Unless it says "they have to act just a creature would act in that situation or else the spell stops functioning" or the DM has some kind of deeply held opinion about how the spell is overpowered/unbalancing for its level (and the players agree to have the spell changed to maintain verisimilitude) I would let it function as described. If it has a duration then the spell continues to work without the wizard having to concentrate, etc.
Bonus opinion
The tennis racket question is a good one. Honestly, for a sixth level spell that has no combat impact I would say "they look like whatever damn sort of tennis rackets the caster wants". If s/he wants floating the rackets float, if s/he wants dragging they drag (complete with the sound of dragging), they could move around like something from fantasia, or else grow arms and legs to facilitate their activities (complete with eyes and a mouth on the head of the racket). And if they stopped moving they would look -just- like tennis rackets lying on the ground or propped against a wall if that was what the caster had originally intended.
Bonus opinion #2
If the players want to avoid arousing suspicion and actually get further than a room or two into the complex they are better off doing some research and pretending to be something that would naturally be in the area (i.e. if they are invading the inner sanctum of the purple eye then a bunch of purple robed cultists (maybe with a tongues spell to fake any language requirements and charm and detect thoughts to deal with any questions)) is going to get you a lot further than something like a rat.
Feels a bit weird posting responses to much more experienced DMs. (I am, btw, a DM 90% of the time and focus almost entirely on being one. I also tend to think that people make too much of a big deal out of how powerful illusions are).
edit: weird double posting
Last edited:
Sagiro
Rodent of Uncertain Parentage
Graf, I appreciate your opinions -- and even if I am a "more experienced DM" (which may not even be the case), it doesn't make them more or less valid. As I read your comments, I found myself agreeing with some and disagreeing with others.
For instance, while I agree that DM's should not change the way spells work because they don't like the ramifications, they should also not add things to spell descriptions that aren't there, just to make them work more like how they think they should.
The important lines of veil are:
You can make the subjects appear to be anything you wish. The subjects look, feel, and smell just like the creatures the spell makes them resemble..
I don't see anything here that makes me think that veil will provide additional powers to cover for characters acting in ways that are at odds with how they "look, feel and smell."
For instance, if a PC disguised as a cave rat picks up a 20' long pole and pokes someone with it, an observer is going to see something very strange: to wit, a small rat picking up something much to heavy for it, and making a very un-ratlike poking motion.
Another example: the same PC walks up to a tall elf, puts one hand on the elf's head, and ther other on the elf's ankle. What does the elf see? A super-stretchy rat? I don't think so. I think he sees a rat stretching its little paws out, and he feels rat paws on his head and ankle, but he sees that the rat's paws aren't actually touching him.
Put another way: If someone is disguised by a glamer, it will work fine as long as that someone does things that the illusionary form could also do. No need to walk on all fours; if a rat can walk, then you can walk and look/feel/smell like rat walking. If a rat can make an unarmed attack, you can make one too, and look/feel/smell like a rat swiping you with its claw. But a rat can't wield a pole-axe, so if you try that, it's going to look very un-rat-like by definition. I don't see anything about the spell that makes me think that, if I as the rat never make physical contact with you (because I'm wielding a pole-axe), the illusion "covers for me" and makes it look like I ran up and swatted you. Likewise, if you leap for a dangling rope hanging 8' off the ground, you're going to look like the all-time high-jump rat champion of the universe. The glamer isn't going to somehow provide extra mojo to make that look natural.
I agree with you, that once the person grabs the rope and starts climbing, he'll look more natural -- since a rat can also climb a rope.
Those, to me, are the sensible consequences of assuming a glamer that's very unlike your own form. You'll be more limited in the things you can do and still maintain believability.
As for veil being a 6th level spell, and as such a powerful glamer: that's because a) it can make targets look like anything you wish, b) it can affect as many targets as you can fit into a 15'-radius circle, and c) it lasts hours and hours and possibly days if the caster can keep concentrating.
And not, in my opinion, d) because it can cover for action-generated cognitive dissonance.
All just my opinions, of course.
-Sagiro
For instance, while I agree that DM's should not change the way spells work because they don't like the ramifications, they should also not add things to spell descriptions that aren't there, just to make them work more like how they think they should.
The important lines of veil are:
You can make the subjects appear to be anything you wish. The subjects look, feel, and smell just like the creatures the spell makes them resemble..
I don't see anything here that makes me think that veil will provide additional powers to cover for characters acting in ways that are at odds with how they "look, feel and smell."
For instance, if a PC disguised as a cave rat picks up a 20' long pole and pokes someone with it, an observer is going to see something very strange: to wit, a small rat picking up something much to heavy for it, and making a very un-ratlike poking motion.
Another example: the same PC walks up to a tall elf, puts one hand on the elf's head, and ther other on the elf's ankle. What does the elf see? A super-stretchy rat? I don't think so. I think he sees a rat stretching its little paws out, and he feels rat paws on his head and ankle, but he sees that the rat's paws aren't actually touching him.
Put another way: If someone is disguised by a glamer, it will work fine as long as that someone does things that the illusionary form could also do. No need to walk on all fours; if a rat can walk, then you can walk and look/feel/smell like rat walking. If a rat can make an unarmed attack, you can make one too, and look/feel/smell like a rat swiping you with its claw. But a rat can't wield a pole-axe, so if you try that, it's going to look very un-rat-like by definition. I don't see anything about the spell that makes me think that, if I as the rat never make physical contact with you (because I'm wielding a pole-axe), the illusion "covers for me" and makes it look like I ran up and swatted you. Likewise, if you leap for a dangling rope hanging 8' off the ground, you're going to look like the all-time high-jump rat champion of the universe. The glamer isn't going to somehow provide extra mojo to make that look natural.
I agree with you, that once the person grabs the rope and starts climbing, he'll look more natural -- since a rat can also climb a rope.
Those, to me, are the sensible consequences of assuming a glamer that's very unlike your own form. You'll be more limited in the things you can do and still maintain believability.
As for veil being a 6th level spell, and as such a powerful glamer: that's because a) it can make targets look like anything you wish, b) it can affect as many targets as you can fit into a 15'-radius circle, and c) it lasts hours and hours and possibly days if the caster can keep concentrating.
And not, in my opinion, d) because it can cover for action-generated cognitive dissonance.
All just my opinions, of course.
-Sagiro
Graf
Explorer
(I hope this is useful and not disruptive)
One general comment.
None of my comments above were intended to imply that there is some kind of charm, etc. effect, woven into illusions that makes subjects of illusions happy or comfortable with what they are perceiving.
So I am in agreement with you (visa vie what I think you are saying) on a lot of the points above. For example
>and not d) because it can cover for action-generated
>cognitive dissonance.
The cognitive dissonance is in full bloom as the rat jumps 10 feet into the air, or picks up a huge polearm of the ground in its teeth and then smacks them over the head with it. Some days I get congnitive dissonace turning on the TV.
If that statement is supposed to imply that because a creature looks at an illusion and thinks "that's not supposed to happen" that there is some kind of automatic illusion-nullifying effect -> they start to see through the parts of the illusion that the character would not believe (i.e. that the battle ax would start hanging over the head of the character where the character's real hands are, etc) then I think that that is unfair to the player and makes it hard for people to play the game with confidence.
For me the cognitive dissonance is reflected in a save. You fail the save and your mind does not get to resolve itself by breaking free of the magic to show you the truth. You're stuck working off the "bad data" the caster has decided to feed you. In the case of veil you receive no sensory information about the true appearance (smell, texture, etc) of the creature.
If someone does something that would not be possible for a normal rat then the spell adapts in some fashion that
1. Transmits all pertinent information to the outside world (which is a bit of a gray area I admit, but since you don't generally have to explain what every monster is seeing to the PCs its fine to leave it a bit gray)
2. Continues to screen out any information that is not necessary to perceive the action.
So if some idiot under the effects of a veil that makes them look like a rat reaches out and touches some 6 foot tall person's heel and head at the same time then the person touched gets a save. If they fail they don't get any new info, but the spell does show a rat stretching out in an absurd fashion (or something similar).
[Making the little rat do the motion and then feel only the pressure raises a problem for me. The hand on the head is effectively invisible. If that were a fist, then the target wouldn't know it would be coming. Normally in unpercived attack gets lots of bonuses (i.e. invisibility spell). Since viel doesn't provide that I would say that the spell holds, because it doesn't indicate anywhere in the spell that it can be broken by actions, but that the spell warps what is being seen to provide enough information that the target, while confused, is never the less aware that it is being attacked, by a "rat" using its body, and the vector of the attack so that it can defend itself normally.]
As a player I know that I would prefer a spell that basically renders all my actions unobservable would be much better than one that makes it clear what I was doing, roughly how I was doing it and so on. So I see this function as Veil -not- doing something that would be more powerful (i.e. covering up the source of actions) instead of doing something (i.e. making the rat image change an appear different than it did before).
>The glamer isn't going to somehow provide extra mojo to
>make that look natural.
Honestly these kinds of explanations for nerfing spells make me crazy.
In Core DnD a human monk can make a 20ft standing leap straight up. A human with a jump spell (potion, scroll, etc) can do the same.
While the number of effects that can be generated by a given player character are limited the kinds of things that can happen in the world are literally unlimited. Stars can (and from time to time are) torn from the sky and used to shatter the earth, portals open and uncountable demons pour through, creatures whose physiognomy would be completely impossible in the "natural" world lounge about with reckless disregard for the feelings of the authors of biology and physics textbooks.
At least once a session someone says to me (something like)
"Wait? He's got an eye where?!?" and I say "Yeah, it looks weird. But that's what it looks like."
So I'm inclined to say that illusions just work regardless of what a given orc in a given room is used to seeing on a given day.
What did that orc see when the monk (glamoured to appear like a rat) drove one sandal down onto his foot and pivoted to slam the other into his face?
Well..., he's unconcious. But if you woke him up he would tell that it was one weeeiird looking rat.
One general comment.
None of my comments above were intended to imply that there is some kind of charm, etc. effect, woven into illusions that makes subjects of illusions happy or comfortable with what they are perceiving.
So I am in agreement with you (visa vie what I think you are saying) on a lot of the points above. For example
>and not d) because it can cover for action-generated
>cognitive dissonance.
The cognitive dissonance is in full bloom as the rat jumps 10 feet into the air, or picks up a huge polearm of the ground in its teeth and then smacks them over the head with it. Some days I get congnitive dissonace turning on the TV.
If that statement is supposed to imply that because a creature looks at an illusion and thinks "that's not supposed to happen" that there is some kind of automatic illusion-nullifying effect -> they start to see through the parts of the illusion that the character would not believe (i.e. that the battle ax would start hanging over the head of the character where the character's real hands are, etc) then I think that that is unfair to the player and makes it hard for people to play the game with confidence.
For me the cognitive dissonance is reflected in a save. You fail the save and your mind does not get to resolve itself by breaking free of the magic to show you the truth. You're stuck working off the "bad data" the caster has decided to feed you. In the case of veil you receive no sensory information about the true appearance (smell, texture, etc) of the creature.
If someone does something that would not be possible for a normal rat then the spell adapts in some fashion that
1. Transmits all pertinent information to the outside world (which is a bit of a gray area I admit, but since you don't generally have to explain what every monster is seeing to the PCs its fine to leave it a bit gray)
2. Continues to screen out any information that is not necessary to perceive the action.
So if some idiot under the effects of a veil that makes them look like a rat reaches out and touches some 6 foot tall person's heel and head at the same time then the person touched gets a save. If they fail they don't get any new info, but the spell does show a rat stretching out in an absurd fashion (or something similar).
[Making the little rat do the motion and then feel only the pressure raises a problem for me. The hand on the head is effectively invisible. If that were a fist, then the target wouldn't know it would be coming. Normally in unpercived attack gets lots of bonuses (i.e. invisibility spell). Since viel doesn't provide that I would say that the spell holds, because it doesn't indicate anywhere in the spell that it can be broken by actions, but that the spell warps what is being seen to provide enough information that the target, while confused, is never the less aware that it is being attacked, by a "rat" using its body, and the vector of the attack so that it can defend itself normally.]
As a player I know that I would prefer a spell that basically renders all my actions unobservable would be much better than one that makes it clear what I was doing, roughly how I was doing it and so on. So I see this function as Veil -not- doing something that would be more powerful (i.e. covering up the source of actions) instead of doing something (i.e. making the rat image change an appear different than it did before).
>The glamer isn't going to somehow provide extra mojo to
>make that look natural.
Honestly these kinds of explanations for nerfing spells make me crazy.
In Core DnD a human monk can make a 20ft standing leap straight up. A human with a jump spell (potion, scroll, etc) can do the same.
While the number of effects that can be generated by a given player character are limited the kinds of things that can happen in the world are literally unlimited. Stars can (and from time to time are) torn from the sky and used to shatter the earth, portals open and uncountable demons pour through, creatures whose physiognomy would be completely impossible in the "natural" world lounge about with reckless disregard for the feelings of the authors of biology and physics textbooks.
At least once a session someone says to me (something like)
"Wait? He's got an eye where?!?" and I say "Yeah, it looks weird. But that's what it looks like."
So I'm inclined to say that illusions just work regardless of what a given orc in a given room is used to seeing on a given day.
What did that orc see when the monk (glamoured to appear like a rat) drove one sandal down onto his foot and pivoted to slam the other into his face?
Well..., he's unconcious. But if you woke him up he would tell that it was one weeeiird looking rat.
Last edited:
Graf
Explorer
One of my players (who, incidentally is both quite bright and agrees more with you than me on this) mocks me for my long posts.
But one other comment I feel obliged to make is that whenever a DM (as from time to time every DM has to do) says "sorry that spell can't do that" I feel that they should be comfortable backing that up with a statement like
1. The spell is not high enough to achieve that effect. Spell x which generates a comparable effect is y numbers of level higher.
2. That effect is more powerful than a wish, which is the most powerful spell in the game. I'm not saying that there is no way to generate that effect, but it is beyond the range of magic normally available to mortals.
Personally I see the whole "stretchy rat" (or yoda style bouncing beanbag of death thing that would probably necessarily happen if a high level monk were made to look like a rat with a Veil spell) effect as being a detriment to a player because it gives more information about what the underlying creature is doing, as well as making it clearer to the viewer what is happening.
But if you see that as an extra effect which the Veil spell is not capable of producing (as a 6th level spell) then how many additional levels would you require the Veil spell to have before it could product it?
But one other comment I feel obliged to make is that whenever a DM (as from time to time every DM has to do) says "sorry that spell can't do that" I feel that they should be comfortable backing that up with a statement like
1. The spell is not high enough to achieve that effect. Spell x which generates a comparable effect is y numbers of level higher.
2. That effect is more powerful than a wish, which is the most powerful spell in the game. I'm not saying that there is no way to generate that effect, but it is beyond the range of magic normally available to mortals.
Personally I see the whole "stretchy rat" (or yoda style bouncing beanbag of death thing that would probably necessarily happen if a high level monk were made to look like a rat with a Veil spell) effect as being a detriment to a player because it gives more information about what the underlying creature is doing, as well as making it clearer to the viewer what is happening.
But if you see that as an extra effect which the Veil spell is not capable of producing (as a 6th level spell) then how many additional levels would you require the Veil spell to have before it could product it?
Sagiro
Rodent of Uncertain Parentage
Yes, and no, respectively.Graf said:
My statement was not meant to imply that. I agree completely that the sort of cognitive dissonance I'm talking about is what causes a saving throw, and not an automatic see-through-the-illusion effect. The bar for automatic disillusionment should be pretty high -- for instance, if a human-as-rat starts a grapple, I'd say that level of physical contact stresses the illusion too far. (Whereas a human-as-elf would not.) Your personal breaking point may be higher, obviously, but it sounds like we agree in principle.
I think I'd rather deal with the consequences of some invisibility-ish activity, than imagine that the illusion causes the rat to appear super-stretchy. But your arguments are compelling, and I may change my mind. One thing's for sure; if faced with a rat that whose little arm stretched to 6 feet long, the observer will get a save with some bonuses attached.
I think you misunderstand me. I don't think any of the things you mention look natural, either. The rat jumping 8 feet into the air will look unnatural just like the monk jumping 20 feet. When I say "The glamer isn't going to somehow provide extra mojo to make that look natural," I mean it's not going to make the rope appear longer, or the rat larger, or anything else that will make an observer think: "yeah, that jumping rat is no big deal. I bet all rats can do that." You're going to see a rat make a jump that looks impossible in the same way a monk jumping flat-footed onto the roof of a two-story building looks impossible.
-Sagiro
Sagiro
Rodent of Uncertain Parentage
I guess I'm content with:Graf said:
3) Nothing in the spell description mentions that effect.
For instance, a player might say to me: "I just hurled a highly-damaging ball of fire at that creature standing on the cliff. Surely the impact would knock him back five feet as well."
That statement fails both of your tests. A fireball that included five feet of knockback would still be a 3rd level spell (albeit a tiny bit better than a by-the-book fireball), and is clearly not beyond the means of even limited wish, but I'd stand by my ruling that because knockback isn't specifcally mentioned in the spell description, it doesn't happen.
-Sagiro
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
First, respect and gratitude to two great SH GMs and thier players.
I would agree with this caveat: the fantasy world is already an awfully strange place. Most creatures and/or people have encountered fantastic effects in thier lives. Some even survive. These tell others stories about the purple spotted blue whale that flew over thier hut/cave during a freak storm of toads and asked for a cup of sugar. While having a rat jump vertically 4' and begin to climb a rope is suspicious, it is not automatically outside the bounds of belief. Nor is the same rat picking up a pole axe and laying out the whup@ss. These things may indeed be the powers of some new breed of uber rat. One that should be exterminated with due haste. Like now.
My point is that while these actions are definately not those of your common garden rat, they are not outside the bounds of reality as it exists in a fantasty universe. The jumping rat should raise suspicion, but not grant a save. This behavior is odd, but not impossible. A four foot jump is only DC 32 (did I say ONLY???) from a standing leap, and a jump spell of sufficient level could account for this easily. Weilding a pole axe is exceptionally odd and should cause general head shaking and eye rubbing, a great indicator that a save is taking place. I wouldn't allow a bonus on this save, because it possible the rat is just that Bruce Lee cool. The power of the veil spell (minimum save DC 19) means that it is attempting to cover the most egregeous(sp?) logical dissonances as best it can, providing the necessary effects to promote vesimilitude. The save is indicator of how well it does that.
Bonuses applied to saves against illusions should only be awarded in situations where there is almost no other believable explanation available to the affected creature. Only truly outlandish situations should qualify: Your friend walking through a solid wall like its not there; Your favorite childhood pet showing up on your doorstep even though you know for a fact that you sacrified it to the dark gods and they don't ever let things come back; Not having your luggage lost when you travel by lightning rail; et cetera. Being attacked by an invisible sword while a rat makes swinging motions nearby would lead me to believe that an invisible attacker is attempting to distract me with an outlandish illusion of a rat, not that the rat is really attacking me with an invisible sword. At least, if I failed my save. For which I should not get a bonus on because the action can be accounted for in other, easier ways.
Veil is a powerful spell. Let it be powerful. If your players insist on actions that are difficult to attribute to normal rats, then let the guards/whatever react to the strange rat behavior. Personally, if I saw a rat jump straight up four feet and climb a rope, I would leave the premisis post haste. If I were tasked to guard said location, I would call someone over to help kill the freaky rat. If it hissed and swiped at me and I developed a sudden case of sword wound fever, I would run screaming like a little girl, raise the alarm, and put out the word that all rats are to be killed on sight. Provided I failed my save. Which I will. Really. D20's hate me.
Sagiro said:
I would agree with this caveat: the fantasy world is already an awfully strange place. Most creatures and/or people have encountered fantastic effects in thier lives. Some even survive. These tell others stories about the purple spotted blue whale that flew over thier hut/cave during a freak storm of toads and asked for a cup of sugar. While having a rat jump vertically 4' and begin to climb a rope is suspicious, it is not automatically outside the bounds of belief. Nor is the same rat picking up a pole axe and laying out the whup@ss. These things may indeed be the powers of some new breed of uber rat. One that should be exterminated with due haste. Like now.
My point is that while these actions are definately not those of your common garden rat, they are not outside the bounds of reality as it exists in a fantasty universe. The jumping rat should raise suspicion, but not grant a save. This behavior is odd, but not impossible. A four foot jump is only DC 32 (did I say ONLY???) from a standing leap, and a jump spell of sufficient level could account for this easily. Weilding a pole axe is exceptionally odd and should cause general head shaking and eye rubbing, a great indicator that a save is taking place. I wouldn't allow a bonus on this save, because it possible the rat is just that Bruce Lee cool. The power of the veil spell (minimum save DC 19) means that it is attempting to cover the most egregeous(sp?) logical dissonances as best it can, providing the necessary effects to promote vesimilitude. The save is indicator of how well it does that.
Bonuses applied to saves against illusions should only be awarded in situations where there is almost no other believable explanation available to the affected creature. Only truly outlandish situations should qualify: Your friend walking through a solid wall like its not there; Your favorite childhood pet showing up on your doorstep even though you know for a fact that you sacrified it to the dark gods and they don't ever let things come back; Not having your luggage lost when you travel by lightning rail; et cetera. Being attacked by an invisible sword while a rat makes swinging motions nearby would lead me to believe that an invisible attacker is attempting to distract me with an outlandish illusion of a rat, not that the rat is really attacking me with an invisible sword. At least, if I failed my save. For which I should not get a bonus on because the action can be accounted for in other, easier ways.
Veil is a powerful spell. Let it be powerful. If your players insist on actions that are difficult to attribute to normal rats, then let the guards/whatever react to the strange rat behavior. Personally, if I saw a rat jump straight up four feet and climb a rope, I would leave the premisis post haste. If I were tasked to guard said location, I would call someone over to help kill the freaky rat. If it hissed and swiped at me and I developed a sudden case of sword wound fever, I would run screaming like a little girl, raise the alarm, and put out the word that all rats are to be killed on sight. Provided I failed my save. Which I will. Really. D20's hate me.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
