Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How does the Phantasmal Force spell work correctly?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="lkwpeter" data-source="post: 7023815" data-attributes="member: 6804713"><p>I believe, that's actually the same point as discussing the meaning of "reasonable" in the suggestion spell. The illusion of PF must be <strong>backed up by evidence</strong>. If a player is able to create such an illusion, there is absolutely no reason to ask for an investigation check. The whole question about that has to be <strong>considered from the target's point of view - not from the DM's one!</strong> In my view, this is absolutely intended. A sign for this is the "rationalize" part of the spell description that emphasizes that even situational unlogical circumstances will be forgiven, if the initial thought of the effect was plausible.</p><p></p><p>Furthermore, there are other powerful spells. E.g. think of <em>Hold Person</em> that applies the paralyzed condition on a failed WIS save giving advantage to attacks + auto crit within 5 feet range. And the condition stays as long as the target doesn't make a successful check. Sure, <em>Phantasmal Force</em> is powerful, but it's not overpowered, if used correctly (applying the restrictions mentioned above). And it is only single target + has an inital saving throw.</p><p></p><p></p><p>No worries, I understand what you mean. English is not my mother language. How do you like the following wording?</p><p></p><p><strong>Status effects in fights:</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The most important point is that <strong>it is not possible to <em>physically </em>control a creature against its will</strong>. This especially refers to <strong>objects that intend to bind the target directly</strong>. E.g. if you create chains to bind a creature, these might even move a bit with the target. But the moment, the target moves away from the object's range, its arms/legs would simply go through the illusion. The creature would rationalize it in some way (as the spell description says), but it would be free though.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Instead, you could try to<strong> affect the creature's <em>motivation</em></strong> <strong>to do or omit to do something</strong>: E.g. you could create a cage of fire. The creature might feel the heat an decide not to touch it. Or you could create something that forces the target to go prone at its own will (e.g. a poisonous fog at a specific height, so that the could duck).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Also keep in mind that <strong>phantasms created to appear as a creature can attack, but they will not be able to cause status effects</strong>. This is because these creatures neither can take special actions nor feats. Moreover, the type of damage they deal is <em>psychical</em> in origin, not <em>physical</em>! The spell description explicitly names types of elemental damage. It would elaborate on them, if thy would be able to trigger status effects.</li> </ul><p></p><p><strong>I you want to consider, whether or not an illusionary effect is viable or not, apply the following rule of thumb:</strong></p><p></p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>"Is the object supposed to <u>directly physically affect</u> the target against its will?"</em> If yes, the effect is <strong>not possible</strong>.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul"><em>"Is the object supposed to only affect the creature's <u>motivation</u> to do or omit to do something?"</em> If yes, than it is <strong>absolutely viable and works as the spell is intended to work</strong>.</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="lkwpeter, post: 7023815, member: 6804713"] I believe, that's actually the same point as discussing the meaning of "reasonable" in the suggestion spell. The illusion of PF must be [B]backed up by evidence[/B]. If a player is able to create such an illusion, there is absolutely no reason to ask for an investigation check. The whole question about that has to be [B]considered from the target's point of view - not from the DM's one![/B] In my view, this is absolutely intended. A sign for this is the "rationalize" part of the spell description that emphasizes that even situational unlogical circumstances will be forgiven, if the initial thought of the effect was plausible. Furthermore, there are other powerful spells. E.g. think of [I]Hold Person[/I] that applies the paralyzed condition on a failed WIS save giving advantage to attacks + auto crit within 5 feet range. And the condition stays as long as the target doesn't make a successful check. Sure, [I]Phantasmal Force[/I] is powerful, but it's not overpowered, if used correctly (applying the restrictions mentioned above). And it is only single target + has an inital saving throw. No worries, I understand what you mean. English is not my mother language. How do you like the following wording? [B]Status effects in fights: [/B] [LIST] [*]The most important point is that [B]it is not possible to [I]physically [/I]control a creature against its will[/B]. This especially refers to [B]objects that intend to bind the target directly[/B]. E.g. if you create chains to bind a creature, these might even move a bit with the target. But the moment, the target moves away from the object's range, its arms/legs would simply go through the illusion. The creature would rationalize it in some way (as the spell description says), but it would be free though. [*]Instead, you could try to[B] affect the creature's [I]motivation[/I][/B] [B]to do or omit to do something[/B]: E.g. you could create a cage of fire. The creature might feel the heat an decide not to touch it. Or you could create something that forces the target to go prone at its own will (e.g. a poisonous fog at a specific height, so that the could duck). [*]Also keep in mind that [B]phantasms created to appear as a creature can attack, but they will not be able to cause status effects[/B]. This is because these creatures neither can take special actions nor feats. Moreover, the type of damage they deal is [I]psychical[/I] in origin, not [I]physical[/I]! The spell description explicitly names types of elemental damage. It would elaborate on them, if thy would be able to trigger status effects. [/LIST] [B]I you want to consider, whether or not an illusionary effect is viable or not, apply the following rule of thumb:[/B] [LIST] [*][I]"Is the object supposed to [U]directly physically affect[/U] the target against its will?"[/I] If yes, the effect is [B]not possible[/B]. [*][I]"Is the object supposed to only affect the creature's [U]motivation[/U] to do or omit to do something?"[/I] If yes, than it is [B]absolutely viable and works as the spell is intended to work[/B]. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How does the Phantasmal Force spell work correctly?
Top