I want to believe

[irdeggman]

The first thing to establish is that the missing kama is proof enough that the body is fake. I don’t see why people don’t understand that. A minor detail is usually all the proof you need. Imagine an evil rogue that is harassing your party uses a disguise check to disguise himself has one of your party members. You make spot check to notice that your friend has blue eyes when you know his eyes to be brown. Would you say that’s just a minor detail that you should ignore?

Now that I have established my belief that the missing kama is proof of a fake body, let me establish why a Will save does not make us ignore that proof. Imagine your talking to a German fellow and during the conversation his accent slips and you hear him speak with his native English accent. He then waves his hand through the air like Obi-Wan and says, “You didn’t just hear that.” Of course you heard him. You caught him slip and now you know he is a fake.

When we opened the coffin and saw the Kama was missing, and we knew the body was a fake. The same way you would know that your now blue-eyed friend is an imposter. The Will save in this situation is the vampire doing the jedi mind trick and saying, “You don’t see a missing kama.” But since illusions aren’t mind affecting, it cant convince me that I didn’t notice a clue that’s right in front of my face. I’ve already noticed the missing kama and know the body is a fake. The illusion spell can attempt to “jedi mind trick” me all it wants. I already know the truth.

No - the missing kama was what led you to believe the body was fake. It is not absolute proof as you insist, there are other possibilities.

The 2 failed saving throws led you to believe that you were mistaken and that there must be some other reason for the kama not being there or that the kama orginal seen might have been fake.

None of these possibilites was taken because the players felt the body was fake, the players didn't fail a saving throw to determine how they interpreted what they saw. The PCs did make and fail 2 saving throws to determine how they interpreted what they saw and yet still acted as if they never made the attempts in the first place.

Also how did the PCs know the kama was "magical".

Was a detect magic done on it earlier?

Did it glow? - not necessarily proof, but an indicator - a light spell or the equivalent could have been cast on it.

Did the DM tell you it was?

Did they figure it out because of the damage it was doing?

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

It doesn’t matter if the kama was magical or not. What matters was it was there then it wasn’t. And the missing kama is proof enough the vampire in the coffin was different then the one we fought. If I was better at art, I would draw two pictures of this vampire. They would be identical except he would be holding a kama in one, and be barehanded in the other. I could then bring in my 7 year old cousin and ask him if the 2 are the same or not. I doubt it would take long for the 7 year old to point and the second picture and say, “He doesn’t have a weapon.”

You ask what it would take to prove to me the body in the coffin was real. It would take the body in the coffin looking like the one I fought, without any noticeable difference. One vampire had a kama and one did not, big difference. What if one had a beard and one didn’t? What if one had long hair and one had short? What if one was male and one was female? How big of a noticeable difference do you need before you become suspicious?

Your claiming that failing the Will save forces our minds to rationalize the missing kama. It forces us to implant illusions in our own heads about where the kama could be.

On the other hand, the missing kama could just be like finding a bloody glove at the home of a murder suspect. “Oh well, he made his bluff against us so we have no indication that he is lying. We might has take this dirty little glove, all covered in the victims blood, and toss it in the trash. Its probably not as important as we say it is.”

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

Oh, and just to clear up the thing about 2 failed saves. There was only one failed save. The DM gave us a will save against the illusion as well as the real one so that we couldent use out of character knowlege to determine which one was real. Since is was obvious from our observations that we knew the two were not the same.

 

[Theroc]

You ask what it would take to prove to me the body in the coffin was real. It would take the body in the coffin looking like the one I fought, without any noticeable difference. One vampire had a kama and one did not, big difference. What if one had a beard and one didn’t? What if one had long hair and one had short? What if one was male and one was female? How big of a noticeable difference do you need before you become suspicious?

He may have dropped it while injured... he may have stashed it before you arrived. He may have cut his hair to throw you off the scent. He may have shaved to throw you off the scent. He may have used an illusion on you the FIRST time you encountered him to make you THINK he had a beard or long hair when he really didn't.

By the way, you never did explain how the kama was so important... as many have stated, there are various reasons the kama might not be there, and I pointed out two of them.

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

You can use any argument you want to say we couldn’t have called the body fake without out of character information. And you can present any logic to explain why the missing kama wasn’t proof enough. But no argument can trump the fact that it actually happened.

When the DM said that the corpse in the coffin didn’t have a kama, we called it a fake. And we did so without any out of character information about the module, or the vampire.

If the missing kama isn’t proof the body is fake then how do you explain that we drew that conclusion from the missing kama? If calling the body a fake is using out of character information then how did we do so with no out of character information, and even before we knew there was a save? People are trying to argue that something that actually happened couldn’t happen. It’s like making the argument that a pig cant fly while you watch a pig flying loops right in front of you.

 

[Theroc]

You can use any argument you want to say we couldn’t have called the body fake without out of character information. And you can present any logic to explain why the missing kama wasn’t proof enough. But no argument can trump the fact that it actually happened.

When the DM said that the corpse in the coffin didn’t have a kama, we called it a fake. And we did so without any out of character information about the module, or the vampire.

If the missing kama isn’t proof the body is fake then how do you explain that we drew that conclusion from the missing kama? If calling the body a fake is using out of character information then how did we do so with no out of character information, and even before we knew there was a save? People are trying to argue that something that actually happened couldn’t happen. It’s like making the argument that a pig cant fly while you watch a pig flying loops right in front of you.

He may have dropped it while injured... he may have stashed it before you arrived. He may have cut his hair to throw you off the scent. He may have shaved to throw you off the scent. He may have used an illusion on you the FIRST time you encountered him to make you THINK he had a beard or long hair when he really didn't.

By the way, you never did explain how the kama was so important... as many have stated, there are various reasons the kama might not be there, and I pointed out two of them.

You didn't address my post at all, really. Just more generalized, "You don't know what you're talking about" stuff.

You are assuming the only conclusion that can be drawn from the kama is "Fake body! Illusion!" when there were multiple other explanations. And you still aren't addressing why the kama was irrefutable proof of illusion.

It's like asking a drunk person what 3x3 is, have him answer six, and then stating is irrefutable proof the drunk is a moron. Just because you concluded that doesn't mean it's the only conclusion or that you're right.

 

[irdeggman]

You didn't address my post at all, really. Just more generalized, "You don't know what you're talking about" stuff.

You are assuming the only conclusion that can be drawn from the kama is "Fake body! Illusion!" when there were multiple other explanations. And you still aren't addressing why the kama was irrefutable proof of illusion.

It's like asking a drunk person what 3x3 is, have him answer six, and then stating is irrefutable proof the drunk is a moron. Just because you concluded that doesn't mean it's the only conclusion or that you're right.

Yup - and it only backs up my previous comment

Your game needs to include no saving throws for illusions and Search, Sense Motive and Knowledge Checks should never ever be done.

You insist on ignoring the results of those results - which is fine for a house-rule, but is strictly against the RAW.

 

[coyote6]

I think the GM should have made the Will saves for the PCs, secretly, and then told anyone who made it that there was an illusion; if no one made, he could maybe ask "what's your Spot/Search?", as if he'd rolled a skill roll for some PC. Then there wouldn't have been a mention of Will saves, which was pretty much like hanging a giant "Hello, Welcome To My Illusion" sign on the whole thing, and naturally led the players to suspect illusions.

Without that Will save, then any player suspicions of illusions wouldn't have been "metagaming" (in as much as the PCs know that illusions exist in the world); it would've just been suspicious player characters. Then if they tried detect magic, it would've just been PCs trying various measures, and starting with the lowest level of spells to investigate.

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

Theroc, you are right, it is possible to draw other conclusions about the missing kama. But the conclusion we drew is that the body was fake. You say the missing kama wouldn’t convince somebody that the body was a fake, but the fact is it did. Your say we cant know the body is a fake without out of character knowledge but we did.

You haven’t really addressed my issue. The fact that the metagaming argument claims that something which actually happened couldn’t possibly happen. How can you claim that event X is impossible when event X is actually happening before your eyes. I would challenge the smartest man on the planet to make an argument that a bumble bee cant fly, and I guarantee you his argument would fail because bees can fly.

 

[Theroc]

Theroc, you are right, it is possible to draw other conclusions about the missing kama. But the conclusion we drew is that the body was fake. You say the missing kama wouldn’t convince somebody that the body was a fake, but the fact is it did. Your say we cant know the body is a fake without out of character knowledge but we did.

You haven’t really addressed my issue. The fact that the metagaming argument claims that something which actually happened couldn’t possibly happen. How can you claim that event X is impossible when event X is actually happening before your eyes. I would challenge the smartest man on the planet to make an argument that a bumble bee cant fly, and I guarantee you his argument would fail because bees can fly.

Where did I say I thought you were metagaming? I never claimed anything was impossible. You assumed since I didn't jump in accusing everyone else of being wrong and praising you as right, that I was saying you were wrong.

I'm saying you're acting as if everyone else is stupid because they don't see that as the first and most convincing conclusion. It isn't the only conclusion, you keep acting like everyone is telling you it's impossible, when all I've seen anyone say is it's IMPROBABLE that it would be your first conclusion. Especially since FAKE does not mean ILLUSION. And even if you suspect an illusion, it was entirely possible the FIRST vampire's traits were an Illusion done to trick you into suspecting you'd found the wrong vampire when you found the right one.