I want to believe

[Moff_Tarkin]

Ok, lets look at this in terms of the game world and not the real world. Here is what my character knows based on previous encounters with this DM’s brand of illusions.

He knows that some things in the world that appear to be real can be magically created images. He knows that some people, when interacting with these illusions, will find no empirical evidence that they are false.

We had previously run into an illusionary pit trap. When a PC fell into the trap and failed his save he felt himself falling in, and felt the spikes enter his body. We all saw him fall in; we saw the spikes go into his body. It was real in every way to us and to him. Only when we later uncovered that the pit was an illusion did we realize what we had seen was false. That gives my character all the experience he needs to question things that are out of place, even if they appear to be real.

I, as a player, assumed to be the body to be a fake due to my previous experiences with illusions and their effects. My player assumed the body to be a fake due to his previous experiences with illusions and their effects. Exact same thought process using the exact same evidence. So please tell me where the meta-gaming came in.

This next argument, I’ll admit, is a little shaky. But I’ll make it anyway on the off chance it will sway somebody. The DM’s interpretation denies the entire concept of faith. Faith is believing in something without proof, or sometimes not believing in something despite proof. Our DM’s interpretation of illusions almost makes it seem as if the concept of faith doesn’t exist in his game. I hope our Cleric doesn’t lose his spells.

 

[MichaelK]

This next argument, I’ll admit, is a little shaky. But I’ll make it anyway on the off chance it will sway somebody. The DM’s interpretation denies the entire concept of faith. Faith is believing in something without proof, or sometimes not believing in something despite proof. Our DM’s interpretation of illusions almost makes it seem as if the concept of faith doesn’t exist in his game. I hope our Cleric doesn’t lose his spells.

Some might argue that this is why Clerics have high will saves.

Anyway, it is a perpetual problem in games that you may have a perceptive player controlling a stupid character or a socially inept player who supposedly runs a charming bard for their character. In this case what's written on the character sheet and what's provided by the player contradict one another.

The degree to which a character's actions should be governed by the player's choices and the degree to which random chance and the characters statistics should control them is something that's often debated... but rarely solved.

You seem to be on one side, your DM the other. This thread is divided in a similar fashion.

Frankly I think it all stems originally from your DM not having thoroughly read the rules on magic in the PHB or running illusions to more of a 2nd edition standard than a 3.x standard. This could have been avoided with a closer following the rules.

But... now that the problem has occurred, I'd recommend not worrying too much about who is right. This is a thorny issue with a lot of tough dilemnas involved.

Instead maybe talk with your DM. Express your concerns and discuss how you can work together to make the game run better for everyone. See if you can find a compromise.

 

[Foxworthy]

I, as a player, assumed to be the body to be a fake due to my previous experiences with illusions and their effects. My player assumed the body to be a fake due to his previous experiences with illusions and their effects. Exact same thought process using the exact same evidence. So please tell me where the meta-gaming came in.

You character didn't assume the body to be a fake by illusion. He realized that nothing was amiss in regards to the body being an illusion because he failed his saving throw.

Your metagaming came in when you decided that your character still thought the the body was still a fake because of the illusion despite the fact that the failed saving throw said otherwise.

Once your character fails the saving throw to disbelief he no longer thinks that illusion is the reason the body is a fake. He can still think the body is a fake, just not because of an illusion.

 

[aboyd]

Just to add fuel to the fire, I thought I'd bring in the Phantasmal Killer spell. It's an illusion that can be turned against the spellcaster. When the illusion is turned on the spellcaster, he must use a Will save to disbelieve his own illusion. If he fails, he believes it so much that he could actually take damage from it.

I think that gives an important example of how illusions work. Even if you know that it's an illusion (because you cast it), you can still have your brain twisted into thinking it's real. Therefore, some vampire-hunters who didn't cast the illusion and really know nothing for certain would definitely think the illusion is real. If they think there is a missing weapon, they'd need to take illusions off the menu and try other things -- secret doors, the possibility that there are twin vampires and the one they seek is elsewhere, etc.

 

[Moff_Tarkin]

Remember that the DM’s ruling is that interaction does not give an automatic save. And that an illusion appears real in every way if you interact with it in the way it expects you to.

When we opened the coffin the DM said that we see the corpse of the vampire. When we said that we decapitate/burn the corpse, the DM claimed that went off without a hitch. There was no Will save for that interaction either. So we “as players” had no evidence that the body was an illusion, yet we still suspected that it likely was. Why can’t the same thought process apply to our characters? Are they not as smart as us? Are they not as familiar with illusions despite having encountered them first hand? If we as players can suspect a body to be fake with no evidence from the DM, not even a Will save, then why cant our characters hold the same suspicions.

People also tend to think a lot of things are metagaming when they actually aren’t. Lets say I choose to specialize in a given weapon based on its stats in the PHB. I have had people say that is metagaming, but its not. Game rules translate into the game world. My character knows that weapon X does more damage than weapon Y. He knows weapon X has more uses with various combat styles (feats). In fact, there are very few game rules that don’t translate into the game world. So I, as a player, choosing my skills, feats, weapons, etc. based on numbers from the book isn’t metagaming. All those numbers translate into the game world and my character chooses them for the same reasons I did.

 

[Vegepygmy]

I think that gives an important example of how illusions work. Even if you know that it's an illusion (because you cast it), you can still have your brain twisted into thinking it's real.

Eh, not so much. This is an important example of how mind-affecting illusions work, which all phantasms are, but really says nothing at all about figments such as the one in question.

I'll say it again: the DM is solely responsible for the mess in this case. He changed the way illusions operate, and thus (unintentionally) changed the way characters in his world would reasonably react to them. As Moff Tarkin has correctly pointed out, if you know from experience that you can't rely on your senses to pierce illusions, the fact that you sense "nothing amiss" wouldn't necessarily alter your behavior. In such a world, it would not be unreasonable for the characters to continue their investigations despite failing their saves. Thus, there is no metagaming (or at least, you'll never be able to prove there is).

 

[akbearfoot]

Plus, it would be difficult to put together the exact thought processes of each player when all this happened. Could be the spell caster's player was thinking illusion right from the get go, but the more headstrong guy who was in a hurry to hack off the vampires head was the one leading the out of combat action etc...

It's clear the PCs have several options and strategies at their disposal. The fact that they had to make a save doesn't suddenly make any option they choose metagaming just because it would also reveal the illusion. Might seem that way because of the way the player phrased his reaction. But the PCs were probably already planning on using all those strategies anyways. Search to find secret loot, detect magic to find magic items/invisible kamas, illusionary walls etc...the non-mind-affecting illusion isn't allowed to stop them from using any of that.

 

[irdeggman]

When we opened the coffin the DM said that we see the corpse of the vampire. When we said that we decapitate/burn the corpse, the DM claimed that went off without a hitch. There was no Will save for that interaction either. So we “as players” had no evidence that the body was an illusion, yet we still suspected that it likely was. Why can’t the same thought process apply to our characters? Are they not as smart as us? Are they not as familiar with illusions despite having encountered them first hand? If we as players can suspect a body to be fake with no evidence from the DM, not even a Will save, then why cant our characters hold the same suspicions.

This is the core of metagaming ligic.

You must separate the two.

Just because you as a player have memorized the entire MM does not mean that your PC has.

Just because you as a player have much experience with real life sword fighting does not mean that your wizard PC does.

Again you have not given us a lot of information about the PCs themselves - only sporadic information on real life comaprisions to justifying your decision and examples of how your DM is a "bad DM".

No one here is arguing based on the information given that the DM is incorrect in how he handles illusions per the RAW.

But almost everyone is critizing using player knowledge to run your PC (i.e., metgaming).

Attempts at rationalizing this stance basically are falling on deaf ears because it is a rationalization and not a stance based on RAW and what is commonly believed as to be proper role-playing etiquette.

What levels/classes are the PCs?
What skills do they possess?
How much experience have they had with vampires (or other undead)?
What is their "normal" pattern for searching for treasure?
How do they normal behave (i.e. what is the basic personality type of the PCs)?

 

[Foxworthy]

Plus, it would be difficult to put together the exact thought processes of each player when all this happened. Could be the spell caster's player was thinking illusion right from the get go, but the more headstrong guy who was in a hurry to hack off the vampires head was the one leading the out of combat action etc...

It's clear the PCs have several options and strategies at their disposal. The fact that they had to make a save doesn't suddenly make any option they choose metagaming just because it would also reveal the illusion. Might seem that way because of the way the player phrased his reaction. But the PCs were probably already planning on using all those strategies anyways. Search to find secret loot, detect magic to find magic items/invisible kamas, illusionary walls etc...the non-mind-affecting illusion isn't allowed to stop them from using any of that.

Again, just because something isn't Mind Affecting doesn't mean it can't exert control over a creature/person. An intelligent plant is still subject to Command Plant even though it's not Mind Affecting. Mind Affecting is nothing more than a descriptor to tell how spells interact with other game effects. That would be like saying Melf's Acid Arrow can't cause something to die because it's not a Death effect.

Anyway, your right that the illusion wouldn't stop the players from thinking it's a fake corpse. It also wouldn't normally prevent them from casting detect magic...

Except the OP already said that he asked another player to cast detect magic to figure out it was an illusion "after" he failed a disbelief check.

His character failed the disbelief check so he no longer thinks it's an illusion. He may still believe the body to be a fake though.

The character that doesn't think it's an illusion then asks another character to cast detect magic to find out if it's an illusion. Despite the fact that the character asking doesn't believe their is an illusion.

The reason the character does this is because the player failed a saving throw. The character is acting on the knowledge that the player failed the saving throw.

If the character would have asked the other character to cast detect magic to see if the body was preserved with Gentle Repose, or any other spell, than no one would have been saying he was metagaming.

But he didn't he had the other player cast detect magic because he found out it was an illusion by failing a saving throw. That's metagaming. He decide his course of action based on a failed saving throw.

And while his DM has changed the rules on how illusions work, he obviously hasn't change the way disbelief works.

 

[zendruid]

Simple:

You fail the save you believe the illusion to be real (ie. the body is a body and it looks like the vampire).

IF anyone interacts with the illusion in anyway (cutting it's head off, burning it, moving it, sniffing it, playing with it's hair, etc) they are allowed a save to disbelieve. Them's the rules. No matter how convincing the illusion you get a save for any interaction.

IF you fail this save see above.

IF you fail this save and say to another player I just failed this save cast detect magic to see if this is an illusion you are not playing in character and the DM has several choices.

He can let it fly for the sake of continuing play.

He can deny you experience for overcoming the encounter (you broke the rules you get no xp).

He can come up with an on the fly effect or spell that would radically change the encounter and prevent the PC's from taking their course of action.

He cannot however tell you what your PC's do or do not do unless there is an ingame effect that would prevent such action. Believing that an illusion is real does not prevent you from being suspicious of the circumstances surrounding the illusion. In the OP there was reason to believe that this is not the simple case though. The character failed the save then instructed another player to make an action based on out of character knowledge.

If the player still suspected something was wrong (not that it's an illusion but rather there maybe another reason for the missing kama) he can investigate other avenues but he does not get an in character justification for asking for someone to try and see if it's an illusion. That is poor roleplaying.

To the player: don't ever use OOC knowledge to make IC actions. Period. I would whole-heartedly support the DM in placing XP based sanctions against your character for this. Please don't argue with your DM during the game abide by his ruling on the RAW. Save the rules lawyering for after the game.

This is not a scripted form of entertainment, for that we have TV, DM's let your players do what they want within the bounds of the rules. If they do something you don't agree with that isn't clear in the rules don't argue. Simply make a note on the characters xp total and award less xp for bad roleplaying. Save the discussion of rules for after the game or you risk ruining everyones fun.

You are the DUNGEON master not the PUPPET master. You do not under any circumstances get to tell a person what to think or do. If you do you are a fascist who believes they are superior to their players and as such I hope I never have you as a DM (now I could be totally mislead, you may not have told players that they could not perform an action that is clearly allowable in the rules, in which case the above does not apply to you). You control the world, the players control their characters. That is how this game works.

If the rules of the particular illusion say your character becomes oblivious to surrounding circumstances then yes the player is required to follow those rules. There is no illusion that states that in any rules.

You come across a forest in the middle of the desert. You fail your save and believe that the forest is real. You can still think in character that something is fishy about the forest in the desert and can ask others to help you discover why.

The "character" simply may have thought there could be another magical effect that he could not see or that the detect magic would reveal the location of the magical kama.

Ok now my post starts to fall apart and I walk away.