Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Moff_Tarkin" data-source="post: 4837831" data-attributes="member: 14175">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.</blockquote>

Verification