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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Foxworthy" data-source="post: 4847823" data-attributes="member: 80704">Edit: Fixed quote box.No it wasn't it. That's not what you asked. It may have been what you meant, but it wasn't what you asked at all. I'll quote your first post so you can actually see what your original question was. I'm going to snip the in game example though as it's an explanation of the question, rtaher than the question itself.You asked what failing a save against an illusion meant, and whether PC's had the right to disbelieve an illusion regardless of the results of the disbelief check.As you can see you are the one who brought the metagaming topic up, even if you didn't use the word "metagaming" itself.You brought it up by asking if you could ignore the result of a disbelief check.Now had this been your original question the answer would be simple.No.If you suspect a body to be fake and fail to disbelieve the illusion you would still think the body is fake, just not as a result of an illusion.Failing the will save only means that you believe their is nothing amiss in regards to illusions. As I have mentioned before in this thread you are perfect in your right to suspect the body has had gentle repose cast on it. Or even mundane forms of alteration.The only problem with your original post was that it made it seem that the failed roll against an illusion led to the expressed statement to another player that they should cast detect magic to check to see if it was an illusion. Which of course the player, that asked for the detect magic against illusion to be cast, character did not believe illusion was the reason. So for him to asked for the person to cast detect magic against an illusion seems like metagaming as opposed to logical investigation.</blockquote>

Verification