Illusions, Zombies, and Golems

[juliaromero]

I have a couple of questions on how illusions should work. First, should there be special rules for them affecting zombies and golems and other non-intelligent creatures? Doesn't seem to make much sense to give soemthing with no Int a will save to "disbelief" an illusion no matter how much they interact with it.

Also, how often should an NPC get a will save to disbelief an illusionary monster it is fighting if there is not "obvious" clues ... ie if it is made to react when struck and such, and always seems to "near miss" when attacking? Is it every round, or just once at the beginning and then again only if something major "changes" to make them try again?

Thanks.

 

[Particle_Man]

I have a couple of questions on how illusions should work. First, should there be special rules for them affecting zombies and golems and other non-intelligent creatures? Doesn't seem to make much sense to give soemthing with no Int a will save to "disbelief" an illusion no matter how much they interact with it.

Also, how often should an NPC get a will save to disbelief an illusionary monster it is fighting if there is not "obvious" clues ... ie if it is made to react when struck and such, and always seems to "near miss" when attacking? Is it every round, or just once at the beginning and then again only if something major "changes" to make them try again?

Thanks.

Assuming that you mean figments, glamours, and shadow magic, since phantasms and patterns usually do not affect creatures immune to mind-affecting spells.

I'd say that such creatures get a save, but only the one, upon initially interacting with the illusion (assuming that there is a save allowed at all). Whatever means they use to detect something (undead don't always have eyes, but they always have darkvision) either registers X as real or flips a switch and ignores it. I suppose that a controlling necromancer who did make his save could command his undead to ignore the (illusory) "gargoyle" and attack the (real) man in the robe over there, even if the mindless undead failed its save.

Just my take on it.

 

[AuraSeer]

I suppose that a controlling necromancer who did make his save could command his undead to ignore the (illusory) "gargoyle" and attack the (real) man in the robe over there, even if the mindless undead failed its save.

I agree. If the controller spots something as an illusion, he can order his minions not to engage it. But the reverse could also happen; if the controller is the one fooled by an illusory creature, he may order his minions to attack it, if it seems to be a greater threat than whatever they went after on their own.

 

[juliaromero]

I agree. If the controller spots something as an illusion, he can order his minions not to engage it. But the reverse could also happen; if the controller is the one fooled by an illusory creature, he may order his minions to attack it, if it seems to be a greater threat than whatever they went after on their own.

The situations I'm concerned about don't involve a "Controller".

 

[juliaromero]

Oops ... double post

 

[Hypersmurf]

I have a couple of questions on how illusions should work. First, should there be special rules for them affecting zombies and golems and other non-intelligent creatures? Doesn't seem to make much sense to give soemthing with no Int a will save to "disbelief" an illusion no matter how much they interact with it.

Sean K Reynolds has an essay (well, a rant ) on the "undead can ignore all illusions" topic, but he doesn't really touch much on the "Should undead be able to disbelieve?" topic.

However, like "Sneak Attack" or "Cleave", "Will Disbelief" doesn't necessarily describe what's going on very well.

Unlike earlier editions, you don't elect to attempt to disbelieve an illusion. The "Will Disbelief" save is more a chance to recognise an inconsistency in the illusion when you interact with it, not a "force your mind to ignore the illusion" check like "I disbelieve!" used to be.

So there's no decision involved for the Zombie... either it notices "Hey, that Dire Bear isn't leaving footprints!" or it doesn't.

-Hyp.

 

[juliaromero]

So there's no decision involved for the Zombie... either it notices "Hey, that Dire Bear isn't leaving footprints!" or it doesn't.

-Hyp.

Yeah, but part of my point is can a zombie really notice that a dire bear isn't leaving footprints? It has no intelligence. Not low, but none. Same for golems.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Yeah, but part of my point is can a zombie really notice that a dire bear isn't leaving footprints? It has no intelligence. Not low, but none. Same for golems.

He can notice there's a bear.

He can notice if the bear is hostile.

He can follow instructions like "Defend this room against hostile bears, but let bears wearing green hats through."

So where do you draw the line on what he can't and can't determine based on the observations he makes?

Undead do have a Will Save entry in their stat block - even the unintelligent ones. So they qualify for Will Saves, unless the spell in question is mind-affecting.

Figments aren't, so they get a chance to save when they interact with the figment, to recognise it as illusory.

-Hyp.

 

[Particle_Man]

He can notice there's a bear.

He can notice if the bear is hostile.

He can follow instructions like "Defend this room against hostile bears, but let bears wearing green hats through."

Undead do have a Will Save entry in their stat block - even the unintelligent ones. So they qualify for Will Saves, unless the spell in question is mind-affecting.

One subtle way I would run it is that, while intelligent creatures that save still notice the vague outline of what the illusion is meant to be portraying, non-intelligent creatures that save will not see this outline. It will be as if there is nothing at all there (well, I guess technically there is nothing at all there...)

Mind you, that is more of a houserule, and prevents a controller from (mistakenly) ordering skeletons to attack an illusion that they have saved against but she hasn't.

Back on topic...

Just treat the will save as a test of the sensory-discriminatory apparatus to register sensory data as representational of reality or not-representational of reality (in a primitive, binary, go/nogo sense). All beings with sensory apparatus must have some such ability, even mindless ones, assuming that they can react to the outside world at all. Effectively, it is a modification of the frame problem, telling the artificial "robot" (golems, undead), what to ignore. Just as undead can be bluffed with a good feint maneuver in combat, so their senses can be fooled in other ways, but just as they sometimes succeed in not being bluffed, so they can sometimes "see what is really there" and not be fooled by an illusion.

 

[The Spectrum Rider]

While we're at it: can a shadow evocation spell affect an unattended item? (A tree in the forest when only the spellcaster's there....) Does the item get a disbelief roll and, if so, what is it?

The Spectrum Rider