Interpreting Illusion saves

[backbeat]

I am currently playing an illusionist. I want to use illusion spells in combat, to mess with the minds of my attackers. This has caused one debate already and I'm sure more will follow. I'll throw out an example, and hopefully through feedback get an idea on how to treat these things.

I use minor image to make a blade barrier seem to appear around me. As I understand it, an attacker assumes it real until he interacts with it. So he gets no save until he tries to cross my foreboding barrier. If someone gets real brave and tries, he gets a save. If he makes it, obviously he knows it’s not real. If he doesn't make the save what happens? He takes no damage, so he knows the blades do not hurt him. I don't see how "disbelieving" is any different from "believing" at this point.

** I'm not sure if this is a rules question or a general RPG question. The rule is no damge, but what I'm more concerned with is how the case of failed save, no damage taken is played out. What is the character thinking then? **

 

[irdeggman]

In this case interacting would also include "getting hit" by the blade barrier.

A figment can cause no damage, neither can a glamour.

Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot
produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They
cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide
nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently,
these spells are useful for confounding or delaying foes, but useless
for attacking them directly. For example, it is possible to use a silent
image spell to create an illusory cottage, but the cottage offers no
protection from rain.

 

[Dei]

In my campaign interaction such as you described leads to an automatic success on a disbelief save so someone leaping through the blade barrier would automatically see it as illusiory though others around him would not.

For other, less obvious interactions such as a wet object being made to appear dry the save is not automatic but does get a bonus. This save is the character deciding wether to believe their eyes and dismiss the evidence of their other senses or vice versa. If they fail they are assumed to have said, "I must have been mistaken, it's obviously dry." and should be played as though the interaction that caused the failed disbelief save had never taken place i.e. they still percieve the illusion as real. For those observing an automaticly passing interaction such as leaping through your blade barrier perhaps a spot check would be called for to determine what or if they would recieve a bonus to their own disbelief save.

It's quite a discretionary method with a lot riding in the DM's hands so it's not suitable to every table but usually a DM can judge what bonus to give on a disbelief save fairly easily. i.e. +5 or +10 for wet surface vs dry image and perhaps +15 or +20 for iced over lake vs grassy meadow image.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

I tend to agree with the automatic disbelief but, that being said, it could be possible for someone to get through a blade barrier without taking any damage (e.g., evasion). So it could be possible for someone to think they "miraculously" made it through.

 

[MarkB]

Characters gain a Will save to disbelieve illusions if they interact with them or study them carefully. That action isn't defined, but in combat conditions I would define it as spending either a standard action to make a Search check, or a move action to make an active (rather than reactive) Spot check, directed at the illusory object. In either case, the skill check is replaced with the Will save to disbelieve.

The DM shouldn't be having your opponents make these checks routinely, but a smart spellcaster, or anyone who knows your character has a tendency towards illusion magic, might well think to do so.

A few other things to consider:

• A character with ranks in Spellcraft can attempt to identify your spell as you cast it. If they succeed, they will know the result is an illusion, and can inform their friends, which in my opinion would grant them Will saves as though they had studied or interacted with the object (and even if they fail, they can choose to trust their ally and walk through it anyway).
• Image spells have a fixed location once cast. If you move beyond the spell's effect, it cannot follow you.
• If you're actively concentrating upon a spell, your opponents can probably notice you doing so, and may attack to disrupt your concentration. Even if they don't, maintaining concentration limits what else you can do in subsequent rounds - and without concentration, Image spells have very limited durations.

 

[frankthedm]

I am currently playing an illusionist. I want to use illusion spells in combat...

Big mistake. Illusions are better used to prevent combat. There are a few with direct combat applications, most fail miserably since NPCs are just as entitled to trust their HP and saves as a PC.

Make a wall of fire and the barbarian goes through it expecting some damage.

Make a wall of stone and the fighter power attacks your illusion.

Those with spellcraft will recognize your illusions for what they are if they see you casting or if they see you effect did not behave as the actual spell does.

If he doesn't make the save what happens? He takes no damage, so he knows the blades do not hurt him. I don't see how "disbelieving" is any different from "believing" at this point.

You are correct, it is not any different at that point.

 

[lukelightning]

With the blade barrier example, even if someone takes no damage they still may believe it is still dangerous (i.e. they got lucky that time).

 

[pallandrome]

If your GM will let you, try multiclassing in Shadowcrafter or Shadowcraft Mage (Underdark and Races of Stone, respectively). Either one of these Will make your illusions more "real" and allow them to cause ACTUAL damage, even on a successful save to disbelieve. Makes for an interesting basis for an illusionist character.

For now, try protecting yourself with illusory pits. Few baddies are willing to "interact" with a hundred foot deep pit, just to see if they can take it.

 

[backbeat]

The game in question is actually a gestult game. I am a ninja/illusionist going shadowcraft mage, and I have no shortage of other actions I can take at any given time. The point is for flavor, I would like to use more illusions in combat, but I want to understand the mechanics so I do so effectively.

So far I like the "automatic" disbelieve when a character proves my illusions don't effect him. I like it as a +X to save, where in the event they still fail they think "wow, I got lucky there". X would be determined by how unrealistic the result lack of interaction on the part of the illusion was.

 

[Three_Haligonians]

...(and even if they fail, they can choose to trust their ally and walk through it anyway)...

So wait.. Even if the character fails their save, the player can just act like they passed it anyway? That doesn't seem fair somehow...

J from Three Haligonians