Shadow Conjuration and non-offensive spells

[Li Shenron]

How Shadow Conjuration and similar spells work with offensive spells is clear, but I am not sure how it works with other spells.

Shadow objects or substances have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them.

Against disbelievers, they are 20% likely to work.

If I use it to replicate the following spells, is their effects reduced anyhow (beside HP/AC if attacked)?

Mage Armor
Mount
Unseen Servant
Glitterdust
Phantom Steed

For example, I hope that if I cast SC to replicate a Mount/Phantom Steed I am able to at least ride it even if I obiously don't "believe" in it.

What about fogs and clouds. The damage or chance of negative effect is reduced to 20% if the target makes the save, but do they still hamper vision?

 

[CrimsonTemplar]

I believe that the Shadow Mount/Phantom Steed has a reduced carrying capacity as well.

As far as the fogs and clouds hampering vision, I'd allow them to provide some concelament even if they're disbelieved.

 

[Li Shenron]

Another question: can you apply metamagic to a shadow spell? Is there any problem if I extend or heighten a Shadow-Conjured spell for example, or does the effect normally apply to the replicated spell?

 

[Saeviomagy]

How Shadow Conjuration and similar spells work with offensive spells is clear, but I am not sure how it works with other spells.

If I use it to replicate the following spells, is their effects reduced anyhow (beside HP/AC if attacked)?

Mage Armor
Mount
Unseen Servant
Glitterdust
Phantom Steed

For example, I hope that if I cast SC to replicate a Mount/Phantom Steed I am able to at least ride it even if I obiously don't "believe" in it.

First up, I think you are allowed to 'believe' in your spells... I'm not sure whether this is stated or not, but I've a vague feeling that Heart of Nightfang spire has a reference to it (in the lose-lose riddle trap)

What about fogs and clouds. The damage or chance of negative effect is reduced to 20% if the target makes the save, but do they still hamper vision?

I'd say they have 20% of their normal effect.

Which means that at 5 feet, you'll have partial concealment that's 20% effective, so a miss chance of 4%. At more than that you'll have full concealment that's 20% effective, so you'll have a miss chance of 10%.

 

[Thanee]

First up, I think you are allowed to 'believe' in your spells...

Huh? That doesn't make a lot of sense...

How could you believe in something you absolutely know is false.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

About obscuring mist example: As the spell says, it has normal effect on others, unless they make the save to disbelieve. If they do, the effect is only 20% likely to occur, which would result in the above 4% miss chance instead of 20% (20% x 20%).

About mount/phantom steed: Only 20% is real, so it should be able to carry only 20%, which makes it kinda hard to ride on it, altho the mount should still work, if you are not too heavy, phantom steed probably doesn't work (or only 20% chance to be able to carry you per casting).

About mage armor: Offers protection against opponents that do not make their save. Otherwise it only has a 20% chance to offer protection (or gives only +1 to AC, if you find that easier to use).

Glitterdust: 20% chance to blind and 20% chance to outline a target, that does make the disbelief save, but not the regular spell save.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Gez]

You don't know it's false, since you know it's powered by the strength of the Plane of Shadows.

Besides, it's easy to believe in something you know is false. There are lot of people doing it. That's, for example, a key part of the denial mechanism. The human mind is not a boolean computer.

And I imagine it's even truer for a practitioneer of Illusion magic.

 

[Thanee]

Oh, c'mon. That's completely silly. The caster knows that it isn't real. He needs no saving throw. You cannot voluntarily fail a saving throw, if there is none.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

The problem with these shadow spells is that the designers seem to have addressed only the offensive use of them.

These are the few lines about non-damaging or non-offensive effects:

Shadow conjurations are actually one-fifth (20%) as strong as the real things, though creatures who believe the shadow conjurations to be real are affected by them at full strength.

This is still IMHO referring to damaging or attacking. It has nothing to do with the Strength value for example, including carrying capacity. Otherwise it should have said explicitly. Also, you cannot expect that a shadow creature strength is 20%, because Str 4 is NOT 20% of Str 20.

Shadow objects or substances have normal effects except against those who disbelieve them.

Against disbelievers, they are 20% likely to work.

It's always talking about "effects", but I think that the writers couldn't see past the combat scenario. If I conjure a shadow mount, does it mean that the ones who believe it's real can ride it, and the ones who don't they have 80% of chance of falling with their butt on the ground?

A shadow creature has one-fifth the hit points of a normal creature of its kind (regardless of whether it’s recognized as shadowy).

That's fine. The mount or unseen servant will be more vulnerable if attacked in any case.

 

[Thanee]

Yep.

It's all in the "only 20% likely to work" part.

In general you simply have to roll for every ability, if it works or not.

As a more reasonable application, you could scale down the ability to 20% if it is numeric. It's the same effectively, just more evenly distributed.

Bye
Thanee