Shadow Conjuration and non-offensive spells

[The Spectrum Rider]

That's why it should have reduced carrying weight at least (reduced speed makes little sense), because that's the effect of the phantom steed.

Why does reduced speed make less sense than reduced anything else?

If you stand on the horse's back, and you know it's an illusion (because you cast it), does it only boost you 1 or 2 feet off the ground (20% of its normal height)? Why or why not?

Personally, I don't like the implication that a person who doesn't make their save against a Shadow Evocation can get better positive use out of it than the caster can. So I allow the caster to be treated as if he failed the saving throw, if he wishes.

The Spectrum Rider

 

[Li Shenron]

People, I really appreciate your help and comments, but I don't think this is really a matter of belief. Not all illusions are a matter of belief.

Take Invisibility for example, which is a glamer. You don't get a saving throw to disbelieve that someone is invisible. Even if your friend tells you "I am going to cast invisibility on myself and grapple you", you don't suddenly see him again when he grapples you because you have "incontrovertible proof". If you cast invisibility on an object or another creature, you don't see it just because you are the caster and of course know it is an illusion.

Shadows spells are said to be "quasi-real", an incomplete definition indeed. If they damage you or otherwise give you some disadvantage they are clearly stated to have lesser effects once recognized as illusory, but this doesn't necessarily apply to their substance*. The only clear thing is that they are frail because of the less HPs, but I cannot say whether for example the weight less.

*although that could have some interesting game implications: you secretely shadow-conjure a mount in place of your enemy's steed, and when he is riding and spirited-charging you shout "dude, it's fake!" and he falls with his butt on the ground...

 

[Christian]

I think we're just talking about illusions that have "Will (disbelief)" in their Saving Throw line ...

 

[Thanee]

Yeah, I guess that really boils down to personal preference. The rules surely allow enough leeway to do it either way.

Bye
Thanee

 

[HighlandsBear]

Actually, it is in the PHB that you can voluntarily fail any save you want. Not sure that I'd let that make shadow spells work better than their description says. Clearly, if its not a combat effect they only work 20/40/60/80 % of the time.

 

[Thanee]

Yeah, it also says there, that no save is necessary if you have proof that it isn't real. My line of thinking is explained somewhere above.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Tzarevitch]

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.

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?

Honestly, this is why I have hated the Shadow Magic spells since even before 3e. I hate them because they are poorly thought out. The issue of --% real and belief or disbelief make no sense in cases where the spell does anything other than straight damage. I have had players in my campaign who have used Shadow Magic spells frequently and they cause a lot of problems.

Take the phantom steed/mount question. Another issue that it brings up is whose belief controls? If I make a shadow magic phantom steed, and Bob is interacting with it does my belief control whether it is real or not or does Bob's? Note that like many conjuration spells it is not cast "on" anyone. Also, what if you load a sack of gold on the mount, does this work? The gold can't believe in the mount in the first place.

Here is another variant of your fog cloud question:
Take one of the fire spells that can set people or objects on fire as a subsidiary effect. You cast it at flammable oil. Does the oil burn? This generates two followup questions:

1. Can shadow magic reproduce special properties of a material or energy since it is not that material or energy (i.e. does shadow magic fire burn? can you gain nurishment from conjured shadow water? does shadow magic ice melt?) and if it can, what is the subsidiary effect (if shadow magic can set paper on fire, is the subsidiary paper fire also shadow magic since the shadow magic spell is gone? Does shadow magic ice melt and if so what does it leave you with? A shadow puddle?).
2. Oil is not sentient. It has no ability to believe the fire is "real" in the first place, so what happens when the shadow fire hits it? Does it auto-disbelive?

Here's another one:
What if the oil is on a person? If the person "believes" that the fire is real and he is affected, can the shadow magic fire effect the oil or even his clothing? Does a sentient being's belief of disbelief change the results for an object that is incapable of belief?

Replace the paper with a fire giant. If you cast the same spell on a fire giant what happens? The giant is immune to fire, so is he immune to shadow magic fire? What then if he disbelieves the illusion? Note now that if the giant is immune to shadow magic fire because it is immitating real fire, his disbelief of the illusion suddenly means that he takes more damage because it is now no longer fire.

Tzarevitch

 

[Thanee]

Hmm... after reading this, I think it should be handled like this...

Unless the illusionary portion has some way to actually affect the target (i.e. deal damage, creature that attacks, etc), it has no effect at all.

Thus a mage armor spell would only confer a +1 armor bonus, unless your opponent could detect the spell and know what a mage armor is. Otherwise it makes no difference for him, he just strikes you and there is nothing to protect you, except for the 20% shadow part.

A mount or phantom steed would always have a carrying capacity of only 20%. Speed would remain the same, tho, since speed and carrying capacity are basically both factors of the total effect and reducing one would reduce the total effect likewise, so the 20% is already given then.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Saeviomagy]

Take the phantom steed/mount question. Another issue that it brings up is whose belief controls? If I make a shadow magic phantom steed, and Bob is interacting with it does my belief control whether it is real or not or does Bob's? Note that like many conjuration spells it is not cast "on" anyone. Also, what if you load a sack of gold on the mount, does this work? The gold can't believe in the mount in the first place.

The mount does work, but at 20% efficiency - the last line of the spell is "objects automatically succeed on their saves against this spell". The object has to rely on the 'shadow' portion of the spell, and cannot believe in it.

Here is another variant of your fog cloud question:
Take one of the fire spells that can set people or objects on fire as a subsidiary effect. You cast it at flammable oil. Does the oil burn? This generates two followup questions:

Yes, the oil burns. 20% ignited is still ignited.

Here's another one:
What if the oil is on a person? If the person "believes" that the fire is real and he is affected, can the shadow magic fire effect the oil or even his clothing? Does a sentient being's belief of disbelief change the results for an object that is incapable of belief?

The oil ignites. The oil burns for real. The spell may be partially disbelieved, but 20% of it cannot be.

Replace the paper with a fire giant. If you cast the same spell on a fire giant what happens? The giant is immune to fire, so is he immune to shadow magic fire? What then if he disbelieves the illusion? Note now that if the giant is immune to shadow magic fire because it is immitating real fire, his disbelief of the illusion suddenly means that he takes more damage because it is now no longer fire.

Tzarevitch

The giant is immune to fire. 20% of the spell is real fire - that's what the spell does, create a small amount of 'real' from shadow, and supplement it with illusion.

Fire is fire is fire, regardless of whether it's magic or natural or partly illusiory.

Hmm... after reading this, I think it should be handled like this...

Unless the illusionary portion has some way to actually affect the target (i.e. deal damage, creature that attacks, etc), it has no effect at all.

Thus a mage armor spell would only confer a +1 armor bonus, unless your opponent could detect the spell and know what a mage armor is. Otherwise it makes no difference for him, he just strikes you and there is nothing to protect you, except for the 20% shadow part.

A mount or phantom steed would always have a carrying capacity of only 20%. Speed would remain the same, tho, since speed and carrying capacity are basically both factors of the total effect and reducing one would reduce the total effect likewise, so the 20% is already given then.

Bye
Thanee

The illusion (for mage armour) is that of your sword bouncing off the invisible mage armour. You feel it, you react to it, and your sword swing is disrupted as a result.

As for the mount spell - this is pretty easy. Has less hitpoints and less AC, does less damage but it carries full load and moves at full speed. It's special abilities are only 20% likely to work, but normal ability scores aren't 'special abilities'. The description of shadow conjuration is pretty explicit on this.

 

[Thanee]

The illusion (for mage armour) is that of your sword bouncing off the invisible mage armour. You feel it, you react to it, and your sword swing is disrupted as a result.

Well, let's say I have a hard time to figure how something could bounce off something that isn't there (and isn't perceivable as well).

If the shadow spell would change the mental perception of the opponent, yeah, then I could see it work like that. But otherwise, it just creates an invisible armor, which doesn't stop attacks. That's hardly something that would change the way the opponent is attacking.

As for the mount spell - this is pretty easy. Has less hitpoints and less AC, does less damage but it carries full load and moves at full speed. It's special abilities are only 20% likely to work, but normal ability scores aren't 'special abilities'. The description of shadow conjuration is pretty explicit on this.

Sorry, but to me, the stuff stated in the spell description simply does not cover those spells. It's only applicable to summon monster type spells.

The big problem is, that the shadow brand of illusions is not really explained. It only states what the shadowy portion does (and what it does, if someone is fooled by the illusion). But it doesn't state at all, what kind of illusion it actually is and how the illusionary portion really works (like figment or like pattern or like phantasm?).

Bye
Thanee