Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 3581616" data-attributes="member: 2525">Interaction requires an action on your part, or the illusion directly interacting with you.&nbsp; Merely being attacked from within an illusion (and not by the illusion itself) isn't interaction with the illusion itself, though it might count as proof.But, I do not think it is proof, as there are spells in the spell compendium that provide a cloudy cover that the caster can see out of but others cannot, and abilities and feats that allow people to ignore some cover and/or concealment, and you CAN attack from behind concealment, you just stand a much larger miss chance.&nbsp; In other words, it's not proof.This is precisely the kind of situation that grants a saving throw to disbelive, and not proof.&nbsp; That IS the kind of interaction they are talking about.&nbsp; You don't automatically notice some fog isn't damp! But you MIGHT notice.&nbsp; Which is why interacting grants a save.I think, if people believe silent image is too powerful, they should house rule it to a higher level rather than trying to twist the rules to nerf it.&nbsp; Your using a bomb to acomplish what could be done with a hammer.&nbsp; Your radical nerfing of this spell by tinkering with the intepretations of the illusion detection rules in general has ramifications for dozens of other spells, and consequences you do not intend.&nbsp; Let the interaction and proof rules stand as they are, and deal with this particular spell with a house rule if it's really bugging you.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 3581616, member: 2525"] Interaction requires an action on your part, or the illusion directly interacting with you. Merely being attacked from within an illusion (and not by the illusion itself) isn't interaction with the illusion itself, though it might count as proof. But, I do not think it is proof, as there are spells in the spell compendium that provide a cloudy cover that the caster can see out of but others cannot, and abilities and feats that allow people to ignore some cover and/or concealment, and you CAN attack from behind concealment, you just stand a much larger miss chance. In other words, it's not proof. This is precisely the kind of situation that grants a saving throw to disbelive, and not proof. That IS the kind of interaction they are talking about. You don't automatically notice some fog isn't damp! But you MIGHT notice. Which is why interacting grants a save. I think, if people believe silent image is too powerful, they should house rule it to a higher level rather than trying to twist the rules to nerf it. Your using a bomb to acomplish what could be done with a hammer. Your radical nerfing of this spell by tinkering with the intepretations of the illusion detection rules in general has ramifications for dozens of other spells, and consequences you do not intend. Let the interaction and proof rules stand as they are, and deal with this particular spell with a house rule if it's really bugging you. [/QUOTE]

Verification