The Gaming Den

Hi everyone,

I' just reread the description of silent image and stumbled over the mentioning of force. Now while it doesn't create texture, it seems to me that the illusion would have a touch component.

The other spells in the image line never mention anything of it again, so I don't really know what to think, and would like to our esteemed opinion

SRD wrote:
This spell creates the visual illusion of an object, creature, or force, as visualized by you. The illusion does not create sound, smell, texture, or temperature. You can move the image within the limits of the size of the effect.

Greetings,

Sma
PS: Im on vacation so ym internet access is sporadic. So please forgive any slowness of reply.

When it says force, basically it means stuff like fire, electricity, etc. The illusion doesn't actually have a component that causes any force beyond the visual but you can create illusions of a wall of fire for instance.

It's just really bad writing, but it means that you can make things look like there was heavy wind, or things were on fire, or the giant beast was pushing things over.

Note that you are not actually limited (as the spell seems to imply) to a single illusionary thingy, as one of the few examples of the spell line in action is the creation of "several orcs playing cards".

-Username17

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1097099811[/unixtime]]It's just really bad writing, but it means that you can make things look like there was heavy wind, or things were on fire, or the giant beast was pushing things over.

Wouldn't it take a glamer to actually change the appearance of something that already exists?

RC wrote:Wouldn't it take a glamer to actually change the appearance of something that already exists?

Yes and no.

A glamer would be needed to make a real house look like it was knocked over. A figment can make the illusion of a house and the illusion of a giant knocking it over.

Although, depending on the perspective and distance of the viewer, you could just as easily make a flat screen with a picture of the house being knocked over in front of the real house. Only a viewer who was close would notice it was just a 2-d effect.

-----------------------

I still don't know why illusions don't use a Spot or Spellcraft check instead of a Save.

Guest (Unregistered) at [unixtime wrote:1097107503[/unixtime]]
I still don't know why illusions don't use a Spot or Spellcraft check instead of a Save.

Couldn't you legally use spellcraft to detect illusions using the "detect ongoing spell effect" or whatever use it is?

Nope. You can only detect which spell is being cast when it is being cast, which officially does not actually entitle you to know where illusions begin or end unless you interact with them and then make your save.

Illusions right now seriously break the whole concept of stealth/perception skills, and need to be somewhat rethought in order to bring them in line.

-Username17

What about the 20 + spell level DC use of spellcraft that lets you identify a spell already in place? It says you have to see or detect the effects of the spell, which is pretty evident for an illusion I think.

RandomCasualty at [unixtime wrote:1097140295[/unixtime]]What about the 20 + spell level DC use of spellcraft that lets you identify a spell already in place? It says you have to see or detect the effects of the spell, which is pretty evident for an illusion I think.

Which basically means that if you successfully disbelieve, you can (if you have a high enough bonus) figure out what illusion spell it is.

But if you've identified it as an illusion spell, then you automatically disbelieve it because you have absolute proof that it's an illusion.

And using spellcraft for that requires no action, so we assume it happens automatically when you encounter an illusion.

Unless there's something in the rules I'm missing that says this would work... then spellcraft > illusionists.

RC wrote:But if you've identified it as an illusion spell, then you automatically disbelieve it because you have absolute proof that it's an illusion.

But if you haven't made the save you can't see the spell effect.

-Username17

FrankTrollman at [unixtime wrote:1097192646[/unixtime]]
But if you haven't made the save you can't see the spell effect.

How do you figure? When someone casts a wall of fire, I see the spell effect. I see a big collumn of fire or whatever. I can identify that as the spell "wall of fire". When someone creates an illusion, I see the illusion's effect, assuming I see or hear the illusion at all. The effect of the illusion is in fact to create something I see, that is the spell effect. So I'm actually looking at the spell effect for the illusion to work at all.

Legally, you can use spellcraft to identify illusions. It makes illusionists suck, but that's what the text actually says.

But you don't recognize it as a spell effect until you've made the will save. That's what the illusion does. It appears like the real mccoy unless and until you interact with it and make a will save. If you aren't allowed to recognize that there is a spell effect, I fail to see how you could make the claim that you could recognize the specific spell effect that you specifically don't know is even there.

-Username17

You recognize it as an illusion, that's different from recognizing it as a spell effect. You are detecting that it's not real. You can always see the spell effect, because the purpose of the effect is that you see something.

Spellcraft can detect that effect, just like when the guy splits into a bunch of identical images he can say that's mirror image. Though he won't offhand be able to pick which one is real and which is not, only that the guy is under the effects of mirror image.

However, it's another story with illusions, if you spot an image and you know it's an illusion spell, you know it's not real.

RC wrote: You recognize it as an illusion, that's different from recognizing it as a spell effect.

According to "Sage Advice" answers on the subject, no it's not. I don't know what else to tell you.

-Username17