Illusion Magic: I Don't Believe This Crap

[Aktariel]

Illusion magic has the distinguishing characteristic of being either the most powerful school of magic, or the least -- entirely at the whims of your playgroup. Illusions can be used as distractions, threats, enticements, concealment, modes of communication, prisons, attacks, disguises, false targets, entertainments, misdirections, religious inspiration, incitements to riot, madness provokers, commercial fraud, redecoration, time wasters, limited-use ability wasters (like prepared spells, scroll spells, or use-per-day spell-like abilities), or traps (in conjunction with dangerous terrain, monsters, substances, events, or magical effects). And that's just using the 1st level spell silent image.

People just don't expect their senses to lead them wrong, even in a world where people know that illusions exist. I mean, if a wall of fire suddenly pops up out of nowhere, it's actually more likely to actually be a real damaging wall made out of magical fire than it is to be an illusion of the same thing. And truthfully, who wants to pop a hand in to check? Not me either.

What this means is that illusions are incredibly powerful because they allow such perfect forgeries of the real world. The downside of this is that lots of DMs try to counter the efforts of creative players by using a particularly harsh interpretation of the Disbelief rules in order to nerf illusions out of existence. It works like this: by the rules, you get a Will save vs. an illusion if you ''interact" with it. DMs looking to throw salt in an illusionist's game usually allow that to mean ''in the same square as an illusion" or ''looking at it." You also automatically make a save if you have ''proof that an illusion isn't real." What that means is anyone's guess, because in D&D even the most unlikely circumstances could quite plausibly occur without illusionary influence. A silent orc moving through the grass might be a silent image of an orc, an orc in a silence effect, an incorporeal orc, or just an orc who happens to be really sneaky. Once you disbelieved the illusion, you suddenly got to see through its like it was transparent.

Usually, DMs looking to punish illusionists will give multiple saves per turn, and then at some point just say that the target has automatically disbelieved the illusion, and this is possible only because the rules regarding illusions were written in the style of previous editions of D&D called ''Rule 0" where playing a pick-up game of D&D involved a few hours of discussion about how the DM handled most effects. The current edition of D&D (3.X) mostly did away with this because it sucks up valuable game time to have arguments about D&D rules and it was the worst part of playing the game; however, illusions were never fully overhauled, so we are still stuck with this noise.

Potential effects of illusions are also hotly debated. Some genius at WotC has laid down the law and said that the various image and illusion spells don't cause darkness, but that doesn't stop them from creating opaque mist or smoke or dust, obscuring objects, or even autumn leaves that drift around a person's head and float away from his touch, effectively blinding a person from dangers as well as complete darkness. Additionally, there are DM vs Player wars where DMs try to interpret the ''single object, creature, or force" line to mean ''no more than one person or a monster in the illusion" and players respond with things like ''its an illusion of a single force that summoned many monsters like the spell summon monster or gate" or ''its one object connected by many invisible threads." Other DMs and players are convinced that you control all visual information in the Area of Effect, while others agree but say things like ''you can't trap a creature in a bubble with visual information on the inside that mimics the world except for some key creatures/object/terrain/effects, but people outside see him as normal because his image is on the outside of bubble."

In the end, it's a mess because the current rules can be made to do amazing things by creative people, but those amazing things break the level system and that means that DMs are forced to punish players for their creativity, thus hurting everyone. That being said, here are some playable rules regarding illusions that won't cause you to stab out your own eyes:

...so where are they?

[K]

I decided that writing pages of pages on DnD rules for no pay and tiny amounts of internet fame was not my bag, so I shelved the rules I was working on. If I ever write a full RPG that I can sell, they will appear there.

Sorry.

[PoliteNewb]

Here are some that will work. They won't make a lot of people here happy, because they don't work the way they'd want them to, and they do not make illusions especially powerful, so I guarantee they will provoke a lot of rage from people who like illusions. But they are simple enough to be manageable, and still allow illusions to be useful in certain circumstances.

For Figments...

1.) Forget "interacting". You get a save anytime the illusion does not have a sensory trait that you are capable of perceiving.

If the illusion is sight only, you get a save any time it should make noise and doesn't.

If the illusion is sight and sound, you get a save only if it should have a smell or thermal component (heat/cold) and doesn't. Keep in mind that this generally requires close proximity (human beings don't smell that well), but creatures with Scent will not be easily fooled. I'd say you need to be within 5' even for very strong smells, and things with relatively mild smells (like most people) don't grant a save; if it's something you wouldn't notice if you had a head cold, it doesn't grant you a save.

If the illusion is sight, sound, thermal, and olfactory, you don't get a save unless you stick your hand in it.

If you stick your hand (or other part of your body) in an illusion, it is obviously an illusion, and you don't need a save. Illusions are not solid and cannot be touched, so anytime you touch one you know it's an illusion. This does not make it go "poof", nor does it make it transparent so you can see through it...you just know it's an illusion. Note that this means illusory objects block the sight of the caster just as much as other observers, even though they know they are illusions.

You do NOT get a save for stabbing something with a spear or shooting an arrow at it! In combat, these things happen fast, and you probably can't be sure your attack didn't miss, glance off armor, etc. Testing an illusion's (or suspected illusion's) "realness" should require a standard action and a touch attack (if the target is moving), and if the target is REAL, this should provoke an attack of opportunity. If you touch something dangerous that you suspect is an illusion (for instance, a wall of fire) you automatically take damage, no save.

Keep in mind that since Ghost Sound just produces sound, and since sounds NEVER have another sensory component (specifically, not a tactile one), you NEVER get a save against Ghost Sound. It just makes a sound, and people hear it. Ta da. Ventriloquism is similar (and yes, it should work so that YOU don't make any noise, the noise comes from somewhere else).

Similarly, if you use illusions carefully, your enemies will not normally get a save against them. Walls don't make noise, have perceivable smells, or radiate heat/cold...so you get no save against an Illusory Wall (or for that matter, a Silent Image of a wall). Either you stick your hand in it and you know what it is, or you don't and you don't. Similarly, subtle illusions at a distance will usually be automatically believed, since there is no reason to disbelieve. Illusions are thus tools of misdirection, and should be used in that manner.

2.) Once you fail a save vs. an illusion, you do not get another unless a DIFFERENT sensory factor comes into play (or until you stick your hand in it). Once you accept that a silent orc is real even though you can't hear him (by failing a save), you don't get another save unless something else happens (maybe he waves an illusory torch in your face and it doesn't feel hot).

3.) Illusions do not react perfectly and instantly at all times. D&D is a turn-based game, which means some people act before other people...and your illusions act when you act. If an orc moves away from you, you don't get to automatically follow...and neither does the illusory box you're trying to project on his head. You can make it follow as a move action, on your turn.

4.) Forget "forces". You can only make illusions of tangible, corporeal solids or liquids, with the sole exception of fire. No illusions of darkness or mist or crap like that.

5.) Figment spells create ONE THING. Whether that thing is a bee, or a huge pool of water, size doesn't matter (within the area of effect of the spell)...what does matter is you can't create a swarm of bees, or a pool with fish in it. You can create an orc in armor with a sword...but that armor and sword are a part of the orc; he can't get undressed or throw his sword at you.

For glamers...

1.) Most glamers do not grant a saving throw (I can't think of any, offhand, that should); they look like (and sound like, smell like, etc) what the illusionist wants them to. They change appearances, and since most objects have an appearance, there is no reason to suspect that an armchair is really a rock...until you try to sit on it. Remove the ability of glamers to affect the tactile; touch is one sense illusions never fool. Even after you realize a glamer is there, you STILL can't see through it...it still looks fake, you need to feel around to get an idea of what's real. If you use disguise self to make yourself look like an orc, someone is going to need to feel your face to realize you don't have a snout.

For phantasms...

No special rules needed; phantasms are fairly straightforward mind-affecting spells, and mostly either work or they don't.

For shadows...

I actually suggest getting rid of shadow spells, personally. If you want to keep the Shadow Conjuration/Shadow Evocation lines, revert them to earlier edition rules:
a.) Shadow Conjuration can only duplicate Summon Monster spells.
b.) Shadow Evocation can only mimic direct-damage-dealing evocations.

Are these fairly harsh restrictions on illusions? Yes, they are. Illusions are probably the most open-ended magic available, and they NEED strict rules to prevent outrageous abuse. If you feel this means the level should be lowered on some (or all) illusion spells, that's fine. But illusion spells without sufficient restrictions are not balanced at any level. If you feel this makes illusions suck and you'll never use them, that's fine too.

EDITED TO ADD:

I forgot about the whole "somebody proves it's an illusion" thing. If someone else recognizes an illusion and shouts "hey you guys, these things aren't real!", you can reroll saves for sensory failure...maybe you thought it was a really quiet orc before, but if Bob says it's an illusion, it might make you think twice. If there is no sensory issue, you don't get another save unless that person does something pretty convincing (like, waves his hand around in the orc's head)...in which case you should probably get a save, maybe at a +4 bonus or something. If someone spends multiple rounds shoving his head in the illusory wall of fire, you should probably get to auto-save even if you don't personally go touch it.

All of the above assume the person warning you is someone you trust, and have reason to believe. If it's a complete stranger...why the fuck should you trust him? It's your ass. Maybe he's lying, or mistaken. Maybe he has fire resistance, and that's why he can touch the wall of fire. In most parties, I'd figure that a fellow PC is usually considered trustworthy...but if your teammates are evil or just companions of circumstance, that might not apply. Most NPCs are probably not trustworthy enough. Remember, the question being asked is, "would I jump of a cliff if this guy told me there was a haystack at the bottom, when I can't see one?".

[Dominicius]

I decided that writing pages of pages on DnD rules for no pay and tiny amounts of internet fame was not my bag, so I shelved the rules I was working on. If I ever write a full RPG that I can sell, they will appear there.

Sorry.

So how much money do we need to send you?

[RobbyPants]

You do NOT get a save for stabbing something with a spear or shooting an arrow at it! In combat, these things happen fast, and you probably can't be sure your attack didn't miss, glance off armor, etc. Testing an illusion's (or suspected illusion's) "realness" should require a standard action and a touch attack (if the target is moving), and if the target is REAL, this should provoke an attack of opportunity.

What if the target is incapable of moving, like a wall? I don't see why you can't throw a rock at a wall and just watch it go right through. I also don't see why you can't make a ranged touch attack with something sufficiently large (like a net or blanket) to check if a combatant is real.

Personally, I'd allow any ranged or melee touch attack to work, even with arrows and the like.

Remove the ability of glamers to affect the tactile; touch is one sense illusions never fool.

Why? Why can they fool smell but not touch?

[tzor]

My favorite illusion joke of them all, from an actual game ...

PLAYER: "I disbelieve."
DM: "OK ... You go away."

Turned out he wasn't running an illusion at all, but was involving the players in a shared dream, so when the PC disbelieved, he woke up.

But the complete stares by the other players to the DM was priceless.

[tzor]

Remove the ability of glamers to affect the tactile; touch is one sense illusions never fool.

Why? Why can they fool smell but not touch?

That's simple, smell is something that can be fooled completely in the mind. Touch is a direct interaction that involves the laws of physics. Illusions should not be able to fool either the law of gravity or the law of momentum.

Otherwise you could easily try to make an illusion of a bridge to cross a pit.

[PoliteNewb]

You do NOT get a save for stabbing something with a spear or shooting an arrow at it! In combat, these things happen fast, and you probably can't be sure your attack didn't miss, glance off armor, etc. Testing an illusion's (or suspected illusion's) "realness" should require a standard action and a touch attack (if the target is moving), and if the target is REAL, this should provoke an attack of opportunity.

What if the target is incapable of moving, like a wall? I don't see why you can't throw a rock at a wall and just watch it go right through. I also don't see why you can't make a ranged touch attack with something sufficiently large (like a net or blanket) to check if a combatant is real.

That was primarily for mobile illusions (creatures)...against a wall or something, yeah, that could maybe work. My line of thinking was that if you shoot an arrow and it seems to go through...you don't know what really happened. What if the wall absorbed/disintegrated the arrow? With your own body, you are aware that "yes, I shoved my hand in there and I can pull it out and still wiggle my fingers...yeah, that wall is bullshit."

Besides...I was trying not to nerf them TOO hard.

Remove the ability of glamers to affect the tactile; touch is one sense illusions never fool.

Why? Why can they fool smell but not touch?

Tzor hit on it. But also because allowing illusions to fool all your senses leads to bullshit like Josh K described in another thread, where aboleths make you drown and you don't even get to realize it until you drop dead with water in your lungs, because you think the lake is somebody's living room. You should be able to tell when you're fucking drowning. Or on fire. Or bleeding.

[schpeelah]

To be more exact, it's OK to have illusionary tactile sensations, it's just that an illusory wall's realistic texture doesn't stop you from putting your hand through it. Not until you upgrade it to a Shadow Illusion.

[Kaelik]

So to be clear, your solution to Illusions is to ban 3/4ths of the Illusions spells? How is that different from just banning spells explicitly. If your problem is with Aboleths casting Hallucinatory Terrain, maybe you should just ban Hallucinatory Terrain, instead of nerfing it to a 5th level spell that can only be used when people are miles away from the Illusion.

[PoliteNewb]

To be more exact, it's OK to have illusionary tactile sensations, it's just that an illusory wall's realistic texture doesn't stop you from putting your hand through it. Not until you upgrade it to a Shadow Illusion.

Not in my book...because where is the line between "I'm touching this wall and feeling it's texture" and "my fingers go through it?". If your character says, "I touch the wall", the DM should say "you don't feel it".

This allows thermal sensations, because you can "feel" those without touching things. If you get near an illusory wall of fire, it's going to feel hot...you're not going to want to stick your hand in there. But if you do, you're not going to get burned. It will feel hot like a hot water bottle, not "OMG IT BURNS".

So to be clear, your solution to Illusions is to ban 3/4ths of the Illusions spells? How is that different from just banning spells explicitly. If your problem is with Aboleths casting Hallucinatory Terrain, maybe you should just ban Hallucinatory Terrain, instead of nerfing it to a 5th level spell that can only be used when people are miles away from the Illusion.

Yeah, that's funny, and about what I expected from you.
Saying "Silent Image has these limitations" is not the same as banning it. I suggested banning about, what, 6 spells from the PH? Cry me a river.

Hallucinatory Terrain works when you are 5 feet from it. It just doesn't work when you're walking around, sticking your hands into trees. Actually, it works even then...even if you're fully aware the forest you're in is illusory, you STILL SEE IT. You still don't know what it's hiding. But yeah, the main use for illusions is to mislead people. If you create hallucinatory terrain of a lake, people are probably going to ride around it, not wade right in to see what's hidden in there. Ditto an illusion of a big canyon, or similar things.

But if you think this nerfed version of Hallucinatory Terrain is too weak for a 5th level spell, that's fine. I said that. Make it a 3rd level spell. Or a 1st level spell, I don't give a fuck. I probably agree it's not worth a 5th level spell (3rd-4th seems right to me).
But if you let it do what it did before, it's too powerful for a 5th level spell. AND it causes headaches. So fuck it.

Saying "waaaah, you made it so weak, why don't you just ban it?" is a bullshit question. Unless I made it so weak you would not take it as a 0th level spell, that is a cop-out. There are spells that one might want to exist, but with limited effect. Like, pretty much all spells.

[Kaelik]

If you actually understood the rules of spell areas, you would know that Hallucinatory Terrain takes up an area, and that by definition, being anywhere inside that area counts as touching the illusion, you you actually can't make an illusion of a canyon, because anyone on the ground who is within the area of the illusion IE, anyone passing through the canyon, would automatically know that it's an Illusion. Likewise, if you hallucinatory Terrained a forest, it would be discovered to be an illusion the second anyone walked into the forest, not when they stuck a hand in a tree.

Secondly, "Just change the spell level" is not a valid argument for why you were previously right. If I said "Shapechange now only makes you look like the creature, and gives a +1 bonus to attack rolls, and does nothing else." And someone points out that's retarded, I couldn't fall back on "Just make it a 0th level spell!" because a) I didn't say that, so it is implied to leave it at it's current level, b) There is already a spell that does basically the same thing at a lower level, so why make Hallucinatory Terrain a level 1 spell, when Silent Image exists, and does all the same things, but better.

[tzor]

Tzor hit on it. But also because allowing illusions to fool all your senses leads to bullshit like Josh K described in another thread, where aboleths make you drown and you don't even get to realize it until you drop dead with water in your lungs, because you think the lake is somebody's living room. You should be able to tell when you're fucking drowning. Or on fire. Or bleeding.

I'm going to slightly disagree here. I think the water thing is obvious only because water has a inheritantly different interaction than air, so moving through it, breathing it, etc will have different effects that just don't make sense to someone thinking they are walking through normal air.

I'm also going to argue that illusions affect the mind, so automatic responses (your response to drowning is partially automatic) don't get surpressed. On fire or bleeding on the other hand is a different story.

This allows thermal sensations, because you can "feel" those without touching things. If you get near an illusory wall of fire, it's going to feel hot...you're not going to want to stick your hand in there. But if you do, you're not going to get burned. It will feel hot like a hot water bottle, not "OMG IT BURNS".

Why not? You just nerfed my favorite Dune Toy, the one used by the B.G. to determine if a person is a human or an animal. It basically gave an illusion of such pain from fire damage that Paul thought his hand had burned to bare bones.

[PoliteNewb]

I'm going to slightly disagree here. I think the water thing is obvious only because water has a inheritantly different interaction than air, so moving through it, breathing it, etc will have different effects that just don't make sense to someone thinking they are walking through normal air.

Moving through it and breathing it are touching it...with your body, or your lungs. The only way we "interact" with anything is through our 5 senses. If an illusion can interfere with all 5 senses, NOTHING is obvious.

I'm also going to argue that illusions affect the mind, so automatic responses (your response to drowning is partially automatic) don't get suppressed. On fire or bleeding on the other hand is a different story.

And I'm going to argue that they're NOT mind affecting, because they don't have that tag. They fuck with the information going to your brain (via your optic nerves, etc), NOT what your brain does with that information. Illusions are like holograms, or audio recordings.

Phantasms are specifically mind-affecting. Figments and Glamers aren't.

This allows thermal sensations, because you can "feel" those without touching things. If you get near an illusory wall of fire, it's going to feel hot...you're not going to want to stick your hand in there. But if you do, you're not going to get burned. It will feel hot like a hot water bottle, not "OMG IT BURNS".

Why not? You just nerfed my favorite Dune Toy, the one used by the B.G. to determine if a person is a human or an animal. It basically gave an illusion of such pain from fire damage that Paul thought his hand had burned to bare bones.

Sorry. D&D has no rules for "pain", really. If you stuck your hand in a real fire, the only effect is that you take damage. And in an abstract system, one can argue that some aspect of HP damage is pain. Since illusions don't deal damage, they can't provoke really major pain.

I guess if you wanted to say, "yeah, you feel the searing agony of your hand melting", that'd probably be okay...but it has no mechanical effect.

[tzor]

I'm going to slightly disagree here. I think the water thing is obvious only because water has a inheritantly different interaction than air, so moving through it, breathing it, etc will have different effects that just don't make sense to someone thinking they are walking through normal air.

Moving through it and breathing it are touching it...with your body, or your lungs. The only way we "interact" with anything is through our 5 senses. If an illusion can interfere with all 5 senses, NOTHING is obvious.

But your movement rate through water is vastly not equal to your movement rate through air. Illusions don't fake the locations of your body parts, so if you are walking through air and you wonder why your legs are dragging so slowly and it's hard to scratch your nose and (yes) the direction UP seems to be right in front of you (because you are floating ... DUH) then something is clearly wrong with the world.

I'm also going to argue that illusions affect the mind, so automatic responses (your response to drowning is partially automatic) don't get suppressed. On fire or bleeding on the other hand is a different story.

And I'm going to argue that they're NOT mind affecting, because they don't have that tag. They fuck with the information going to your brain (via your optic nerves, etc), NOT what your brain does with that information. Illusions are like holograms, or audio recordings.

My point is that illusions don't affect auto responses. So you can't make a hot object appear to not be hot and not have the hand react when it touches it, because that reaction occurs long before the mind.

Sorry. D&D has no rules for "pain", really.

It has no rules for a lot of things, but if you go by that route, it has no rules for illusions either, practically speaking. So they can't exist?

[PoliteNewb]

My point is that illusions don't affect auto responses. So you can't make a hot object appear to not be hot and not have the hand react when it touches it, because that reaction occurs long before the mind.

Okay, let's look at this in real world terms (as much as we can).
You "see" things because your eyeballs take in reflected light, and your optic nerves transmit that information to your brain, which then processes it and says, "that's an apple". That's how you see.
You "feel" things because your skin contacts them, and the nerve endings in your fingertips transmit that information to your brain, which then processes and says "hey, that's fucking hot". That's how you feel.

If illusions provide false sensory inputs, your brain is going to process those false sensory inputs. GIGO. The brain is not affected; it's working perfectly. What's being fooled are the way that information is transmitted to your brain, through the 5 senses.

We don't process these using our mind, our conscious brain...but our brain is absolutely involved; it processes that nerve information and sends the reflex response back to your hand/arm. Problem is, when you grab that red hot thing, the illusion is telling your hand "nothing wrong here". So your nerves don't transmit that burning sensation, and your autonomic responses don't say "let go of that, dumbass".

Sorry. D&D has no rules for "pain", really.

It has no rules for a lot of things, but if you go by that route, it has no rules for illusions either, practically speaking. So they can't exist?

Sure it has rules for illusions. How many pages of the PH are dedicated to explaining what "figments" and "glamers" are? Do illusions grant a Will save? How big an illusion can you make? How long does it last? There are rules for all that shit. Granted, they are often bad rules, but they are rules nonetheless. Further, this thread is nothing BUT rules for illusions, so if we're starting there, yes, D&D has rules for illusions.

What do the rules say happen when your hand gets burned? Go on, tell me. And I'll tell you what happened when you get an illusion of your hand being burned.

[Midnight_v]

I decided that writing pages of pages on DnD rules for no pay and tiny amounts of internet fame was not my bag, so I shelved the rules I was working on. If I ever write a full RPG that I can sell, they will appear there.

Sorry.

So how much money do we need to send you?

+1

[Dean]

A series of problems with what's been presented:

The idea of your rules explicitly forbidding being able to create "forces" is both uselessly vague and needless. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to create mist or fog. Forces also means nothing so it's basically unenforceable. I get what you're trying to do in that you only want people to make "things, like real things!" but that won't work. If I want to make a globe of the color red to show people the color I want for my cloak I guarantee you would let me, but if I want to make a bigger globe of the color black suddenly that's off the rules because "no darkness fuck you" is why.

Secondly saying the images create "One thing" is also silly and needlessly vague. A swarm of bee's is "one thing" as much as a pool of water is "one thing". "One thing" is not a proper enough definition to operate under and simply doesn't work. If you wanted to get clever on it you could work with words in a way that might be clever and functional. Saying that Illusions can only create something describable in a single word. There would be no reason for this it would just be "Magic, that's why" but it would mean you could make a "Pool" but not a "Swarm of Bee's". You could also however make an "Army" or "Senate" but not a "Wall of Fire", so it's still pretty silly. All in all you are almost certainly best left with just defining the outer limits of the image in area and nothing else, because that's about the only thing that works or makes any sense.

Finally and I imagine most interesting to you. Illusions should absolutely not be able to generate heat. Your illusion rules break their own defining feature of never being a tactile illusion if you allow heat. This is to the rules detriment as a whole. The moment you allow heat to be output from an illusion you IMMEDIATELY change what the discipline does as a whole and how it operates. It goes from being a discipline that can use trickery and guile by making people, who trust what they think they see and hear, make incorrect assumptions about the real world around them. To some sort of psychic, everyone living in a dream world, who's to say what's real and not, matrix master. Sight and Sound are generated from the outside world and registered through the eyes and ears, heat is a tactile sensation, you FEEL heat. And the moment an illusion can make you feel something you need to redefine what an illusion is. Can I cook over an illusion of a fire? Can I warm myself over it? Can I melt snow with it? The stupid answer to all of these is "NO, of course not it's just the ILLUSION of heat" but that's stupid because it's the sort of stupid thing a stupid person would say. Heat is a sensation yes but it is also an energy form and one with big time real effects. How hot can I make something? Will this new "illusion heat" every generate pain?

The moment an illusion can generate a sensation you have to redefine how they work to somehow operating INSIDE people's heads as opposed to out in the world. Because if it's just making you think it's creating heat then it's not an Illusion it's an enchantment and that's a different spell school. That's how you get people drowning in illusions and all sorts of other stupid shit. So no heat from illusions please and thank you good morning.

[Quantumboost]

Illusions should absolutely not be able to generate heat.[blah blah physics stuff]

No, this is nonsense. Illusions of sound don't cause vibration damage no matter how finely tuned they seem to be to resonant frequencies, illusions of light don't hurt vampires regardless of how bright they appear, etc.

Figments and Glamers specifically do not create anything real. Aside from exceptional effects like silence's protection against [Sonic] effects, that means that illusions of those subschools do not create light or sound (even silence doesn't *create* sound). They "alter the sensory qualities". What a Figment or Glamer illusion does is cause arbitrary sensory devices to behave as though the illusion's contents are "real".

This "illusion heat" will not let you cook over it, because it can't alter the alchemical or elemental makeup of the food. It will warm you over it, but the air within the illusion range will feel warmer, because that's part of your sense inputs. It will not melt snow for the same reason as cooking.

Heat is a sensation yes but it is also an energy form and one with big time real effects.

There's a famous philosophical conundrum: "If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound?" When you get down to it: The tree falls. Air vibrates. No auditory cortices respond to vibration due to the tree falling. All the question illustrates is a bug in the human brain. Sure, you have a dangling neuron saying "SOUND: YES OR NO", but there is nothing outside their brain which corresponds to that dangly bit. So, unhappily and irrationally, people who hear the question and that response still feel like there's something to be answered. At least, until the reason why it feels that way is understood.

This is relevant because you are conflating the two concepts of heat-as-energy and heat-as-sensation. You are probably doing this because your brain associates the word "heat" with both of them, and doesn't notice any difference most of the time. If you feel heat, it is much more likely that the thing has a lot of heat-energy, and if the thing is hot, you are much more likely to feel the heat-sensation. Just like something walking upright, talking, and using elaborate tools happen together so often that we link those together into a single concept of a "human" and treat them as one thing together.

Heat-as-sensation and heat-as-energy are not the same thing. You can have one without the other.

The existence of chile peppers is proof that you can have the sensation without the energy. If you have jalapeno juice on your skin, your skin will feel hotter without a single degree of temperature changing anywhere.

The existence of local anaesthetic is proof that you can have the energy without the sensation, which also allows for illusions of things being colder than they are.

This contention that you can't have a thermal illusion is the product of you previously (and hopefully not now) being unable to separate the responses you get from your tactile nerves from actual temperature, no more. A delusion - an illusion - of the mind.

[norms29]

Heat is a sensation yes but it is also an energy form and one with big time real effects.

yeah... heat is a form of energy, just like LIGHT AND SOUND

[RobbyPants]

It's all a matter of where you draw your lines, and it looks like a lot of them are being drawn arbitrarily to try to prevent some abuses. I don't think it's working all that effectively, though.

[PoliteNewb]

Dean: thanks for analyzing, and I'll see what I can do to address your issues.

The idea of your rules explicitly forbidding being able to create "forces" is both uselessly vague and needless. There is no reason you shouldn't be able to create mist or fog. Forces also means nothing so it's basically unenforceable. I get what you're trying to do in that you only want people to make "things, like real things!" but that won't work. If I want to make a globe of the color red to show people the color I want for my cloak I guarantee you would let me, but if I want to make a bigger globe of the color black suddenly that's off the rules because "no darkness fuck you" is why.

I don't think it's either vague or useless; it's specific (although illusions are intangible, the thing you are making an illusion of needs to be tangible) and it's useful in the sense that it helps prevent endless wrangling over what a "force" is. Shit, if you can make illusions of forces, can I make an illusion of magnetism? Or gravity? What the fuck is a "force"?

Your example of the black is well put, and I honestly don't have a problem with you saying "this is an illusion of a giant black lump", and when people are in the lump they can't see. I guess I'm cool with that...it's not like being able to make illusory darkness breaks the game. It's just that when you can make literally ANYTHING the game does become broken.

Secondly saying the images create "One thing" is also silly and needlessly vague. A swarm of bee's is "one thing" as much as a pool of water is "one thing". "One thing" is not a proper enough definition to operate under and simply doesn't work. If you wanted to get clever on it you could work with words in a way that might be clever and functional. Saying that Illusions can only create something describable in a single word. There would be no reason for this it would just be "Magic, that's why" but it would mean you could make a "Pool" but not a "Swarm of Bee's". You could also however make an "Army" or "Senate" but not a "Wall of Fire", so it's still pretty silly. All in all you are almost certainly best left with just defining the outer limits of the image in area and nothing else, because that's about the only thing that works or makes any sense.

I have been reconsidering that one...and since we've thrown out the "interaction" rules, I suppose it probably wouldn't be the end of the world to let you create a swarm of fucking bees.

One thing I absolutely do want to address, though, is using figments as substitutes for glamers. Mirage Arcana creates an illusory room or building, okay? If you can do the same thing with Silent Image (by saying "this is an illusion of all of these things that are one thing"), it kinda throws things outta whack. The difference between glamers and figments is supposed to be that figments are new "things", whereas glamers change what existing things look like. I would like to preserve that.
This may require a significant spell rewrite, though.

As I already wrote it, though...no, you couldn't create "senate" or "army"...because those are definitionally lots of things. The entire definition of an army is that it is a bunch of guys. This isn't about semantics, it's about math. And "magic that's why" is a perfectly reasonable explanation for the limitations on any spell.

Finally and I imagine most interesting to you. Illusions should absolutely not be able to generate heat.

I actually agree with you. Illusions cannot generate heat.
Instead, they generate the sensation of heat...which is not energy, of any kind. It is a signal to your nerve endings that they are perceiving a certain phenomenon, one that happens to be false. Illusory heat cannot burn you, cook meat, melt anything, because it isn't real. Your senses simply think it is, and tell your brain that.
Here's an example...can you warm yourself over an illusory fire? In one sense, sure, because rubbing your hands by it will make them feel warm. But they will not BE warm; the 20-below temperature is still going to gradually give you frostbite, and whether or not you feel it is irrelevant. You will feel warm right up to the point where you die of exposure.

I realize you said "that's stupid"...but you offer no proof of WHY. How hot can you make something? What does that matter? The only way to perceive the temperature differences is human sensation, and it is simply not fine enough to know the difference between 10 degrees and 11 degrees. When you hold your hand up to something, it feels "hot" or "warm". You can make those sensations. Who gives a shit how hot that is, exactly?
Can it create pain? Technically, a sword cut in D&D doesn't create pain, unless you define pain as HP damage. So basically yes, it can create pain, but not pain that will affect you mechanically in any way whatever.

It's all a matter of where you draw your lines, and it looks like a lot of them are being drawn arbitrarily to try to prevent some abuses. I don't think it's working all that effectively, though.

Yes, they were drawn arbitrarily to try and prevent abuse, I cop to that. Why don't you think they work, and how can they work better without being overly complex?

[hogarth]

I decided that writing pages of pages on DnD rules for no pay and tiny amounts of internet fame was not my bag, so I shelved the rules I was working on. If I ever write a full RPG that I can sell, they will appear there.

Sorry.

So how much money do we need to send you?

+1

Hey, get in line -- I'm still waiting for his $8, 100 page, level 1-20 D&D adventure path.

[Dean]

Pardon my ill explanation of my points on heat. Allow me to try again in a post entirely about that, with greater detail given to the (admittedly circuitously demonstrated) point I was trying to make.

Before I go on I realize I need to make a point about an assumption I have always made about illusions which I realize upon introspection is totally contendable.

I assume Illusion magic really creates the light and sound it's images are made of. I assume that if you had a recording studio and you used illusion magic to make the sound of a roaring lion then it would pick up, register, and be able to record that noise. Not that only the people would hear it. I suppose this is totally debatable, but I assumed that this was the reason that the PHB spells put such tight limits on maximum decibel volume spells which also increased as you leveled up. I assumed you were creating -more- light and -more- sound.
It may very well be your interpretation that an illusion spell is some sort of mass mental enchantment generated by line of sight to the effect or being in the area of effect for the noise. If this is your interpretation I can in no way contend with it as this is magic. So.....magic.

However I think that generally speaking when people imagine it my way. That the light and sound effects your creating actually do occur, as opposed to creating a mental impression in sentient minds in the nearby area that they have occurred. If my Mage uses an illusion of a large light or ball of fire to illuminate a dungeon I assume they are ACTUALLY SEEING the dungeon as opposed to seeing a mental impression of their minds best guess as to what this dungeon might look like if they could see it. As after all if there really is no light then it still really is pitch black.

So there. My assumption is and has always been that illusions can actually create sound and light.

So with regards to heat: Heat breaks the line in my opinion, because when you say illusions can generate heat (as well as some other effects) you move into the second column of thinking about illusions where they are a supremely strange enchantment spell and that has side effects, like the no light idea. So my statements are that if you allow heat into your repertoire of illusion magic you are moving illusions in general into functioning in a way I find, as I had elucidated earlier, "Stupid".

[Quantumboost]

So there. My assumption is and has always been that illusions can actually create sound and light.

It's good that you realize this assumption. The next step is to test your assumption - whether it is compatible with what the game mechanics say about illusions, specifically (Figment) and (Glamer) illusions.

Here's the relevant text:

A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.) Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the image produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like.

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.

Now, with your assumption, the illusion would be projecting light which would then reflect off of surfaces and sound which would disturb objects (for instance, if there was very fine sand or dust). But that would be a real effect - you could rig the system to trigger indirectly off the disturbance of dust, and have wide-ranging consequences.

That is incompatible with a figment not causing real effects. Your assumption does not mesh with the rules for how illusions work, so we must discard it - or at least severely down-rank it.


Of course, if it were a mental effect, a Figment couldn't affect golems, which it obviously does, not allowing Spell Resistance or being [Mind-Affecting]. So that (strawman) position is also wrong.


How about this: The illusion causes a sensory override within the perceived bounds of the illusion, so that anyone who looks at/listens to the illusion sees/hears/smells/feels the illusion's contents in the area rather than whatever is actually there, within the limits of the illusion. See also: Ends of the Matrix treatment of AR/VR.

Under this interpretation, when you make an illusion of a fireball inside a darkened room and don't make the illusion cover the walls, you see a ball of fire in the middle of the room, without any change in brightness of the room itself. It is wholly compatible with rules as written and the concept of an illusion.

This also makes thermal illusions pretty damn obvious in how they work. When you move your hand over the illusion, it feels warm, and if it's supposed to be hot enough causes the sensation of your hand burning. The illusion can't cook food, because the food is cooked or not based on temperature - not sensory inputs. If you sit around an illusory campfire, you feel warm until you die of frostbite.


You may not LIKE that interpretation, but it's the only one compatible with how D&D illusions work. And I see no reason to force silent image to subsume light - a perfectly good Evocation [Light] spell.