slb@drutx.UUCP (Sue Brezden) (11/19/85)
A question (well, a whole area of questions, actually) We've been
wondering about...
How do illusionist spells work? How do you play them? If an
illusionist uses Phantasmal Force to make a bridge across a chasm
for his friends, can they walk on it? If so, how? Would the
illusionist have to cast it secretly, to avoid disbelief by the other
players--leading to a sudden descent? What is reality anyway? (Sorry,
I got carried away. :-)
I have not seen illusionist spells discussed here, and they seem
to be the most confusing ones around. Some of them, the high level
ones, seem VERY powerful. (Point and you're dead sorts of things.)
Any tips on DMing illusionists and/or playing them? Thanks.
--
Sue Brezden
ihnp4!drutx!slb
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To search for perfection is all very well,
But to look for heaven is to live here in hell.
--Sting
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~mff@wuphys.UUCP (Swamp Thing) (11/19/85)
In article <620@drutx.UUCP> slb@drutx.UUCP (Sue Brezden) writes: > >How do illusionist spells work? How do you play them? If an >illusionist uses Phantasmal Force to make a bridge across a chasm >for his friends, can they walk on it? If so, how? >Some of them, the high level >ones, seem VERY powerful. (Point and you're dead sorts of things.) > That's something we've worried about too. In our campaign, you could not walk on an illusionary bridge, because it's not really there, and thus cannot support you against gravity. You might, however, think you were, until, very suddenly, you would stop thinking so (Splat!). It's not very clear at all how you treat something like a phantasmal force of a red dragon. Can a first level illusionist create a 90 h.p. red dragon and have it snuff out a high-level party? And what happens when you swing at it, and your sword passes right through it? The way we have handled this is that you can only create monsters which you have studied carefully, and you must be able to make them react realistically to "damage" that they take, although even this is not always satisfactory. One idea we have toyed with is to use have the "realness" of an illusion depend on the relative hit dice of the caster vs. the monster being created. We haven't actually tried this, though. As for high-level illusionist spells being nasty, have you looked at "Death" (6th lev. M.U.) latley? (Let's see. That's 4d20, right?) Or how about cloudkill? Mark F. Flynn Department of Physics Washington University St. Louis, MO 63130 ihnp4!wuphys!mff "There is no dark side of the moon, really. Matter of fact, it's all dark." P. Floyd
cc100jr@gitpyr.UUCP (Joel M. Rives) (11/20/85)
Sue -
I must agree with you. Illusionists are often difficult to judge for.
The question of belief is a big one and the answers you decide upon
can make the illusionist character either very powerful or very ineffectual
if you aren't careful. One of the major obstacles to overcome is a systematic
method for determining when a PC (or NPC) gets to save versus the illusion.
One method, which I used with some success, is to come up with a dice table
for disbelief of illusions based upon the character's intellegence. The table
could then be used by the GM for NPCs as well as PCs to determine whether they
doubt the reality of what they see. Bonuses could be given for certain cir-
cumstances - such as the presence of a known illusionist or a poorly concieved
illusion (i.e. the presence of a white dragon in the middle of the dessert).
You might also give bonuses in favor of the illusionist based upon their level
and for cleverly contrived illusions. If the character makes his/her disbeleif
roll, then they may make their savings throw versus the spell. Or alternately,
you may wish to make the disbelief roll THE savings throw vs. Illusions in
general.
The efffective reality of an illusion will depend largely upon the type of
illusion it is. As you know there are gradiated levels of illusions based
upon whether the illusion contains sound effects, tactile senses, etc...
In general, if a character believes an illusion and is struck by a spell
or spell-like power from that illusion, that character will act in all ways
as if they had indeed been effected by the spell (unless they manage to save
against it). However, no real effect can be produced directly from the
illusionary spell. In other words, a character struck by an illusion of
a fireball will believe that they are engulfed by a real fireball (assuming
they fail their disbelief roll) and react accordingly. However, no real
damage is done to the character from the spell. Damage could accrue in-
directly, though. For example, if a character is climbing a rope and an
illusionist creates the illusion that the rope has suddenly turned into a snake
which in turn bites the character, the character may believe that they have
taken damage from the snake bite - which they have not. The character may,
however, take damage from falling when he lets go of the rope-turned-snake.
In reference to the illusionary bridge you mentioned, It may be possible to
fool a party into believing there is a bridge there. I might even allow a
character to be fooled into believing they are actually walking across the
bridge - until they actually strike the bottom of the ravine that is!
Some, more powerful illusions do have a modicum of reality intertwined
amoungst the strands of illusion (Demi-Shadow Magic for example). The
effectiveness of the reality aspect of these spells must be adjudicated
on a spell-by-spell basis.
I hope this is of some use to you.
the never-present whisper spirit
Joel Rives
Georgia Insitute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
...!{akgua,allegra,amd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!gitpyr!cc100jr
"Remember, no matter where you go, there you are!"
<< Buckaroo Banzai >>prs@aicchi.UUCP (Schmidt) (11/20/85)
This is my first posting to the net ever so please be patient if I mess up a bit.(A lot even! :-)) Sue Brezden writes: > How do illusionist spells work? How do you play them? If an > illusionist uses Phantasmal Force to make a bridge across a chasm > for his friends, can they walk on it? If so, how? Would the > illusionist have to cast it secretly, to avoid disbelief by the other > players--leading to a sudden descent? . . . In Dragon magazine (Issue #66, pg. 31), Tom Armstrong writes, " ... the damage taken as a result of belief in an illusory pit, for example, ... is not ACTUAL damage, but 'mental' or 'shock' damage: i.e., damage induced by the believer's mind because the mind 'knew' that the 'fall' would cause harm to the body." While I have never DM'ed, I do have many hours of play time to my credit and the people I've played with have discussed this at length. The general consensus was that in order for an illusion to be effective it must be perceived (i.e., seen/heard/felt/smelt/etc.) by the person you wish it to affect. It must also not violate the laws of physics (real and/or magical). There is a caveat to this second rule, see below for an explanation. This means that if you cast a Phas. Force lightning bolt into the face of Joe orc, it will quite likely make orc crispies of him because he THINKS/BELIEVES it does. Now, if Joe happens to be sleeping at the time it would have no affect whatsoever because Phas. Force creates an illusion that is exclusively visual (i.e, it must be seen to work). Your bridge example wouldn't work with Phas. Force because even if the characters believe there is a bridge there, their bodies would actually fall. They might even seem to them that they are walking across the bridge until their bodies are smashed to pieces from the real, physical damage of falling to the bottom of the chasm. > I have not seen illusionist spells discussed here, and they seem > to be the most confusing ones around. Some of them, the high level > ones, seem VERY powerful. (Point and you're dead sorts of things.) > Any tips on DMing illusionists and/or playing them? Thanks. This is where the aforementioned caveat comes into play. The reason that the upper level illusionist spells are so powerful is to demonstrate that the illusionists has become so great as to make their illusions a reality.(That was a run-on I know!). This is the only point at which an illusionist spell can violate/change the laws of physics. To use the above examples -- If you used an Improved P. Force lightning bolt on Joe orc, he wouldn't need to be looking at you for the spells to zap him because IPF has an audio component as well so he could hear the bolt. Even better still, the 3rd level Spectral Force might even kill Joe whilst he slept because it has a thermal component ast well. As for the bridge scenario, while PF wouldn't work an Alter Reality (7th level, probably the most powerful Illusionist spell there is) would because it changes the actual physical reality upon which it is cast. This turned out to be a little longer an less coherent than I wanted it to be but like I said this is my first attempt at posting news. I hoped it helped. Paul R. Schmidt ihnp4!aicchi!prs ============================================================================= An elephant is a mouse made to government specifications. - L. Long =============================================================================
andrews@ubc-cs.UUCP (Jamie Andrews) (11/20/85)
Most posters have taken the tack that an illusion is completely in the
mind of the one deceived. I suppose the converse is to say that the power of
the mind is supreme; if the characters *believe* in the illusion, *everything*
will happen as if it were real.
With this interpretation, the illusory fireball causes real damage because
the character's powers of control over his own body are subverted to make them
cause 3rd-degree burns. Kind of like those saints that could make stigmata
(nail wounds) appear on their hands and feet.
Similarly, if the party *really believed* that that bridge over the chasm
were there, they would be able to walk across it -- though to someone who
didn't believe they would seem to be walking on air, and though if they for one
instant disbelieved they would plunge into the chasm. In this case it would be
risky to get a party to walk over its own illusionist's bridge, because no one
except maybe a Paladin or a Monk would have the mental discipline to believe in
it so strongly.
Conversely, I can imagine the illusionist creating an illusory bridge and
letting the poor grunt Orcs on the other side stream across. Then just before
they reached the near side, someone could yell "It's an illusion!" -- and watch
them all go the way of Gandalf & the Balrog.
--Jamie.
...!ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!andrews
"For slain ye can be, and slain ye shall be"mqh9523@ritcv.UUCP (Michael Hojnowski) (11/21/85)
<Mmmm, tasty!> > How do illusionist spells work? How do you play them? If an > illusionist uses Phantasmal Force to make a bridge across a chasm > for his friends, can they walk on it? If so, how? Would the > illusionist have to cast it secretly, to avoid disbelief by the other > players--leading to a sudden descent? What is reality anyway? (Sorry, > I got carried away. :-) Illusionists are my favorite class. Illusionist spells work by affecting the mind of the recipiant. In my universe, an illusionists spells cannot alter physical laws (Except when we're talking "Alter Reality" and such). For the phantom bridge, the (fooled) characters would believe the bridge is there, but it wouldn't fool gravity. The characters would fall through the bridge, and at that point, they would probably get a big bonus on their "disbelieving" roll (not much help at that point). In my universe, illusions of (something) affects you just like that (something) would unless you successfully disbelieve. If you're unfamiliar with the damage that the (something) does, then I do damage according to the illusionists level (more on that later). I don't give a roll for disbelieving unless the character specifically tells me (s)he disbelieves. For example, if a party comes upon a nasty person in flowing robes, who throws a fireball at them, they'll all take fireball damage. If it happened to be a whimpy illusion, such as a phantasmal force (as opposed to a spectral force), I secretly roll to see if anyone in the party notices. If someone does notice, I'll tell them, and from then on, they get bonuses on disbelief saves if they choose to request them. I DO NOT let a character disbelieve a fireball, while cowering behind his +N shield, and opening the stopper on his potion of fire resistance. In my universe, you either disbelieve, or you take the damage. The other "hard" thing to decide about illusionists, is how to work damage on spells. I decided to work the damage based on the level of the illusionist, and familiarity. Basically, if the character expects to get whalloped for 37 D10 of damage, he will. But if the character is being attacked by a person he never met, he'll take damage based on the level of the illusionist. For example, if a second level illusionist throws a fireball, it does 2 D6 of damage. If a fourth level illusionists creates an illusion of a fighter, the fighter will be fourth level, and have the same hit points as the illusionist. If the illusionist creates an illusion of a red dragon, and the party has fought one before, they will believe they are taking dragon damage. The dragon will, however, have the same hit points as the illusionist. (I made that up arbitrarily, but the seems to help game balance). Well, I've babbled long enough, I'd also like to see how other people run illusionists, anything that makes sense usually gets worked into my universe. When I DM, I'm always carrying a few "Alter Fantasy" spells, and a potion of confuse PC's. Mike Hojnowski (Hojo) |allegra| (UUCP) |decvax |!rochester!ritcv!mqh9523 (cute quote goes here) |seismo | (CSNET) mqh9523@ritcv
jso@edison.UUCP (John Owens) (11/22/85)
> > How do illusionist spells work? How do you play them? If an > illusionist uses Phantasmal Force to make a bridge across a chasm > for his friends, can they walk on it? If so, how? Would the > illusionist have to cast it secretly, to avoid disbelief by the other > players--leading to a sudden descent? What is reality anyway? (Sorry, > I got carried away. :-) > > I have not seen illusionist spells discussed here, and they seem > to be the most confusing ones around. Some of them, the high level > ones, seem VERY powerful. (Point and you're dead sorts of things.) > Any tips on DMing illusionists and/or playing them? Thanks. > > Sue Brezden > ihnp4!drutx!slb The key point about illusionists spells is that they are NOT real. (Yes, whatever that means...) If an illusionist creates a bridge, no one can actually walk across it; it would be perfect for fooling someone chasing you into running into the chasm, though.... (If the illusion was sophisticated enough, each member of a chasing party could see the ones in front run across safely, but the DM would have to judge if the illusionist could carry off the necessary concentration (probably based on Intelligence and Level)). As a DM, one has to be careful not to let players get away with having PCs believe illusions cast by an illusionist either in or helping the party. A good ground rule to avoid being taken advantage of: if the player suspects or knows it's an illusion, so does the PC. Illusionist spells can be VERY powerful, if played right. Certainly NPCs could be scared to death by some things an illusionist might come up with, but no NPC is going to believe a major demon on the 4th level of the dungeon of Podunk castle, especially after just running into a bunch of silly PCs.... As a DM, I base an NPC's disbelief on the quality of the spell, how many different senses are involved (an illusion of fire that doesn't crackle and gives off no heat?), and the intelligence/wisdom of the character. For PCs, if the player decides he doesn't believe in it, then that's good enough (subject to a roll, but I don't have any books or tables with me). Unless, of course, the player gets into the habit of saying "I disbelieve" every time he runs up against something too big for him; then I rule (when the REAL illusion comes up) that his disbelief, being such a common thing, doesn't have any real power. An interesting thought: if you play a monk or a cleric with Buddhist or similar tendencies, does it mean anything at all for the PC to disbelieve in the reality of something? {It's all maya, so what's the emotional difference between maya created by the laws of physics and maya created by the Will of an illusionist. (The emotional difference being what creates the psychic (not necessarily spiritual) energy to break the effect of the illusion.)} That's how I play it anyway... -- John Owens General Electric Company Phone: (804) 978-5726 Factory Automated Products Division Compuserve: 76317,2354 decvax!mcnc!ncsu!uvacs ...!{ gatech!allegra!uvacs }!edison!jso ihnp4!houxm
peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) (11/23/85)
> risky to get a party to walk over its own illusionist's bridge, because no one > except maybe a Paladin or a Monk would have the mental discipline to believe in > it so strongly. The irrational powers of belief of certain types of people (in D&D, Paladins and Clerics) could be used to produce an explanation of their powers... whether or not there are any "gods", they believe there are. Scenario: cleric sits down beside a mortally injured body and calls on his god to heal it. He believes it, and his incredible (naivette?) belief (and possible mild telepathy) convinces said body's owner that the god is healing hir. This of course would mean that only followers of the same god could benefit from that cleric's ministrations. Conversely only beings who could be convinced that that god existed and was willing to zap them could be injured. This would mean followers of a god opposed to the cleric's in the same pantheon. This would also put a damper on the clerical magic user... the clerics whose only form of worship is occasionally zapping an orc or something. These types are basically MUs with a different set of spells. "Sorry, Bishop, but you've lost faith & you don't really believe in that healing stuff any more." -- Name: Peter da Silva Graphic: `-_-' UUCP: ...!shell!{graffiti,baylor}!peter IAEF: ...!kitty!baylor!peter
hogge@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU (11/24/85)
> Similarly, if the party *really believed* that that bridge over the chasm >were there, they would be able to walk across it -- though to someone who >didn't believe they would seem to be walking on air, and though if they for >one instant disbelieved they would plunge into the chasm... >...Conversely, I can imagine the illusionist creating an illusory bridge and >letting the poor grunt Orcs on the other side stream across. Then just before >they reached the near side, someone could yell "It's an illusion!" -- and >watch them all go the way of Gandalf & the Balrog. Though you've qualified the first case, low-level illusions shouldn't be this powerful. Low-level illusions should be in the mind only, so the party would *think* it's crossing the bridge, though in reality they would take one step and fall into the chasm. (The Illusionist party member would presumably get a kick out of this.) Only high level illusion spells should come close to altering reality (as in AD&D "Alter Reality" and "Shades"). Low level illusions (ie. Phantasmal Forces) are a bitch to judge. However, this is an easy, nasty, and fun way to judge them: 1. If a being (player character or monster) suspects that something s/he can sense isn't real, s/he tries to disbelieve. The attempt is automatic, no saving throw required. In the case of a character, the DM tells the character whether the sensory input is real or illision. 2. If an illusion is thrown and sensed (seen) by a being and the being doesn't think to try to disbelieve it, the illusion takes "full" effect in the being's belief system. Calculate any damage upon the being as what the being expects to take. In the case of falling into a chasm, the damage is full. In the case of a thrown fireball, do the number of dice the being would expect (based on either the current situation or what he has taken in the past--for instance, an Orc doesn't expect a 20 die fireball since he's never survived one). Comments on this system: 1. Your players have to keep on their toes and look for fishyness in what's going on, otherwise they could be burned bad. 2. You have to be smart in your choice of key illusions, throwing them when the party least expects them, otherwise they'll see right through your plots. In the heat of battle, a really clever illusion which misdirects all the players is a LOT of fun. 3. Character-thrown illusions are still somewhat hard to handle. You have to make judgements about the likelihood of your monster disbelieving the illusion based on intelligence, past experience, and the illusion's cleverness. So throw some dice. (Note on handling illusions of damage spells such as Fireball--if I believed one was coming at me, I'd hope for the best. In otherwords, in the absence of knowledge about how much damage it's going to be, I'd WANT it to be low. Therefore, I kind of like the idea of miminum dice (5d6) or less in such cases.) 4. If any or all of this system duplicates what's said in the DM guide, sorry. I haven't looked at the thing in a long while. 5. #4 is an illusion. Ha!
req@warwick.UUCP (Russell Quin) (11/24/85)
Here are some of the ways in which Illusionists can be dealt with. Perhaps some of these will help the people who asked how to cope with them in FRP. psionic: The spells affect the mind of those victims within range, so that they believe that they perceive the relevant effects. Each victim would presumably get the chance to resist the "mental attack" (although if it was something that they wanted to see, they might prefer simply to accept it as real -- i.e. it might not occur to them to doubt it). There are problems if some people don't believe the effect, as this may cause inconsistencies in others' perceived realities. The effects may still perceived even when seen to be an illusion. Physical: The spells create an image (for a vision-based illusion) which is false; people in the area see the image rather than whatever it conceals. Again, people could have an individual chance to perceive the forgery. It is clear that even when it has been discovered, the image will remain. Subjective reality: The idea here is that reality is a function of the individual; if one person believes something to be real sufficiently strongly, it *is* real _for_that_person_. Of course, this can be very confusing. If Mhvrk believes that there is a bridge over the chasm, he is free to walk over it. But if others are unaffected by the spell which caused Mhvrk to believe this, they will suffer the startling spectacle of Mhvrk walking on thin air. Of course, either of the first two methods could have persuaded Mhvrk, and he will continue to believe in the bridge until he has reason to doubt it -- which is, after all, a very hard (and strange) thing to do! In FRP games, I have seen all three used -- sometimes in the same game! Common embellishments include: the illusionist can add sound/touch/smell/vision/sound independently, with each extra sense adding to the difficulty of the spell [eg. Rolemaster, (partly) AD&D] the illusionist is always aware that the effect is false (particularly relevant with Subjective Realities!) the spell is only effective from certain angles [many systems -- eg. Rolemaster] a moving image requires sustained concentration a static image can be created & will remain [image not restricted to sight; many systems do this] An artifact that casts illusionist spells can be very powerful, especially if they are in a Subjective Reality. For example, if people disagree about whether there is an exit to a chamber, there can be severe problems! The idea of `disbelieving' in an illusion is a difficult one; most people find it very difficult to doubt their eyes. Of course, if magic always has a characteristic aura of brimstone... but probably the simplest way is to touch, smell or taste the thing. In most cases, one would discover that one could walk through the image anyway... The idea that one would believe that one was falling down a pit is another difficulty. Presumably the illusionist would have to be concentrating very hard to create the sensation of falling when the victim was in fact standing still. In some cultures, religion & magic interact. A Holy Person might be able to pray, and thus call up enough power that the illusion would fail. Perhaps the two kinds of "magic" cannot co-exist in the same space. The problems that I had with illusionists was that they were powerful. Things can be pretty effective even without being touched. But it was never really a great difficulty. Alter Subjective Reality was one of the most fun, but it was also one of the hardest to cast! There are so many possibilities that an enumeration would be pointlessly large. I could look up the illusionist rules in a number of FRP games, but there doesn't seem to be much point. As long as you have a way with which you are satisfied, things are probably OK anyway. - R -- ... mcvax!ukc!warwick!req (req@warwick.UUCP) ... mcvax!ukc!warwick!frplist (frplist@warwick.UUCP) friend: someone one seems to be able to tolerate at the moment
dove@mit-bug.UUCP (Web Dove) (11/24/85)
We always used to play that illusions couldn't "really" effect you. Fireball might "trick" you into dying, but you wouldn't really be burned. After seeing that AMAZING STORY about the bomber crew with the phantasmal landing gear, I think I like the idea that if you don't disbelieve, then it IS real. That means the illusory fireball will burn up all your scrolls etc. Disbelief would be a sort of magic resistance. In that event, the DM needn't hide the fact that something is illusory. If our people knew something was illusory they would behave differently towards it even if they didn't disbelieve. If the effects were real then you could have "positive" illusions in the dungeon such as illusory doors to treasure rooms with real treasure (unless someone in the party succesfully believed then the party wouldn't get any treasure). Or illusory magic weapons that you would have to believe in to use (give them to the stupid people in the party). Consider the famous tunnels into mountains in "road runner" cartoons. One character believes and can enter the tunnel. The other doesn't so they smash into the mountain. We have a convenient way of disbelieving. The Deities book specifies that 19+ intelligence is immune to certain level illusions. We would just have the player (or the dm) calculate a characters effective intelligence vs the illusion in question. Your effective intelligence is your true intelligence - 4 plus one point for each d6 you can roll without rolling a 1. For any attempt your effective intelligence ends up being about 4 pts higher than what you started with (there is about a 50/50 chance of rolling 4 non ones using a d6). If you were told that the effect was illusory (by someone who disbelieved) then the next round you would get one more try (by yourself you only got a single try). This second time you rolled d8's instead of d6's. In a similar way, the dm could use higher dice if the effect was unusually "suspicious".
laura@l5.uucp (Laura Creighton) (11/25/85)
In article <524@mit-bug.UUCP> dove@mit-bugs-bunny.UUCP (Web Dove) writes: >After seeing that AMAZING STORY about the bomber crew with >the phantasmal landing gear, I think I like the idea that if you don't >disbelieve, then it IS real. That means the illusory fireball will >burn up all your scrolls etc. Disbelief would be a sort of magic >resistance. > I always play that an illusionary fireball could cause fireball type damage to a player character who believed that it was real -- but their scrolls and maps (you do remember to check to see if your party's map just got cindered after fireballs, don't you?) would show no damage. That was often the only way that the characters in my dungeons ever knew that they had been ``illusioned''. -- Laura Creighton sun!l5!laura (that is ell-five, not fifteen) l5!laura@lll-crg.arpa
holt@convexs.UUCP (11/25/85)
I agree with some of what Mike says, especially the part about disbelieving
the bridge while falling into the chasm. However, fireballs make a lot of
noise (at least in our campaigns), and they are very hot. The 1st level
illusionist spell, phantasmal force, doesn't have thermal or auditory
components. It doesn't make a very believable fireball (significant saving
throw bonus). Improved phantasmal force does include some auditory
components so there would be less bonus there. Spectral Force includes
excellent auditory, and thermal effects thus resulting in a "standard"
saving throw vs. magic. All of these would NOT result in typical fireball
damage if the victim failed their save.
The 5th level illusionist spell, Shadow Magic, is the closest an illusionist
can get to a real fireball in effect. Read the spell, and realize that it's
a FIFTH level spell, and still doesn't equal a fireball all of the time!
Illusionists are not meant to be damage inflicting characters. They are
meant to be used creatively. Run a mage if you want to cast fireballs.
so saeth Lothwin,
a disgruntled fellow illusionist
aka Dave Holt
Convex Computer Corp.
{allegra,ihnp4,uiucdcs,ctvax}!convex!convexs!holtcdrigney@uokvax.UUCP (11/26/85)
/* Written 6:32 pm Nov 20, 1985 by mqh9523@ritcv.UUCP in uokvax.UUCP:net.games.frp */ > Illusionists are my favorite class. Illusionist spells work by > affecting the mind of the recipiant. In my universe, an > illusionists spells cannot alter physical laws (Except when > we're talking "Alter Reality" and such). For the phantom > bridge, the (fooled) characters would believe the bridge is > there, but it wouldn't fool gravity. The characters would fall > through the bridge, and at that point, they would probably get > a big bonus on their "disbelieving" roll (not much help at that > point). > In my universe, illusions of (something) affects you just like > that (something) would unless you successfully disbelieve. There seems to be a contradiction here. You say illusions affect you just like the real item does if you don't disbelieve, and also say an illusion of a bridge doesn't affect you (i.e. you fall whether you believe in it or not). Explanation? --Carl Rigney USENET: {ihnp4,allegra!cbosgd}!okstate!uokvax!cdrigney
9234dwz@houxf.UUCP (An Illegally Tossed Dwarf) (11/26/85)
-->I always play that an illusionary fireball could cause fireball type
-->damage to a player character who believed that it was real --
No question here.
--> -- but their
-->scrolls and maps (you do remember to check to see if your party's map
-->just got cindered after fireballs, don't you?) would show no damage.
Here is where I have a couple of questions.
1) Wouldn't the PC expect that maps & scrolls had been at least
damaged, if not destroyed and not seek to check them until
the melee was over. Imagine trying to use a scroll with some
important detail missing.
2) What are you doing checking a map in the middle of melee ?
If recourse to a map is needed in a retreat, first I'd put
some distance between myself and the current conflict.
3) After a skirmish, yes I would check scrolls (& maybe maps)
then one might deduce that tha fireball had been illusuory(sp)
and react accordingly in the near future.
4) If I was your DM and you believed that you'd been fireballed
and you went to check your pack for damage(you're anticipating
the probability of damage and you BELIEVE that there MAY have
^^^^^^^ ^^^
been damage I would roll some percentage to determine, if upon
examining perishable items, you BELIEVED that they had been
damaged (HELL, you still believe that you're down 16 hit points
don't you ? So the effect of the illusion is residual).
-->That was often the only way that the characters in my dungeons ever
-->knew that they had been ``illusioned''.
I agree but it should only a chance to find out.
-->
-->Laura Creighton @ sun!l5!laura
-->
Dave Peak
@ ihnp4!hotel!dxp
"All the net's a stage and all the men and women merely ham actors !"
- Rev Peak (apologies to Bill S.)tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) (11/27/85)
I'd like to hear less about interpretation of the Phantasmal Force spell and
more about how illusions ought to work in the best of all possible
campaigns. Remember, any DM can throw out or rewrite spells that she or he
finds unworkable.
To get things started: Illusions are not merely false sensory data. Go down
to the hologram gallery on Haight Street in San Francisco and put your
finger on the button in the dish. You saw it, but that didn't fool your
finger into feeling it, because it isn't really there. Nor would the sight
of a sword swinging into your arm be sufficient to cause you to react in
pain; you would notice that there was no tactile impression.
Second, illusions are too complex to be maintained by a person. There is
simply no way anyone could have strong enough powers of visualization to
produce a really convincing illusion of any complex phenomenon from someone
else's perspective, matching eye movements, Dopplering, and so forth. It
would be even more ridiculous to imagine that someone could produce a
multi-sensory hologram which would appear correct from all directions. Some
sort of auxiliary processor (that is, a spirit) would be necessary.
Third, illusions may be disbelieved, and they will have no effect. In
literature, this is usually represented as an act of will on the part of the
disbeliever. What this suggests most to me is shrugging off a spiritual
attack. Disbelieving does not go particularly well with the view that
illusions fabricate temporary reality.
So the illusion system I would most like to see completely discards all this
AD&D nonsense, which (with typically absurd Gygaxian logic) is clearly based
on an idea that a Phantasmal Force is false sensory data, and also the
RuneQuest III "temporary reality" approach, which disallows disbelieving.
Instead, illusionists would summon, bind, and control spirits of illusion,
which can be set upon various people to psychically attack them. If a
person realizes that she or he is under spiritual attack, then an attempt to
throw off the spirit (disbelieving) may be made. If not, then the person's
nervous sytem reacts precisely as if the illusion were real. There would
be, for example, no blood from a wound, but to the person affected it would
look as if the red red krovvy were spurting out in torrents, the part of the
body affected would be useless, and if enough blood were lost, the whole
nervous system would go into shock or shut down entirely.
Instead of having "more real illusions, with more sensory compoenents" as
the illusionist gains experience, as in AD&D, more powerful illusionists
would be able to summon more spirits or spirits that could affect more
people, make it more difficult for a victim to realize that the phenomena
are not real (by using more intelligent spirits), and summon spirits of
illusion that are harder to shake off (disbelieve).
Comments?
-=-
Tim Maroney, Professional Heretic, CMU Center for Art and Technology
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
CompuServe: 74176,1360 | God is not dead; he just smells funny.tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) (11/27/85)
By the way, it is impossible to create a sensation of falling using the AD&D
iluusions, or any other kind which says "you can create an illusion that
affects sense X and Y". The reason is that falling is an impression
produced by the sense of balance, a function of the inner ear, and it isn't
listed in any of the sensory illusion spells that I know of.
Similarly for illusions that your arm is moving, since kinesthesia is not
listed either....
-=-
Tim Maroney, Professional Heretic, CMU Center for Art and Technology
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
CompuServe: 74176,1360 | God is not dead; he just smells funny.jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner) (11/27/85)
[...] I realize the dangers of superimposing one game system on another, but maybe D&D players can pick up something useful from the way Champions handles illusions. There are two different types of illusions: Mental Illusions (which are beamed right into the brain of the target) and "Effect" Illusions (e.g. Light Illusions which are like holograms, Sound Illusions which are like traditional sound effects, etc.). Effect Illusions are experienced by anyone who is in a position to perceive them. In Champions, the caster buys so many D6 of skill with creating illusions and when (s)he casts the illusion, (s)he rolls that many dice to determine how authentic the illusion looks. The amount rolled is compared to the INTs of people perceiving the illusion. To have people accept very complex illusions, you must score 4x their INT. To have people accept very simple illusions (e.g. have them see a blank wall where there is actually an open doorway) you only need to match their INT. Effect illusions have no physical reality (again, think of holograms) and they can never do damage...well, a really good blinding light or deafening sound may blind or deafen you for a few phases, but that's it. Mental illusions are usually only experienced by a single target, although you can buy them to apply to all those in a given area. To cast a mental illusion, you must make an attack roll which pits your EGO against the target's EGO. If this attack is successful (meaning that you have forced your way into the target's mind), you can then roll for the extent of the effect. Again, the caster buys so many D6 of skill in creating illusions, and rolls that many dice to see how effective the illusion is. If the roll is 1x the target's INT, the target sees the illusion; if the roll is 2x INT, the target experiences the illusion with all five senses; if the roll is 3x INT, the target can take STUN damage from the illusion; and if the roll is 4x INT, the target can take both STUN and BODY. This set-up makes it very easy to figure out how far you can go with illusions. Effect illusions are always intangible -- you can't use them to make a useful bridge, for example. Mental illusions are always in the mind, and up to 3x INT, any effect they have is purely in the target's brain. However, at the 4x INT mark, they are so believable that they have a physical effect on the universe (namely, they do BODY damage to the victim). This suggests that some sort of innate psychic/TK ability has been invoked by the vividness of the illusion. We therefore play that the target behaves as if the illusion is really there, even being able to walk across illusory bridges if need be. Since it takes an amazing amount of clout (or appallingly low INT) to get this level of effect, the issue does not come up too often, and game balance is preserved. The rules make no allowance for "disbelief" as such, but the level of effect is reduced if you already have some reason for rejecting what you see. For example, if you know that character X is on the other side of the world but you see him walk through the door, the illusionist may roll 4x your INT but the effect would only be worth 3x your INT. I don't know how much this is going to help D&D players, but the distinction between Mental and Effect Illusions is useful, if nothing else. Maybe some D&D guru can see a way to incorporate some of the things I've mentioned. Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) (11/29/85)
My previous message, proposing that illusions be created by spirits of
illusion, may have stated the case too strongly. The illusion spell might
augmnent the caster's visualization abilities to the point where no
peripheral processor (spirit) would be needed. There are drugs that can
almost do that in this world, after all. Still, the rest of the message
stands; illusions ought to be played as a psychic attack on the victim or
victims, and should be limited based on the number of people who can be
affected, the psychic strength of the caster or spirit of illusion, and the
intelligence of the caster or spirit versus the intelligence of the victim.
-=-
Tim Maroney, Electronic Village Idiot, CMU Center for Art and Technology
tim@k.cs.cmu.edu | uucp: {seismo,decwrl,ucbvax,etc.}!k.cs.cmu.edu!tim
CompuServe: 74176,1360 | CMU. Tomorrow's networking nightmares -- today!showard@udenva.UUCP (showard) (12/03/85)
In article <675@k.cs.cmu.edu> tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) writes: >By the way, it is impossible to create a sensation of falling using the AD&D >iluusions, or any other kind which says "you can create an illusion that >affects sense X and Y". The reason is that falling is an impression >produced by the sense of balance, a function of the inner ear, and it isn't >listed in any of the sensory illusion spells that I know of. You can create the illusion of falling with the Phantasmagoria spell, which was in Dragon several months back and now appears (I assume) in Unearthed Arc- ana. Also from the new spells, we get an answer about illusionary bridges. In the description of the 7th level spell Mirage Arcane, it says that a bridge could be part of the illusion but it could not be walked upon. Using the prin- ciple that a low-level spell cannot be more powerful than a high-level spell, this argues that, short of Alter Reality, there is no way to walk across an ill- usory bridge in AD&D. --Mr. Blore, the DJ who would not die --aka Steve Howard, ...udenva!showard --"Just because something's impossible doesn't mean you can't do it" "Well, actually it does. Never mind"
oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) (12/03/85)
In article <674@k.cs.cmu.edu> tim@k.cs.cmu.edu (Tim Maroney) writes: >I'd like to hear less about interpretation of the Phantasmal Force spell and >more about how illusions ought to work in the best of all possible >campaigns. Remember, any DM can throw out or rewrite spells that she or he >finds unworkable. I may yet respond to the rest of the article in the future, but for now : If you are interested in how ILLUSION should work a few examples spring to mind: "The Misenchanted Sword" and other works by Watt-Evans (?) "The Futurological Congress" by Lem "THe Knight of Delusions","To End As A Hero" and several other works by Keith Laumer These books provide some very good ideas on how ILLUSION works and what it can be used for. Also ( especially in Lem) a number of ways the ILLUSION is rationa- lized are discussed. I, ofcource, have THE BEST and THE ONLY R I G H T idea on how these things work (;-).... -- Disclamer: My employers go to church every Sunday, listen to Country music, and donate money to GOP. I am just a deviant. +-------------------------------+ Don't bother, I'll find the door! | "VIOLATORS WILL BE TOAD!" | Oleg Kiselev. | Dungeon Police |...!{trwrb|scgvaxd}!felix!birtch!oleg --------------------------------+...!{ihnp4|randvax}!ucla-cs!uclapic!oac6!oleg
laura@l5.uucp (Laura Creighton) (12/03/85)
> Here is where I have a couple of questions. > 1) Wouldn't the PC expect that maps & scrolls had been at least > damaged, if not destroyed and not seek to check them until > the melee was over. Imagine trying to use a scroll with some > important detail missing. I dunno -- if you start checking your things, then the monsters get a free bash on you. I wouldn't check until the battle was over unless I wanted to see if my scrolls really *were* damaged ('cause I want to use one RIGHT NOW...) or if I was spelled out. > 2) What are you doing checking a map in the middle of melee ? > If recourse to a map is needed in a retreat, first I'd put > some distance between myself and the current conflict. Don't you have ambushes? Besides, it doesn't matter. If a real fireball lands upon a party, they are going to start burning. I always run the whole melee and then, at the end run a complete fire-test on all possibly burnt items -- with the exception of things that might possibly used in the current melee. This is because it is easier that way, though: it would be more realistic to deal out item damage at the same time as you deal out fire damage to PCs. > been damage I would roll some percentage to determine, if upon > examining perishable items, you BELIEVED that they had been > damaged (HELL, you still believe that you're down 16 hit points > don't you ? So the effect of the illusion is residual). This is not how it would work in my dungeon. If it was a whoppingly successful illusion then you might believe that the things in your pack were damaged, but for the general case, no. Scrolls and maps just don't believe that they can be harmed. But *you* do, and so you *harm yourself*. What you are saying sounds as if you think that the *damage* is illusionary; I don't play that either. If you have been hit by an illusionary fireball, and you check your pack, and find narry a cinder you may scream in frustration as you know damn well that you have been ``illusioned'' -- but you don't get any hit points back... -- Laura Creighton sun!l5!laura (that is ell-five, not fifteen) l5!laura@lll-crg.arpa
db@cstvax.UUCP (Dave Berry) (12/03/85)
I like Tim Maroney's distinction between the senses of touch, balance and kinesthesia. Presumably we could add heat/cold as another sense (this would include infravision) and maybe ultravision too. I also like the distinction made by Tim, Russell Quin & Jim Gardner, between "Effect" illusions and "Mental" (psionic) illusions. I don't agree with Tim's insistence on Mental illusions only - if we're dealing with magic which can create fireballs etc., why can't we create the magical equivalent of a hologram or tape recording? HOWEVER, while I can cope with visual, infravisual (heat), ultravisual, aural & olfactory Effect illusions, I don't see how one's sense of balance or kinesthesia can be affected by external influence (except secondarily, eg. as a result of a disorienting visual illusion), so I would only allow these to be affected by Mental illusions. I'm not sure how I would deal with touch - I think I would allow tactile Effect illusions, but I wouldn't allow them to do damage. Tactile Mental illusions would be able to do damage, probably as per a mental attack (as Tim suggested). The two approaches give an interesting balance. Effect illusions affect everybody, but Mental illusions only affect the target(s). On the other hand, Mental illusions can do damage and can be made more convincing. Either or both could be allowed to alter reality at high levels. Mental illusions would probably alter subjective reality only, as Russell suggested (in a slightly different context). Disbelief would differ also. Mental illusions would require willpower (Wisdom in AD&D) to disbelieve, and would then disappear completely. Effect illusions would require perception (Intelligence in AD&D), and should remain (as suggested by Jim & Carl Rigney) - the "false" sensory data is still there, but you know you can ignore it .... As several people have pointed out, the chance of disbelieving something should be affected by how likely the something is, and quite possibly by how desirable it is - we all tend to believe what we want to believe. -- Dave Berry. CS postgrad, Univ. of Edinburgh ...mcvax!ukc!cstvax!db
franka@mmintl.UUCP (Frank Adams) (12/03/85)
Just a thought on the subject of illusion spells. Why not let anyone who wants to disbelieve in a monster or spell do so? And if it really is an illusion, the character suffers no harm. But if it isn't, she gets no resistance: a monster automatically hits, there is no saving throw against the spell, etc. Frank Adams ihpn4!philabs!pwa-b!mmintl!franka Multimate International 52 Oakland Ave North E. Hartford, CT 06108
afw@pucc-k (schlagenha) (12/04/85)
>> Similarly, if the party *really believed* that that bridge over the chasm >>were there, they would be able to walk across it -- though to someone who >>didn't believe they would seem to be walking on air, and though if they for >>one instant disbelieved they would plunge into the chasm... >>...Conversely, I can imagine the illusionist creating an illusory bridge and >>letting the poor grunt Orcs on the other side stream across. Then just before >>they reached the near side, someone could yell "It's an illusion!" -- and >>watch them all go the way of Gandalf & the Balrog. The consensus in our gaming group is that if a party member has the ability to fly, is wearing a fill-in-the-blank of flying, or if there is any concievable way to get across, (tightrope, leaping from rock to rock, swinging on a rope) the creature will unconsiously (sp?) do the actions. Meanwhile, the creature will be blissfully unaware they are doing anything but walking across a bridge. If there is no way, save vs. dex or plummet. -- Mark Schlagenhauf Purdue University Computing Center ihnp4!pur-ee!pucc-k!afw You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without hanging on. -Dean Martin
ekblaw@uiucdcs.CS.UIUC.EDU (12/04/85)
Can't beat Mother nature! Robert A. Ekblaw
mccolm@ucla-cs.UUCP (12/05/85)
<"Finals are coming." "I kill them with my sword!">
My system makes the rule that all illusions monkey around with the perceptions
of the viewers. So the bridge across the chasm will look and feel all right,
(if the illusionist is clever enough to cause it to seem solid to the testing
foot) but gravity isn't fooled. If the illusionist is clever, the falling
idiot may not realize s/he is falling, because all perceptions may be messed
up, with the possible exception of the built-in motion detector that doubles
as your most recent meal.
Of course, the ordinary illusionist can only monkey with one sense at a time.
The warrior hit by an illusionary sword thinks s/he is hurt, and will act
appropriately. Of course, only a tactile component can cause pain, and blows
that don't hurt are a bit on the suspicious side. Also, blood loss may be
faked visually, but that light-headed feeling simply won't arrive. Burns
are harder, because fires have visual, audial, tactile, and aromatic telltale
signs, and you sort of figure they would notice if one of these was left out.
But in the end, illusions do not do physical damage. You can fool someone
into thinking that they're hurt, but they'll then live through their own
'death', which they may find mildly embarassing.
And about setting fire to things: the poor characters pack may seem aflame,
and the character may drop it and leave it behind, but that doesn't mean it's
really gone. The character may even discard a perfectly good scroll because
it looks like it's been reduced to ashes, but it isn't really.
Illusions are and always were a very good way of avoiding fighting non-
intelligent animals and monsters, and of somewhat more limited usefulness
against intelligent, reasoning creatures. Of course, in my system,
disbelieving an illusion does not make it go away, i.e. the (false) wound
still hurts, but you notice it doesn't quite hurt where the cut is...
Of course, the shadow-magic sort of stuff is mind-effect, not perceptual-
effect, so that stuff is different. And if the illusionist doesn't know about
someone viewing the illusion, they don't see it. (But some illusions are
area-effect as to TARGET, so who needs to know how many there are?)
--fini--
Eric McColm
UCLA (oo' - kluh) Funny Farm for the Criminally Harmless
UUCP: ...!{ihnp4,trwspp,cepu,ucbvax,sdcrdcf}!ucla-cs!mccolm
ARPA: mccolm@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU
Quotes on the Nature of Existence:
"To be, or not to be..." -Hamlet (Wm. Shakespeare)
"I think, therefore I am." -R. Descartes
"<Gleep!>" -Gleep (Robt. Asprin)scott@hou2g.UUCP (The Brennan Monster) (12/06/85)
>> Similarly, if the party *really believed* that that bridge over the chasm >>were there, they would be able to walk across it -- though to someone who >>didn't believe they would seem to be walking on air, and though if they for >>one instant disbelieved they would plunge into the chasm... Excuse me, but have any of you ever seen Bugs Bunny? This is (some variant of) AD&D, not TOON. :-) > You're not drunk if you can lie on the floor without hanging on. > -Dean Martin And I always thought it was without "falling off" instead of hanging on :-) Non-Newtonianly Yours, Scott J. Berry ihnp4!hou2g!scott