israel@qantel.UUCP ( Renegade) (07/02/84)
Suggestions for dealing with Phantasmal Force: This is tricky stuff, and the system I suggest using will probably turn out to have a few short-comings, but it has restored a sense of sanity in my world... The spell description says that characters make a saving throw vs. illusions IF they attempt to disbelieve what they're seeing. However, the smart player will therefore try to disbelieve damn-near everything, in hopes of discovering an illusion. At this point, I have introduced a variant into the system - if a player wants to disbelieve, he must explain to the DM a logical reason behind this attempt. The DM must then rule if the reason is plausible, and so allow the saving throw, otherwise not. For example - a party is journeying in a forest, and is suddenly attacked by a brown bear. The ranger says "I disbelieve!" Bullshit! What's so out of the ordinary about running into a bear in the forest? However, let's add a few variants - the party is in the forest, trying to track down a hostile illusionist/thief gnome - what better illusion then something that belongs there? The bear attacks, the ranger says "I disbelieve!". The DM asks why, and the ranger says, "Well, these gnome tracks are only five minutes old, so he's probably very close by, and cast this illusion to defend himself." That makes sense! The DM rolls, the ranger saves, and the party looks in amazement as the bear takes three successful swipes at the ranger. The ranger grins, turns to the party, and says "relax gang, it's not real". The cleric now says "I disbelieve!", the DM asks why, and the cleric says "Cause the ranger says it's an illusion, of course!" That is good enough. The DM rolls (with +4 to save, since the ranger explained it to him), and also saves. The magic-user, using the same procedure, also rolls, but he wasn't so lucky - he missed his saving throw, and so is still subject to the effects of the illusion (keep in mind, though, that the illusionist as no way of automatically perceiving this, aside from interpreting the characters subsequent behavior). Another situation goes as follows - the paladin enters the holy church of Heimdall (lawful good), and upon entering encounters ORCUS!!! Is despair, he cries out "NO WAY, JOSE! I DISBELIEVE!" The DM asks why, and he replys "Because demons don't hang out in lawful good churches" Well, I suppose so... As for casting illusions of spell effects, such as fireballs, etc., one must keep in mind that illusions are sight-oriented spells, so casting an illusion of a sleep spell does nothing, since there is nothing to see. If a visual effect does occur, it must be something that the victim can understand. A fireball is well understood - after all, fire is fire. But suppose an illusionist casts a an illusion of a stinking cloud at at a goblin. This particular goblin hasn't ever seen a stinking cloud before, and so doesn't understand what it's supposed to do. Hence, the effect of the cloud will merely serve to partially obscur his vision, such as a wall of fog. On the other hadn, if he has been the victim of a REAL stinking cloud, then he will be subject to the spell's effects. Another problem concerning illusions of other spells is attempting to disbelieve them, as per the following example: Bonan the fighter is approaching a dark tower which is rumored to contain powerful magics. As he approaches the front door, it opens, and a tall, dark, robed man with a long, grey beard steps out and casts what appears to be a fireball at him. Panicked, he blurts out "I disbelieve that fireball!" The DM, confused, asks why - "Uh, because, uh, he MIGHT be an illusionist instead of a magic-user!" Hmmmm. OK, suppose the DM is kind, and allows him a saving throw. The DM rolls, and he fails his save trying to disbelieve the fireball. Hence, he must then save vs. spell to take half damage, which he makes. Now the spell-caster throws what appears to be a magic missile spell. Again, the fighter calls out "I disbelieve - same reason!" This is no longer a valid point. The fighter already took what he believed to be real damage from what he thought was a real fireball, from what appears to be a real magic-user. There is no reason to think that all of this isn't exactly how it appears. Let us now say, however, that the DM, when the fireball hit, says "As the fireball silently explodes, you take X points of damage." As the magic missiles start flying next round, the fighter perks up, and joyously proclaims "I disbelieve those missiles. That guy is an illusionist!" The DM demands an explanation, and he says "Because that fireball wasn't real. Real fireballs are supposed to make a lot of noise when they explode!" Voila! This is a good enough excuse for a new saving throw vs. the missiles (although he retains the damage for the fireball, regardless of the outcome). The DM rolls, the missiles strike, do no damage, and the fighter lunges at the illusionist gleefully... Hope you find all this useful. Paul Israel Renegade of Berkeley ucbvax!dual!qantel!israel PS - I'll be posting some new magic items soon, for those of you who asked - if I could just find where I left that binder...
yba@mit-athena.ARPA (Mark H Levine) (07/10/84)
With respect to disbelieving phantasmal forces: I play a simple system. You the player decide whether you do or do not believe what you see for whatever reason. The act of disbelieving however is one of steadfastly holding your ground and concentrating your senses-- it is nothing like dropping to the ground or dodging aside from a real threat. Because of this, if you announce that you disbelieve, you may NOT have any save at all against a REAL thing (be it spell or monster or whatever). You better be sure it is an illusion. If you disbelieve the appearance of a creature, it gets full surprise against you. This tends to keep players honest. They get hit with real stuff much more often than the occasional illusionist. -- yba%mit-heracles@mit-mc.ARPA UUCP: decvax!mit-athena!yba
jmd@inmet.UUCP (07/13/84)
#R:qantel:-14300:inmet:20400006:000:1906
inmet!jmd Jul 11 14:25:00 1984
<What do you mean, this floor isn't real???>
I must disagree with one point that you make. Your claim is that illusions
are sight-oriented. The best-known spells, as described in the PH, are,
indeed, sight-based. This is why the AD&D illusionist is so poorly designed.
First, illusionists are primarily mind-control experts - creating an illusion
that you BELIEVE is so real that it can hurt you. Second, this illusion
usually has sight components, but doesn't have to to be effective. It could
affect any one of the other four senses (or some combination of all of
the senses) to have a similar effect. This is where the AD&D illusionist is
so lacking in ability. Why can't an illusionist create the illusion of the
smell of a dragon - strong enough to make you think that there is a BIG dragon
there - in the entrance to a cave that the illusionist is hiding in? Why
can't the illusionist create the image of a Cloudkill cloud, along with the
odor of chlorine - so that even a stupid goblin who has never seen a cloudkill
would know that this is bad stuff? Why can't the illusionist create an
illusionary texture - a wall perhaps? Why can't the illusionist create a
meal that tastes increadibly good - even though it is laced with a strong
poison?
The answers: because the AD&D illusionist concentrates on the sense of sight.
This is such a gross waste of a such good character. One must rememeber the
other spells that the illusionist has - they are more mind-control spells.
So, that would indicate that the simple illusions have a taste of mind-control
in them as well.
The illusionist character class in AD&D is a poorly thought out class. It
needs a major overhaul - not the attempted patches that have been offered
in the Dragon. I have done so in my campaign - and boy is it better!
<This is an illusionary signature line>
Jeff Diewald
{harpo|ihnp4|ima}!inmet!jmdmr-frog@sdcsvax.UUCP (07/16/84)
<> Hey, Jeff, that's pretty good. I'm not much of an illusionist runner myself, so I never noticed the thing about illusionist spells only affecting one sense. However, in my opinion, you don't need to overhaul the entire class, just the spells illusionists get. Perhaps that's what you meant. Anyhow, I'd like to thank you for opening up my mind to lots of new potential, illusionist-effectiveness-wise. Boy, that "chlorine odor" and the "dragon smell" are really good examples of what illusionists do best -- fooling people into believing things that aren't there. Sight is only one of five! Now I've got to start work on a whole bunch of new illusionist spells. Gee, and I thought the class was pathetic, too... Dave Pare [ucbvax | dcdwest]!sdcsvax!mr-frog
jmd@inmet.UUCP (08/03/84)
<what do you mean, this floor is an illusion!>
About the illusionist casting an illusion of a well-known MU throwing
Meteor Swarms about... Again, this sort of "abuse" is easily limited.
I use the following guidelines:
Spell Max Damage
Phant. Force 10hp + 2hp/level
Imp. Phant. Force 15hp + 3hp/level
Spectral Force 20hp + 4hp/level
Thus, the fifth level illusionist could throw a meteor swarm illusion, but it
could do, at most, 40hp of damage with the spell. Also, if someone failed to
save against the illusion the first time, but noticed that the damage was
excessively low for a meteor swarm, they should get plusses against the second
time the illusion is thrown, because there was something fishy about the first
one.
As a DM, I would also caution against using the illusion of this high-level
wizard. He or she might not LIKE the way you are making them look, and may
come and "ask" you to stop. High level spell-casters do not generally like
others to make enemies for them. Besides, there are much more clever ways
for an illusionist's spells to beat someone.
"Oh, Ab-a-lie - is that your illusion,
or are we up against Asmodeus????"
Jeff Diewald
{ihnp4|ima|harpo}!inmet!jmd