Illusions and (Disbelief)

[Deral]

This all started with one of those things I've just never even thought about- I read, I think for the very first time, the line on pg 113 that reads:

Disbelief: The character may instead make a Sense Motive (Wis) check to save against the effect.

While I think this definitely has a cool flavor, it means that certain types of characters (player and not) are almost outright immune to Illusion spells (at the current moment there is one illusion spell- Confounding Images- that could target someone unwilling and isn't disbelief) and granted that mostly includes just the Illusory Image spells, but they're pretty iconic and I suppose they're pretty broad (which might be why it exists- just as a balancing factor).

More than anything it caught me off-guard and I'd wager I'm not the only one who's missed it, but when I was considering the in-game use of such a rule (and whether or not I was going to keep it, really) I realized there isn't any mention of what exactly makes an illusion's save go off (actually, rules for saves assume you can use common sense to figure out when you have to make a save, which is completely appropriate because I didn't even realize the rules were missing until I looked for them just now).

So while there may or may not be an official position on how Illusionary Images trigger saves I was wondering, how do you guys run Illusions? Does the save trigger upon interacting with them (like in D&D), upon seeing them (which would likely make sense with Sense Motive), or something else? Come to think of it, there's mention that Illusions lack texture- can they be touched at all and if not do you grant bonuses to saves for that (or even make the save automatically succeed)?

I'm not trying to poke holes in the concept but it was something I had almost glossed over with assumption, just figuring I'd be running it like I always have, but now I'm interested, like I said not just in any official opinion but also in how other GMs run it (or would run it).

Edit: D: Emissaries care not for your foolish Illusions!

Edit again: What I'm thinking I might run with myself (as far as the Sense Motive thing) would be to use Sense Motive opposing the Spellcasting result to make it more like a forgery, trying to see through the caster's craftsmanship of the illusion, hmm.

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

In some ways I'd prefer it if Illusions were real constructs of energy rather than their seeming to be mental projections if I take "Will negates" to be an indication.  I much rather prefer using the Sense Motive method, maybe allowing also Notice or Search to pick out the flaws in the construct.

[Deral]

In some ways I'd prefer it if Illusions were real constructs of energy rather than their seeming to be mental projections if I take "Will negates" to be an indication.  I much rather prefer using the Sense Motive method, maybe allowing also Notice or Search to pick out the flaws in the construct.

I definitely think the Sense Motive thing is cool, but you're never really going to see anything over a DC 25 for a spell, and that's at high levels, that's why I was thinking of going with Spellcasting vs Sense Motive

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

  Sorry, not sure what you meant by that comment.

What I'm talking about is that except for a few special cases I prefer that there be no way to "shrug off" illusions, just figure out they aren't real.  So I don't necessarily like that they require a Will save.

[Deral]

I mean that I like the concept of using Sense Motive in place of a Will save, but feel that the difference between Will Save Bonus and Sense Motive Bonus is too wide (Sense Motive, with full ranks, is likely to be close to double the bonus)- that's why I was looking at an alternative.

[Wolverine]

Back in the days of DnD3(.5) our group would quite often say 'I disbelieve the illusion' whenever we thought some mage was playing tricks on us. That sounds like a perfect use of Sense Motive to me.

Sure, it's going to become easy to see through a Mage's spells pretty quickly, but some extra options might make things a little more balanced. A class that specialised in Illusion magic, for example, might have a class feature or two that made their spells harder to see through. If only there was a product coming out soon that might include such a thing...



Disclaimer: I'm not spoiling anything about Spellbound, just suggesting that a class that specialises in such spells might be better at casting them and making them stick.

[Crafty_Alex]

The Trickster in Spellbound has a selectable class ability currently titled "lord of illusions" which allows him to remove the Disbelief tag from a spell. Nasty 

[Wolverine]

And there we go

Now to make some random assumptions about other Spellbound classes and she how accurate I am...

[SilvercatMoonpaw]

I may still go with Sense Motive or other skill over Will, but possibly introducing some other constraints to balance it out.  Maybe better of opposed skill or DC (in case the caster doesn't have a great skill bonus they aren't left with nothing).

[the331st]

I would have it be Will (Negates) upon interaction. And the illusion is "real" to the target.

eg it's an illusion of a wall, PC touches said wall, *will save*...

Pass: the wall is obviously a fake
Fail: Damn... whats up with this wall?

and I would reward a player with an AD for playing along.

I had a PC today run into a illusion of a girl crying over her dead "father", only it was an ambush by some thugs and a mage. I forgot about the AD reward... the player was kinda angry... I'll make it up to her.

If the Illusion can talk and stuff and the PC wants to sense motive, maybe trigger the will save then? As the PC is picking up on stuff like "tells"?

I always thought of illusions like those automated voices on phones like when you call PG&E or something. When they first came out with that stuff my grandmother didn't know at first that it wasn't a real person. She was vary confused when I tried to explain to her it was a robit.

ramble ramble ramble....

[Krensky]

The Will save is whether or not the spell takes hold against the target. If you make it, the spell doesn't effect you. If you go with the Will save you're relying on your innate mental strength to resist the spell.

The Sense Motive 'save' is you using your powers of observation to determine the illusion is an illusion. You 'let' the spell take effect, so you 'see' the illusion, but you know it's not real.

[Typhon]

Disbelief was a rule a friend had in his game. Worked great. You just can't go around using it on everything. Combat situations you never really think to use it (it should be a full minute action). I mean unless you're in "The Castle of the Illusionist", you're really not going to think to use it.

[Bill Whitmore]

It's easy for a player to say they "disbelieve" but what does that mean from a character point of view.  If a character is leaping back from attacks and throwing their shield or blade into the path of oncoming weapons to parry them aside, they obviously are believing the illusion is real enough.  Disbelieving objects means interacting pretty heavily with the object.  So I offer the following new action:

DISBELIEVE
   1 Full Action • Initiative Action
   The character attempts to see through illusions that may be in the area.  The character may designate any number of opponents within Close Quarters or any objects that are adjacent and may make a will save for each as if they were an illusion.  If the save is failed against a targeted opponent or if the targeted opponent is not an illusion, that opponent may treat you as if you are flat-footed for the entirety of its next initiative count.  If the save is failed against a targeted object or if the targeted object is not an illusion, any traps or effects triggered by interacting with the object automatically go off.

This will still allow players to say "I disbelieve, I think that group of orcs is just an illusion" but you had better be right, because if you aren't you just made yourself flat-footed against all of them for the next turn.  And if you really believe that the floating orb in the middle of the room is just an illusion, you better hope it isn't actually some sort of trap trigger when you go over to prove you're right.

[Typhon]

I disagree. 6 seconds really isn't enough time (well guess you COULD do it at a big negative). You should be in a calm state of mind (not in combat) and able to focus on the target that you're disbelieving for a full minute to get a chance at seeing through it.

Another fun consideration is being able to roll UNDER a Will roll in order to see through the illusion. The idea being the target is too "dense" or "unimaginative" to see the illusion lol. So a high Wisdom would actually be a negative.