Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site qantel.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!amd!dual!qantel!israel From: israel@qantel.UUCP ( Renegade) Newsgroups: net.games.frp Subject: Dealing with Illusions Message-ID: <143@qantel.UUCP> Date: Mon, 2-Jul-84 14:11:59 EDT Article-I.D.: qantel.143 Posted: Mon Jul 2 14:11:59 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 10-Jul-84 03:57:29 EDT Organization: MDS Qantel, Hayward CA. Lines: 86 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...