When are you allowed a saving throw on silent image?

[MiniMoose]

Im creating a campaign, and at one point I want a sorcerer to scare off the party using a major image of a giant red dragon (they would be way underleveled to even try to fight it) and the saving throw text says they get one "once they interact"

What does interact really mean? Do they need to go up and try to touch it? If part of the image seems to try to attack them does that count?

EDIT: also, does anyone have good advice on how to use illusions/enchantments in a cave/dungeon esq setting?

[Greenish]

If they attack the image or it attacks them.

[MiniMoose]

Im planning on having the image fire a "warning shot" breath weapon just over there heads. Is this enough for a save?

[Gauntlet]

I don't believe so, but if they notice it's not making any noise and take an action to examine it (by checking for magic, throwing a rock at it or just studying it) I would give them one then.

[Zeful]

Im planning on having the image fire a "warning shot" breath weapon just over there heads. Is this enough for a save?

Would the breath weapon enter any of the PC's square?

If not: then no, it has not interacted with them, they do not get a save.

[Scipio]

EDIT: also, does anyone have good advice on how to use illusions/enchantments in a cave/dungeon esq setting?

Using an illusion to get the party split up is always a good idea. Put an image of something away from the party. Fighter boy charges over to deal with it, and the caster drops a wall spell between the poor fighter and the remaining party members.

[MiniMoose]

Would the breath weapon enter any of the PC's square?

If not: then no, it has not interacted with them, they do not get a save.

If we're looking at squares as purely 2D then yes. However, if they are considered 5x5x5 cubes, it does not enter thier cube.

[Gauntlet]

Illusory floors are also good.
Other possibilities:
- Summon a few monsters- then illusion up a good twice as many again. Have one or two summons attack, then send in your 'army'.
- Illusory sounds are brilliant things. Footsteps tapping behind the PCs. Rock collapsing in the distance (followed by an illusory rockfall when they retreat). A scream or two up ahead or a cry for help is enough to get people running, often- which means they get no chance to spot your traps.
- Illusory allies will work as effective 'prompts' for PCs. If they charge in a head, chances are PCs will follow. If they flee, often the PCs will fall back with them to a more 'defensible' position. Speaking of defense, a few illusory ridges here and there will serve to hide your allies- even better, if the PCs use them for cover you can shoot straight through the stuff.
- Illusions, when disbelieved, still remain visible as a hazy, translucent outline. This means that illusory mirrors, forming a room, can cause serious mind problems. Put a few real mirrors in there as well, to spice it up a little.

[QuantumSteve]

"Interact" can be as simple as looking at it really hard. If he party runs from the dragon without giving it a second look, then, no, they don't get a save. But if they, say, notice that the dragon breath that barely missed them wasn't hot and do give it a second look, that's enough to allow a save.

[The Cat Goddess]

"Interact" can be as simple as looking at it really hard. If he party runs from the dragon without giving it a second look, then, no, they don't get a save. But if they, say, notice that the dragon breath that barely missed them wasn't hot and do give it a second look, that's enough to allow a save.

^ This.

Breathing fire over their heads and they don't feel the heat? Allows a save.

[Eldan]

Always a favourite: put an illusory something over or just next to the real thing: when the PCs disbelief it, they won't watch it.

[Greenish]

"Interact" can be as simple as looking at it really hard.Source for this? (Since as far as I know, "interact" has not been defined in the rules, so you'd have to use the word's actual meaning.)

Also, illusionary air.

[Ryuuk]

A major image actually does have thermal components though, they would feel heat.

[QuantumSteve]

A major image actually does have thermal components though, they would feel heat.

Just thought of this myself. But, the principle still holds. If something doesn't add up, and they character chooses to study it, he gets a save.


Saving Throws and Illusions (Disbelief)

Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.

A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline. emphisis mine

It is possible to study something just by looking at it. Perhaps a DM would rule this examination requires an action, not an unreasonable assumption. But all you have to do is look at it hard enough.

Indecently, would walking up to the dragon and waving your hand through it let you auto-disbelieve? What if it weren't illusory, but incorporeal?

[Ryuuk]

Indecently, would walking up to the dragon and waving your hand through it let you auto-disbelieve? What if it weren't illusory, but incorporeal?

It would be the signal that your hand sends you fighting against the signals that every other part of your body is sending you. If you're hand is right, then there's nothing to worry about, but if its wrong, well, you're body's knows it'll be the end of it.

I would say this is resolved by the Will save, though I'm not sure how right I am with RAW. If you fail it, the rest of your body overwhelms the signals being sent by your hand and you continue to believe you've got a dragon in front of you.

[QuantumSteve]

I ask because, by RAW, if "faced with proof that an illusion isn't real (one) needs no saving throw."

What, exactly, is "proof"? (I refer you to my previous example)

[Drakevarg]

Probably just needs to be sufficient to convince the character. (i.e., if he suspects it could be an incorpreal creature, it's probably harder to convince him its not. If he doubts its incorpreal, he's probably more easily convinced its an illusion.) This of course doesn't mean he's RIGHT...

[Greenish]

It is possible to study something just by looking at it. Perhaps a DM would rule this examination requires an action, not an unreasonable assumption. But all you have to do is look at it hard enough.Ah, right you are (though looking at something isn't interaction).

Looking for something real hard is a Move action, I believe, as per Spot rules.

[QuantumSteve]

Probably just needs to be sufficient to convince the character. (i.e., if he suspects it could be an incorpreal creature, it's probably harder to convince him its not. If he doubts its incorpreal, he's probably more easily convinced its an illusion.) This of course doesn't mean he's RIGHT...

But, disbelieving an illusion has very specific consequences. i.e. you perceive the illusion as a "translucent outline." An incorporeal creature cannot be disbelieved, so a character could easily determine whether a creature is incorporeal or an illusion by walking through it; if it turns clear: it's an illusion.
Unless, walking though an illusion is not sufficient proof to auto-disbelieve.

Oww. Makes my head hurt.:smallconfused:

[Beorn080]

When Major Image says that it is a thermal illusion as well, does that mean it can create heat hot enough to ignite things, or merely that it seems like the heat is hot enough to ignite things?

[QuantumSteve]

When Major Image says that it is a thermal illusion as well, does that mean it can create heat hot enough to ignite things, or merely that it seems like the heat is hot enough to ignite things?

The second one. Although, not bursting into flames when it seems that it's 1,000 K might allow a save.

[holywhippet]

When Major Image says that it is a thermal illusion as well, does that mean it can create heat hot enough to ignite things, or merely that it seems like the heat is hot enough to ignite things?

Seems like would be my guess - or at best it might make things look like they are on fire.

I'd have the dragon atop a hill looking angry and searching the area carefully - the party will hopefully take the hint that they are the target of the search and will try to depart stealthily. It should be far enough away that they can't launch a direct assault on it.

Be prepared for failure though, the players might see through your ruse - or even just be dumb enough to think they can win. Maybe have a backup plan like a pit covered with an illusion they will fall into if they approach the dragon.

[Starscream]

Here's a question. Suppose the PCs are knowledgeable enough to know that dragons are spellcasters. They shoot an arrow at it and it goes through.

An ordinary person would see this as proof that they are looking at an illusion. An experienced adventurer however might assume the dragon has simply rendered itself incorporeal by some means. So would this still count as proof for them?

[Zeful]

Here's a question. Suppose the PCs are knowledgeable enough to know that dragons are spellcasters. They shoot an arrow at it and it goes through.

An ordinary person would see this as proof that they are looking at an illusion. An experienced adventurer however might assume the dragon has simply rendered itself incorporeal by some means. So would this still count as proof for them?

No, because the dragon really could be incorporial. If it was an illusion it would allow them to receive a saving throw though.

[Drakevarg]

This is headed into metaphysics/quantum physics territory.

Of course, if you can't be convinced that the dragon that you JUST WALKED THROUGH isn't real, how can you be convinced anything's real? Why does a disbelieve save exist at all?

[Riffington]

An ordinary person would see this as proof that they are looking at an illusion. An experienced adventurer however might assume the dragon has simply rendered itself incorporeal by some means. So would this still count as proof for them?

The way I like to do this is: if the player has a plausible argument that the proof is good enough for her, then it is. You tell her good job realizing it was an illusion; she can ignore it. If it happens not to be an illusion, she's flatfooted against it and fails reflex saves against it. Next time she acts she gets to say whether the proof still holds.

[holywhippet]

The way I like to do this is: if the player has a plausible argument that the proof is good enough for her, then it is. You tell her good job realizing it was an illusion; she can ignore it. If it happens not to be an illusion, she's flatfooted against it and fails reflex saves against it. Next time she acts she gets to say whether the proof still holds.

You don't actually become flatfooted in the case of an incorrect illusion check by RAW. Part of the disbelief check is studying the illusion and looking for discreptancies - you aren't neccessarily assuming it is a fake and ignoring it.

[Riffington]

You don't actually become flatfooted in the case of an incorrect illusion check by RAW. Part of the disbelief check is studying the illusion and looking for discreptancies - you aren't neccessarily assuming it is a fake and ignoring it.

Not an illusion check. Deliberately disbelieving it without a check. If you don't ignore it, it is going to be real to you. Ignoring someone doesn't technically do anything by RAW, but it really ought to make you flatfooted against him. Similarly, if you are making reflex saves you are moving. Moving whenever an illusion does something to you means that it is affecting you. Logically anyway, not RAW.

[MiniMoose]

wow, thanks for all the replies.

Firstly, all I really want to do with this "encounter" is show people not to assume they know whats going on (its probably slated for day 2 or 3 of my campaign). Also, since a lot of my friends are big into DnD, if they all fail the save since its will, I'm hoping when I say "Nothing changes" due to thier save, they will assume they saved on the dragon's frightful pressence.

[Divide by Zero]

No one's linked to this yet? Disappointed. http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=54
Also, http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=56

[Greenish]

No one's linked to this yet? Disappointed. http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=54I wonder why they changed it…

Also, http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=56Beat you to it.
Also, illusionary air.

[Seffbasilisk]

Also, illusionary air.


No one's linked to this yet? Disappointed. http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=54
Also, http://agc.deskslave.org/comic_viewer.html?goNumber=56

Interact, while it may seem vague, is basically limited to P.C.'s imagination. Basically, if something could cause the P.C.'s to suspect it, they get a roll.

[Divide by Zero]

Beat you to it.

Ah, missed that when I was skimming for links.

[Greenish]

Interact, while it may seem vague, is basically limited to P.C.'s imagination. Basically, if something could cause the P.C.'s to suspect it, they get a roll.
interact |ˌintərˈakt|
verb [ intrans. ]
act in such a way as to have an effect on another; act reciprocally : all the stages in the process interact | the user interacts directly with the library.

DERIVATIVES
interactant |-tənt| adjective & nounIt's not defined in the rules, so normal definition applies. Of course, as has been pointed out, they also get a saving throw if they "study [the illusion] carefully".