Will Saves and Illusions

[Milo v3]

There have been countless threads about when a illusion allows a will save, what interaction counts as, what are its effects on mindless creatures, etc.

But what happens when people fail the checks. Do their brains fill in information? Do they deny what is so blatantly obvious?

For example:
There is an illusionary solid stone wall in a dungeon. The Rogue feels around seeing if there are any traps, fails the willsave. When hand touches the wall he doesn't get any tactile sensory information from it, but he still thinks its solid and normal. Or does he think that he can feel it and all the details are made up in his mind, giving it a tactile feeling.

And what if half a minute later, the fighter in the group leans on the same wall, fails the will save. So he believes the wall is a solid stone wall....

[KillianHawkeye]

No. When presented with proof of an illusion's falsehood, you automatically make your save to disbelieve it.

[supermonkeyjoe]

I go by the rule that doing something like sticking your hand through a wall you thought was real would allow you to make a save at a +4 bonus, if you fail you could know that it's an illusion but dammit you just can't convince your brain and the illusory wall still appears to be there. If you suspect that something is an illusion and you investigate it with the intent of disproving it then no save would be needed.

It's kinda like a magic eye picture, you know what it is and if you focus correctly an image will pop out but until you get it right all you can see is a patterned mess.

[Gamer Girl]

For example:
There is an illusionary solid stone wall in a dungeon. The Rogue feels around seeing if there are any traps, fails the willsave. When hand touches the wall he doesn't get any tactile sensory information from it, but he still thinks its solid and normal. Or does he think that he can feel it and all the details are made up in his mind, giving it a tactile feeling.

And what if half a minute later, the fighter in the group leans on the same wall, fails the will save. So he believes the wall is a solid stone wall....


First it does depend on the illusion spell used, of course.


By the book, if you fail your will save, you don't notice the illusion. So the Rogue in question might very well stick his hand through the wall...but he won't notice that. But after that, the rules are no help.....

Illusionary wall (the spell) should have tactile elements. But in 3X it does not. I add them in anyway. It's a 4th level spell and should be able to fool the sense of touch. (1st level sight, 2nd level sound, 3rd level thermal and smell, 4th level touch).

Note that save or no save, the fighter will still fall through the illusionary wall....

[jackattack]

This depends entirely on the nature of the illusion. Look up Figments, Glamers, Patterns, Phantasms, and Shadows to see which are perceptual (existing as sensory constructs in the real world) and which are mental (existing only in the mind of the affected creature).

As a general rule, I would say that disbelieving a perceptual illusion does not actually dispel it, it only allows you to realize that it isn't real and act accordingly. Think of a hologram -- you can see it, and so can everyone else, but knowing that it is just intersecting lightwaves doesn't make it disappear. Note that perceptual illusions are typically created by the mind of the caster, which allows mistakes to be built into the illusion.

Mental illusions are typically induced by a caster but created by the affected mind. As such, there should be no sensory mistakes in a mental illusion, as the affected mind fills in every detail it expects to perceive. "Errors" in mental illusions should be logical errors, such as "that person died two weeks ago" or "penguins don't live in Africa" or "what are you talking about, we're being attacked by bugbears, not owlbears". Disbelieving a mental illusion should dispel it (or radically change it), since you are basically cutting it off at the source.

If your rolls dictate that you believe an illusion despite incontrovertible fact, then your mind may fill in details or rationalize errors. If you fall through an illusory wall and still believe it, you might think you fell through a secret door, or that a spell is affecting you or the wall. If you see someone you know to be a thousand miles away, you might assume they teleported home, or that a double is a thousand miles away. Until you make that roll, or the DM waives belief, get creative and justify your character's interaction with (or avoidance of) the illusion.

[That_guy_there]

From the SRD:

"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.

A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus."

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm

So in the example (rogue putting his hand through it, doesn't need to save, he realizes its not real. But it reamains as a translucent image to him. If he lets others know they get a +4 to their saves.
Also from the example is the fighter leaning on the "fake" wall... he falls through and gets an instant successful save. The wall then becomes tranclucent to him too.

[AlchemicalMyst]

First off, this article (HERE (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060221a)) is worth the read. Clears things up with most situations, though definitely not all.




*snip*
So the Rogue in question might very well stick his hand through the wall...but he won't notice that.
*snip*
Note that save or no save, the fighter will still fall through the illusionary wall....
In both those situations, if going by RAW, the characters automatically pass the Will Save.



But what happens when people fail the checks. Do their brains fill in information? Do they deny what is so blatantly obvious?
This is exactly what you're looking for. pg 173 PHB 3.5
"A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false,
but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline. For examples, a character making a successful saving throw against a figment of an illusory section of floor knows the “floor” isn’t safe to
walk on and can see what lies below (light permitting), but he or she
can still note where the figment lies."

WoTC is actually pretty clear on the rules when it comes to full blown illusions. Just don't hold your breath for details involving small changes, that's where people disagree as there aren't really clear wordings on that matter.


For example:
There is an illusionary solid stone wall in a dungeon. The Rogue feels around seeing if there are any traps, fails the willsave. When hand touches the wall he doesn't get any tactile sensory information from it, but he still thinks its solid and normal. Or does he think that he can feel it and all the details are made up in his mind, giving it a tactile feeling.
In this example the wall has absolutely no tactile sensation, PHB3.5 pg 243. Which means IF he is actually touching said Illusary Wall he automatically succeeds his will save as stated on page 174 of the PHB3.5
"A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. A character who falls through a section of illusory floor into a pit knows something is amiss, as does one who spends a few rounds poking at the same illusion."

If instead of actually feeling the wall he was just studying it, maybe instead of feeling for traps, in fear of setting them off, he is just looking for signs of traps, then he rolls a Will Save. If he fails the Wall looks real. If he succeeds however, he realizes it is a fake wall and can even see through it! Although keep in mind the Illusory Wall hasn't actually disappeared.


And what if half a minute later, the fighter in the group leans on the same wall, fails the will save. So he believes the wall is a solid stone wall.... Again the wall is NOT actually solid so the fighter would just fall through the wall when leaning on it and automatically be able to see through it.

Being faced with proof of the wall being an Illusion, anyone viewing this automatically succeeds at a Will Save as well as per page 173. However, some GMs would make them still roll but with a +4 bonus; the same roll if someone had just told them it's a fake wall. Either way is usually accepted.

[Gamer Girl]

In both those situations, if going by RAW, the characters automatically pass the Will Save.

Wait? What?

Ok...lets do this step-by-step.

1.Rogue sees wall and walks over to it. (no dice rolls)
2.Rogue uses Search Skill(rolls) and gets to roll a will save from interacting with the illusionary wall.
3.If the rouge makes the save, they see through the illusion. If the rouge fails the save, they think the wall is real and solid...and find no traps to boot. (and like I said in my example, they might very well pass there hand through the illusionary wall for a second or two, but they won't see it or realize they have done it if they fail their save. Characters (and people) don't get to automatically see every single thing they do in perfect detail )

So where does the auto will save come in?

[AlchemicalMyst]

Wait? What?

Ok...lets do this step-by-step.

1.Rogue sees wall and walks over to it. (no dice rolls)
2.Rogue uses Search Skill(rolls) and gets to roll a will save from interacting with the illusionary wall.
3.If the rouge makes the save, they see through the illusion. If the rouge fails the save, they think the wall is real and solid...and find no traps to boot. (and like I said in my example, they might very well pass there hand through the illusionary wall for a second or two, but they won't see it or realize they have done it if they fail their save. Characters (and people) don't get to automatically see every single thing they do in perfect detail )

So where does the auto will save come in?:smallsigh:

Pg. 243 in the spell's own description for starters, "Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface."

Pg. 173 "A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw." Hand going through the wall is pretty good proof IMHO and in Wizards' as well (see below).

From the Wizard's Rules of The Game articles "...if you poke around an illusory [wall] and your hand (or the implement you're using as a probe) goes through the [wall], you know the [wall] isn't real."

Simple Illusions like that are mainly to keep people from caring/wanting to get close and to trick low level enemies/adventurers. Also, it is a good way to prevent elves and low level casters from just detecting your hidden entrance. For instance, why would a would be thief closely examine a small 10ft by 5ft section of a 50ft stone wall in the random hopes that some Wizard hid an entrance there?

That's why any, semi-smart Illusionist makes Illusions at least somewhat believable to prevent others from questioning or closely examining them. Springing up an illusory stone wall in a hallway might slow pursuers down for a round or two as they might believe you conjured an actual wall but not much longer as when they try to touch it it's an instant disbelief.


This does make for some pretty funny situations when using a wand of Illusory Wall and a wand of Wall of Stone in conjunction. A handful of Illusory Walls and eventually pursuers will just be leaping through them without a second thought...that is, until you pop up a Wall of Stone instead! :belkar:

[Deophaun]

So where does the auto will save come in?
Right here

they might very well pass there hand through the illusionary wall for a second or two
That would be proof the wall is an illusion, so auto success on the Will save.

Personally, I'd have them only notice that on a successful search check. So, there are two rolls. The first is Search. If it succeeds, the rogue was thorough enough to do something to find proof of the illusion. Automatically makes Will save. Otherwise, he gets a will save as normal.

[Gamer Girl]

Well, surprise surprise, I disagree with the playground and the Wizards folks, i'm shocked!

I guess I just think illusion magic should be more useful in my games. And that a character does not just automatically save vs an illusionary wall. Kinda makes the wall useless in my view.

I would say the character gets the wil save when they go to interact with the say, by say touching it. But they can't 'just' touch the wall and make the auto save. That makes no sense to me. And if the Illusionary Wall spell is so useless, why did they not put Save:Auto in the spell description?

[AlchemicalMyst]

Well, surprise surprise, I disagree with the playground and the Wizards folks, i'm shocked! More like you disagree with the rules as the spell description even sates, clear as day, that touch reveals the wall being just an illusion.

Disagreeing is fine, the game changes from GM to GM to suit different needs. Just don't pretend it's RAW.


I guess I just think illusion magic should be more useful in my games. And that a character does not just automatically save vs an illusionary wall. Kinda makes the wall useless in my view. It's plenty useful. See above and below.


I would say the character gets the wil save when they go to interact with the say, by say touching it. But they can't 'just' touch the wall and make the auto save. That's your houserule, which is fine.


That makes no sense to me. And if the Illusionary Wall spell is so useless, why did they not put Save:Auto in the spell description?
It's not useless at all! Just can't dumb about it.

Pit traps, hidden passages, hidden traps, secret looking holes, fooling onlookers, etc.

Example 1:
An Illusionist wants to have a secret home in the mountains. He finds a small opening to an empty cave along a rock wall. Using his wits he casts an Illusory Wall over the entrance to keep most animals and adventures at bay. Just to be safe though he does craft a door with some pretty nasty magic security just within the entrance and enchants it to help prevent anyone nearby from hearing what's beyond the fake wall. Unless someone is super fascinated with staring at walls no one will find it without some help or lots of luck!

Example 2 (funny but real encounter from one of the local shop's campaigns):
A perverted old man had been kidnapping local girls and to find who would be his next victim had cut very small peep holes high up on some of the walls of the baths he owned, and covering them with Illusory walls. He had put them next to fine art statues to distract them and keep their wandering eyes away from the magic covers.

Example 3:
In order to make his traps less noticeable a mad wizard covered spike pits, arrow holes, swinging axes, and magic glypths with Illusory walls so that even the best of victims would only realize much too late.

[jaybird]

Best use of an illusionary wall?

To cover up the Prismatic Wall behind it :smallbiggrin:

[Oscredwin]

Trying to put your hand through an illusory wall should be done as often as trying to put your hand through a real wall. I require a statement like "I try to put my hand through it" or "I lean on it". A search check only warrants a save.

[ShikomeKidoMi]

Yes, "searching for traps" does not mean sticking your hand through the wall. If I think a wall is trapped, the last thing I'm going to do is randomly shove my hand against it.

Similarly, I do not walk down dungeon hallways trailing my hands on both sides.

As long as a rogue's skills are primarily visual, Search checks are not going to result in automatic saving throw success.

Now there will be some players that insist on poking everything with a ten foot stick.

There are all kinds of trap designs that make that a dangerous idea. The very simplest is an Alarm. Or throwing in a time constraint, because poking everything takes a while.

[AlchemicalMyst]

Trying to put your hand through an illusory wall should be done as often as trying to put your hand through a real wall. I require a statement like "I try to put my hand through it" or "I lean on it". A search check only warrants a save.

Yes, "searching for traps" does not mean sticking your hand through the wall. If I think a wall is trapped, the last thing I'm going to do is randomly shove my hand against it.

Similarly, I do not walk down dungeon hallways trailing my hands on both sides.

As long as a rogue's skills are primarily visual, Search checks are not going to result in automatic saving throw success.
^^^THESE^^^

[Gamer Girl]

As long as a rogue's skills are primarily visual, Search checks are not going to result in automatic saving throw success.

Um...I thought Search checks were physical. If your just looking at something then it's a Spot check.

[KillianHawkeye]

Um...I thought Search checks were physical. If your just looking at something then it's a Spot check.

That is an assumption on your part. While the exact methods are not mentioned in the skill description, the Search skill requires you to be within 10 feet of an area you are searching. This strongly implies that physically probing the area is not part of it.

As for the difference between Spot and Search, Spot is faster and usually reactive, and can be done at a much greater distance, but it's not as thorough as searching and it can't be used to detect things which are designed to be secret.

[AlchemicalMyst]

Um...I thought Search checks were physical. If your just looking at something then it's a Spot check.

As KillianHawkeye has pointed out, that is quite the assumption. Also, mistaken.

[Milo v3]

I go by the rule that doing something like sticking your hand through a wall you thought was real would allow you to make a save at a +4 bonus, if you fail you could know that it's an illusion but dammit you just can't convince your brain and the illusory wall still appears to be there. If you suspect that something is an illusion and you investigate it with the intent of disproving it then no save would be needed.

Where does the +4 bonus come from?
Also by RAW it doesn't get disbelieved until you succeed on a save or there is proof that it is fake.


First it does depend on the illusion spell used, of course.
Silent Image.


By the book, if you fail your will save, you don't notice the illusion. So the Rogue in question might very well stick his hand through the wall...but he won't notice that. But after that, the rules are no help.....
I wouldn't say he is sticking his hand through the wall, as most people don't try and do that when looking for traps.

Illusionary wall (the spell) should have tactile elements. But in 3X it does not. I add them in anyway. It's a 4th level spell and should be able to fool the sense of touch. (1st level sight, 2nd level sound, 3rd level thermal and smell, 4th level touch).

Note that save or no save, the fighter will still fall through the illusionary wall....[/QUOTE]


This depends entirely on the nature of the illusion. Look up Figments, Glamers, Patterns, Phantasms, and Shadows to see which are perceptual (existing as sensory constructs in the real world) and which are mental (existing only in the mind of the affected creature).

As a general rule, I would say that disbelieving a perceptual illusion does not actually dispel it, it only allows you to realize that it isn't real and act accordingly. Think of a hologram -- you can see it, and so can everyone else, but knowing that it is just intersecting lightwaves doesn't make it disappear. Note that perceptual illusions are typically created by the mind of the caster, which allows mistakes to be built into the illusion.

Mental illusions are typically induced by a caster but created by the affected mind. As such, there should be no sensory mistakes in a mental illusion, as the affected mind fills in every detail it expects to perceive. "Errors" in mental illusions should be logical errors, such as "that person died two weeks ago" or "penguins don't live in Africa" or "what are you talking about, we're being attacked by bugbears, not owlbears". Disbelieving a mental illusion should dispel it (or radically change it), since you are basically cutting it off at the source.
I'm not talking about the effects of disbelieving an illlusion...
And I'm aware that its simply an image. I'm wondering why people can believe it when they interact with it.


If your rolls dictate that you believe an illusion despite incontrovertible fact, then your mind may fill in details or rationalize errors. If you fall through an illusory wall and still believe it, you might think you fell through a secret door, or that a spell is affecting you or the wall. If you see someone you know to be a thousand miles away, you might assume they teleported home, or that a double is a thousand miles away. Until you make that roll, or the DM waives belief, get creative and justify your character's interaction with (or avoidance of) the illusion.


So in the example (rogue putting his hand through it touches the wall, interacts with it, doesn't needs to save, ,fails the save, he realizes believes it's not real.

[QUOTE]Also from the example is the fighter leaning on the "fake" wall... he falls through and gets an instant successful save. The wall then becomes tranclucent to him too.
That would make sense.


First off, this article (HERE (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060221a)) is worth the read. Clears things up with most situations, though definitely not all.
I can't go to Wizards because of the blocks on my laptop.


In both those situations, if going by RAW, the characters automatically pass the Will Save.
Second yes. Why the first?


This is exactly what you're looking for. pg 173 PHB 3.5
No it isn't. I'm talking about Failing the save. Not succedding on the save.


In this example the wall has absolutely no tactile sensation, PHB3.5 pg 243. Which means IF he is actually touching said Illusary Wall he automatically succeeds his will save as stated on page 174 of the PHB3.5
"A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. A character who falls through a section of illusory floor into a pit knows something is amiss, as does one who spends a few rounds poking at the same illusion."
So searching for one round wouldn't mean he instantly succeeds in disbelieving.


:smallsigh:

Pg. 243 in the spell's own description for starters, "Touch or a probing search reveals the true nature of the surface."
I never said Illusory Wall. I don't like that spell as its just a more limited Silent Image with longer duration.

[AlchemicalMyst]

I can't go to Wizards because of the blocks on my laptop.

Interacting With Illusions

According to page 173 in the Player's Handbook, you don't receive a saving throw against an illusion effect with a disbelief saving throw until you study the illusion carefully or interact with it in some way. The text uses an illusory floor as an example. The character in the example provided there gets a saving throw by stopping to examine the floor (study) or by probing the floor (interaction).

For game purposes, we can define "studying" an illusion as taking an action (which DMs can choose to make a move action since this is an extrapolation of the rules and not an actual rule) to observe an illusion effect and note its details. Some DMs I know require a Spot or Search check to disbelieve an illusion. That's going too far. Merely pausing and using an action to make the check is enough to allow a saving throw.

Also for game purposes, we can define "interacting" with an illusion as doing something that could affect the illusion or allowing the illusion to have an affect on you. You have a valid claim to an interaction with an illusion when you attack it, touch it, talk to it, poke it with a stick, target it with a spell, or do something else that one might do with a real creature or object.

The key to disbelieving an illusion is investing some time and effort in the illusion. If you decide to ignore the illusion, you don't get a saving throw to disbelieve it. Let's consider the illusory guard from a previous example. The guard is a figment created with a major imagespell, and the caster has left the illusory guard to prowl around a chamber. A character entering or looking into the chamber might react to the illusory guard in several ways, some of which will allow a saving throw to disbelieve and some that will not. Here are just a few possibilities:

The character tries to sneak past the guard.
Although both hiding and moving silently are resolved with opposed skill checks, the character really isn't doing anything that could affect the illusion and isn't really interacting with it. It would be best to call for the appropriate checks from the sneaking character and then pretend to make the opposed rolls (the illusory guard cannot see or hear the character). The character doesn't get a saving throw against the illusion.

The character attacks the guard.
Attacking an illusion is a definite interaction. The character makes the attack, using at least a standard action to do so. Hit or miss, the character makes a Will save to disbelieve the illusion immediately after making the attack roll.

If the attack hits, the character probably should disbelieve automatically (see Automatic Interactions or Automatic Disbelief, below) as the character sees and feels the weapon passing through the figment with no effect (just like swinging the weapon through empty air). If the illusion in question were a shadow instead of a figment, a successful attack would not result in automatic disbelief (there's something solid to hit there).

The character takes a moment to observe the guard's movements.
The DM can choose to make this at least a move action for the character -- as noted earlier, this is an extrapolation of the rules, not an actual rule. No check is required, and the character makes a saving throw to disbelieve the illusion as part of the action used to observe the guard.

The character tries to identify the guard's uniform or insignia (or simply looks for the same).
This kind of scrutiny merits a standard action. The character makes a Spot or Search check to look over the guard's gear (or possibly an appropriate Knowledge check). A successful check reveals something about the guard's gear. For example, if the illusion's caster included insignia or if a particular uniform style is included in the figment, the check reveals those. In any case, the character makes a saving throw to disbelieve the illusion as part of the action used to study the guard, even if the check fails to uncover any details.

The character taunts the guard or asks the guard a question.
This one might qualify as an interaction, or it might not. Speaking usually is a free action, but meaningful communication between two creatures takes up some time.

From page 144 of the Player's Handbook:

Speak:
In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. Some DMs may rule that a character can only speak on his turn, or that a character can't speak while flatfooted (and thus can't warn allies of a surprise threat until he has a chance to act). Speaking more than few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action; to communicate more information than that, your DM may require that you take a move action or even a full-round action.

If the character and the guard are alone and there hasn't been an initiative roll, the character needs to stick around to note the guard's reaction to the taunt or wait for the guard's reply to truly interact with the illusion. (That's the equivalent of a move or standard action.) The character makes a saving throw to disbelieve the illusion as part of the action used to communicate with the guard.

If this interaction occurs during an encounter, the character could speak as a free action, but she probably would have to wait until the following round to attempt a saving throw to disbelieve. (A real creature would need the same interval to respond, probably using a free action itself.)

Automatic Disbelief

According to the Player's Handbook, if you're faced with proof that an illusion isn't real, you disbelieve the illusion without making a saving throw. The rules give a few examples of "proof" that an illusion isn't real. If you step on an illusory floor and fall through, you know that floor isn't real. Likewise, if you poke around an illusory floor and your hand (or the implement you're using as a probe) goes through the floor, you know the floor isn't real.

It's worth noting that in both examples the illusion fails to function as a real object would. A real floor is solid. It supports your weight (unless it breaks under you), and you can't push objects or parts of your body through it. A character could create an illusion that reacts appropriately when disturbed (with a programmed image spell, for example). In such cases, a character interacting with the illusion still must make a saving throw to disbelieve the illusion. For example, if you use a programmed image spell to create an illusory floor that collapses when someone touches it or walks in it, that's consistent with the way at least some real floors work and a saving throw is required to disbelieve even when someone falls through it.

The rules don't say so, but if you create an illusion that allows a saving throw for disbelief, you automatically disbelieve it (you know it isn't real because you created it).

Automatic Interactions

As noted in Part Two, you must take some action that could affect an illusion before you can attempt to make a saving throw to disbelieve it. Some illusion spells, however, allow saves to disbelieve even when you don't use an action to interact with them. The ventriloquism spell, for example, allows a saving throw to disbelieve whenever you hear the figment sound the spell produces. It always pays to read an illusion spell's description for such exceptions to the general rule.

Dealing with the Unbelievable: The rules governing illusions assume that the spellcaster is at least trying to create something believable. When an illusion spell allows a saving throw for disbelief and the caster creates something unbelievably weird, it's best to allow an immediate saving throw. You're the best judge of what's unbelievable in your campaign. In a world where dogs breathe fire (hell hounds), immense dragons fly through the air, and wizards can shoot bolts of lightning from their fingertips, what's unbelievable covers a tiny slice indeed. Still, if the illusion caster is just being silly (singing carnivorous vegetables, bloodsucking bunnies, dancing hippos), it's best to just roll a saving throw.

Pointing Out Illusions

According to page 174 in the Player's Handbook, a character who successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates that information to others grants those other characters a +4 bonus on saving throws to disbelieve the illusion. The rules don't specifically say so, but a character claiming the bonus still must use an action to study or interact with the illusion before attempting a saving throw.



Second yes. Why the first?
Because her example was the Rouge literally sticking their hand through the wall.

Even your original post stated that the rouge was touching the wall.



No it isn't. I'm talking about Failing the save. Not succedding on the save.
Ah then my friend look no further! ...than in the same paragraph.
Seriously would've taken less time then posting that sentence.
"A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw."

example:
Nimble the rouge studies the door (made with the spell, Major Image) for traps and obviously finds nothing. However, he gets to make a Will save; he fails. Noticing nothing out of the ordinary Nimble reaches forward to push the door open and his arm goes elbow deep through it! Faced with this proof that the door isn't real Nimble automatically disbelieves the figment leaving only a translucent outline.


So searching for one round wouldn't mean he instantly succeeds in disbelieving.
Depends what you mean by searching. If the rouge actually tries placing his hand on (or for whatever reason, through) the image, then the illusion is automatically disbelieved as there is no tactile sensation.

To answer your original question... neither interpretation is correct by RAW as you state the rouge actually touches the image. Without any tactile sensation his hand goes right through and "BAM!" free success. Same with the fighter leaning on the wall. Their minds don't write in tactile sensation neither can the object support weight. Clearly stated on page 173 PHB3.5 under the description of Illusion magic and its subschools.


I never said Illusory Wall. I don't like that spell as its just a more limited Silent Image with longer duration. Infinitely longer duration, haha.

Also, your example stated an "illusionary stone wall"... that's why everyone though Illusory Wall. Don't be so surprised.

[Gamer Girl]

That is an assumption on your part. While the exact methods are not mentioned in the skill description, the Search skill requires you to be within 10 feet of an area you are searching. This strongly implies that physically probing the area is not part of it.

As for the difference between Spot and Search, Spot is faster and usually reactive, and can be done at a much greater distance, but it's not as thorough as searching and it can't be used to detect things which are designed to be secret.

Well, I guess they never bothered to say that searching was a physical act. Though I'd sure say that it could be added to that Common Sense Ruling Thread that to search you must touch the area/object searched. It just makes sense to some of us that the main way you search for a secret door for example, is to fell along a surface for a crack where air comes through.

And note that the Search skill does include the example of 'looking through a chest for an item' and that is touching all the stuff in the chest, as you can't 'look' through a chest of junk from ten feet away and see an item under the junk in the bottom of the chest(though this is again going by common sense).
But then this is the type of thing that is pointless to tell the 'rule people' anyway. Just look: Open locks does not say the character needs to touch the lock or even be with in ten feet, so 'by the rules' a character can pick a lock from the moon...and you can't find a single line in the rules that says they can't.

[Mnemnosyne]

The search skill is also used to detect traps, an activity during which touching things is an exceptionally bad idea. If search required touching, it would automatically set off most traps, except those which require a specific amount of pressure to trigger.

Additionally, as noted, search can be done from ten feet away. If searching automatically involved touching, this would not be possible under any circumstance, since most characters cannot reach ten feet.

Therefore, it is logical to presume that search only involves touching when it would not be possible to conduct a search without doing so, such as the aforementioned rummaging through a chest, or searching someone's pockets, or a desk's drawers. Alternately, it may depend on what one is searching for. If searching for traps, obviously, no touching. If searching for secret doors, then touch. This requires the player to state the intended objective of the search.

[KillianHawkeye]

Well, I guess they never bothered to say that searching was a physical act. Though I'd sure say that it could be added to that Common Sense Ruling Thread that to search you must touch the area/object searched. It just makes sense to some of us that the main way you search for a secret door for example, is to fell along a surface for a crack where air comes through.

I'll just say that "common sense" is not common and leave it at that.

[jackattack]

If a character fails their save against an illusion, it would not be unreasonable to rule that they cannot and will not purposely break the illusion.

In the wall example (not Illusory Wall), the observer who believes the illusion simply won't try to put his hand through the wall because he (thinks he) knows that it's impossible and (thinks it) will probably hurt when his moving hand hits the stone.

If he tries to touch the wall and doesn't feel anything, and fails another save, he could easily be considered to be in a delusional state. People suffering from delusions often go to great lengths to preserve or justify their delusions, and frequently respond... poorly... when those delusions are challenged. The observer may consciously run his hands along the illusory "surface" but avoid "actual contact" to prevent the mental paradox of the illusion (collapse of the delusion), or he might convince himself (un/sub-consciously) that he actually does feel the wall. (He might even pretend to "lean" against the wall without putting any weight on the illusory surface.) There may be some wiggle room, though, if the observer comments that the wall feels "weird" or "smooth".

If the illusion has a tactile component (specified when cast), the observer still gets a saving throw for interacting with it, but if he fails the save then his mind doesn't have to fill anything in -- the caster set the details when the illusion was created. The observer will actually believe that he feels the wall, and his hands will follow the contours, but now he is actually more likely to violate the boundaries of the illusion because he is so thoroughly fooled. Why wouldn't he lean against the wall, or push against stones looking for a secret door? And he will go right through it because it is immaterial.

And as said before, whenever the caster provides the details of the illusion, there is a chance that he will get things wrong, potentially allowing more saves or different/complementary rolls if the observer has relevant knowledge and/or skills.

[IthroZada]

Well, I guess they never bothered to say that searching was a physical act. Though I'd sure say that it could be added to that Common Sense Ruling Thread that to search you must touch the area/object searched. It just makes sense to some of us that the main way you search for a secret door for example, is to fell along a surface for a crack where air comes through.

And note that the Search skill does include the example of 'looking through a chest for an item' and that is touching all the stuff in the chest, as you can't 'look' through a chest of junk from ten feet away and see an item under the junk in the bottom of the chest(though this is again going by common sense).
But then this is the type of thing that is pointless to tell the 'rule people' anyway. Just look: Open locks does not say the character needs to touch the lock or even be with in ten feet, so 'by the rules' a character can pick a lock from the moon...and you can't find a single line in the rules that says they can't.

It has to be all or nothing? You can't be satisfied with Search sometimes requiring physical contact and sometimes not, as decided by the player and the DM?

[Milo v3]

If a character fails their save against an illusion, it would not be unreasonable to rule that they cannot and will not purposely break the illusion.

In the wall example (not Illusory Wall), the observer who believes the illusion simply won't try to put his hand through the wall because he (thinks he) knows that it's impossible and (thinks it) will probably hurt when his moving hand hits the stone.

If he tries to touch the wall and doesn't feel anything, and fails another save, he could easily be considered to be in a delusional state. People suffering from delusions often go to great lengths to preserve or justify their delusions, and frequently respond... poorly... when those delusions are challenged. The observer may consciously run his hands along the illusory "surface" but avoid "actual contact" to prevent the mental paradox of the illusion (collapse of the delusion), or he might convince himself (un/sub-consciously) that he actually does feel the wall. (He might even pretend to "lean" against the wall without putting any weight on the illusory surface.) There may be some wiggle room, though, if the observer comments that the wall feels "weird" or "smooth".

If the illusion has a tactile component (specified when cast), the observer still gets a saving throw for interacting with it, but if he fails the save then his mind doesn't have to fill anything in -- the caster set the details when the illusion was created. The observer will actually believe that he feels the wall, and his hands will follow the contours, but now he is actually more likely to violate the boundaries of the illusion because he is so thoroughly fooled. Why wouldn't he lean against the wall, or push against stones looking for a secret door? And he will go right through it because it is immaterial.

And as said before, whenever the caster provides the details of the illusion, there is a chance that he will get things wrong, potentially allowing more saves or different/complementary rolls if the observer has relevant knowledge and/or skills.

This was what I thought would happen.

[AlchemicalMyst]

This was what I thought would happen.

Why post a question if you will only accept someone agreeing with you? By RAW, touch ruins the illusion since it doesn't provide tactile sensation. There is no "fill in the blank" or "mime" effect. Shadows are the exception.

[Milo v3]

Why post a question if you will only accept someone agreeing with you? By RAW, touch ruins the illusion since it doesn't provide tactile sensation. There is no "fill in the blank" or "mime" effect. Shadows are the exception.

Note, I was asking as I was unsure on my position. Thats why I used past tense, as I no longer think that works. I probably should have been clearer.

[Mnemnosyne]

If a character fails their save against an illusion, it would not be unreasonable to rule that they cannot and will not purposely break the illusion.

In the wall example (not Illusory Wall), the observer who believes the illusion simply won't try to put his hand through the wall because he (thinks he) knows that it's impossible and (thinks it) will probably hurt when his moving hand hits the stone.

If he tries to touch the wall and doesn't feel anything, and fails another save, he could easily be considered to be in a delusional state. People suffering from delusions often go to great lengths to preserve or justify their delusions, and frequently respond... poorly... when those delusions are challenged. The observer may consciously run his hands along the illusory "surface" but avoid "actual contact" to prevent the mental paradox of the illusion (collapse of the delusion), or he might convince himself (un/sub-consciously) that he actually does feel the wall. (He might even pretend to "lean" against the wall without putting any weight on the illusory surface.) There may be some wiggle room, though, if the observer comments that the wall feels "weird" or "smooth".

If the illusion has a tactile component (specified when cast), the observer still gets a saving throw for interacting with it, but if he fails the save then his mind doesn't have to fill anything in -- the caster set the details when the illusion was created. The observer will actually believe that he feels the wall, and his hands will follow the contours, but now he is actually more likely to violate the boundaries of the illusion because he is so thoroughly fooled. Why wouldn't he lean against the wall, or push against stones looking for a secret door? And he will go right through it because it is immaterial.

And as said before, whenever the caster provides the details of the illusion, there is a chance that he will get things wrong, potentially allowing more saves or different/complementary rolls if the observer has relevant knowledge and/or skills.
This is pretty much completely wrong if you're referring to RAW. It may be the way you houserule it, but by the actual rules, as soon as you touch an illusion that should, but actually does not have a tactile sensation, you are faced with proof that it is not real, and therefore automatically save against it. So an illusion of a wall is always spoiled by someone touching the wall for any reason, unless that illusion has a tactile component (in which case touching in the wall only provides a standard saving throw).

You are correct in that an observer probably won't try to put their hand through the wall if they believe in it (unless this person goes around trying to put their hands through walls all the time) but if he touches the wall, there is absolutely no 'fill in the blank' functionality to Illusion (Figment) spells. An Illusion (Phantasm) spell would probably act that way, because that one is in the mind of the subject.

[Slipperychicken]

(unless this person goes around trying to put their hands through walls all the time)

If you're looking for something that doesn't want to be found in a world with illusory walls, it's a decent idea to check them out (run a 10ft pole down the walls surface, putting pressure on it, so it will catch if part of the wall is an illusion and not really there). If you can spare a minute or two, of course. If you can't spare that pittance of time, you have bigger problems to deal with.

[Deophaun]

In the wall example (not Illusory Wall), the observer who believes the illusion simply won't try to put his hand through the wall because he (thinks he) knows that it's impossible and (thinks it) will probably hurt when his moving hand hits the stone.

If he tries to touch the wall and doesn't feel anything, and fails another save, he could easily be considered to be in a delusional state....

If the illusion has a tactile component (specified when cast), the observer still gets a saving throw for interacting with it
So basically, under this understanding, there is no benefit to an illusion having a tactile component.