I'm starting to have problem building challenging encounters. Damn Illusionist

[Hyperversum]

We are a generally optimized groups, I had not many problems in my last campaign (and I played against a Conjurer focused on doing debuff and ground controll and a good optimized summoner) in giving good fights even against high level Casters, but now, at level 7/8 it has become difficult.

Why? Because the Illusionist has ridicolously high DCs (They are level 7/8 characters, but between his age [the player loves to play old characters] and proper feats his 3rd level spells are like 27 in illusion) while the other, an evoker, also Just read polymorph and started morphing into an pyrohydra and does more damage in this way (getting also boosted in HPs and saves!) than with his spells.
OBVIOUSLY they have clear weakness -The illusionist has like 12 CON, he doesn't have much HPs and blasting him at the start of an encounter could take him out in 2 blow, and for sure invisibility is a good defense, but at level 7/8 it is about to lose power.
The evoker makes himself a huuuuge target in the eyes of most enemies, and while he out-damage everyone else, he isn't exactly THAT optimized.

I have mastered other very optimized wizards as I said, and played one myself, but they weren't so... Annoying? Yes, I would define annoying the need to design an encounter only thinking about the freaking illusionist and his SoD at level 7 (Phantsmal killer, which generally hasn't a big effect but against most humanoids it's a problem.

Any idea that isn't speaking with them (I will do If It remains a problem, but I would like to find a solution in-game because I don't like asking people to change build only because of these problems) or focusing them in every fight?

I mean, in general "humanoid figths" I could see how the enemy is gonna be ready to fight them with dispel of poisons and so on, but creatures and those who can't be really prepared?
And to be clear, this isn't a "Damn spellcasters ruining my game" thread it's a "Good ideas in how to deal with this since I'm experienced but no that much?"

P.S. Yeah, the CDs are legit. He started with 18 Int and a +2 Int gnome subrace, and old age (that's also why he doesn't have many HPs anyway) and that's another +2, the +1 at level 4 and an item for +2 int.
That's 26.
Add Spell Focus, Greater Spell focus, Shadow Weave Magic, and +1 for Gnome, and you get your DC is 21+Spell Level

[Hellpyre]

Creatures with blindsight or mindsight make for great counters to most forms of illusion. Otherwise, ambush tactics get your monsters a turn to see the real layout and party before everything changes, and a Hulking Hurler/Barbarian in a rage may just throw his allies through an illusion.

[Darth Ultron]

Well...

*Higher Will Save Foes, of course. Have more ''intelligent opponents'' and not ''dumb cave men''. The vast majority of intelligent, magical races and creatures with have both high will saves and high mental stats.

*Spell Resistance-Even if he has feats for this, it is still at least another roll/chance a spell won't work

*Buffs. Foes should naturally buff themselves, just like the Pc's do. Potions, wands, magic items and feats can all be taken, as well as spells.

*Builds. For classes and templates, you can get a better will save. Even just one level in a class with a good will save is a big boost.

*Senses. There are tons of monsters and creatures that don't use sight...and just about all shadow type illusions are sight based. Anything with out sight or with other senses will be at least much less effected.

*Unintelligent foes-for a lot of illusions they only work if the foe has intelligence. The vast ton of animals, oozes, constructs and many undead can't be ''fooled''.

*Mobility. Foes that can move fast are much harder to target, as are ones that can do things like burrow. And all sorts of magical movement.

*More foes. Don't just have like ''five orcs'' attack. Have twenty orcs, in like five groups, spread out. Plus a couple goblins and dogs. A spellcaster can only cast so many spells...

*Plenty of foes are immune to illusions or even magic.

[Fouredged Sword]

I like undead who use lifesight. It is one of the few senses that is almost imposible to remove. A lich with lifesight seems like a really good arch villain. Immune to most enchantment and illusion, hard to fight in melee with natural weapons without getting paralyzed.

And the party can kill him and you can reuse to your heart's content.

He can't see invisible targets, but can see where they ARE. Glitterdust handles the rest.

[lord_khaine]

Initially, how does it boost the hp of the Evoker to turn into a pyrohydra?
Because i assume this is 3.5 (you did not have a PF tag anywhere). And even though your con score changes from polymorhing, then your hp remains the same. So its a 7d4+7*con mod spellcaster thats wading into melee range, in a shape with a base ac of 17. That should be suicide.

Also, i dont think he should be getting the breath weapon of the Hydra. Its not listed under the Hydra entry what sort of attack its breath weapon is. But for everyone else its a supernatural ability. So i just think this is a classic case of poor editing.

The Gnome illusionist meanwhile is a bit of an annoyance. I do think you allowed things to get a little off the rails with allowing both +int subraces, and him starting at old. But it should also be a massive penalty of -3 to every physical attribute. So he is kinda fragile. As it is just a fireball dumped in whatever area he hides in should keep him on the toes.

Alternatively for a group of lower level humanoids. Someone who wins initiative and have either a bow or a wand/scroll of magic missile, just need to ready an action to disturb the gnomes casting. That should give him a bit of challenge, and force him to rely on other party members for getting rid of that person.

[Hyperversum]

Creatures with blindsight or mindsight make for great counters to most forms of illusion. Otherwise, ambush tactics get your monsters a turn to see the real layout and party before everything changes, and a Hulking Hurler/Barbarian in a rage may just throw his allies through an illusion.

Last fight was indeed an ambush, but simply it CAN'T always be an amush on them. And obviously, creatures with immunities are used but they simply can't be always immune. Just consider the case of human enemies.


Well...

*Higher Will Save Foes, of course. Have more ''intelligent opponents'' and not ''dumb cave men''. The vast majority of intelligent, magical races and creatures with have both high will saves and high mental stats.

*Spell Resistance-Even if he has feats for this, it is still at least another roll/chance a spell won't work

*Buffs. Foes should naturally buff themselves, just like the Pc's do. Potions, wands, magic items and feats can all be taken, as well as spells.

*Builds. For classes and templates, you can get a better will save. Even just one level in a class with a good will save is a big boost.

*Senses. There are tons of monsters and creatures that don't use sight...and just about all shadow type illusions are sight based. Anything with out sight or with other senses will be at least much less effected.

*Unintelligent foes-for a lot of illusions they only work if the foe has intelligence. The vast ton of animals, oozes, constructs and many undead can't be ''fooled''.

*Mobility. Foes that can move fast are much harder to target, as are ones that can do things like burrow. And all sorts of magical movement.

*More foes. Don't just have like ''five orcs'' attack. Have twenty orcs, in like five groups, spread out. Plus a couple goblins and dogs. A spellcaster can only cast so many spells...

*Plenty of foes are immune to illusions or even magic.

There are obviously things I'm considering, the fey they were chasing in the last encounter (I can describe the encounter if needed) was "buffed" by a 3 level dip in Sorcerer and had a basic +12 Save, which was moved up to +14. Yet, I had to roll at least 15 to save from a 4th level spell. Do you see the point? Without many arbitriary changes it's literally HARD to resist such DCs. Yeah, I could rulehouse better WIS attributes, in order to give another +1/+2 on some of them, but it's anyway hard. Which isn't bad, he is a one trick pony on such attacks, but it's ridicolous high anyway.

And anyway, the problem is always the same. I can design an encounter interesting for everyone? Yes, sure.
But it requires to be designed around this guy basically.


I like undead who use lifesight. It is one of the few senses that is almost imposible to remove. A lich with lifesight seems like a really good arch villain. Immune to most enchantment and illusion, hard to fight in melee with natural weapons without getting paralyzed.

And the party can kill him and you can reuse to your heart's content.

He can't see invisible targets, but can see where they ARE. Glitterdust handles the rest.

This could be a good idea, after all I'm using a good bunch of Undeads, even if not THAT many. The problem remains that as soon as it returns back to people with normal brains, they are ****ed in 75%/80% of the cases.


Initially, how does it boost the hp of the Evoker to turn into a pyrohydra?
Because i assume this is 3.5 (you did not have a PF tag anywhere). And even though your con score changes from polymorhing, then your hp remains the same. So its a 7d4+7*con mod spellcaster thats wading into melee range, in a shape with a base ac of 17. That should be suicide.

Also, i dont think he should be getting the breath weapon of the Hydra. Its not listed under the Hydra entry what sort of attack its breath weapon is. But for everyone else its a supernatural ability. So i just think this is a classic case of poor editing.

The Gnome illusionist meanwhile is a bit of an annoyance. I do think you allowed things to get a little off the rails with allowing both +int subraces, and him starting at old. But it should also be a massive penalty of -3 to every physical attribute. So he is kinda fragile. As it is just a fireball dumped in whatever area he hides in should keep him on the toes.

Alternatively for a group of lower level humanoids. Someone who wins initiative and have either a bow or a wand/scroll of magic missile, just need to ready an action to disturb the gnomes casting. That should give him a bit of challenge, and force him to rely on other party members for getting rid of that person.

Yes, we are using 3.5, I tagged it now, sorry. Anyway, we play with "Maxxed" HP, so wizards get 4hp for dice, and the Evoker has a nice CON by himself but... sure that HP doesn't change? I was pretty sure it doesn't. But in fact, he isn't much of a problem. In the last encounter he was able to laid destruction on a monster in one round, but it was a plant monster ya know, so breath weapon or not, between Schorcing rays and Fireballs he would have done the same.
And he got feats for it. He loved the idea of his wizard doing blasts even in other forms and got the idea of morphing into a hydra after fighting one. It's cool for me.

And yeah, I ****ed up a bit with leaving old age and subraces but... you know, I played myself a Grey Elf. But I was a support Generalist wizard, I mostly buffed, counterspelled and so on, Int was mostly to have more spells for me ahahah!
The age imo is more a malus than a bonus. He INDEED has low hp, i'm gonna abuse it a bit more but... hell, the problem as I said above, is that in this way I have to design encounters after it.

For sure, next time they are gonna meet humanoids, these humanoids are gonna have some random "Mercenaries thugs" in the back rows ready to fire on him ahahah

[Eldariel]

TBH creatures not adjusting their HP for Polymorph is kinda weird causing all sorts of rules issues. For example, if your Con changes after Polymorph (e.g. Con damage, Con boost or such), does your HP get recalculated based on your now-current HP? The only really functional ruling retains your "original" Con as a shadow number and all changes to Con during Polymorph are applied to that for the purposes of calculating HP but there's no precedent for any such mechanisms in the game nor does a creature have secondary Con-scores.

The ruling that a creature's HP is unaffected relies on Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorph.htm) inheriting the following line from Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm): "Your class and level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses all remain the same." which is fine but given the circumstances it's stated under, the intent is probably that the spell doesn't change how things derived off your HD are calculated in spite of it changing your type (which potentially influences your racial HD and what they give). Indeed, Alter Self itself doesn't even influence your stats so it being aimed at the stat changes makes no sense. Thus, it's probably RAW that hit points don't change but it's very reasonable to recalculate them for Polymorph numbers. Of course, this does alter the balance of the spell (which is already out of the whack), but it's at the point where that hardly matters.

[ericgrau]

What spells is he casting? That will affect a lot because even successful illusions only do so much.

By the illusion rules proof that an illusion is fake can end it for a creature regardless of save DC. Such as touching a visual only illusion. Being told it's fake gives a +4: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#illusion

Truly fantastic illusions may leave foes skeptical, especially intelligent foes like humanoid. Even if they fail their save DC and see that it's there, they may try to test it or otherwise react with uncertainty. This could lead to the above, or even before then they may not think what's in front of them is really there if it's crazy enough.

On the flipside if he does illusions that are subtle enough that no one examines or interacts them, they don't get a save. These are vague terms and DMs often equate seeing with examining or interacting. Obviously the rule would be pointless if that were true. I'd take examining as looking at it directly: searching it or declaring an observation action on it. Interacting is doing any action on it. Attacking it for example, though again that usually proves it's fake without rolling a save. If it's a ranged weapon or ranged spell attack for many illusions the caster may make the illusion react appropriately to prevent proof that it is fake.

You kind of screwed yourself with the max HP rule because it lets players like the illusionist dump HP more easily. Damage is less effective and non-damaging effects are proportionally more effective against players. Con HP is less of of a factor since it was not likewise increased. But at least everybody got max HP. If you use stronger monsters with more damage to compensate it could work out fine, as long as they don't use too many non-damaging effects. Of course then you're back to square one and next time you could just use an average HP by level rule instead if you're afraid of bad rolls. Stronger monsters also means the monsters have higher HP and non-damaging effects like illusions are more effective against them than damage. It's funny how supposed game needs like damage supposedly being too weak and HP supposedly being too low contradict each other. In general be careful about game balance house rules without a lot of evidence beyond popularity.

That said max HP isn't a huge deal. It looks like the illusionist is still getting hurt. Maybe foes could go after the caster or low armor foes first regardless of apparent immediate threat. Maybe if someone does something crazy in round 1 or after 2 rounds then switch to him. Otherwise "pick off the weakest" is just as valid as "go after the biggest threat". You can do it gradually since you weren't doing it before and should have, giving him time to switch to defensive spells or other measurs. Any effort spent on those is less effort spent on offense.

[Geddy2112]

Illusions are really strong against a lot of enemies, but balanced because a lot of enemies are outright immune to them.

As said above, undead, oozes, vermin, some animals, constructs, and anything immune to mind affecting effects won't give a flip about illusions.

Have you tried a swarm of insects? Swarms are surprisingly lethal to fragile arcane casters. The distraction DC is low but arcane casters have garbage fort saves making it a legitimate threat. Throw the concentration check on top, and you can easily shut them down. Use something with scent or a similar sense ability to beat invisibility.

Also, include threats that can't be stopped by illusion-rooms filled with poison gas, lava, etc. Certainly your casters can get around these, but they can't concentrate on illusions while doing so and it will burn their spell slots/spells prepared.

[Gullintanni]

Illusions are really strong against a lot of enemies, but balanced because a lot of enemies are outright immune to them.

As said above, undead, oozes, vermin, some animals, constructs, and anything immune to mind affecting effects won't give a flip about illusions.

Have you tried a swarm of insects? Swarms are surprisingly lethal to fragile arcane casters. The distraction DC is low but arcane casters have garbage fort saves making it a legitimate threat. Throw the concentration check on top, and you can easily shut them down. Use something with scent or a similar sense ability to beat invisibility.

Also, include threats that can't be stopped by illusion-rooms filled with poison gas, lava, etc. Certainly your casters can get around these, but they can't concentrate on illusions while doing so and it will burn their spell slots/spells prepared.

Emphasis added - The Image line of spells works on all of these creatures, especially if they're mindless. A creative Illusionist doesn't need to directly affect your mind in order to mislead.

[Eldariel]

Illusions are really strong against a lot of enemies, but balanced because a lot of enemies are outright immune to them.

As said above, undead, oozes, vermin, some animals, constructs, and anything immune to mind affecting effects won't give a flip about illusions.

This is actually the total opposite. Most actual illusions (Figments) lack the mind-affecting tag; they're just as efficient against things that lack a mind. More-so in fact since things without a mind also tend to lack the wits to be able to test whether the illusion is real or not; a mindless vision-reliant zombie has no memory and will probably just stop chasing you if you block its modes of detection by e.g. placing an illusionary visual obstacle between you and it. The thing that does work against illusions is having senses it doesn't affect. Intruder Alarm (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?printed=true&multiverseid=5174) from MTG is a good example; who cares about visuals if your primary method of detection is scent for instance?

EDIT: Precise limits of mindlessness are as per here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm):
"Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks.

Mindless creatures do not gain feats or skills, although they may have bonus feats or racial skill bonuses."

They're really quite pathetic against any creatures of reasonable intelligence..

[Gullintanni]

This is actually the total opposite. Most actual illusions (Figments) lack the mind-affecting tag; they're just as efficient against things that lack a mind. More-so in fact since things without a mind also tend to lack the wits to be able to test whether the illusion is real or not; a mindless vision-reliant zombie has no memory and will probably just stop chasing you if you block its modes of detection by e.g. placing an illusionary visual obstacle between you and it. The thing that does work against illusions is having senses it doesn't affect. Intruder Alarm (http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?printed=true&multiverseid=5174) from MTG is a good example; who cares about visuals if your primary method of detection is scent for instance?

Higher level figments manipulate smells as well :smalltongue:

[Fizban]

As ericgrau said, what spells are they casting? The illusion rules can be interpreted multiple ways, and often the problem with an illusionist is that the DM is letting them do whatever they want and treating a failed save as holding the idiot ball, like "oh hey something went through that "wall" but I failed my save so I won't even consider poking it." Mindless creatures, the counter to mind games, are written off as being no-save beaten by illusions when the opposite should be true: no mind means no caring that a "wall" has suddenly appeared, the skeleton/golem/whatever just runs through it because their response to an actual wall would have been to ram into it anyway. Distracting "creatures" are ignored just as easily- the default behavior of almost every mindless creature is to attack if attacked, and if the thing in front of them isn't damaging there's no reason it should keep the attention of something that doesn't think. Root response is attack the thing that hurts. Let's see, then there's the old "illusory fog," fog is not an object, creature, or force, so that's illegal- at best you can just fill the place with illusory stone and then let failed saves block sight, but that'll hit your allies as hard as it does the enemies unless your allies can make the save.

Silent Image ends if you stop concentrating, and Major Image stops moving and ends after 3 rounds (or after a single hit from an opponent against its object tier AC). Locking down one enemy that's just smart enough to be fool-able and dumb enough to be fooled, while you maintain concentration, is pretty okay I guess.

The Mirror Image spell is a particular annoyance, often given a massive boost by letting people have a greater than 50% miss chance when the spell doesn't actually work that way: nothing in the spell says the images stay in your square and your opponents randomly attack them. In fact they specifically separate from you, which should allow your foes all the usual clever methods of telling illusion from fake, including such things as basic listen checks for direction, scent, blindsense, flour or water on the floor, etc- and even if they did stay in the same square you could just close your eyes and swing and have only 50% miss chance.



If the problem is just that they're using a couple of specific save or lose/die spells that happen to be illusions, that's a different problem you're just gonna have to deal with.

[Segev]

You named two spells in particular as your "problem spells," and I note one important thing about them: they're both short- or instant-duration. Polymorph and phantasmal killer work for a single encounter. Casters are generally stronger than non-casters, but this problem only gets exacerbated when you don't have enough encounters between rest periods. Your illusionist, if your enchanter only just now got polymorph, shouldn't be able to spam a phantasmal killer every combat. Further, phantasmal killer is a single-target spell; have encounters with greater numbers of foes. (Greater numbers of foes solves a lot of ills, unless you're packing 'em in so the wizard can fireball them in one fell swoop.)

The issue with polymorph is similar, but a little broader. The fact that it's his most damaging spell probably means, again, that you're giving them too few enemies on whom to focus. Note, too, that I'm pretty sure the pyrohydra is no better than the regular hydra for him; he doesn't get its breath weapon(s).

You might also try more social type encounters. Both the Enchanter and Illusionist should be able to do very well, here, but they'll have to think differently than normal to do it.

[Eldariel]

As ericgrau said, what spells are they casting? The illusion rules can be interpreted multiple ways, and often the problem with an illusionist is that the DM is letting them do whatever they want and treating a failed save as holding the idiot ball, like "oh hey something went through that "wall" but I failed my save so I won't even consider poking it." Mindless creatures, the counter to mind games, are written off as being no-save beaten by illusions when the opposite should be true: no mind means no caring that a "wall" has suddenly appeared, the skeleton/golem/whatever just runs through it because their response to an actual wall would have been to ram into it anyway. Distracting "creatures" are ignored just as easily- the default behavior of almost every mindless creature is to attack if attacked, and if the thing in front of them isn't damaging there's no reason it should keep the attention of something that doesn't think. Root response is attack the thing that hurts. Let's see, then there's the old "illusory fog," fog is not an object, creature, or force, so that's illegal- at best you can just fill the place with illusory stone and then let failed saves block sight, but that'll hit your allies as hard as it does the enemies unless your allies can make the save.

Uh, you do realise it lacks memory, right? So the second it no longer detects its target, it does whatever it does if there's no target. The second it loses line of sight the target ceases to exist far as it's concerned. Thus, unless it spends its time normally attacking walls for thousands of years while waiting for something to attack. And even if it did, it lacks the heuristics to determine which wall to attack. Also, a block of pure darkness is a perfectly valid illusion - I don't know why you'd bother with fog when it's much more efficient and unarguable to make a block. Since you can walk through it, it doesn't matter what the block is "composed" of anyways.

[Deophaun]

Mindless creatures, the counter to mind games, are written off as being no-save beaten by illusions when the opposite should be true: no mind means no caring that a "wall" has suddenly appeared, the skeleton/golem/whatever just runs through it because their response to an actual wall would have been to ram into it anyway.
Mindless is such a poorly-defined thing that this interpretation would render such creatures largely useless for anything as they would lack even the most basic of navigational abilities. Just place a two-foot-high wall in front of some zombies and watch the fun. Want to make your castle mindless proof? Hallways with acute angles will have them trapped in the corners. Mandatory for grain silos to protect against mice.

That's why I prefer "simple;" they are unquestioning and uncreative, but the furniture doesn't frustrate them.

[Fizban]

Uh, you do realise it lacks memory, right? So the second it no longer detects its target, it does whatever it does if there's no target. The second it loses line of sight the target ceases to exist far as it's concerned. Thus, unless it spends its time normally attacking walls for thousands of years while waiting for something to attack. And even if it did, it lacks the heuristics to determine which wall to attack.
If you run a mindless creature like a program, sure. And assume that the program lacks any sort of provisions for regaining contact after losing sensory data, making it a pretty terrible creature program. And who says a mindless creature wouldn't sit around attacking a wall for thousands of years in an attempt to follow its last target? Or you could run mindless creatures as the creatures they are and have them act in ways that are both appropriate and produce an interesting game, rather than treating them as a couple lines of code to subvert and then just have it permanently "solved." Or you can say that mindless creatures are in fact programs and write a program for every one you use. Or say that whoever programed it thought of that, whatever "that" is, because they had more int than you. Or just say "fine" and let the players cheap shot all mindless creatures with low-level illusions, while gaining no xp because they never assumed any of the risk. Or give them the xp and up the challenge elsewhere to compensate (without giving them more xp for it). This is what most people actually recommend, since many of the tactics and scenarios given to "deal with" casters are laser targeted special preparations that should be worth more xp than normal, but they never do that, the same as they never decrease xp for encounters with no risk.

The point as always is that if your players are acting like the game is something they can exploit, the DM has infinite excuses for why its not and needs none of them in the first place, because there is no such thing as an exploit when a human can just say no.

Also, a block of pure darkness is a perfectly valid illusion - I don't know why you'd bother with fog when it's much more efficient and unarguable to make a block. Since you can walk through it, it doesn't matter what the block is "composed" of anyways.
Well the fog is usually mentioned as invisble spell'd fog to catch people with See Invisbility or something, but a fog lets you see where you're putting your feet, and more importantly see the thing you're trying to attack if it's adjacent. So people without line or cone based area attacks can kill of the nearby enemies while the others are prevented from lobbing in non-line/cone ranged effects of their own.

Since you can't make an illusion of a fog as far as I'm concerned, you can't do that, so at best both sides in a brawl on the edge of the solid illusion are taking 50% miss chance against each other, unless one side made the save and the other didn't. Which is still one-sided enough I'd be tempted to stipulate that illusions can't actually be solid, so even if you can't disbelieve it to see through the edge you can still see within the edges and thus the room full of stone is actually just a barrier on the edges. Oh, and a block of pure darkness isn't an object, creature, or force either, unless you define force both as energy and the absence of energy, which is why my example is filling the room with a block of stone.


Mindless is such a poorly-defined thing that this interpretation would render such creatures largely useless for anything
See above, re: running mindless creatures as robots with bad programming is the opposite of my view. But the people who say illusions auto-win because mindless creatures follow some mythical "rules" about their actions would demand justification for why your mindless creature isn't behaving they way they've decided they think mindless creatures should. Hence the example.

[Deophaun]

See above, re: running mindless creatures as robots with bad programming is the opposite of my view. But the people who say illusions auto-win because mindless creatures follow some mythical "rules" about their actions would demand justification for why your mindless creature isn't behaving they way they've decided they think mindless creatures should. Hence the example.
The game assumes they have bad programming. Mindless creatures take a massive CR hit because of this. A 32 HD vermin has a CR of 11. Because mindlessness is that bad. Your experience penalty for risk is already factored into the creature.

And who says a mindless creature wouldn't sit around attacking a wall for thousands of years in an attempt to follow its last target?
If it was ordered to attack anything that got between it and its target, sure. It will attack walls, trees, fog banks, lakes, etc, because it's mindless and has no creativity. If it's just ordered to attack its target and prevented from doing so, it has no creativity to decide to attack something else in order to get to its target. Because it's mindless. You might as well expect it to enroll in wizard college to learn how to teleport.

Well the fog is usually mentioned as invisble spell'd fog to catch people with See Invisbility or something,
Invisible Spell only works that way if the DM says it works that way. It's another poorly written bit of RAW. But nothing in the spell demands it interacts with fog cloud or any conjuration or illusion spell at all. Evocations? Pretty much a universal yes on that, though.

Since you can't make an illusion of a fog as far as I'm concerned,
Can we do that? Can I just say "since mindless creatures cannot overcome figments as far as I'm concerned" and end it? Huh. Think of what we can accomplish! "Since wizards don't exist as far as I'm concerned." What illusionist? OP's problem is solved!

Oh, and a block of pure darkness isn't an object, creature, or force either, unless you define force both as energy and the absence of energy, which is why my example is filling the room with a block of stone.
Well, I wouldn't conjure darkness, because creatures can see in it. I would just conjure black. And as it's a block or sphere of black, it's an object, as that's what blocks and spheres are.

[Segev]

Invisible Spell only works that way if the DM says it works that way. It's another poorly written bit of RAW. But nothing in the spell demands it interacts with fog cloud or any conjuration or illusion spell at all. Evocations? Pretty much a universal yes on that, though.


Uh... how do you justify the claim that Invisible Spell doesn't say it interacts with conjuration or illusion spells? I mean, it's a dreadfully-written feat, but I don't know where you're getting this out of it.

[Deophaun]

Uh... how do you justify the claim that Invisible Spell doesn't say it interacts with conjuration or illusion spells? I mean, it's a dreadfully-written feat, but I don't know where you're getting this out of it.
Because it says "manifestation," and manifestation is nowhere defined. When it talks about effects, it references fireball, which has no effect line. To me, the intent is clear: go watch Cinderella and go to the scene where the fairy godmother is turning the pumpkin into a carriage. Now, imagine that scene only without all the sparkly glowy stuff. That's what Invisible Spell is supposed to do. It's not supposed to divide by cucumber, which is what the common interpretation does.

[Elder_Basilisk]

From the sound of things, the root of the problem is allowing a silly subrace and manipulation of starting age. Depending upon your campaign this could be fixed by either killing the character (barghest are level appropriate and permanent) or talking to the player and going back on the decision to allow that silliness.

But if you don't want to do either, it sounds like the prominent problem for you is phantasmal killer. So solve that problem. The spell has quite a few ways to target it beyond what you have discussed.

1. It is a single target effect. That means that encounters with lots of bad guys neuter it. Sure, you can kill orc barbarian 11 unless he rolls a 20. But you can do that with magic missile too. Not a problem. While common message board wisdom is that low level bad guys are useless against mid level bad guys like your group, a group of orc barbarian 1s with mad foam rager can prove a significant threat. Starting strength 19 for 23 in rage, give them a Bard with inspirational boost (and a scroll of haste for round 2) and a cleric with a scroll of recitation and they're swinging at +12 for 1d12+9 (greataxes of course-falchions are for sissies). Charge and that's +14. Charge into a flank and it's +16. Higher ground for more. Etc. They'll go down quickly (mad foam rager let's them get a second hit in. Mass aid will help with the staying power too) but they'll dish out damage quickly and you have lots of them. Lead them with a greater barghest and you can drop mass bull's strength on them.

2. It is a fear effect. Lots of things are immune or resistant. Undead and constructs are straight up immune. And if the bad guys serve a level 11 evil cleric, they can eat a hero's feast and be immune too. Or they can just be resistant. Remove fear is a level 1 multi-target spell and gives the targets all +4 vs fear. Drop a mass conviction and a recitation as well and you could easily give your bad guys +6 to all saves and +10 to saves vs fear. Even against DC 27, that's going to give your bad guys better odds without giving everyone an 18 wisdom and improved iron will.

[Segev]

Because it says "manifestation," and manifestation is nowhere defined. When it talks about effects, it references fireball, which has no effect line. To me, the intent is clear: go watch Cinderella and go to the scene where the fairy godmother is turning the pumpkin into a carriage. Now, imagine that scene only without all the sparkly glowy stuff. That's what Invisible Spell is supposed to do. It's not supposed to divide by cucumber, which is what the common interpretation does.
By that definition, it does nothing at all, because those "sparkly effects" aren't listed in any spell description. It seems to me that you just want to limit it by DM fiat, which is fine, but I am not positive I could divine what you'd have it do on any particular spell, nor which spells it would work with, given this discussion, so I'd probably just not take the feat in your games without a lengthy discussion of its effects. (Obviously, this is not the thread for such a discussion.)

[Eldariel]

If you run a mindless creature like a program, sure. And assume that the program lacks any sort of provisions for regaining contact after losing sensory data, making it a pretty terrible creature program. And who says a mindless creature wouldn't sit around attacking a wall for thousands of years in an attempt to follow its last target? Or you could run mindless creatures as the creatures they are and have them act in ways that are both appropriate and produce an interesting game, rather than treating them as a couple lines of code to subvert and then just have it permanently "solved." Or you can say that mindless creatures are in fact programs and write a program for every one you use. Or say that whoever programed it thought of that, whatever "that" is, because they had more int than you. Or just say "fine" and let the players cheap shot all mindless creatures with low-level illusions, while gaining no xp because they never assumed any of the risk. Or give them the xp and up the challenge elsewhere to compensate (without giving them more xp for it). This is what most people actually recommend, since many of the tactics and scenarios given to "deal with" casters are laser targeted special preparations that should be worth more xp than normal, but they never do that, the same as they never decrease xp for encounters with no risk.

The point as always is that if your players are acting like the game is something they can exploit, the DM has infinite excuses for why its not and needs none of them in the first place, because there is no such thing as an exploit when a human can just say no.

The game is pretty explicit about what mindless things do and do not have. The lines I quoted clearly state they cannot think, remember nor learn. Thus any solution that relies on them remembering things like last known target doesn't work; they lack the ability to act on past information. There's no last known target; there's only reality they perceive as it exists in that very moment. Their programming is also very simple; there's only so much you can fit in there. Spells like Command Undead, Animate Dead, etc. provide enough information for the general limitations. They can process simple commands and if their creator moves out of range, they try and fulfill the last command but they can only do so within the confines of their sensory abilities and (lack of) mental faculties. Yes, DM can change that but that makes little sense; indeed, the encounters are more interesting precisely because of the enemy's limitations. Otherwise you run into samey problems where enemy's stats and abilities fail to manifest.

Taken to its ultimate conclusion, if every enemy acts with superhuman intelligence, that gets stale and pushes the rocket tag angle. Not to mention it discredits the enemies whose intelligence should be their key strength. It's much more rewarding to be able to outthink the things you should be able to outthink, and outmuscle the ones you should be able to. This makes precisely the right enemies, high end Dragons, Outsiders, Aberrations, Undead and Fey, ultimately the most dangerous precisely because of their superior mental prowess. Mental scores should matter in how the enemy feels and acts - playing a Pit Fiend as a dumb Barbarian is a straight-up travesty.

This doesn't make mindless things irrelevant. It just means mindless things are not the kind you'd expect to challenge a party that has any lateral thinking capabilities. However, mindless things should never occur alone: they're made by creator and can be commanded by spellcasters. They should occur as grunt enemies in a fight with a controller, where they have some mental capabilities because the caster can command them and take intelligent action. Random zombies shambling in sewers or forgotten ruins are not meant to be threats. That's what intelligent undead are for. Mindless things will always be extremely limited compared to intelligent servitors (though vermin really shouldn't be mindless), which is precisely how it should be. This is why intelligent monsters are tougher fights in spite of lacking the mindless immunities, and this is why a single minded being is more dangerous than any amount of automated defenses. Which is precisely why automated defenses should be controlled by minded being(s) where the defense is actually relevant and the location is not expendable.


As for the illusionary block, it can be an illusion of a block of obsidian or whatever; it really doesn't matter. Exact same result anyways. And yeah, the ruling that knowing that they're false allows you to see through it is really convenient for parties for no-save one-sided darkness. Forcing allies to roll (at the +4) makes it a bit less amazing but still very good. Still, it's not out of line with other first-second level spells like Pyrotechnics, Glitterdust, Wall of Smoke, Grease, etc. Indeed, images requiring concentration is a significant drawback compared to the permanent save-or-be-****ed spells.

[Deophaun]

By that definition, it does nothing at all, because those "sparkly effects" aren't listed in any spell description.
This is why the RAW is poorly written: because it is referencing something that is not part of a spell description. It's inexpertly trying to draw a distinction between the spell and the things that accompany the spell coming into effect. That's why it talks about manifestation.

It seems to me that you just want to limit it by DM fiat,
I have a general rule that if the interpretation results in nonsense, then the interpretation is wrong.

but I am not positive I could divine what you'd have it do on any particular spell, nor which spells it would work with, given this discussion, so I'd probably just not take the feat in your games without a lengthy discussion of its effects. (Obviously, this is not the thread for such a discussion.)
I can give you rules that will work on 99.9% of spells:

Conjurations: Nothing
Transmutations: Invisible rays
Illusions: Nothing
Enchantments: Invisible rays, auras
Necromancy: Invisible rays, auras, pretty much any display of raw energy (e.g. glowing hands of chill touch)
Evocation: Complete invisibility (the corner cases are not worth making exceptions for)
Divination: I cannot think of any spell that has any display anyway, so nothing.
Edit: Abjuration (knew I forgot one): Complete invisibility, including the interference generated by overlapping fields.

That's it. No more discussion. And you know what? That list of how it interacts with every spell is going to be a lot shorter than the discussion you're going to have when you try to Invisible Spell polymorph using the common interpretation, with the added benefit that you will avoid the nose bleeds and the room you're sitting in won't sound orange.

[Segev]

That's it. No more discussion. And you know what? That list of how it interacts with every spell is going to be a lot shorter than the discussion you're going to have when you try to Invisible Spell polymorph using the common interpretation, with the added benefit that you will avoid the nose bleeds and the room you're sitting in won't sound orange.

Fair enough on your list, though I disagree with your claim that you have "smells like zero" errors for these things. At worst, you wind up with broken effects. But, as I said, wrong thread for this.

[Hyperversum]

What spells is he casting? That will affect a lot because even successful illusions only do so much.

By the illusion rules proof that an illusion is fake can end it for a creature regardless of save DC. Such as touching a visual only illusion. Being told it's fake gives a +4: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#illusion

Truly fantastic illusions may leave foes skeptical, especially intelligent foes like humanoid. Even if they fail their save DC and see that it's there, they may try to test it or otherwise react with uncertainty. This could lead to the above, or even before then they may not think what's in front of them is really there if it's crazy enough.

On the flipside if he does illusions that are subtle enough that no one examines or interacts them, they don't get a save. These are vague terms and DMs often equate seeing with examining or interacting. Obviously the rule would be pointless if that were true. I'd take examining as looking at it directly: searching it or declaring an observation action on it. Interacting is doing any action on it. Attacking it for example, though again that usually proves it's fake without rolling a save. If it's a ranged weapon or ranged spell attack for many illusions the caster may make the illusion react appropriately to prevent proof that it is fake.

You kind of screwed yourself with the max HP rule because it lets players like the illusionist dump HP more easily. Damage is less effective and non-damaging effects are proportionally more effective against players. Con HP is less of of a factor since it was not likewise increased. But at least everybody got max HP. If you use stronger monsters with more damage to compensate it could work out fine, as long as they don't use too many non-damaging effects. Of course then you're back to square one and next time you could just use an average HP by level rule instead if you're afraid of bad rolls. Stronger monsters also means the monsters have higher HP and non-damaging effects like illusions are more effective against them than damage. It's funny how supposed game needs like damage supposedly being too weak and HP supposedly being too low contradict each other. In general be careful about game balance house rules without a lot of evidence beyond popularity.

That said max HP isn't a huge deal. It looks like the illusionist is still getting hurt. Maybe foes could go after the caster or low armor foes first regardless of apparent immediate threat. Maybe if someone does something crazy in round 1 or after 2 rounds then switch to him. Otherwise "pick off the weakest" is just as valid as "go after the biggest threat". You can do it gradually since you weren't doing it before and should have, giving him time to switch to defensive spells or other measurs. Any effort spent on those is less effort spent on offense.

So, the most for now are major image (which is problematic, but yet is legit after all), a spell which I don't know the english name (I'M italian) but basically gives -2 to a lot of things and drop Dex bonus to the CA to zero another side effect, Phantasmal Killer (he tried to SoD various things to be honest, but worked only once, yet that once was really good for his party, and it was failed by rolling a 15, which should
generally provide an high chance fo saving your ass) and all possible Invisibility Effect and them damn Rainbow Pattern, which isn't that strong as a spell but ****ed me up one giant lol.

Anyway, the spells by themselves aren't a problem, he isn't using anything cheesy as Shivering Touch (which we enabled to be used, but after giving it a Save on Fortitude and making it nullify the effect).

And about the HP max: it's for PCs only and "Big Bad monsters". On Wizards and d6 classes it hasn't been a problem, we did mostly to give something nice to mundane characters, so that even with not godly rolls (we use random rolling, not buy point) they can have decent HPs.
All of this started from our experience in which simply most mundanes, even with their big ass d12 or d10 couldn't stand their ground as they were supposed to. At that point, 3 hp more or less every level on a figther wouldn't change much tbh.

I'm gonna consider everything you said guys anyway, the real problem in any case is that having a large group (6 people, but one in a good chunck of sessions can't play, but that's a problem that we already resolved) making a lot or too big encounters slow down a lot the campaign itself.
Simply, as a group we will need to accept this I guess.

If the illusionist (which is the real problem at this point) keeps being such a problem, I could think about speaking.
Also the old age IMO isn't the core of the problem. He gave up a good chunck of HPs and TS for that +1, I can accept it.

[Nifft]

One useful and plausible way to threaten spellcasters is to have encounters happen in waves.

So, the first wave of attackers isn't a big deal. The caster novas a bit, the attackers drop like flies.


Then the second wave shows up. They saw the first wave go down, and they've got tactics based on whatever the PCs did to the first wave.

The second wave also dies, but hopefully gives the PCs a bit more trouble.


Now the third wave shows up. This is the "boss", the commander or leader or spellcaster who is specifically prepared for this fight -- because she took a minute to contact her superiors in the Abyss or the Panarcanic Tower or the Guild of Antagonists or wherever, filed a report on the PCs, and got a few specific anti-illusion creatures or items.

Plus, now the enemy leadership knows the party's tactics. Random encounters should still be pretty easy, but will use up resources -- and the big waves-of-death encounters just keep getting more tailored as the PCs keep winning them.

[daremetoidareyo]

Counterspell, brother.

A dedicated counterspelling lieutenant. dispel magic and Heightened spell dispel magic in every slot.

[lord_khaine]

The age imo is more a malus than a bonus. He INDEED has low hp, i'm gonna abuse it a bit more but... hell, the problem as I said above, is that in this way I have to design encounters after it.

For sure, next time they are gonna meet humanoids, these humanoids are gonna have some random "Mercenaries thugs" in the back rows ready to fire on him ahahah

Making your character a glass cannon is a really inconsiderate thing to do, all in all. But its not that bad since he still has a positive con score.

I am glad i have given some advice you could use though, and hearing that you have a party of 6 i have been thinking a little more about how you likely need to design encounters.

for start i think it will be really hard to have a single large monster challenge them. But perhaps it would be easier for you to make larger groups of 1-2 types of minions. With different sort of gear. Some geared for melee. Som geared for ranged. And then have 1 or 2 bigger commanders. It should ensure you only have 1 complicated monster to keep track off, but still got a lot of chaff to get in the way of your caster players.

[Jay R]

Send an illusionist and an evoker after them. No party is over-powered against a mirror.

[Nifft]

Another way to neuter illusions is to use a group of monsters which don't care about conventional barriers:
- Shadows who come up through the floor
- Dread Wraiths with Lifesense
- Xorns / Ankhegs / other burrowing critters with Tremorsense

Don't do this every time, of course.


Scent might be a cheap way for humanoid hunters to find the party -- even if the humanoids don't have Scent personally, a few hunting dogs could try to pull their master through a wall.

[ayvango]

The ruling that a creature's HP is unaffected relies on Polymorph (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/polymorph.htm) inheriting the following line from Alter Self (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/alterSelf.htm): "Your class and level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses all remain the same."

The polymorph web articles says the opposite: (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a)

The subject retains its own mind, but its body is transformed into a semblance of the assumed form. Unlike previous versions of the D&D game, the subject's hit points change according to his new Constitution score.


Example:


In lizardfolk form, Anlion's statistics change significantly. He gains the lizardfolk's natural armor, natural weaponry, and racial skill bonuses; he also gains the Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution scores of a typical lizardfolk (as noted in the Monster Manual). The ability score changes give him a few more hit points and improve his melee combat abilities, but his reduced Dexterity score makes his Dodge feat unusable

[Eldariel]

The polymorph web articles says the opposite: (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040525a)

Aye, but articles on the web have no practical authority while PHB is the primary source and its errata takes the ultimate precedence over everything. That article may also be pre-errata, I don't remember for sure. In any case, the Polymorph subschool inherits the "The target retains its own hit points." statement in the Rules Compendium so that's probably final; though as I stated in the original post, it seems to me that the intent is that the target retains its own HD and its HP is not adjusted for its type, but that changes to Con should influence HP normally. So RAW be what it may, either ruling is probably reasonable. Though the Con changes not affecting HP does create inconsistencies and it seems like strictly a balance call with very questionable efficiency.

[ayvango]

Polymorph spell fortunately doesn't belong to the polymorph subschool.

[Eldariel]

Polymorph spell fortunately doesn't belong to the polymorph subschool.

PHBII:
"Spells That Have Come Before
For the purpose of adjudicating effects that apply to polymorph spells, any spell whose effect is based on either alter self or polymorph should be considered to have the polymorph subschool. However, note that the spells’ existing rules text takes priority over that of the subschool. Alter self, for instance, does not change the target’s ability scores (unlike normal for spells of the polymorph subschool)."

The same line exists in Rules Compendium page 123.

[ayvango]

I see. So polymorph formally belongs to polymorph subschool but ignores its rules. It keeps class features of the caster and adjust HP based on new constitution score.

[Fizban]

Can we do that?
Yes.*


-stuff
None of that is wrong or anything, buy I feel like it's not really a counterpoint to what I said? You're still basically implying that mindless creatures have RAW limits which mean they must be easily manipulated by illusions, which I think is bogus. Mindless creatures act however the DM thinks mindless creatures should act. Just because they can't "think, remember, or learn," doesn't mean they don't have instinct.

Vermin are all mindless. This includes Giant Bees and Giant Ants, both of which live in colonies that work together and have a level of sophistication in their threat responses and gathering procedures. Spiders lay traps and hunt. If a bug could do it, it's not outside the range of mindless creatures.

How many zombie movies have that scene where the zombies are chasing someone who jumps over a fence or closes a door or something and the zombies just run into it? Is it so in-credible that the same can't stop won't stop behavior would continue even if a "wall" or other obstruction suddenly appeared? If a zombie could do it, it's not outside the range of mindless.

And of course, golems are always being placed and given orders that last for who knows how long, which they keep following, the standard example of "programmable" mindless creatures. A golem ordered to kill one target at a time doesn't suddenly forget that order and start aggroing whatever last attacked it. If a golem could do it, etc.

You could say that in order to be "fair," the DM has to pre-write the limitations of every mindless creature's instincts or programming, but unless they find it fun to do so it's just busywork. Better to be reasonable in making interesting responses on the fly and remember that just because the party chump blocks an encounter with a 1st level spell out of a wand, doesn't mean they get xp or loot for it. All the examples I've given so far basically boil down to "if mindless creatures is aggro'd, you shouldn't get to retroactively skip the fight."

As for other effects, just because Pyrotechnics (a spell with a special requirement and a drawback if you try and fight in it) can block all sight, doesn't mean that Major Image should be allowed to- the spell can already do other things, and if you're allowing it the block sight better than 3rd or 4th level spells without also hampering the party, then it's your your own fault that the spell is overpowered. The "one object, creature, or force" line can be read just as restrictively as "can't think, remember, or learn." Letting illusionists take a broad meaning while mindless creatures get a strict one isn't any more valid than the opposite, where Major Image can't just be Super Sleet Storm and mindless creatures act like their real-life and movie counterparts.


Oh, and since the OP has given the problem spells: Yeah, it's basically save or lose problems. Mystery spell might be Phantasmal Strangler, it grapples people which would make them lose dex, but not the -2 on other things. As for Rainbow Pattern, the thing to do there is make sure you actually know what the fascinated (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#fascinated) condition does. Any obvious threat, such as aiming or even just drawing a weapon, or someone casting a spell, ends the fascination immediately. It's an effect that either has to catch every enemy combatant (because one active foe can break the others free) or be cast before combat. Rainbow Pattern gives you some additional control by allowing you to pull them around, but that's it.

The biggest problem as the OP has already guessed, is having a 6 person party, probably also combined with using too many single monsters. Both are a recipe for letting save or lose casting rule the day, only needing a single failed save to end the encounter and having more people who can cast more spells per round and more spells per day to force those saves.


*As in, I'm not obliged to argue with you if I don't want to, and the DM has full authority to make whatever ruling they want. When somebody says "as far as I'm concerned," that's a signal which means you shouldn't bother complaining about it, because you're not going to change their mind.

[Eldariel]

I see. So polymorph formally belongs to polymorph subschool but ignores its rules. It keeps class features of the caster and adjust HP based on new constitution score.

Not quite. Polymorph sub school rules apply everywhere, where the original spell has no rules text and Polymorph's only clause about HP is the one inherited from Alter Self, both of which state pretty much the same:
"Your class and level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses all remain the same."
"The target retains its own hit points."

In other words, there's no two ways about it; the HP doesn't change by RAW.


None of that is wrong or anything, buy I feel like it's not really a counterpoint to what I said? You're still basically implying that mindless creatures have RAW limits which mean they must be easily manipulated by illusions, which I think is bogus. Mindless creatures act however the DM thinks mindless creatures should act. Just because they can't "think, remember, or learn," doesn't mean they don't have instinct.

Vermin are all mindless. This includes Giant Bees and Giant Ants, both of which live in colonies that work together and have a level of sophistication in their threat responses and gathering procedures. Spiders lay traps and hunt. If a bug could do it, it's not outside the range of mindless creatures.

The thing here is though, vermin are logically speaking not mindless. That they're in the game is a sort of a weird inconsistency but then again, if we apply any real world logic to them animals should not be restricted to such low intelligence scores in general. It's another example of the stupid human superiority complex people so easily engage in. That said, yes, I agree that vermin could act above that level, should have at least 1 Int, and should similarly be subject to Will-targeting spells. If I ran a game as such though, I would certainly inform the players beforehand since that goes a long way towards influencing what the players can do (e.g. Verminkeeper and various Vermin Druids get way better if they have Int for feats/skills and communication).


How many zombie movies have that scene where the zombies are chasing someone who jumps over a fence or closes a door or something and the zombies just run into it? Is it so in-credible that the same can't stop won't stop behavior would continue even if a "wall" or other obstruction suddenly appeared? If a zombie could do it, it's not outside the range of mindless.

And of course, golems are always being placed and given orders that last for who knows how long, which they keep following, the standard example of "programmable" mindless creatures. A golem ordered to kill one target at a time doesn't suddenly forget that order and start aggroing whatever last attacked it. If a golem could do it, etc.

Well, Zombie movies are invariably illogical and wrought with internal inconsistencies on the Zombie capabilities - I wouldn't expect the writers to have the capacity to think what capabilities any given feats of mental processing entail. At the same time, most of them exist as cheap entertainment and aren't even trying to make sense. In any case, D&D Zombies are not the same creatures. Generic Zombie movie Zombies are more like Ghasts - they clearly have some basic needs (to feed) and the ability for some mental processing (breaking obstacles to get to objects, remembering objects in the first place, etc.) and memory and similars. If we look into psychology, there are some clear indicators for how intelligent a creature is; e.g. does it recognise its own mirror image, does it learn to go through intermediate steps to reach an end reward and what kinds of intermediate steps it's capable of in the first place. When intelligence is zero, it makes no sense for it to have capabilities that require a greater intellectual capacity. Its programming not abiding by the limitations would mean that it should logically have Int to match.


You could say that in order to be "fair," the DM has to pre-write the limitations of every mindless creature's instincts or programming, but unless they find it fun to do so it's just busywork. Better to be reasonable in making interesting responses on the fly and remember that just because the party chump blocks an encounter with a 1st level spell out of a wand, doesn't mean they get xp or loot for it. All the examples I've given so far basically boil down to "if mindless creatures is aggro'd, you shouldn't get to retroactively skip the fight."

I think DM should have Int - to mean Int -. If he wants to play them by higher Int he should give them higher Int (there are plenty of ways). Otherwise the whole Int - category is lost since you can't well go lower than that. Clearly there should be some score that reflects a being not having memory for instance, and beings not having a memory should act like they had no memory (it's very different from computers, which have way more memory than humans ever will - consider a computer that has only ROM for instance, that's much closer to what Int - should mean).


As for other effects, just because Pyrotechnics (a spell with a special requirement and a drawback if you try and fight in it) can block all sight, doesn't mean that Major Image should be allowed to- the spell can already do other things, and if you're allowing it the block sight better than 3rd or 4th level spells without also hampering the party, then it's your your own fault that the spell is overpowered. The "one object, creature, or force" line can be read just as restrictively as "can't think, remember, or learn." Letting illusionists take a broad meaning while mindless creatures get a strict one isn't any more valid than the opposite, where Major Image can't just be Super Sleet Storm and mindless creatures act like their real-life and movie counterparts.

Well, it doesn't really matter; one rock is one object and one obsidian block is just as much of an object.

[ayvango]

Not quite. Polymorph sub school rules apply everywhere, where the original spell has no rules text and Polymorph's only clause about HP is the one inherited from Alter Self, both of which state pretty much the same:
"Your class and level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus, and base save bonuses all remain the same."
"The target retains its own hit points."

In other words, there's no two ways about it; the HP doesn't change by RAW.

Polymorph has amendment over the Alter Self, that it changes Con. And changing Con affects your HP as normal.

[Eldariel]

Polymorph has amendment over the Alter Self, that it changes Con. And changing Con affects your HP as normal.

*shrug* That's an implication, not a statement, and thus does not exactly overwrite the rule. Indeed, Polymorph Sub School specifically states that Con changes but HP is retained.

[Menzath]

Well, as for a challenging encounter I can imagine a necromancer with 1-2 heavy hitters draw attention and then a butt ton of weenies come out of hidden wall space behind them could be troublesome, maybe have the necro hide in the ceiling and cast some spells at them.

And/or an artificer with a shield golem or two and a wand of stone shape to escape and trap people and maybe a wand of dimension door and moderate/serious repair. Have the encounter in either a large tunnel network or a catacombs, so the artificer can stoneshape them in, and dimension door around to block off networks to force them into traps or block a damaged golem to repair it and send it down another path.

[ViperMagnum357]

You do not have to turn every encounter into a parade of of enemies designed to defeat the illusionist; not every encounter needs Undead, Vermin, Constructs, Plants, Oozes, counterspelling casters, etc. Mix in some enemies with extra resists or immunities without being immune to everything; something like Duergar, which are immune to phantasms but not other illusions. And I second having enemies start with buffs or have access to consumables to augment them without dumping huge piles of treasure on your group.

[Darth Ultron]

And anyway, the problem is always the same. I can design an encounter interesting for everyone? Yes, sure.
But it requires to be designed around this guy basically.


The thing is that the game rules are based around average, non-optimized characters. As soon as even a single character breaks that, it causes a problem...as you have seen.

But if as DM you allow a character or two to change the game, then you as the DM have to change the game too. That is how it works.

[ericgrau]

So, the most for now are major image (which is problematic, but yet is legit after all), a spell which I don't know the english name (I'M italian) but basically gives -2 to a lot of things and drop Dex bonus to the CA to zero another side effect, Phantasmal Killer (he tried to SoD various things to be honest, but worked only once, yet that once was really good for his party, and it was failed by rolling a 15, which should
generally provide an high chance fo saving your ass) and all possible Invisibility Effect and them damn Rainbow Pattern, which isn't that strong as a spell but ****ed me up one giant lol.
Major image I covered.

Invisibility: Don't forget it's usually a DC 20 listen check to find out which square an invisible creature is in, or at least where he was when he attacked, cast, or moved without using move silently. If he does move silently, beating his check by 20 or more also gives his square. A creature can move at full speed while moving silently by taking a -5. But usually there's no way to quiet down attacking or casting. Once a creature's square is located it is still a 50% miss chance, but that's better than nothing. Note that footprints, tossing a liquid at the creature, etc. might also reveal his location (no further rolls required). It still might give a 50% miss chance if it doesn't fully cover the creature.

Phantasmal killer is ok but not great. Besides getting 2 rolls, many things are immune or have SR. Yeah, sometimes it will work, but that's fair. It's only 1 target even then.

Don't go easy on him. Foes should attack the guy wearing no armor first, even if someone else attacked them. Even dumb animals often want to go for a soft target. If hit really hard with a weapon then they might change their mind, or maybe not. Put yourself in their shoes. Even if you don't kill him, you may force him to waste time protecting himself. And to be fair attack the evoker too. Foes should ambush the party when possible too, often from behind. They shouldn't attack out in the open unless the PCs caught them.

If other players aren't optimizing as much help them make better characters. And/or disallow options that are stronger than what the inexperienced players know about.

[Fizban]

I think DM should have Int - to mean Int -.
By which you mean your definition of Int -, since you're defining things standard mindless creatures do as above Int -, by your own admission. You've added your own tier that's lower than the game's and then say that the game is wrong for not matching it.


If he wants to play them by higher Int he should give them higher Int (there are plenty of ways). Otherwise the whole Int - category is lost since you can't well go lower than that. Clearly there should be some score that reflects a being not having memory for instance,
Your definition of Int -, as far as I can tell, is basically "unable to do anything without constant input," since even remembering orders or having instincts requires a special new stat or automatically counts as non-mindless. So mindless creatures can only be used as pawns of other creatures. That goes directly against how the game sees it, since mindless creatures can act without direct control and have been used as such in countless modules, so. . .

I'm also rather annoyed by the implication that I'm saying Int - creatures should be run as intelligent creatures. I could list off a dozen or more things a mindless creature obviously shouldn't be able to do, some of which would be allowable for animals and some not, with little effort. You may not like that mindless creatures in DnD aren't mindless by your definition, but that doesn't mean there's no difference between an independent creature with no brain and an independent creature with one (the same as there should be a difference between Int 10 and Int 30). Acknowledging and using the possibility that a mindless creature might not fall for an illusion isn't shutting down lateral thinking- it's how you show that they didn't think laterally enough, or maybe thought about it too much. Again with the wall example: put up an illusion from hiding and you can distract it just fine, put in an illlusion in combat and you'd better have a good reason why it should distract them from you.

You also say that vermin should have Int 1 and be susceptible to mind-affecting- have you not considered the possibility that mind-affecting spells only work on creatures with significantly higher brain functions to manipulate? Mindless creatures in dnd are already the state in-between object and int 1. They obviously must have some "brain" function or they wouldn't be creatures (and have Wis and Cha), but they lack the complexity that allows a mind-affecting effect to work. There's way more bits to mess with in a human or animal's brain than a bug's, and apparently that makes it easier for magic rather than harder. Seems pretty intuitive to me. I expect you'll say that's just my human superiority complex, and sure I don't have a college degree in brains to describe the exact differences- but I'm not the one saying "mindless" creatures are too dumb to use on their own. I'm perfectly okay with how DnD uses "mindless" to mean "weaker minds, that are immune to magic," and how animals can do all sorts of things despite having only "Int 2."

Can some animals learn language and some bugs learn tricks (I think I've heard of that second one anyway)? Sure, but for game purposes it is not worth the added mechanical and moral complexity of assigning exact matches to every low-int value and deciding when an animal is actually a person and weather the cuddly giant vermin should be tamed instead of exterminated.


Well, it doesn't really matter; one rock is one object and one obsidian block is just as much of an object.
You assume that an illusion actually "smothers" the area in such a way that entering an illusory object prevents you from seeing. The spell does not say this. It could work more like a projection, casting an image across a 3d model rather than a flat surface, and standing inside just means you're standing inside- you can't see out but are otherwise un-impaired. Since allowing the spell to mimic or exceed the vision blocking properties of spells equal to and above its own level in addition to its other uses would obviously be overpowered, this should be the obvious ruling.

Furthermore, it is impossible to physically pass through another physical object. If you make an illusion of a block of obsidian filling a room, anyone within or who enters the room is immediately faced with proof the illusion is an illusion, automatically disbelieves, and can see through it. This is the whole reason people try to use the "clever" idea of making an illusion of pure blackness- because it can't be automatically disbelieved. This is not a valid use of the spell, so yes, it rather does matter.

If you're allowing the Chains of Disbelief ability from Unearthed Arcana, well that's not the spell's problem now is it?

[Fouredged Sword]

As a dm i have always run mindless creatures as having short term memory but no long term memory. No short term memory makes no sense. You can't DO STUFF without some context for what is happening. That said, give them 5 min (memory only lasts 1 encounter) and they will forget everything not magically enforced (like a command undead command).

[Mordaedil]

I do want to point out that mindless in RAW states they are immune to illusions and mind-affecting effects, so they should just ignore the illusions. They struggle with other things which are truly drawbacks of being mindless, but their immunity to distractions is intended to be the flaw for illusionists and the like.

As for the "invisible spell" feat, I want to point it was printed in a supplement that also features a metamagic that allows half of the damage of your spell to count as CITY damage.

What even is City damage or how do you resist it? It's really weird and yes it's basically useless, but at least it doesn't raise your spell level. The intention is that the enemies tailing you won't be able to tell what alleyway you cast that fireball from.

[noob]

City damage is damage dealt by the power of cities.
It is generally inflicted by cities hitting you or by people drawing from the power of the cities for attacking you.
It totally makes sense than being hit by an entire city is not the same kind of damage as being hit with a club.
City damage can only be resisted by stuff which allows to resist non specific damage such as regeneration/evil(unless your opponent is using evil city damage) or being a zodar.(or if a truenamer goes and decide to give itself resistance to city damage but then truenamers are weird)
This metamagic is very useful if you blast and adventure in a city but if you do not then it is useless.

[Hyperversum]

Update for all those still reading the thread.

The player of the illusionist himself asked if I thought that he was giving too much problems with his absurd CDs. We made a rapid discussion about it and decided to "ret-con" his gnome into a standard gnome and put Shadow Weave in working only on Shadow Spells, not all Illusion (we checked the description, and since we should have banned it by setting -we don't use a thing such as the Shadow Weave and therefore there was no reason to use it as it was- we simply "nerfed" it).

Reducing the CD by 2 and his Int is already a huge leap ahaed.

[VisitingDaGulag]

2 pages and no one just said "True seeing"? I'm disappointed.

[Fizban]

The party is level 7-8, monsters with continuous/at-will True Seeing are a mite overleveled and spamming clerics to cast it is even more obvious.

[Nifft]

2 pages and no one just said "True seeing"? I'm disappointed.


The party is level 7-8, monsters with continuous/at-will True Seeing are a mite overleveled and spamming clerics to cast it is even more obvious.

Nah, let's hear him out.

@VisitingDaGulag, what are these CR 7-8 monsters with "True seeing"?

[Jay R]

The solution to an illusionist is an illusionist. Ideally, the party smashes its way through an illusory advance force.

Also, area effects that can't be dodged are crucial. Without them, low hit points for wizards aren't a weakness. Avalanches, cave-ins, etc.

[Zanos]

This is actually the total opposite. Most actual illusions (Figments) lack the mind-affecting tag; they're just as efficient against things that lack a mind. More-so in fact since things without a mind also tend to lack the wits to be able to test whether the illusion is real or not; a mindless vision-reliant zombie has no memory and will probably just stop chasing you if you block its modes of detection by e.g. placing an illusionary visual obstacle between you and it.
That seems a bit far for my tastes, and in any case zombies in particular have some level of memory and rudimentary killin' skills. They can follow orders, after all.

[Falontani]

I like undead who use lifesight. It is one of the few senses that is almost imposible to remove. A lich with lifesight seems like a really good arch villain. Immune to most enchantment and illusion, hard to fight in melee with natural weapons without getting paralyzed.

And the party can kill him and you can reuse to your heart's content.

He can't see invisible targets, but can see where they ARE. Glitterdust handles the rest.

If you give the lich the feat Contagious Paralysis from LM and have some ghouls carry a permanently paralyzed human into town with disguises then it starts an outrageously funny domino affect whenever someone tries to help. Remember Remove Paralysis is a touch spell. The town then hires your heroes to fix the problem. Could be a good story arc

[VisitingDaGulag]

Nah, let's hear him out.

@VisitingDaGulag, what are these CR 7-8 monsters with "True seeing"?I'm only bothering to take the time because you were a positive voice. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar. **Rolls up sleeves**

Okay so optimized level 8 groups can gain XP from opponents of up to CR15 (http://www.d20srd.org/extras/d20encountercalculator/). It totally acceptable to say "your optimization sets the difficulty of the game/campaign" and "obviously if this were a non-caster T5 party, you'd be getting very easy encounters rather than very hard ones."

NPC psions of 11th level are fair game, as are Glabrezu & Nalfeshnee.

[Nifft]

I'm only bothering to take the time because you were a positive voice. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar. **Rolls up sleeves**

Okay so optimized level 8 groups can gain XP from opponents of up to CR15 (http://www.d20srd.org/extras/d20encountercalculator/). It totally acceptable to say "your optimization sets the difficulty of the game/campaign" and "obviously if this were a non-caster T5 party, you'd be getting very easy encounters rather than very hard ones."

NPC psions of 11th level are fair game, as are Glabrezu & Nalfeshnee.

Glabrezu is CR 13, and Nalfeshnee is CR 14.

Now it looks like maybe you were just being sarcastic? I don't know what to make of this.

I'd been hoping that you knew some legit CR 7-8 monsters in one of the many other monster books that I haven't read thoroughly.

Oh well.

[martixy]

Update for all those still reading the thread.

The player of the illusionist himself asked if I thought that he was giving too much problems with his absurd CDs. We made a rapid discussion about it and decided to "ret-con" his gnome into a standard gnome and put Shadow Weave in working only on Shadow Spells, not all Illusion (we checked the description, and since we should have banned it by setting -we don't use a thing such as the Shadow Weave and therefore there was no reason to use it as it was- we simply "nerfed" it).

Reducing the CD by 2 and his Int is already a huge leap ahaed.

Last session in my game I discovered the solution to this problem: numbers.
Make statistics work for you.

Say you're building an encounter and figure, well, you'd like your party to face 3-4 capable enemies. Say your mooks have only a 25%(16 or higher) chance of saving vs him. So put 10-12 of them. When 75% of them don't save you still have your target number of 3-4. More enemies also has the benefit of offering both additional sacks of HP and serving as tension in case of abilities that don't outright kill them(if they get paralyzed for a few rounds, the party can feel the clock ticking as they try to deal with the ones who didn't succumb before the ones you disabled wake up and things get a lot more dangerous for them), which also helps with the game's rocket-tagginess.

Incidentally, I also discovered the true potential of tactics in the same encounter. The numbers were hilariously against the enemy guys(usually success was only possible on 17/18s), but it still ended in almost-TPK against my party of uber-optimized PCs.

[Eldariel]

That seems a bit far for my tastes, and in any case zombies in particular have some level of memory and rudimentary killin' skills. They can follow orders, after all.

The way the rules seem to describe them, they are like machines with ROM but no RAM. You can give them a simple programming and they can execute simple tasks based on it, but they explicitly have no memory, no thinking capacity and no learning capacity. Their controller is "capable" of magically altering a piece of that ROM enabling a direct command that overrides their basic programming, but they are unable to do so on their own accord. Thus they always act the same in the face of the same situation, they are reliant on constant sensory feedback and can only act on what they perceive on that very moment, have no capacity for planning or longterm actions, etc. That all directly follows from mindlessness. All that entails is that they always take require direct sensory input on the targets to be able to do anything regarding said targets. Remember though, Zombies do have the five "basic" senses at least according to Dragon Magazine Sage Advice (all things not mentioned differing from them do) so you do have to mind your Move Silently when using illusions against them.

I would assume that they would still try to finish the thing they are trying to do but a Wall coming into being in front of them...they have no memory, how do they know that the Wall wasn't always there? They don't, lacking memory necessarily entails existing in only a single instant with no past to go off, nor future to plan towards. Thus, unless they have a route to the target they can take that does not involve doing something silly (like walk at walls), I'd assume they cease. The other option is like those random monsters in low pathfinding AI games (Baldur's Gate with low pathfinding AI works like this); if they "sense" you coming they'll walk at the wall nearest to you until you stop. Thus you can just place any real obstacle between you two and they "glitch" at the wall instead of walking around it to attack you. I don't really see another option though; either they can be glitched with walls or they will equally stop at illusionary or real walls. Which one seems to mostly be a matter of programming. The only way for them to be consistent with truly being mindless with all that entails, in good and ill. Though again, some thinking commander increases their threat rating tenfold, even thinking logically, since they explicitly can receive simple orders.

[VisitingDaGulag]

Glabrezu is CR 13, and Nalfeshnee is CR 14.

I'd been hoping that you knew some legit CR 7-8 monsters in one of the many other monster books that I haven't read thoroughly.

Oh well.Off the top of my head? Beguiler [ShS60]. Is CR1 good enough for you? Available as an improved familiar. BOOM all those CR7 sorc/wiz's can have one now. Scratch that honey and vinegar thing. Back to being disappointed.
Oh well.

And yes CR 13 and CR 14 are acceptable encounters for an optimized PL8. If the party isn't optimized, then there's no need to use difficult adversaries. Any magical antithesis/high saves enemy will do (succubus paladin anyone?) and, of course, the creature type all bad DMs forget to use: oozes.

There's also every creature with an exotic sense. That's tons. Or heck, just any NPC with money. From the list of necessary magic items
Scout's Headband (MIC). 3400GP, head slot. Allows you to flush out all of the item's daily charges to gain True Seeing for one minute. Standard action activation. Can spend fewer charges to gain lesser vision-based benefits.
Eyes of Truth (MIC). 5500GP, face slot. Once per day, True Seeing for one round. Swift action activation.
Standard:
Runestaff of Divination or Vision (MIC). 21000GP or 16000GP, respectively, held. As runestaffs, these are only useful for those who have arcane spell slots, but if you're a Sorcerer or such, they will do just fine.
Chalice of True Seeing (DComp). 21600GP, held. Standard action activation, True Seeing once per day.
Truelight Lantern (MIC). 36000GP, held. Standard action activation, and only 10 minutes per day, which looks limited for the price, but is rather unique in working within a radius rather than just showing everything to you, which means your party gains its benefits as well.
Rod of Revealing (DComp). 60000GP, held. Not real True Seeing, but the rod creates an effective antimagic field for 110 min/day that suppresses illusion spells only. Specialized, but makes Illusionists cry.
Deluxe:
Hathran Mask of True Seeing (UE). 75000GP, face slot. Continuous True Seeing, off you go. Occupies the face slot.

[Quarian Rex]

~snip~

Anytime I hear someone describe mindless creature (this is done a lot with undead in particular) as computer analogs it always rings false. Computers, while powerful, are often cripplingly specialized in ways that just aren't feasible in an actual organism (living or undead). Even the most dim-witted of predatory organisms (vermin, oozes) have developed emergent properties that can bear a close resemblance to intelligence. They can sneak, they can hunt, they can attack from stealth, etc. No-one would ever argue that a giant spider couldn't lay a trap with it's web or that a black pudding couldn't drop from the ceiling as a surprise attack on an unsuspecting party. Why? Because we have seen examples of this sort of thing.

The same should really apply to zombies and such. They are predators. Any base assumptions that would make them comically ineffective predators should probably be thrown out. As with any organism, they have their own particular strengths and weaknesses, largely stemming from their undead nature. One would be a greatly reduced aversion to harm. While most predators are quite cautious and unwilling to put themselves at excessive risk, the animated dead are more than happy to smash at barriers and plough through simple traps in pursuit of their all consuming hate for the living. How do we know this? Because we have seen it! Zombies have been part of our pop culture for decades now, we have seen them in action and we all know that they are most definitely not computers that can have their perception shut off like a switch. No one, staring at an oncoming horde, has just shut an opaque screen door on their farmhouse and thought themselves safe. The horde slams into the farmhouse and starts pounding till it gets in, sometimes for hours, sometimes for months, as those inside frantically try to reinforce their failing defenses. No one, having met the gaze of a zombie, has just stepped into their bathtub, drawn the shower curtain, and thought themselves safe because they were now out of sight and out of mind. The zombie will charge through that plastic sheet faster than you can say, "BRAAIIINS!!".

Does this make illusions and such completely useless? No. A 'wall' suddenly appearing between the zombie and it's target would be charged at the same way a door being shut would, and the zombie will probably fall flat when it tries to slam against the non-existent barrier, as will most every zombie following him since they can't warn each other of tricks. Effective? Yes. Game breaking I-Win button? No.

[Fizban]

Does this make illusions and such completely useless? No. A 'wall' suddenly appearing between the zombie and it's target would be charged at the same way a door being shut would, and the zombie will probably fall flat when it tries to slam against the non-existent barrier, as will most every zombie following him since they can't warn each other of tricks. Effective? Yes. Game breaking I-Win button? No.
Converted into mechanics, this would be either a partial charge or bull rush at the obstacle for 1 wasted turn, or move then strength check (for two wasted turns for zombies with partial actions only). The efficacy of other illusions is more highly dependent on the DM.


As for encounters with True Seeing: sure, you can use monsters or NPCs above the level of the PCs. . . for 15% of encounters, plus another 5% if they're part of the portion the party is expected to run from. If you are regularly (more than 20%) using encounters above your PC's level, you are running a higher difficulty game, which brings into question weather you're responding to the char-op or the char-op is in response to you (a proper discussion of how the group wants their encounter difficulty chart set up should be added to the list of "session 0" requirements). If you need to throw off the/your expected difficulty curve in order to account for one PC, that PC is overpowered.

[Eldariel]

Anytime I hear someone describe mindless creature (this is done a lot with undead in particular) as computer analogs it always rings false. Computers, while powerful, are often cripplingly specialized in ways that just aren't feasible in an actual organism (living or undead). Even the most dim-witted of predatory organisms (vermin, oozes) have developed emergent properties that can bear a close resemblance to intelligence. They can sneak, they can hunt, they can attack from stealth, etc. No-one would ever argue that a giant spider couldn't lay a trap with it's web or that a black pudding couldn't drop from the ceiling as a surprise attack on an unsuspecting party. Why? Because we have seen examples of this sort of thing.

The same should really apply to zombies and such. They are predators. Any base assumptions that would make them comically ineffective predators should probably be thrown out. As with any organism, they have their own particular strengths and weaknesses, largely stemming from their undead nature. One would be a greatly reduced aversion to harm. While most predators are quite cautious and unwilling to put themselves at excessive risk, the animated dead are more than happy to smash at barriers and plough through simple traps in pursuit of their all consuming hate for the living. How do we know this? Because we have seen it! Zombies have been part of our pop culture for decades now, we have seen them in action and we all know that they are most definitely not computers that can have their perception shut off like a switch. No one, staring at an oncoming horde, has just shut an opaque screen door on their farmhouse and thought themselves safe. The horde slams into the farmhouse and starts pounding till it gets in, sometimes for hours, sometimes for months, as those inside frantically try to reinforce their failing defenses. No one, having met the gaze of a zombie, has just stepped into their bathtub, drawn the shower curtain, and thought themselves safe because they were now out of sight and out of mind. The zombie will charge through that plastic sheet faster than you can say, "BRAAIIINS!!".

Does this make illusions and such completely useless? No. A 'wall' suddenly appearing between the zombie and it's target would be charged at the same way a door being shut would, and the zombie will probably fall flat when it tries to slam against the non-existent barrier, as will most every zombie following him since they can't warn each other of tricks. Effective? Yes. Game breaking I-Win button? No.

Why are you equating pop culture zombies with D&D zombies? Pop culture zombies are much more like Ghasts, which have intelligence and create spawn. Having the same name doesn't make them the same entity, and D&D zombies long predate pop culture zombies. Vermin and Oozes are one thing (though I'd call foul to an Ooze sneaking; Vermin, again, are not really Int - as per their abilities but that's neither here nor now), but things created with magic are magical constructs much like Golems (which, again, have the exact same programming parameters as Zombies and Skeletons) and should act as such. Intelligent ones can act on their own but nonintelligent ones should be just that, nonintelligent.

Perhaps they could actually draw a shower curtain (you can see through it), but I question them attacking an illusionary wall unless they normally spend their time attacking real ones instead of waiting for something they can reach/finding the shortest open route to a perceived target.

[Quarian Rex]

Why are you equating pop culture zombies with D&D zombies? ... Having the same name doesn't make them the same entity, and D&D zombies long predate pop culture zombies.

You are horribly, horribly mistaken if you think D&D predates the zombie craze. Even just in movies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_zombie_films) they have a long standing history that started way before D&D was first published in 1974. In fact, Night of the Living Dead came out only a few years earlier (in 1968) reinventing zombies for all time, and you could bet your life that it was in the minds of geeks designing a new fantasy game. Claiming that D&D zombies were completely independent creations designed to be nothing more than meat robots just makes you seem to be blind to both current and historical culture.



Pop culture zombies are much more like Ghasts
Ghasts (and Ghouls to a lesser extent) are far more intelligent than humans, so if you are treating them as most people would treat zombies, I have to say, you're doing it wrong, doing a great monster a massive disservice, much as you seem to be doing with the animated dead.

Don't be seduced by the iron-clad control of the Animate Dead spell. While controlled they can be well behaved and docile if their master wishes, but this is a credit to the spell that controls them, not their nature. Once their caster dies or releases them for something better you now have The Walking Dead. Robots aren't neutral evil, animated dead are. That affects their behaviour. Remember, mindlessness is a game term designed to describe how other game features interact. Nothing more. You seem to be reading way too much into it. Just look at all of the creatures that are considered to be mindless and they all have far greater agency that you seem to be willing to grant.

[noob]

Ghasts and ghouls are as smart as an average 80 year old human in dnd 3.5 .(10 is the average then +3 from age) so you can not say that they are "far more intelligent than humans"
Well that means that they can and should use tactics the same way humans does so it means that they might either form mobs or panic or have prepared themselves with a hierarchy or do any combination of the above or yet other things(as humans does).
Since 80 year old people are not very known for forming mobs and riots maybe that is less likely for ghouls too.
You could expect to have a higher proportion of military ghouls than with humans(ghouls are never said to be fearless and being smart does not helps not panicking so the ghouls could panic a lot too)

[TexAvery]

If you are regularly (more than 20%) using encounters above your PC's level, you are running a higher difficulty game, which brings into question weather you're responding to the char-op or the char-op is in response to you

In fairness, the char-op can't be a response to regular encounters above the PC's level when those encounters haven't happened yet and are merely suggestions on how to deal with the char-op. The cause-effect direction of it would be known in this case.

[Fizban]

Uh, if the game's been going on for more than one session, or especially if the group's been playing for more than one game, they can absolutely respond to your past encounter building. I don't think that's the case here but we have regular threads where people want char-op advice to smash their killer DMs. The question of who started it is always relevant, because its part of drilling down to the expectations that both parties have and then properly addressing them.