PDA

View Full Version : silent image use...



quiet1mi
2008-06-01, 09:28 PM
is it possible to use silent image to fill the room with "illusionary darkness" but tell your allies so they get a +4 to the disbelieve... and if so would it provide total concealment from my enemies and [if my allies passed their save] have no penalty on my allies.

of course if the enemy successfully disbelieved the illusion then they will suffer no penalty... but then under what circumstance will they get to have that disbelieve check and is it every round?

I read this on the WOTC forums so I want to know if it is possible...

Hectonkhyres
2008-06-01, 09:36 PM
It may make a certain amount of sense in the real world, but I have a feeling your DM would pull out the 'rocks fall everybody dies' tradition in response.

drengnikrafe
2008-06-01, 09:37 PM
First of all, the room would have to be smaller then the amount of room you are permitted to cover using a silent image.

After that, I think that one is up to your DM, and how willing he/she is to go for such uses of the spell. The RAW doesn't say anything about that not being permitted, I guess. But you still need DM approval.

EDIT: I'd say if you're anywhere within the rays of the sun, or some sort of other lighting fixture that generates heat, they'd get a bonus to disbelief. You can still feel the warmth of the sun, but you can't see it? That creates suspicion, in my mind.

Chronos
2008-06-01, 10:07 PM
You can do even better. Make globes of blackness, just around the enemies' heads. That way, your allies don't even need to make the save at all.

Of course, you could also add a lot of style to this trick, at no extra cost. Instead of just globes of blackness, engulf the enemies' heads with tentacled eldritch things man was not meant to know of. Or oversized plastic masks like the folks playing the Seven Dwarves wear at Disneyworld. Or V for Vendetta-style Guy Fawkes masks. Or whatever you want.

monty
2008-06-02, 12:58 AM
Silent Image does not let you make something appear to be not there. Light is something. Darkness is light not being there. Therefore, you cannot use Silent Image to create darkness.

Better idea: play a Shadowcraft Mage and use Silent Image to simulate a Darkness spell.

Irreverent Fool
2008-06-02, 01:08 AM
I disagree that light is 'something'. But that's not what my post hinges on so no worries. :smallsmile:

If you're intent on doing something like this, don't try to duplicate an existing spell. Make an image of a solid wall... or to be more believable, one with arrow slits and give your allies the advantage of full cover. Not believable enough? How about a massive swarm of multicolored butterflies to effectively grant your allies concealment against your enemies. Butterflies not your thing? Smoke!

Personally, I prefer making false walls as the enemies chase me around a corner only to find a solid wall in their way. It's much more believable if they don't see it suddenly spring into view.

Edit: A swarm of butterflies wouldn't work. It's a single thing you can create an image of. I think 'a cloud of smoke' still works though,

Talic
2008-06-02, 01:14 AM
It would be simpler to create an illusion of a wall that cuts off the last 5 feet of a room. Put party members on one side of the wall. Thus, when party disbelieves, they see through wall. Until monsters disbelieve, they do not. Excellent trick for casters with silent spell.

Xuincherguixe
2008-06-02, 01:43 AM
What about putting something over the monsters heads?

Talic
2008-06-02, 02:06 AM
What about putting something over the monsters heads?

Silent image is non-mobile. Plus, it would be automatic interaction, which would allow immediate saves.

Irreverent Fool
2008-06-02, 02:28 AM
Silent image is non-mobile. Plus, it would be automatic interaction, which would allow immediate saves.

Actually,

You can move the image within the limits of the size of the effect

Also, they can still fail the saves.

Talic
2008-06-02, 02:41 AM
Yes, they could. But effects which don't allow the save in the first place > than abilities with a save allowed.

The wall idea is also usable before the enemy even arrives, allowing for an ambush setup.

Eventually, the enemy will interact, however, a wizard with silent spell (and a feat to lower the MM cost to +0) would be able to lob several spells without being detected. Even with archer types, the ambusher would get a guaranteed surprise round, and even then, the attackers will need to make saves, once they grasp that the attacks are coming from areas where there's no hiding places.

Irreverent Fool
2008-06-02, 02:53 AM
Yes, they could. But effects which don't allow the save in the first place > than abilities with a save allowed.

The wall idea is also usable before the enemy even arrives, allowing for an ambush setup.

Eventually, the enemy will interact, however, a wizard with silent spell (and a feat to lower the MM cost to +0) would be able to lob several spells without being detected. Even with archer types, the ambusher would get a guaranteed surprise round, and even then, the attackers will need to make saves, once they grasp that the attacks are coming from areas where there's no hiding places.

You can't be lobbing spells while concentrating on a silent image, can you?

Talic
2008-06-02, 03:53 AM
Who said you were the one lobbing? Casters can fill a variety of party roles.

For example:

wizard x: Batman
Beguiler x: Skillmonkey
Warlock or duskblade x: frontline combatant (eldritch glaive if lock, gish build)
cleric/druid x: heals

Though a slightly higher level Minor Image will allow you to lob into the fray as well, for a couple rounds (the most such a ploy would get you, anyway, and likely 90% of the average fight).

Mark Hall
2008-06-02, 08:08 PM
The problem with the smoke idea is that it wouldn't smell like smoke, nor would it make the eyes itch, or cause difficulty breathing.

I think for D&D purposes, "dark" (excuse me, "shadowy illumination") is enough of a thing that you could emulate it with a Silent Image spell. If you want to do it differently, create an exact image of the room, but dark.

quiet1mi
2008-06-02, 09:56 PM
The problem with the smoke idea is that it wouldn't smell like smoke, nor would it make the eyes itch, or cause difficulty breathing.

I think for D&D purposes, "dark" (excuse me, "shadowy illumination") is enough of a thing that you could emulate it with a Silent Image spell. If you want to do it differently, create an exact image of the room, but dark.

wow i strangely never thought of that... but what if they pick something up?

FlyMolo
2008-06-02, 10:37 PM
wow i strangely never thought of that... but what if they pick something up?

Then they get a save, but they would still feel the object. It would just look dark. You've "skinned" the room with dark.

Enlong
2008-06-02, 10:42 PM
This reminds me of my favorite hypothetical escape strategy for a sorcerer. You run down a corridor away from your perusers, and throw up a Prismatic Wall. Then you throw up a Silent Image of a Prismatic Wall, with a real Prismatic Wall behind it. Then you put two Silent Images of Prismatic walls behind each other, then a real Prismatic Wall, then a Wall of Force behind and infront of a Silent Image Prismatic Wall. Etc. Makes for an awesome escape. The intended effect is that the enemies get totally confused and waste time trying to figure out whether the wall they're looking at is real or not. Bonus points if they try to meticulously destroy a Silent Image in the way you would destroy a Prismatic Wall (admittedly, Programmed Image is needed for that one)

Chronos
2008-06-02, 10:49 PM
It's not really relevant whether "darkness" is a thing. Just fill the room with something opaque: Call it ink, or smoke, or gibbering giblets or whatever you like, but the important aspect of a concealing illusion is just that you can't see through it. Sure, it won't smell like smoke, but how are the enemies to know that it's supposed to smell like smoke? An image of thick smoke completely filling the room looks just like an image of anything else completely filling the room.