Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 38 of 38
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2019

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by bendking View Post
    It's actually quite easy to cause the Blinded status with Phantasmal Force. Just make the illusion be a beehive on the poor sucker's head. He is now both blind and taking a bit of damage every turn, and you can attack him with advantage while he attacks with disadvantage.
    He will either waste his turns trying to get the beehive off or fight you while blinded and being stung by imaginary bees.

    Also, in your analysis, you seem to kind of gloss over Hold Person inflicting the paralyzed status, which is devastating.
    Someone could argue in order to make a visual phenomenon as stated in the spell it can't produce blindness because then it's not longer visual.

    That said, you could summon some sort of smoke monster that causes the area occupied by it to be heavily obscured and end up mechanically with the exact same thing so I'm not sure it matters much.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Sorinth View Post
    Someone could argue in order to make a visual phenomenon as stated in the spell it can't produce blindness because then it's not longer visual.

    That said, you could summon some sort of smoke monster that causes the area occupied by it to be heavily obscured and end up mechanically with the exact same thing so I'm not sure it matters much.
    I don't think it can cause "Blindness" the condition, but it can create total obscurement. An illusion of a thick hedge, a stone all, a fog... anything that blocks line of sight would do it. Just as with silent image.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    Going to disagree here. The first sentence of the spell is, "You craft an illusion that takes root in the mind of a creature that you can see within range."
    The spell also says: "On a failed save, you create a phantasmal object, creature, or other visible phenomenon of your choice that is no larger than a 10-foot cube and that is perceivable only to the target for the duration." So in the case of an iron maiden you're creating a phantasmal object that is only perceivable by the target. That language to me suggests the phantasmal object exists outside the mind of the target. Otherwise, it would be worded something like "...you create in the mind of the target the false perception of an object, creature, or other visible phenomenon...." For the existing language to be completely internal to the target you'd be taking about creating a full-size phantasmal object inside the target's head. :) Admittedly, we can get into semantics and/or epistemology really quickly on this line of discussion, specifically in regards to to the definition of perception, and whether or not there is a meaningful distinction between a false perception of a non-existent object and a creature-specific real perception of an illusory object.

    Regardless of whether the spell has any sort of meaningful existence outside the target, I still think it's important that the language I quoted demonstrates that the spell creates a phantasmal iron maiden. Iron maidens don't move, so I see no reason to assume that a phantasmal iron maiden would automatically move with the target as Thunderous Mojo suggested.

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    (emphasis added) I think otherwise: they can choose to not move next round, or to change directly entirely, so they can stop on the same dime with the iron maiden that just sprang up beneath their feet like the jaws of some metalic sandworm.
    That works. I prefer a bit more simulation at my table, but it's a matter of personal preference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    I think the approach here is actually one where the illusion is not fixed uniformly. It depends what the illusion is. An illusory creature moves around realistically. An illusory object sits still unless interacted with.

    Remember, it takes root in the mind of the target. So the illusion is something they are hallucinating. It behaves accordingly. If they think they picked up an illusory coin, they'll carry it around and it will seem to them to move around in their hand. If they think they're being chased by a white wyrmling, they'll perceive it to be acting like a white wyrmling, not like a white wyrmling nailed to the ground at that spot. If they perceive a bridge, it'll stay fixed in place as per their expectations of a bridge.
    I think your examples all support my point of view, where the phantasmal object has the properties one would associate with a real object other than lack of substance. I don't see how you're supporting Thunderous Mojo's position that a phantasmal iron maiden would move along with a running target.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Xetheral View Post
    The spell also says: "On a failed save, you create a phantasmal object, creature, or other visible phenomenon of your choice that is no larger than a 10-foot cube and that is perceivable only to the target for the duration." So in the case of an iron maiden you're creating a phantasmal object that is only perceivable by the target. That language to me suggests the phantasmal object exists outside the mind of the target. Otherwise, it would be worded something like "...you create in the mind of the target the false perception of an object, creature, or other visible phenomenon...." For the existing language to be completely internal to the target you'd be taking about creating a full-size phantasmal object inside the target's head. :) Admittedly, we can get into semantics and/or epistemology really quickly on this line of discussion, specifically in regards to to the definition of perception, and whether or not there is a meaningful distinction between a false perception of a non-existent object and a creature-specific real perception of an illusory object.

    Regardless of whether the spell has any sort of meaningful existence outside the target, I still think it's important that the language I quoted demonstrates that the spell creates a phantasmal iron maiden. Iron maidens don't move, so I see no reason to assume that a phantasmal iron maiden would automatically move with the target as Thunderous Mojo suggested.

    (...)

    I think your examples all support my point of view, where the phantasmal object has the properties one would associate with a real object other than lack of substance. I don't see how you're supporting Thunderous Mojo's position that a phantasmal iron maiden would move along with a running target.
    It does say that you create it in their mind, in that first sentence. The later sentence has to be taken in context of it; you're not making something independent of their mind. The reason only they can perceive it is precisely because it's in their head. That's why things behave like the real thing: he's hallucinating it.

    I'm not disputing that an iron maiden wouldn't move, but I am disputing that he would perceive himself as jumping backwards out of it. If he doesn't psychosomatically stop his own jump (in the same way that he psychosomatically takes damage from the spikes), then he jumps backwards but THINKS he was stopped. So to him, he and the iron maiden didn't move, even though, objectively, he did and he now perceives it to be in a technically different place.

    I go with "psychosomatically-enforced pantomime," myself.



    That all said, I still love the notion of a phantasmal crewmate bringing written orders to a captain to get the captain to seem to just make his own mind up while the captain thinks he got a change in orders from higher-ups. I'd love to see more neat and creative ideas like this, as I think it works in just about everyone's interpretation of the spell.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    It does say that you create it in their mind, in that first sentence. The later sentence has to be taken in context of it; you're not making something independent of their mind. The reason only they can perceive it is precisely because it's in their head. That's why things behave like the real thing: he's hallucinating it.

    I'm not disputing that an iron maiden wouldn't move, but I am disputing that he would perceive himself as jumping backwards out of it. If he doesn't psychosomatically stop his own jump (in the same way that he psychosomatically takes damage from the spikes), then he jumps backwards but THINKS he was stopped. So to him, he and the iron maiden didn't move, even though, objectively, he did and he now perceives it to be in a technically different place.

    I go with "psychosomatically-enforced pantomime," myself.



    That all said, I still love the notion of a phantasmal crewmate bringing written orders to a captain to get the captain to seem to just make his own mind up while the captain thinks he got a change in orders from higher-ups. I'd love to see more neat and creative ideas like this, as I think it works in just about everyone's interpretation of the spell.
    I interpret the original sentence you quoted as being explained by the later sentences. The illusion "takes root in the mind of [the target]" is a valid description because the Phantasmal object is visible only to the target. But I concede the sentences taken together can be interpreted in multiple ways.

    I disagree, however, that the spell can make the target think he's not moved when in fact he has. That's definitely not part of the spell description, which merely creates a phantasmal object, creature, or visible phenomenon.

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Xetheral View Post
    I interpret the original sentence you quoted as being explained by the later sentences. The illusion "takes root in the mind of [the target]" is a valid description because the Phantasmal object is visible only to the target. But I concede the sentences taken together can be interpreted in multiple ways.

    I disagree, however, that the spell can make the target think he's not moved when in fact he has. That's definitely not part of the spell description, which merely creates a phantasmal object, creature, or visible phenomenon.
    It also forces him to "rationalize impossible interactions." If he moved, but he couldn't have because he's trapped in an iron maiden, then he could easily rationalize that he did not, in fact, move, and is still in the iron maiden.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    Quote Originally Posted by Segev View Post
    It also forces him to "rationalize impossible interactions." If he moved, but he couldn't have because he's trapped in an iron maiden, then he could easily rationalize that he did not, in fact, move, and is still in the iron maiden.
    I feel like that type of rationalization is excluded by the text of the spell dealing with falling through a Phantasmal Bridge: "If the target survives the fall, it still believes that the bridge exists and comes up with some other explanation for its fall-it was pushed, it slipped, or a strong wind might have knocked it off." Notably, rationalizing that the character did not fall and is thus still standing in the bridge does not appear on the list of options, nor is it similar to any of the listed options.

    I simply don't think the spell can cause the character to lie to themselves about whether they have or have not moved. So just as a stationary phantasmal bridge can't make you lie to yourself that you didn't fall through, a stationary phantasmal iron maiden can't make you lie to yourself that you didn't move away from it.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MonkGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2007

    Default Re: Another Phantasmal Force Discussion: comparing to Tasha's Laughter and Hold Perso

    The real difference between Phantasmal Force and the other two spells can quite simply be summed up in two words:

    DM Fiat.

    If you trust your DM to Let you use phantasmal force in a powerful, effective way, you should take it.

    If you barely know the guy (like in AL for example) and would rather have a spell that is RAW effective, Id pick one of the other two.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •