RPG Pondering: Are illusions dynamic or static?

[woodwwad]

Illusions are interesting, as they are so much more malleable than other spells. They give the player a good bit more thinking room.

[TheArckmage]

Over-thinking it guys: Was the spellcasters intention to make it static? Yes or No? One version is more complicated to cast than the other and requires more time and energy.

First Rule of D&D: Dont over think things, thats how you get to Palladium. Just apply common sense here and there and everything will be fine.

[thespiritcoyote]

(... cont)

in shorter parlance.. if the illusion is static, how static?

Do you not expect an illusion to change with the passing of day and season to some degree?

...or does a section of wall appear by light of day or moon by original design?

and if dynamic, just how dynamic?

Would you really expect a spell need be crafted to hold beyond a few years, maybe a single lifetime of the caster at most?

...or did many lives go into sacrifice for the forming of permanency over eons-to-come?

[thespiritcoyote]

(... cont)

..., if-and-if abides static, erstwhile the effects would wear off quickly anyhow - as the sun traces it's truth in the revealing, too such affronts to natural order and positive balance whither become dismissed - and for when the deception posed nature in formless charade of the shæɑdu passes fickle in boredom, then in giving to tale-tale winks for the folk as if by score of riddle.

(... cont)

[thespiritcoyote]

(... cont)

in general I would say that; a typical quick-dweomercræft, even if made "permanent" would be rather static but suffer weakening over such long-term of many seasons anyway.. if however due to paradigm considerations such as; school-cræft philosophy, and influences in cultural expectancies, any illusion-cræft occurs much too "static" in scope,...

(... cont)

[thespiritcoyote]

A tricky tough question...dynamical static?

Many factors could be in play here... the particulars of immediate urgency vs. long-term planning involved in weaving the illusion, tightness of the permanency vs. any natural dweamor/aether-leak, the central paradigm under which the original caster operates, the specific paradigm under which the original caster attempted to dweomercræft the effect.

(... cont)

[jesokingcryst]

How do illusions work? Is it a fixed picture or is it a command for the minds of the observers?

Depends on how the game describes it. It it works like "Phantasmal Killer" then the wall will change in time because the minds of the observers are ordered to fill in the blanks.

[FukPhysics]

It depends on if the spellcaster intended to create a brick pattern over the door or make the door blend into its surroundings. It could go either way really.

[murphysborounderdark]

I would say static always otherwise it would be possible to create some type of thinking being with a powerful illusion. It would essentially be a robot, or computer, or holocron ala superman. It could change with input, and it would have to be able to adapt to new situations. That sounds a little too much like creating life. I think because of that road you start to go down, you have to say static.

[markushanrath]

static

[psychokazi]

an illusion in that manner, i would believe is static. that is how the spellcaster made it be. for people to think it looks like that one specific pattern. thats how the energy would be woven to affect the mind, so that is how i believe it would stay.

[tfwoods3]

I would say static.

[o1sin182]

I think the "official" answer is that the illusion is static, but I would definitely play this one by ear.

[hkdharmon]

Is this DnD specific? In Ars Magica, if it is an Imaginem spell, it is a created image, like a hologram, and likely does not change unless the Magus was very clever. If it was a Mentem spell, it only exists in the victim's mind, and it would be much easier to stipulate that the wall should "look right". However, you would have to penetrate magic resistance, unlike with the Imaginem spell.

In DnD, illusions are in the victim's mind, so I think it would "look right".

[morganlean]

My opinion of illusions is that its basically a trick of the mind, the illusion is not really there just the viewer thinks its there hence they would be dynamic as they are based on a mixture of the person who cast its idea and the person who views its world beliefs. Hence that's why some people fall for them and some don't. If you see a wall with an illusion you fill in little details about the wall, maybe making your save is noticing bits of moss that are the same as other bits of the wall.

[LordSathar]

I may be mixing up my editions but i think the answer is actually in the spell description, it only changes if the caster is concerntrating on it. but i think this idea has got me thinking of a new idea for my game, a "dispeller's guild" who goes around taking care of spell effects that hvr been lefft unattended.

[markamadeojohnson]

@LordSathar This is a really cool idea. It made me think of a bunch of magical gnomes fixing up magical spells that have been left unattended while no one is looking :)

[Nolinquisitor]

I think they are static if we look at the proposition from the game mechanics perspective. On the other hand, magic is magic. In some setting, the illusion could change with time. In the Harry Potter universe it would likely do so. In Forgotten Realms, it would probably never change. I guess it all depends on the setting.

[blackbarnz]

static. Unless your saying arcane magical energy is alive somehow then maybe but not to suggest the caster can see the future or anticipate what time will brings. What if new spieces of vines evolve?The are of effect could go through endless changes. What may have been a wall may now be an ocean etc.. The idea of casting illusions is say Limbo and having that effect morph to match the plane is silly. 1694 create illusion of tree on Manhatten where today stands Madison Square Garden's ice rink?

[blackbarnz]

@blackbarnz Wow I can't type. sorry!

[FundamentalPhysicist]

It depends on the illusion of course. However, static illusions will make it easier for a party to spot that something isn't right.

That said, what if the illusion manipulated all five senses. What if the party couldn't see, feel, or touch the doorknob? And even if the door was opened they'd feel prevented by a wall that's not there.

[BattleBunny1979]

in your specific example I would let the illusion be static, since its a fun way for the players to discover the door. and then they can start to figure out what is going on here.

As Gm i use illusions as i see fit and dont adhere to any rules really... dont tell my players!

[rockheimr]

Yep, I'd rule static definitely.

[Webhead123]

The impression I get from the library of illusion spells is that they are definately static. Spells used to conceal, disguise or duplicate often define their effects as "at time of casting" and often require a "Disguise" skill check by the caster. Others require attention from the caster in order to manipulate the illusion (such as Major Image and Permanent Image).

Persistent Image says "...follows a script determined by [the caster]" but this means that it requires a pre-determined script...

[Webhead123]

...I'm speaking (of course) of such things relative to D&D/PF which I only assume is the intent of the question.

[lambastedpolemic]

Given that illusions themselves are things without agency - i.e. they aren't thinking, let alone purposeful - it would have to be static. There is no way for the spell caster to know how that brick wall is going to evolve and deteriorate, and since the illusion itself cannot adapt because it has no agency independent of the original intent, it would just stay there in it's original form.

[Webhead123]

@lambastedpolemic I would agree. The illusion is an extension of the caster, not the thing upon which it was cast. The illusionary wall is not really there and has no capacity to perceive its surroundings (with very limited, single-event exceptions such as Magic Mouth and Programmed Image) and is therefore incapable of self-adaptation.

[WizardJim]

In a game I once ran I wrote up the "laws of magic" for that world, one of which is; magic is alive, it's even partially sentient. Mages don't have to program their spells like computer applications, rather they give them orders like minions. In such a game, under those rules, the illusion would be dynamic. The spell's limited sentience itself would recognise when it no longer matched the surrounding brickwork and change accordingly.

[SaudiLindsey4]

I'd say if it was a decent level spell then yes that specifically works by targeting the mind, then yes. I'd rule that an illusion spell exists only in the minds of those that view it. It becomes a wall that a viewer would expect to see. If the surrounding area is older and overrun with foliage then a target would expect the wall to look the same, so it does.

If the spell was more like a hologram, creating an illusion by bending and manipulating light then no. The image would remain static.

[clownkingdon]

@SaudiLindsey4 i agree with this but it begs the question if someone were to lean against the wall would they fall through or would it, to their mind, be a wall??

[SaudiLindsey4]

@clownkingdon Good question. I know that some spell descriptors specify that if said illusion is interacted with then the illusion fails. Baring a defined interaction ruling from a book I'd base my ruling on the power of the spell and caster as well as the forethought of the caster when he/she described the effect while creating it.

[draconis307]

My reasoning being that at spell level 5, you have the Illusory Wall and Wall of Stone spells (a real wall and a fake wall spell), at SL7 you have Greater Shadow Conjuration, which can create semi-real Wall of Stone spells. So, from a power stand point, Permanent Image (SL6) could make dynamic looking wall illusions.

[Antiks72]

They're static unless there's some input from a caster (dispel). The original caster would have to modify the spell and recast it at some point in a different form.

[draconis307]

Thats an interesting argument... Personally, if I were DMing a game where this was an issue, I'd make it based on the power and complexity of the spell. Lower level spells are completely static, only changing when the caster wills it to change. A higher level spell can dynamically mimic reality (if that's the intention of the caster, that is). In this case, Illusory Wall would -not- be dynamic (though its large enough not to matter) and Permanent Image probably could be if the caster so chose.

[SkallagrimNilsson]

I simply wouldn't expect the illusion spell to last that long. Wouldn't it run out of "juice" eventually? At least I'd expect a self-sustaining spell that continues to utilize magic from its environment to power itself to be incredibly complex, probably to be mastered by an arch mage only.

Assuming that it somehow keeps running I would expect it to be static. The mind of the caster would have to adjust for changes in the environment.

[EryxUK]

I would say that they are static, set as when they were cast.

[Darkspriter4]

wouldnt it be both and it simply depends on the type of illusion plus the caster?

[therealrpgguy]

Inherently the spell is static. For it to be dynamic, it would rely on a few things.

1. The success of the roll when casting the spell.

2. If more "power/ magic" were put into the spell.

3. If extra time were included when casting the spell.

[eberik]

Static, unless there is something in the spell description that says otherwise.

[blathdotcom]

Unless there was something that would clearly allow changes in the illusion based on whatever reason, I'd vote static.