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.
..., 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.
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,...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Illusions are interesting, as they are so much more malleable than other spells. They give the player a good bit more thinking room.
woodwwad 1 month ago
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.
TheArckmage 1 month ago
(... 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 1 month ago
(... 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 1 month ago
(... 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 1 month ago
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)
thespiritcoyote 1 month ago
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.
jesokingcryst 1 month ago
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.
FukPhysics 1 month ago
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.
murphysborounderdark 1 month ago
static
markushanrath 1 month ago