Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dunamin 11-25-07, 10:41 AM	I have a situation where a party has penetrated a dungeon, fought until they were low on ressources, and retreated by teleportation. Now after they've left, a resident aboleth would like to take steps to foil entry into the dungeon by teleportation, so I was thinking it could use Mirage Arcana to make the "discovered" parts of the dungeon seem like something entirely different. Would this force a teleportation to result in the False Destination category?
ArcTan 11-25-07, 10:59 AM	I would say yes. Teleportation works by making sure your mental image matches the present appearance of the location. If the appearance of the location has been altered radically enough -- and it doesn't really matter *how* it's been altered, in my opinion -- then the destination counts as false, yeah. The important thing to remember, though, is that you're the DM, this is your game, and if it's important for the story and tactics you have in mind for things to work this way, then they work this way. As long as you're consistent and fair about it (so that the PCs can also use this strategy if they have to) there's nothing wrong with this. (And it's my opinion that reducing the power of teleportation magic can only be a good thing for the game environment.)
Omen_of_Peace 11-25-07, 04:17 PM	I would say no, since the illusion does not actually change the environment. The aboleth can command its minions to do some remodeling though.
groveborn 11-25-07, 04:27 PM	You must have some clear idea of the location and layout of the destination. The clearer your mental image, the more likely the teleportation works. Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible. To see how well the teleportation works, roll d% and consult the Teleport table. Refer to the following information for definitions of the terms on the table. Familiarity: 'Very familiar' is a place where you have been very often and where you feel at home. 'Studied carefully' is a place you know well, either because you can currently see it, you've been there often, or you have used other means (such as scrying) to study the place for at least one hour. 'Seen casually' is a place that you have seen more than once but with which you are not very familiar. 'Viewed once' is a place that you have seen once, possibly using magic. 'False destination' is a place that does not truly exist or if you are teleporting to an otherwise familiar location that no longer exists as such or has been so completely altered as to no longer be familiar to you. When traveling to a false destination, roll 1d20+80 to obtain results on the table, rather than rolling d%, since there is no real destination for you to hope to arrive at or even be off target from. I'll have to go with ArcTan. The illusions should be sufficient to fool Teleporation. The spell isn't intelligent after all. Don't forget to use the % when they teleport, as they likely aren't "very familiar" to begin with.
Dunamin 11-26-07, 04:46 AM	My inclination is also that it should work. The important thing to remember, though, is that you're the DM, this is your game, and if it's important for the story and tactics you have in mind for things to work this way, then they work this way. As long as you're consistent and fair about it (so that the PCs can also use this strategy if they have to) there's nothing wrong with this. (And it's my opinion that reducing the power of teleportation magic can only be a good thing for the game environment.) I’m well aware that I could simply (consistently) rule it as such, but it’s always nice to see if this ruling falls in line with a general consensus on the RAW interpretation. I agree on the notion about erring on the side of lesser benefits of teleportation, by the way. Don't forget to use the % when they teleport, as they likely aren't "very familiar" to begin with. Actually, with this ruling I would go straight for the False Destination category on the percentage roll. Incidentally, when this roll eventually turns up with “Similar Area” they may end up in another part of the same dungeon. Hmm…
tyrecian 11-26-07, 06:06 PM	ouch that is nasty, i like the way you think. Also, would each person along for the ride go the same place? Could be crazy where they end up eh? on edit, nah it looks like they all stick togehter...
BW0222 11-26-07, 08:44 PM	Dunamin, I'd have to say no. Mirage arcana is not altering the place in any way. Even altering the construction of the place isn't changing the location. Claiming that you can foil teleporting by moving around the furnature or painting the walls in a new color is pretty weak. Same as one can't claim that the presence or absence of creatures, objects, etc. changes the "location". "See... there is a spider in the corner... it isn't the same place you last saw." If the presence of creatures, objects, furnature, paint, etc. can't cause it to fail, then I'm certainly not going to allow an illusion to foil it. The teleport should work. However, the PCs will obviously find themselves in what they think is the wrong place. If they start interacting with the place... they might realize it is an illusion. Otherwise, they might assume that the teleport failed -- possibly teleporting back or starting to explore it as if they had landed in the wrong place.
tyrecian 11-26-07, 09:22 PM	I dunno, TP says, according to SRD: Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible. meaning that magics can influence its behavior, first of all... Later it says: “False destination” is a place that does not truly exist or if you are teleporting to an otherwise familiar location that no longer exists as such or has been so completely altered as to no longer be familiar to you. While you might allow a will save v/s the illusion, still it is, without intereaction, going to look completely alterred as to no longer be familiar... therefore fitting with the idea of False Destination. So you would then be shunted to a place that still was familiar like the place (perhaps a similar room in the dungeon, purposely crafted for an ambush?) or you take damage and the spell fails? not sure about spell failure and taking damage both at the same time.
ArcTan 11-26-07, 09:25 PM	Mirage arcana is altering how the location *looks*, which is the only thing teleport cares about (that's how False Destination works in the first place). Mirage arcana is a *bigger* deal than a coat of paint, because it alters the appearance of the location *more* than a coat of paint. The argument isn't over how much something is "really altered", the argument is over whether or not you would recognize the place upon seeing it. Something *designed to alter a place's appearance beyond recognition* is therefore *obviously* useful largely as a tool to trick teleportation spells. The teleport should work. However, the PCs will obviously find themselves in what they think is the wrong place. If they start interacting with the place... they might realize it is an illusion. Otherwise, they might assume that the teleport failed -- possibly teleporting back or starting to explore it as if they had landed in the wrong place. BS. The *point* of False Destination is that it can *only* take you to places that match your mental image. If your teleport screws up, it *always* takes you someplace that matches your mental image, even if it's the wrong place. Teleport has *no* chance of randomly screwing up and taking you into a completely different place that looks nothing like your mental image. If you rule that mirage arcana interacts with teleport this way, then any Wizard who knows anything about how his own spells work will instantly realize that the altered appearance of the place *must* be an illusion -- the place *must* look like his mental image underneath the illusion, or otherwise teleport would *never* have brought him there -- and anything you were planning to do with the mirage arcana is now totally neutered.
ArcTan 11-26-07, 09:31 PM	While you might allow a will save v/s the illusion, still it is, without intereaction, going to look completely alterred as to no longer be familiar... therefore fitting with the idea of False Destination. Yes. There's a big split between not recognizing my living room because it's been repainted, and not recognizing it because it's been bathed in an enormous, realistically 3D hologram of the African savannah. So you would then be shunted to a place that still was familiar like the place (perhaps a similar room in the dungeon, purposely crafted for an ambush?) or you take damage and the spell fails? not sure about spell failure and taking damage both at the same time. No BBEG could actually guarantee that a prepared room would automatically become the "Similar Area" of a False Destination roll, though it might be worth taking the risk. But keep in mind teleport never "fizzles" because of False Destination -- when you get False Destination you automatically end up in a Similar Area, possibly after rolling a few Mishaps along the way (you *always* keep rolling Mishaps until you get a non-Mishap, possibly leaving you dead).
Jaxgaret 11-26-07, 11:23 PM	I'm going to tentatively agree that the TPer gets a Will save against the MA - if they fail that, it's False Destination time.
ArcTan 11-27-07, 01:02 AM	Why the hell would the TPer get a Will save? He hasn't interacted with the MA. He can't even see it. Teleport doesn't give you, the caster, any scrying-like ability to actually *see* the place you're teleporting to before you go there, and if it did it'd be even more broken (now I don't have to do the "scry" half of scryporting anymore!).
Jaxgaret 11-27-07, 01:19 AM	Teleport doesn't give you, the caster, any scrying-like ability to actually *see* the place you're teleporting to before you go there, and if it did it'd be even more broken (now I don't have to do the "scry" half of scryporting anymore!). The Teleport goes by what you *would* see if you were there at the destination point. Otherwise, there is no way to adjudicate if the destination is false or not - and what you would see upon arrival is determined by the result of your Will save. It doesn't make much intuitive sense, but if you think about it for a minute, that's how Teleport must work. Unless someone convincingly proves otherwise, that's how I see it working.
groveborn 11-27-07, 02:00 AM	The rules don't allow a save from illusions until they've been interacted with, and if the Teleport were to fail due to the illusion, it would simply fail. False Destination and all. There would be no save, as the illusion simply protects that location from intruders. This is the risk adventurers take when they use unprotected magics. Call it balance. They can still just use the front door.
Jaxgaret 11-27-07, 02:36 AM	The rules don't allow a save from illusions until they've been interacted with, and if the Teleport were to fail due to the illusion, it would simply fail. False Destination and all. There would be no save, as the illusion simply protects that location from intruders. This is the risk adventurers take when they use unprotected magics. Call it balance. They can still just use the front door. Sure, I can see ruling that way. But you understand what I was getting at, right? The Teleport must go by what you would see if you arrived at the destination, or there is no way to judge what probability of success for the Teleport there is. And what you see when you arrive depends on your Will save. It's wonky, sure, but hey, it won't be the first time I've seen something like this in D&D.
Killer_Rabbit 11-27-07, 03:04 AM	Just dominate a bunch of trolls to paint the walls pink. Thats what I do :D
Omen_of_Peace 11-27-07, 03:46 AM	Mirage arcana is altering how the location *looks*, which is the only thing teleport cares about (that's how False Destination works in the first place). Mirage arcana is a *bigger* deal than a coat of paint, because it alters the appearance of the location *more* than a coat of paint. You must have some clear idea of the location and layout of the destination. The clearer your mental image, the more likely the teleportation works. Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible. I still don't see how MA modifies the layout of the place. Demolishing a wall, building a fountain... : those matter. It seems to me you all want to nerf Teleport, which is fine. :) Also note that it would be different for [Shadow] spells, which actually change a place (in a quasi-real way). The only example I can think of right now is Shadow Landscape in the SC.
Tectorman 11-27-07, 11:48 AM	I'm going to tentatively agree that the TPer gets a Will save against the MA - if they fail that, it's False Destination time. Seconded. As for the whole "no actual interaction means no saves", let me just say that saves can and do happen independently of the person's knowledge or even intent (anyone here smoke? did you cough the first time? if you did, then even though you did it on purpose, your body still did a Fort save). Furthermore, your mental image of a place can be defined as a lot of things. It's what the room/clearing/bridge/etc. looks like, but it can also be a known place, direction, and distance. Exampel: You think of a corridor with dirty brick walls. Someone who cleaned it and put in wooden slats (changing the condition, materials, and even dimensions (wooden slats would take up space) of the corridor) would foil the mental image. However, if you add in the known distance and direction and imagine the corridor as being 215.43 mi in such-and-such direction with a 5 degree incline down from your present location, then the reconstruction of the corridor wouldn't change that part of your mental image. Put it another way. Think the Total Perspective Vortex in the Hitchhiker's Guide series. If you imagine a room with such and such details, then there may be many places within range that match it. But if your mental image zooms out to include the "You Are Here" sign, then there won't be many (if any) false destinations you could end up at.
ArcTan 11-27-07, 03:33 PM	The Teleport goes by what you *would* see if you were there at the destination point. Otherwise, there is no way to adjudicate if the destination is false or not - and what you would see upon arrival is determined by the result of your Will save. But you don't actually see it, so you don't actually interact with it. It doesn't make much intuitive sense, but if you think about it for a minute, that's how Teleport must work. Unless someone convincingly proves otherwise, that's how I see it working. The teleport *spell* checks to see if the destination matches your mental image, but this doesn't mean you get to see it. The spell is being quasi-sentient, as spells often do (just as augury can "look" at a future situation and decide whether it's good or bad for you without letting you know any details about it whatsoever).
ArcTan 11-27-07, 03:35 PM	I still don't see how MA modifies the layout of the place. Demolishing a wall, building a fountain... : those matter. Dude, MA can make it look like none of the walls *exist*. It can turn a dungeon room into a sunlit open plain. It's much *more* of a change to the layout of a place than demolishing a wall. (You're changing the layout by putting a hologram over everything rather than physically moving things around. That's still changing it.)
ArcTan 11-27-07, 03:39 PM	Furthermore, your mental image of a place can be defined as a lot of things. It's what the room/clearing/bridge/etc. looks like, but it can also be a known place, direction, and distance. Exampel: You think of a corridor with dirty brick walls. Someone who cleaned it and put in wooden slats (changing the condition, materials, and even dimensions (wooden slats would take up space) of the corridor) would foil the mental image. However, if you add in the known distance and direction and imagine the corridor as being 215.43 mi in such-and-such direction with a 5 degree incline down from your present location, then the reconstruction of the corridor wouldn't change that part of your mental image. The text for teleport clearly says you must have some idea of the location *and* layout of your destination. If I have a perfectly accurate photograph of a place but no idea where on Earth relative to my location it is -- could be in my own basement, could be in China -- then you can't teleport there. I have to have at least a vague idea, like "underground in Paris somewhere" or "somewhere in the vicinity of that castle". (This is important -- this is why the really abusive scryporting some groups use shouldn't work.) On the other hand, if I know that the spot I want to teleport to is exactly 225 feet west of my current location, but I have *no idea what that place looks like*, then I can't teleport there either. Location AND layout. You simply cannot go somewhere unless you have at least seen it once, and the place's current appearance at least vaguely matches the visual image you had the last time you saw it.
Jaxgaret 11-27-07, 11:32 PM	But you don't actually see it, so you don't actually interact with it. The teleport *spell* checks to see if the destination matches your mental image, but this doesn't mean you get to see it. The spell is being quasi-sentient, as spells often do (just as augury can "look" at a future situation and decide whether it's good or bad for you without letting you know any details about it whatsoever). So Teleport not only scries on the location, but also reads the caster's mind as well as performing translocation duty? I just don't see a Conjuration (Teleportation) spell doing that - it would need other schools to be incorporated to do such a thing. It's much simpler to see it as the person envisioning the place they want to go, and the spell sends them there. If the location itself is obscured, perhaps due to a Mirage Arcana, the destination doesn't match the mental image, and the spell is thwarted.
Red_Wizard 11-28-07, 01:06 PM	Dude, MA can make it look like none of the walls *exist*. It can turn a dungeon room into a sunlit open plain. It's much *more* of a change to the layout of a place than demolishing a wall. (You're changing the layout by putting a hologram over everything rather than physically moving things around. That's still changing it.) Ultimately I'd rule this wouldn't work, simply because the room is the same, even if the appearance is different. For example, should they all teleport in with their eyes closed, and simply walk to where they remembered seeing a wall, the wall would still be there, even if when opening their eyes they were standing over a 200ft drop, and the sun was setting on the horizon. THEN, once in the room, they'd have to make a will save, as looking at the place they are, while remembering the place they were should spark the idea that perhaps the whole mess is an illusion. Finally should they all fail the save, have fun, as they now think they're somewhere they shouldn't be. Also, if this is the case, they might very well teleport back out deciding instead to retry for the "correct" destination. In the latter case, you have succeeded in keeping the pesky adventurers at bay. -RW
tyrecian 11-28-07, 10:50 PM	Ultimately I'd rule this wouldn't work, simply because the room is the same, even if the appearance is different. but the room appears different! Familiarity “Very familiar” is a place where you have been very often and where you feel at home. “Studied carefully” is a place you know well, either because you can currently see it, you’ve been there often, or you have used other means (such as scrying) to study the place for at least one hour. “Seen casually” is a place that you have seen more than once but with which you are not very familiar. “Viewed once” is a place that you have seen once, possibly using magic. “False destination” is a place that does not truly exist or if you are teleporting to an otherwise familiar location that no longer exists as such or has been so completely altered as to no longer be familiar to you. When traveling to a false destination, roll 1d20+80 to obtain results on the table, rather than rolling d%, since there is no real destination for you to hope to arrive at or even be off target from. Even in the SRD the spell relies heavily upon the view of the room. Even were you buffed with a true seeing, you can't see the room (assuming empty so no scrying beforehand) before you activate the teleport except in your mind's eye... That being said, if the mind's view and the place no longer jive, you dont get to go there. An illusion is making the place different, inherently it will not be familiar to you. If you remember that hotel where you were with your parents last week, it was room 213, right above the pool. Yet let us assume that it has been magically alterred to look like rubble... are you going to end up in the room? no because that rubble is not familiar to you, you missed the earthquake, whatever that happenned to change the place. I see what you are getting at, that illusions are not really change. But in this case, i think there is a clear intent for the way a thing is "viewed" and not its physical properties (although those help) to be more a basis for the end result of the spell.
Omen_of_Peace 11-29-07, 12:31 AM	I see what you are getting at, that illusions are not really change. But in this case, i think there is a clear intent for the way a thing is "viewed" and not its physical properties (although those help) to be more a basis for the end result of the spell. If we're arguing, the intent is not so clear. ;) Though I don't dispute it would work the other way around : if the caster had only seen the room while it was subject to a MA, then obviously he wouldn't know its layout. The good thing about your interpretation is that it provides a cheap protection against Teleport : instead of MA, use Permanent Image and change it often and you should be fine.
ArcTan 11-29-07, 02:38 PM	So Teleport not only scries on the location, but also reads the caster's mind as well as performing translocation duty? I just don't see a Conjuration (Teleportation) spell doing that - it would need other schools to be incorporated to do such a thing. What are you talking about? Of course it "reads the caster's mind" -- how else would the caster's mental image possibly affect how the spell works? It's much simpler to see it as the person envisioning the place they want to go, and the spell sends them there. If the location itself is obscured, perhaps due to a Mirage Arcana, the destination doesn't match the mental image, and the spell is thwarted. Yes. You send a mental image to the spell. The spell looks for a place that matches it. Given that mirage arcana makes the place not match your mental image, the spell sends you somewhere else instead. At no point do *you*, the caster, actually get to *see* the place when you're teleporting to it. Nothing anywhere says anything about that. The spell is trying to send you to a place that matches your mental image -- if that place doesn't exist, the spell sends you *somewhere else* that matches your mental image. MA makes the place not match your mental image. The only way to "see through" MA is to physically be there and interact with it. Teleport doesn't let you do that.
tyrecian 11-29-07, 02:39 PM	yes yes good point. I suppose the intent is a bit murky :D but not when ArcTan speaks.... i wholehearteadly agree and use this interpretation AT, thx.
ArcTan 11-29-07, 02:40 PM	Finally should they all fail the save, have fun, as they now think they're somewhere they shouldn't be. Also, if this is the case, they might very well teleport back out deciding instead to retry for the "correct" destination. In the latter case, you have succeeded in keeping the pesky adventurers at bay. -RW No, they wouldn't. I made this point before. If they know how teleport works, then ending up in a place that doesn't match their mental image means it *cannot* be a False Destination, since FD *always* sends you to a Similar Area. There are thus only two possibilities -- they landed Off Target (in which case the first order of business is to explore the surrounding location, meaning the illusion is likely to be defeated) or they landed On Target and they're in an illusion. There is no way teleport can actually malfunction in such a way that it sends you to an entirely wrong place that looks nothing like your mental image.
ArcTan 11-29-07, 02:44 PM	If we're arguing, the intent is not so clear. ;) Though I don't dispute it would work the other way around : if the caster had only seen the room while it was subject to a MA, then obviously he wouldn't know its layout. The good thing about your interpretation is that it provides a cheap protection against Teleport : instead of MA, use Permanent Image and change it often and you should be fine. Teleport itself is the cheap trick here, and allowing creative ways to defend against it is never a bad thing. In any case, permanent image is a bad replacement for mirage arcana, since even a level 20 caster can only make an illusion the size of a large-ish room (220 10-ft cubes), and that illusion has to be a single Figment of a single "object, creature or force" -- some DMs might rule that liberally, but I would say it couldn't really do anything but, say, fill up a room with one giant illusory green slime, which would not be enough to truly foil teleport (though it would be scary upon arrival). Permanent image isn't that "cheap", anyway. It's a 6th-level spell and it has an expensive material component. It doesn't foil *teleporting*, it just foils the uber-cheap "I'm gonna scry here once and from now on I can walk into this place like it was my own front porch". Which *is* cheap and *should* be stopped.
Red_Wizard 11-30-07, 12:30 PM	The MA would IMO still only fool your eyes. The destination would look no different as the spell would IMO see the location as it truly is. Also, there will only be one location to match your mental picture, unless another is altered to be similar, and the original destroyed. The spell doesn't alter reality, it merely blurs it to the viewer. I mean everyone is free to rule as they please, but I don't see how a simple illusion could foil the spell. Sorry for the short response, but I'm a tad busy at work, and only have a moment to respond while reading. -RW
icuall 11-30-07, 01:07 PM	I think everybody is making this way too complicated. Responding to the original poster of the thread, the illusion does not alter the location, thus "False Location" is not applicable. Further more,Teleport relies on "You must have some clear idea of the location and layout of the destination." Location is key, not how the location looks or the extent of it appearing different. In reality, it has not changed with an illusion spell. The party, teleporting back knows the true location and layout, so the spell should succeed. They might think they teleported to an Off Target location, but that is a different issue based on their perception of the illusion spell.
Aricandor 11-30-07, 02:01 PM	I'm tempted to put focus on the "layout and location" part here. And beyond getting from the caster's mind the "mental image", I'm extremely reluctant to let teleport be at all "intelligent". It's not equipped with true seeing or anything such, and thusly I'd rule that an illusion foils the "layout" knowledge requirement of the spell. Mostly because I think teleportation in general needs stronger limits on it than it formally has. As it's being debated with good points on both sides, the bottom line would probably be: "DM's call"
ArcTan 11-30-07, 02:46 PM	The MA would IMO still only fool your eyes. The destination would look no different as the spell would IMO see the location as it truly is. The location "truly is" unrecognizable, though. Illusions are "unreal" in that they aren't *solid*, but they're still real *things* that are really there, just as much as if I blanketed the place with a hologram or a blinding white light. Also, there will only be one location to match your mental picture, unless another is altered to be similar, and the original destroyed. Wait, whoa, what? Are people unaware of the "False Destination" and "Similar Area" rules in teleport? It *specifically says* that if the original location no longer looks like your mental image, the spell sends you to a different location that sort of looks like your mental image. The spell doesn't alter reality, it merely blurs it to the viewer. It doesn't "blur" anything -- it *replaces* the normal view of the area with a completely different view. That's the *point* of mirage arcana.
ArcTan 11-30-07, 02:47 PM	I think everybody is making this way too complicated. Responding to the original poster of the thread, the illusion does not alter the location, thus "False Location" is not applicable. Further more,Teleport relies on "You must have some clear idea of the location and layout of the destination." Location is key, not how the location looks or the extent of it appearing different. No, it's NOT. "Location AND layout". Location is one half of it -- and the other half is LAYOUT, i.e. how the destination looks. If you have exact coordinates for the destination but no idea how it might currently look at the time, then you're screwed.
Dunamin 11-30-07, 04:32 PM	The MA would IMO still only fool your eyes. The destination would look no different as the spell would IMO see the location as it truly is. Also, there will only be one location to match your mental picture, unless another is altered to be similar, and the original destroyed. The spell doesn't alter reality, it merely blurs it to the viewer. I mean everyone is free to rule as they please, but I don't see how a simple illusion could foil the spell. Sorry for the short response, but I'm a tad busy at work, and only have a moment to respond while reading. -RW That is certainly not true. Mirage Arcane can completely change your perception of feeling (tactile sensation), sight (visual sensation), hearing (audible sensation), and smell (olfactory sensation). The only thing it leaves out is your sense of taste, so its hardly a "simple illusion" that "only fools your eyes". Where does the simple part come in, in relation to teleport, anyway? Both spells are at the same level.
ArcTan 11-30-07, 05:47 PM	Yes. Mirage arcana can actually put a bench somewhere where there is no bench, a bench solid enough to sit on. It can't take a wall *away* where a wall exists, but it can cover it in gargoyles it didn't have before, make it part of a much bigger wall when it was originally just a small piece of a wall, etc. It can add a whole building to a place where there was no building before. Sure, it's "illusory", it vanishes under dispel magic, and someone who successfully makes a Will save to disbelieve can walk freely through the illusory walls and hide inside them. But in terms of "really altering the location", you don't get much better Illusion spells.
Tectorman 12-01-07, 01:10 AM	Let me try one more time, 'cause I really think that the mixup is whether or not you consider a locale's location as part of its layout (more accurately, the two are two parts of the same whole, a mental image). A wizards wants to teleport to a specific tombstone in a graveyard. This graveyard is fashioned like our modern day military graveyards (you know, endless and identical rows of cross-shaped tombstones). Well, when his mental image is limited to just the configuration of the target area itself (the cross-shaped tombstone), then there are thousands of similar locales that would result from the same mental image. If he also reminds himself that it's facing a tall oak tree (supposing there's more than one, by the way), then his list of possible false destinations just got shortened. If he then imagines the whole of the graveyard (as seen from a bird's-eye-view, garnered either because he has a good sense of spatial relationships and can easily imagine such things or because he used fly at some previous time to actually see it that way) and puts a little "destination" arrow in his imagination at the exact location of the tombstone, then there's only one possible destination that can be garnered from such a mental image: the correct destination. If there's more than one such graveyard within range of his spell, then all he'd have to do is imagine the graveyard in relation to some fixed landform or building. Then someone (evil) goes and defaces the tombstone. Well, if his mental image is sufficiently large and encompassing, then how much of his mental image is now erroneous/out of date?
Omen_of_Peace 12-01-07, 06:43 AM	Teleport itself is the cheap trick here, and allowing creative ways to defend against it is never a bad thing. Perhaps, but I still wouldn't use MA for that. In any case, permanent image is a bad replacement for mirage arcana, since even a level 20 caster can only make an illusion the size of a large-ish room (220 10-ft cubes), and that illusion has to be a single Figment of a single "object, creature or force" -- some DMs might rule that liberally, but I would say it couldn't really do anything but, say, fill up a room with one giant illusory green slime, which would not be enough to truly foil teleport (though it would be scary upon arrival). Permanent image isn't that "cheap", anyway. It's a 6th-level spell and it has an expensive material component. It doesn't foil *teleporting*, it just foils the uber-cheap "I'm gonna scry here once and from now on I can walk into this place like it was my own front porch". Which *is* cheap and *should* be stopped. Agreed, "cheap" isn't the right qualification. I was assuming a caster wanting to protect more than one room (high level characters won't be happy in a studio apartment ;)) and do so without having to waste slots every day or so. Then he can just add an illusory wall cutting the room in two with PI - by your definition, it changes the layout and foils Teleport, correct ? (if one's not enough, make it add more walls) Yes. Mirage arcana can actually put a bench somewhere where there is no bench, a bench solid enough to sit on. Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Not really - a creature failing the save may convince itself that the bench supports its weight... or may fall through the illusory bench, depending on the DM (I think I'd go with the latter - the former seems like it would be a mind-affecting effect, but it hasn't really come up yet !). I've said it before : only Shadow spells are quasi-real.
ArcTan 12-01-07, 12:10 PM	Let me try one more time, 'cause I really think that the mixup is whether or not you consider a locale's location as part of its layout (more accurately, the two are two parts of the same whole, a mental image). A wizards wants to teleport to a specific tombstone in a graveyard. This graveyard is fashioned like our modern day military graveyards (you know, endless and identical rows of cross-shaped tombstones). Well, when his mental image is limited to just the configuration of the target area itself (the cross-shaped tombstone), then there are thousands of similar locales that would result from the same mental image. If he also reminds himself that it's facing a tall oak tree (supposing there's more than one, by the way), then his list of possible false destinations just got shortened. If he then imagines the whole of the graveyard (as seen from a bird's-eye-view, garnered either because he has a good sense of spatial relationships and can easily imagine such things or because he used fly at some previous time to actually see it that way) and puts a little "destination" arrow in his imagination at the exact location of the tombstone, then there's only one possible destination that can be garnered from such a mental image: the correct destination. If there's more than one such graveyard within range of his spell, then all he'd have to do is imagine the graveyard in relation to some fixed landform or building. Then someone (evil) goes and defaces the tombstone. Well, if his mental image is sufficiently large and encompassing, then how much of his mental image is now erroneous/out of date? You do realize that having a highly accurate mental image doesn't make you *immune* to False Destination, right? Teleport *always* sends you *somewhere* after you cast it. Even if you have an incredibly detailed understanding of the target -- even if it's, say, your own bedroom, which you know the exact geographic location of -- if I burn down your bedroom and leave nothing but a pile of smoking ashes, teleport *will not* take you to your bedroom. It will take you to some place that *inaccurately* matches your mental image but is in some way more similar to your mental image than a pile of smoking ashes. Again, *you're* the one making this too complicated. Teleport requires that you have an accurate mental image of the place. It requires that you "recognize" the place. If the place is unrecognizable, then you can't go there. If you'd still recognize the tombstone even after it had been defaced, then teleport still works. How much "familiarity" you lose on the little chart depends on how badly the place has been defaced. But the standard is still clearly the appearance of the location (hence all the stuff about "seen once" vs. "very familiar"). An exact set of geographic coordinates doesn't do you that much good. There was clearly never any intention of *removing* the requirement for visual recognition of the destination or removing the possibility of destroying or altering the destination beyond recognition to prevent teleportation, even if the caster has a good GPS system. If I covered the entire area of that graveyard with molten lava, you wouldn't recognize it upon seeing it again. You might eventually *figure out* that it was in the same geographic location as the place you saw before, but that's not the same as "recognition", and teleport *would* give you an FD at that point (Similar Area, different location -- possibly a similar graveyard on the other side of the planet, and one that would immediately tip you off that you had been FD'd).
ArcTan 12-01-07, 12:14 PM	Agreed, "cheap" isn't the right qualification. I was assuming a caster wanting to protect more than one room (high level characters won't be happy in a studio apartment ;)) and do so without having to waste slots every day or so. Then he can just add an illusory wall cutting the room in two with PI - by your definition, it changes the layout and foils Teleport, correct ? (if one's not enough, make it add more walls) Sure. One could also do this the mundane way with stone shape or by pouring huge piles of dirt everywhere until the place was unrecognizable. (Notice that the standard for "unrecognizable" goes up and down depending on how familiar the person originally was with the place. I'd probably still recognize my own room no matter what you did to it short of burning it down, but if I've seen a place once in a photograph, it wouldn't take much work to alter it until I didn't recognize it anymore.) Not really - a creature failing the save may convince itself that the bench supports its weight... or may fall through the illusory bench, depending on the DM (I think I'd go with the latter - the former seems like it would be a mind-affecting effect, but it hasn't really come up yet !). Enh. Upon reflection, I'd agree with the latter, too -- that tactile illusions can make you feel like there's a surface there but can't actually support weight. It's tough because this is one of the few examples of tactile illusions in the core rules. I've said it before : only Shadow spells are quasi-real. Only Shadow spells are made of shadowstuff that can have certain real effects. But all illusions are "real" in the sense that they're really there, made of real magic, and really alter your real perceptions. (Well, not quite -- Phantasms are less real than Figments and Glamers precisely because Phantasms only exist inside your mind, while Figments and Glamers exist in physical space, as magical "holograms".)
groveborn 12-01-07, 07:56 PM	From the SRD This spell functions like hallucinatory terrain, except that it enables you to make any area appear to be something other than it is. The illusion includes audible, visual, tactile, and olfactory elements. Unlike hallucinatory terrain, the spell can alter the appearance of structures (or add them where none are present). Still, it can't disguise, conceal, or add creatures (though creatures within the area might hide themselves within the illusion just as they can hide themselves within a real location). Bolding is mine. The terrain is altered in every way you designate *except* that it is possible to walk right through it. The real, unchanged area is still present, but it is filled with an entirely different looking structure. This should foil teleports for that reason. Keep in mind it's concentration +1 hour/level, so it'll disapear quickly.
Zathress 12-01-07, 09:05 PM	If the evil warlord redecorates his castle with new carpeting does that prevent old visitors from teleporting in? What if theres 25% more or less dust? Thats the same logic as casting an illusion spell to change the appearance of the area and expecting to to foil the teleportations of previous visitors. Now with mirage arcana up the party may teleport in and ASSUME they are not in the lair but ended up somewhere else. Which can be just as much fun. For an illusion spell to fool teleportation you need to put up the illusion before they party sees the location. If the party say scrys into the evil guys lair and he has illusion spells up around the place and the party then attempts to use that image for there teleportation the spell would fail because the place they envision doesn't actually exist. Here's better reasoning I want to teleport into a room. Sense I have been in that room everything in it has been covered in sheets. The actually place I envision and layout is still there it is simple covered up. The big harp is that teleport isn't smart enough to recognize the area with the illusions up. Well I say the spell isn't even smart enough to recognize any illusion spell is in place to begin with. Mirage Arcana and other such spells CAN NOT change the location or layout of the area no matter how much you whine the illusion seams real. They simply appear different if you happen to be viewing the area.
ArcTan 12-01-07, 09:19 PM	If the evil warlord redecorates his castle does that prevent old visitors from teleporting in? What if theres 25% more or less dust? It depends on the degree to which he redecorates, and how familiar the teleporter is with the castle in the first place. For someone who lived in the castle, blowing it up may be the only way to make it totally unrecognizable. For someone who's only seen it once, changing all the furniture and painting the walls pink may well make it unrecognizable. Thats the same logic as casting an illusion spell to change the appearance of the area and expecting to to foil the teleportations of previous visitors. Er, the spell specifically says you have to have a matching mental image. If the castle now looks, sounds, smells and feels like a bug-infested swamp, then how can you possibly claim the mental image matches? Now with mirage arcana up the party may teleport in and ASSUME they are not in the lair but ended up somewhere else. Which can be just as much fun. Again, this is BS. No one would assume that a teleportation spell *randomly* sent them into a totally different location. For an illusion spell to fool teleportation you need to put up the illusion before they party sees the location. If the party say scrys into the evil guys lair and he has illusion spells up around the place and the party then attempts to use that image for there teleportation the spell would fail because the place they envision doesn't actually exist. And if you change the appearance of the location *after* they see it, then the place they envision *equally* doesn't exist.
Zathress 12-01-07, 10:16 PM	FACT: Illusion spells (except for shadow spells) don't change the location they simply make it appear different to any one perceiving it. You can't perceive the illusion until your actually in range to interact with it. This is why illusion spells have will saves. Mirage Arcana simply covers the area you envision it still exists. You can not logically deny it still exists. Its like saying I turn off the lights now the room looks different so they can't teleport in. Mirage Arcana will make the location and lay out appear and feel different. But the real location still exists it is simply under the sheet. There are spells that can redirect teleportation magic so its perfectly reasonable that the PC's could teleport into a room thats been alternated by illusionary magic and then assume they've some how arrived off target. I used that trick once, just once and now my party never attempts to teleport into the enemy lair assuming that the trap is always present. (it has never been present after that 1st time).
Tovec 12-03-07, 11:18 PM	Dunamin, I'd have to say no. Mirage arcana is not altering the place in any way. Even altering the construction of the place isn't changing the location. Claiming that you can foil teleporting by moving around the furnature or painting the walls in a new color is pretty weak. Same as one can't claim that the presence or absence of creatures, objects, etc. changes the "location". "See... there is a spider in the corner... it isn't the same place you last saw." If the presence of creatures, objects, furnature, paint, etc. can't cause it to fail, then I'm certainly not going to allow an illusion to foil it. The teleport should work. However, the PCs will obviously find themselves in what they think is the wrong place. If they start interacting with the place... they might realize it is an illusion. Otherwise, they might assume that the teleport failed -- possibly teleporting back or starting to explore it as if they had landed in the wrong place. Assuming they are using the teleport spell to get into the dungeon I would say it is a false destination. The spell is looking for specific criteria, the clearer the picture in the mind's eye the closer to the destination. Considering the layout would have changed and the spell has no sort of scrying to determine falsehoods I would have to say that it goes wrong and puts them in the closest relating area. I personally wouldn't be as mean to say that they are teleported miles off course but I would plop them down somewhere in the dungeon that looks closest to what they are aiming for. Its true that the spider may have not been there but the colours of the walls and furniture in the room do matter. If there are 2 rooms in a dungeon, the room they are aiming for is yellow walls with a red rug and two chairs and the other is green walls, no rug and two chairs; then they paint so that the second room now has yellow walls and the first room has green walls, and the group is aiming for room 2, they would end up in room 1. Even if the rug is still in the room because it is the closest thing that they could aim for within range. As a DM you can say whatever you want, I agree with you that you should have some basis on how it works. Re-read the teleportation spell and interpret how you will. If you think it works then it works, if you think it doesn't then it doesn't.
Omen_of_Peace 12-03-07, 11:55 PM	Sure. One could also do this the mundane way with stone shape or by pouring huge piles of dirt everywhere until the place was unrecognizable. (Notice that the standard for "unrecognizable" goes up and down depending on how familiar the person originally was with the place. I'd probably still recognize my own room no matter what you did to it short of burning it down, but if I've seen a place once in a photograph, it wouldn't take much work to alter it until I didn't recognize it anymore.) Sure, the point was to keep the lair a place the BBEG can live in. Only Shadow spells are made of shadowstuff that can have certain real effects. But all illusions are "real" in the sense that they're really there, made of real magic, and really alter your real perceptions. (Well, not quite -- Phantasms are less real than Figments and Glamers precisely because Phantasms only exist inside your mind, while Figments and Glamers exist in physical space, as magical "holograms".) Agreed. "real", not real. Altering your real perceptions, not real reality. Anyway, let's just really agree to disagree. ;)
jaelis 12-04-07, 12:17 AM	Hmm. How would a blind character fits into this? - Could a blind character gain familiarity with a room by exploring it by touch, and then teleport back? I'd say sure. - Could a seeing character become familiar with a room, and then teleport back to it after he was blinded? That seems reasonable to me. - If the room were altered in the mean time, would the teleport fail? I would say yes. By that logic, it's not the character's perceptions that matter. So there shouldn't be a save or anything. Whether mirage arcana would foil it or not really depends on whether you think the teleport spell itself would interact with the illusion spell. I think that would have to be a DM call, but based on the "Areas of strong physical or magical energy may make teleportation more hazardous or even impossible" line, I'd probably rule that the illusion would work. --- Edit- Another question: If you think mirage arcana would stop the teleportation, what would happen if the character had true seeing active?
Tectorman 12-04-07, 12:47 PM	Good point. Who says that a person's visualization is actually visual? Say they imagine a room with ____ layout in terms of how it feels and how it would look, rather than how it presently looks (Almost as if you superimposed the phrase "However it looks" over the physical layout of the room). 'Cause things look different at night than at day and the difference between night and day doesn't affect teleport. But my question is this: how accurate is teleport? When a person says "I teleport to the lobby of the main inn at Orosun Par", assuming they've worked there for many years and were there yesterday (very familiar and no changes) and no illusions present, where would they end up? I ask because I'm thinking it's dependent on the visualization. If the person imagines the lobby from the perspective of the entrance, do they teleport and end up at the entrance? And if they change the mental image to where they're looking at the lobby from the base of the stairs, do they teleport in there? How's that dealt with?
Red_Wizard 12-04-07, 01:38 PM	That is certainly not true. Mirage Arcane can completely change your perception of feeling (tactile sensation), sight (visual sensation), hearing (audible sensation), and smell (olfactory sensation). The only thing it leaves out is your sense of taste, so its hardly a "simple illusion" that "only fools your eyes". Where does the simple part come in, in relation to teleport, anyway? Both spells are at the same level. I used the term Simple illusion, as it is in fact false. I do not imply the spell is of lower level, only that rather than physically change the layout, you are simply throwing a sheet over it so to speak. Mirage Arcana simply covers the area you envision it still exists. You can not logically deny it still exists. Its like saying I turn off the lights now the room looks different so they can't teleport in. This is what I was getting at. Though I will also use the example of Bed sheets. If we are letting an illusion foil teleport, why not white sheets strewn about the place. Some on the walls, others hanging from the ceiling. Perhaps a couple more over the Stalagmites, and effectively the place is different. To me, such logic seems simplistic, and silly, but as DM's you're welcome, as I said, to rule any way you choose. I still hold to the thought that while it wouldn't foil the Teleport, it would be interesting to see the response the players give to a drastically changed destination. Is it not just as likely they will assume that Teleport sent them off course, and thus leave anyway? And what of the Will save. If the spell is not the one governing the searching of the destination, then it must therefore be the caster. If that is the case, by the RAW, I'd argue they were interacting, and thus could disbelieve before arriving. -RW
PhaedrusXY 12-04-07, 01:47 PM	Mirage Arcana doesn't change the actual area. So if they were actually at a location, Teleported away, and the aboleth put a Mirage Arcana over it, and then they teleported back, the Mirage Arcana would in no way foil the teleport. They're telporting back to the exact same area, which has not actually changed. It would look different, and indeed they might even believe their teleport spell had been messed up somehow, and teleport away again, or something. But they'd still arrive just fine. There are ways that Mirage Arcana could screw up a teleport, but this isn't one of them. If they scried on an area that is under Mirage Arcana and then tried to teleport to the illusionary image, that would obviously be a false destination. Similiarly, if the area was already under the effects of a Mirage Arcana when they were there the first time, and they tried to teleport back to it using the illusion as their destination, that would be a "false destination".
ArcTan 12-04-07, 09:12 PM	I This is what I was getting at. Though I will also use the example of Bed sheets. If we are letting an illusion foil teleport, why not white sheets strewn about the place. Some on the walls, others hanging from the ceiling. Perhaps a couple more over the Stalagmites, and effectively the place is different. The question of "How much change is sufficient change?" isn't an abstract, theoretical question dependent on throwing around all this crap about whether a bedsheet counts as a "real" change or whether it has to be made out of wood or sheet metal to be a "real" change or any of that crap. The question is a very simple one: DO YOU STILL RECOGNIZE THE PLACE? If you put bedsheets all over a place I knew very, very well, like my own home, there's a good chance I'd still recognize it. If you put bedsheets all over, say, the living room of the house of a friend I rarely visit, then yes, it might become unrecognizable. And whether I *recognize* it is the *only* important thing for whether teleport works, since all the teleport spell is doing is groping around for a place that matches my mental image. Mirage arcana is an illusion so thoroughgoing it makes the place almost impossible to recognize.
ArcTan 12-04-07, 09:13 PM	Mirage Arcana doesn't change the actual area. So if they were actually at a location, Teleported away, and the aboleth put a Mirage Arcana over it, and then they teleported back, the Mirage Arcana would in no way foil the teleport. They're telporting back to the exact same area, which has not actually changed. It would look different, and indeed they might even believe their teleport spell had been messed up somehow, and teleport away again, or something. But they'd still arrive just fine. ...Except that whether teleport works is based ENTIRELY on how a place looks.
jaelis 12-04-07, 10:38 PM	So ArcTan, how would you rule teleporation for a blind character then? Unless you want to say they can't use the spell at all, it seems like you have to conclude that there is more than just visual perception going on. And what if the teleporting character has true seeing? Would that overcome the mirage effect? Wouldn't that be a little strange, since he's not actually there to see the illusion in the first place? Not that I know the answer. I'm just not sure you can say it's all about visual appearance.
PhaedrusXY 12-05-07, 12:06 AM	...Except that whether teleport works is based ENTIRELY on how a place looks.The ACTUAL PLACE still looks exactly the same, though. The ILLUSION is what looks different. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. Someone with True Seeing would see the actual place still there, exactly as it was before. Since they are teleporting to the ACTUAL PLACE, instead of the Illusion, their teleport does not fail. If they tried to teleport to the Illusion, it would, because that's not a real place.
ArcTan 12-05-07, 12:06 AM	Same basic question. "Would I recognize the place?" If his mental image isn't based on sight but on another sense, then it's that sense that matters. If a blind character gets around solely by touch, then a visual illusion wouldn't fool him (though a tactile illusion would). A hypothetical character who, like a dog or a cat, navigated solely by smell could be totally disoriented by making a place smell completely different while looking the same. It's still simple -- it boils down to "Would you recognize it?"
groveborn 12-05-07, 04:27 AM	Same basic question. "Would I recognize the place?" If his mental image isn't based on sight but on another sense, then it's that sense that matters. If a blind character gets around solely by touch, then a visual illusion wouldn't fool him (though a tactile illusion would). A hypothetical character who, like a dog or a cat, navigated solely by smell could be totally disoriented by making a place smell completely different while looking the same. It's still simple -- it boils down to "Would you recognize it?" I'll call you on this one. If a blind person was familiar enough with a place to gain a mental image, then that mental image is sufficient to teleport. If that place becomes different visually, then teleport will fail to recognize it. For that dog, a smelly room doesn't change for teleport, just that dog. Mental images are still visual in effect, and should be considered such. This argument is entirely DM's call. There is enough support on both sides that both can be called right.
ToastedAmphibian 12-07-07, 10:35 PM	False destination” is a place that does not truly exist or if you are teleporting to an otherwise familiar location that no longer exists as such or has been so completely altered as to no longer be familiar to you. This spell functions like hallucinatory terrain, except that it enables you to make any area appear to be something other than it is. Appear: to have an outward aspect : seem Seem: to give the impression of being Mirage makes its APEAR to be deffrent, it dosnt change what it IS. It makes it SEEM to be diffrent, in that it gives the IMPRESSION that it is really changed, but it dosnt really exist, it only SEEMS LIKE IT EXISTS (ITS NOT EFFING REAL!) Alter: to become different Mirage gives the IMPRESSION of it BECOMING diffrent Mirage makes it SEEM to have been ALTERED Acordign to miarm webster these two sentences have THE SAME MEANING Ergo, the room SEEMs to have been altered, meaning that the room HAS NOT actually been alterd, thus it cannot have been suficently altered for ANY purpose that DEPENDS on it being altered. (BECAUSE YOU DIDNT ALTER IT) Thus the location they are thinking of "Still exists" and has not "Been Altered" so "False Location" is completly unwarranted. And besides, do you really want to rule that spells are fooled by illusions? DM: Roll a reflex save Player: Why? DM: A fireball just got cast on the square next to you. Player: So what? DM: Its an area affect, so you have to make the save. Player: Why? The fireball cant see me. I appear to not be there to the fireball, so acording to the fireballs reality I dont exist and thus it cant hurt me. DM: huh?
Omen_of_Peace 12-07-07, 11:12 PM	This argument is entirely DM's call. There is enough support on both sides that both can be called right. Agreed. Let's just leave it at that. I love illusions, but they require so many adjudications...
ArcTan 12-08-07, 12:01 AM	And besides, do you really want to rule that spells are fooled by illusions? Not all spells. Spells that explicitly rely on matching the *appearance* of a location to a *mental image* of the location, yes.
Tectorman 12-11-07, 01:16 PM	Okay, contrary to what I was saying earlier, I think the situation would end up resolving like so: A wizard casts teleport with a specific place in mind in a certain direction. The layout of the specific place has been changed via a spell. So what we have to ask is whether teleport is scrying on the place or not. I'm thinking that it would, but as a nonentity (the wizard isn't scrying on the place using the spell, the spell is via it's normal operation). It doesn't make any communication to the wizard as to its findings, the spell's just scrying in order to carry itself out. Then we must ask how the spell is changing the layout. Is it a mind-affecting effect (which would require a mind to function, something a nonentity spell wouldn't have) or does it actually generate the change in reality regardless of whether someone's there to believe it or disbelieve it? Put another way: If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around, does anyone hear it? No. If a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around, does it make a sound? Yes. The difference between the two is that one is dependent on an entity being present, the other is not (dependent). So if teleport is being used to transport to a destination whose familiarity is being changed by a mind-affecting effect, it would not be affected (at least, not entirely). A mind-affecting effect requires a mind to take effect. If there's no mind present (Teleport doesn't actually have a mind), then the spell is nothing more than unrealized magical energy. At most, this would equate to being an area of strong physical or magical energy and make the spell difficult or impossible. (Which is not the same as making a place less familiar by not allowing the mental image and the actual layout to be the same.) But Mirage Arcana does not work that way. It is an Illusion spell, meaning that it works either by deceiving the senses or the mind of others. Furthermore, it's a Glamer subtype spell, meaning it specifically works on the subject's senses. It's not mind-dependent, thus it will work whether teleport is looking at it or if a real person is looking at it. It's not unrealized magical energy, thus it's already in effect and present in reality. Teleport would see the effect of the spell and the actual layout and if the two don't coincide, the spell would not work. Please note: process of elimination means that if there's no other destination in spell range that remotely matches the mental image and if the intended destination still matches (if only in location) then you're still not going to end up anywhere else but where you meant to (or the spell will fail via strong magical energy already present). Furthermore, Mirage Arcana affects an area's visible, audible, tactile, and olfactory qualities, but I'm thinking that they must all be addressed in the casting of the spell. If the caster changed the sights and sounds, but left the smells and textures as is, then the familiarity of the place hasn't been completely changed.
Tsuul 12-11-07, 01:42 PM	At best this may make the party think that teleport has failed, and they'll try again. If the aboleth knows where the party is going to come in, why not build a trap?
Voran 12-12-07, 12:29 AM	I would say yes unless using greater teleport. Yes because teleport relies on your 'minds eye' picture matching reality. Which is why on a mishap, there's a chance you end up somewhere that has the same look/theme as your 'minds eye' picture but can be in a completely different place. Basically you use a global google image search engine, and it pops up a buncha images. The more familiar the place, the more likely its the first one and the correct one, in this case, if the layout of the setting has changed, the search engine skips it (and probably takes you to porn, cause that's what search engines do) and you might end up in a wall, or a different location.
ArcTan 12-12-07, 12:37 AM	Greater teleport isn't fundamentally different from teleport. It just has no "False Destination" possibility, instead always either working or not working. It still needs a "reliable description" to function, and if the description you're using has been made unreliable or false, it can still be stopped.
Dunamin 12-12-07, 12:30 PM	If the aboleth knows where the party is going to come in, why not build a trap? It has neither time, nor tools, nor competence to do so (same for its slaves).
Finarin Panjoro 12-12-07, 02:36 PM	I think I have to agree with Phaedrus XY. Mirage Arcana would definitely work as a pre-emptive defense (changing the location before the players saw it thus preventing them from becoming remotely familiar with it either by visiting or scrying), but not as a foil to return trips once they've been to the area. The Mirage is not actually altering the location, only the location's appearance. If the caster's mental image matches the actual location's features (disguised or not) then teleport should work. Note that the references to sight in the spell all refer to how you determine the caster's level of familiarity in the first place. IF he's never seen the real location due to a pre-existing Mirage Arcana then he has no familiarity and is trying to port to a non-existent destination, but there's no evidence that the spell itself looks at the area before porting them there.