Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Hermes_Trismegistus Apr 13, 2015 11:25:47	So, I posted the following queries in the Wizards Guide thread, but the fact that nobody responded clued me to the fact that I'd posted them in the wrong place ... sorry. Anyway, here's my question:   My questions are about Phantasmal Force. It seems like a great spell (and it is rated highly in the Guide to Wizardry). I like the fact that it is one of the few Int save spells and it seems like it would be great against animals and other low intelligence foes. I have some questions, however, about how the spell continues from round to round.   If you make it appear as a creature that can attack, can the target simply walk away from it? In other words, are you able to "move" the phantasmal force to follow the target (as part of your concentration), or does it simply "follow" the target until the target makes its Intelligence (investigation) save? And, related, would attacking the phantasmal creature count as "interacting" with it, allowing an Intelligence (Investigation) check against the spell? Or, would it need to specifically be trying to "investigate" the phantasmal creature as an action in order to get to make a new save?   Also, if we follow the example provided with the rating in the Wizardry Guide of using the spell to create a phantasmal "web" to ensnare an ogre, would the ogre be unable to move out of its square? If it can move, would it simply rationalize this successful movement in its mind and still think it was "stuck" and suffocating in the web (and still take the psychic damage)? Would trying to move count as "interacting" with the phantasm and allow an Intelligence (Investigation) check against the spell? Or, again, would it need to be specifically "investigating" the phantasm to get a new save?   Thanks.   Hermes Trismegistus
#2 Stormborn20 Apr 13, 2015 11:44:41	The spell doesn't say the phantasm can move, so I would say it doesn't move.
#3 Hamsterkill Apr 13, 2015 11:55:23	I have a feeling all of these questions were meant to be up to DM discretion.
#4 WizardV Apr 13, 2015 14:18:44	My experience using this spell in AL is that, as with all illusions, the complexity of behavior can actually be pretty high. Having the illusory creature follow and harass a foe is well within what I usually get away with. Remember, the target of the spell is the creature, not a space. The illusion exists in the mind of the target, it is not a glamour like minor illusion, limited to a zone at the original time of casting. The only space limitation is the 10 foot cube size of the phantasm. DM's are generally pretty permissive about the illusions behaving intelligently so as to prevent me from having to give a 5 minute programmer-esq speech describing the behavior of the illusion in full. They are less permissive in actually forcing the creature to act in a way I want, or even that I find believable in reaction to the illusion.   Trying to influence NPC behavior such as by having the target attack the illusion not reliable in AL DM's. If the DM does 'attack' your illusion often what this means mechanically is that it spent its action on the intelligence investigation check. I've had bandits ignore the phantom dog that was literally biting their nuts to attack me instead. I've had an NPC that was previously deathly afraid of fire walk through my phantom fire wall to attack me. At this point I generally go with a simpler approach to avoid table arguments.   When pushed by argument DM's will usually allow a 1d6 damage and a condition if you can make it intuitive to the DM with your description. I've managed to impose the blindness, deafness, and poisoned conditions. Usually just 1d6 damage and blindness is what I go for. Great for fighting beasts and ogres and such which are really just attack rolls on an HP bar.
#5 Barky Apr 13, 2015 17:24:28	I don't have any problems with any of the scenarios the OP posted. The target treats the phantasm as real, so whatever is appropriate for the creature to do in reaction to a real "thing" is acceptable to do vs. a phantasm. Just remember concentration is required, and it only lasts a minute.
#6 Undrhil Apr 13, 2015 20:05:46	Phantasmal Force makes a great gelatinous cube. ;)
#7 Drunemeton Apr 13, 2015 20:26:45	Hermes_Trismegistus wrote:
#8 Byakugan01 Apr 14, 2015 0:38:28	I really hate the way this spell is described. Pretty much all of the illusion spells have poorly defined boundaries.    Same goes for the 'upgraded' version phantasmal killer.    I hope nobody in my game decides to go the illusion route.  I'll be the bad DM.
#9 Macv12 Apr 14, 2015 7:37:45	Personally, my baseline for that spell is "makes target waste their action." I don't think a phantasmal web would literally hold a struggling enemy in place. It could certainly feel very real and compel them to flail around "tearing" invisible webs off them...but it wouldn't stop them from making a melee attack (maybe at disadvantage) at someone in reach. If it's an ogre, I'd say they trust their power to escape the webs, and aren't much impeded, so you'll have to think of a better illusion. (And the DM should tell the player this before the commit to casting that spell thinking it will work). I think the spell's basically doing what it's meant to if it stops the target from making a useful action.   I prefer not to have any of its effects treated as physically imposing by the target, because that opens the way for all sorts of nuttiness. Like unbreakable admantium boxes filled with acid. I think the best use I've found for a physically real phantasm is an octopus that immobilizes the target in its tentacles, blinds all their senses, and crushes the breath out of them, giving them CON-modifier rounds before they drop to 0 HP.   Phantasmal Force already has the advantage of being very hard for the enemy to see through, since they must spend at least one action dispelling it no matter what (assuming they failed their initial save). It's especially great for subtle uses out of combat, where targets are less likely to ever even attempt to investigate. It doesn't also need to be a cheap Hold Monster on top of that.   And yeah, I generally count any action spent interacting with the phantasm (such as an attack) as an Investigation check. Try casting the spell on a player and not telling them what it is; see how long it takes before they say "I use my action to poke, prod, and observe to see if the thing is real." Especially if you describe everything as their characters perceive it: landed attacks feel and look like hits; the phantasm makes attacks that happen to be weak; spells seem to have whatever effect they should; it looks, sounds, smells, and moves like it should; and so on. They're probably going to keep using real actions - attacks, etc. - as their method of "investigation," just in case it's not an illusion. Monsters should be the same. They'll never whip out a pipe and muse at it for a turn. Attacking, pushing, struggling against, or otherwise interacting with the thing is their attempt to see if it's real.   Again, only counts for actions, and only those which did nothing useful (so doesn't apply if they cast fireball on the party, including the phantasm), and only direct interaction (doesn't apply if they spent the action Disengaging to escape the phantasm). This rewards the caster more for making an illusion that enemies don't even want to interact with, like a bomb, or a pit fiend, or a wall.   Oh, and I'd let the phantasm follow the target. The spell targets a creature, not a point, and it specifies a size, not an area of effect. I see no reason why it couldn't move as necessary. Making it stationary greatly limits the phantasms that will be useful, anyway.   This is just to offer an opinion on how it could be done, for reference. I don't consider it "more RAW" than other posts.
(Reply to #9) Undrhil	Macv12 wrote:
#11 WizardV Apr 14, 2015 22:41:14	Undrhil wrote:
(Reply to #10) Macv12	Undrhil wrote:
(Reply to #7) Hermes_Trismegistus	Drunemeton wrote:
#14 Hermes_Trismegistus Apr 15, 2015 10:31:21	Thanks for all of the comments guys. This discussion will really help. I'm not looking to abuse the spell, I just want to have some information to present to my DM about the range of ways in which other DMs have handled it, so that we can agree as to how it will work. I can see how some DMs might want to really crack down on the interpretation of this spell, but you've all provided reasonable ways in which to interpret the spell that still makes it fairly powerful, but not out of control.