what you see is not what you get, Illusions in combat Options

[Brazila]

I am playing a mage in our game and plan on doing something kind of new with some illusions. I am going to quicken an invisibility to myself and then put a trid phantasm in a sustaining focus. That way I can still appear to be there when it is helpful to me. I was wondering how this would work during combat.

Assuming people don't resist either spell, then they will see the form of me that I control with my phantasm. So if I misplace this compared to my true location, they would be firing at nothing. This also got me to thinking about invisibility. What would the chance be of getting hit by random fire? And if there was a spellcaster there, but not astrally active, then would his spells be able to hit me, since he didn't have a true LOS?

[FrostyNSO]

Oh I'm sure your GM is going to LOVE this...

[Brazila]

I do what I can...

Besides, he has played under me in the past and he is one of the most difficult players I have ever had. He constantly pushed the boundries, but made the game more fun, so I am hoping to do the same for him.

[JaronK]

I think it's extreamly clever. However, I imagine Trid Phantasm as always staying in the same general area... not able to walk about with you. If it is, though, it should work.

JaronK

[Cold-Dragon]

If I remember correctly, Trid phantasm is manually controlled, you could direct it, but the moment you didn't it would simply continue with the last orders (which will either do a loop or stop or go on until it goes outside your range). You can certainly try, but eventually a smart person is going to realize how oddly you're acting, and react accordingly.

well, at the least, it's preset, so if you can't manually change how it works, you have limited time before the oddities are noticed

[FrostyNSO]

Dude, what about a double image spell? The invisibility would be targeted on yourself and if you cast the double image first...

[Brazila]

I thought about double image, but trid phantasm, has so many more possibilites.

[Cain]

Rules wise, assuming that they don't resist the spells and realize something is up, they'll be shooting at the Blind Fire penalty. Random shots shoudl only be considered if your GM is sadistic or if you're playing with minis. Also, a truly evil GM may start having the guards respond with suppressive fire, which will hit you.

IIRC, a dual-percieving mage can still target you with spells, as he has LOS on your physical body; it's just that his mind is blocked from seeing you. But don't worry, dual-perception has its own disadvantages, such as becoming vulnerable to the Watcher Attack Pack™ strategy.

[RedmondLarry]

I'm not sure what benefit you hope to get from the Trid Phantasm, but with it you're more likely to get hit by grenades, shotgun blasts, area-affect elemental manipulation spells, stun gas and suppressive fire, than if you are simply invislble.

[Bearclaw]

It seems like you'd just be better off dropping the physical mask once combat starts. For the rest of the time, I can't see why it would be a problem, but you're going to want a focus or something, otherwise everyone will think you're always on drugs (-2 to all TN's is kind of harsh).

[Lantzer]

[Brazila]

good thoughts on the control from the focus, I have foucsed Conc. edge so Maybe I will keep it up myself and center it away. I talked to my GM and he says untill they know that someone invis is there and that my illusion is not real he would give me a friend in melee bonus when using my staff. I was thinking that even if you knew it was not real, it would be damn hard to target someone invis, while ignoring the person that you see "really" attacking you. More of an RPing concept than actual game bonus.

[Shockwave_IIc]

[Brazila]

I didn't think of it that way, but I have been known to play that other game so, it is likely that I was influenced by said item.

[Zazen]

I've had at least one NPC mage just use "displace". Custom spells are swell.

[Cold-Dragon]

[BitBasher]

Actually a focus is nothing like that IMHO. A focus completely sustains the spell independant of you. You have nothing longer to do with it. I run it as stated above, that after it's tossed in a focus the mage no longer has any direct control over it.

[Ol' Scratch]

People who claim that the magician loses control of his spells when they place them in a sustaining focus have little to base that decision on in the rules. All a sustaining focus does is sustain the spell for you so that you don't have to maintain concentration on keeping it running; it basically just keeps pumping the mana through to keep the spell up. The spell is still under the control of the magician who cast the spell.

At most you could argue that the magician has to be in contact with the sustaining focus in order to continue to have control of the spell, but even that isn't supported by the rules (especially since they can deactivate the spell at any time, even when not in contact or LOS of the focus -- which wouldn't be possible if this whole "no longer under their control" concept was accurate).

[BitBasher]

I don't pretend for that to be the rules, I'm just saying that's how I do it. My players like that rule.

[Necro Tech]

Actually, the target of the spell must maintain contact with the sustaining focus at all times. Losing contact makes the spell go away. Other than that, I agree with DR. Funk. The sustaining focus maintains it without you having to concentrate on it, it doesn't say you can't concentrate on it.

[snowRaven]

Hmm... interesting question.

It does state "without attention or concentration on the part of the caster", so the question isn't whether the focus disallows any control of the spell (without attention or concentration implies to me that the caster can completely ignore the spell and it keeps working; hence no control) but whether or not a magician could retake that control (perhaps getting the TN penalty again, or at least half of it, since he must reasonable maintain some concentration to direct a spell?) and whether or not the magician has to be in contact with said focus to do so.

[RedmondLarry]

I am perhaps less rigid than the GMs that posted earlier on this thread. I allow the spellcaster to decide, at the time of casting, whether he wants to control the spell or he wants the person he cast it on to control it.

For example, if a shaman casts Levitate on an unconscious body, he obviously wants to retain control of it. If he casts levitate on the Samurai, he may wish the Samurai to have control of it. In either case, putting it in a Sustaining Focus, in my game, does not take away the control.

[snowRaven]

[RedmondLarry]

[snowRaven]