Two questions about Trid Phantasm:

1) It's a multi-sense spell. Most examples and other discussions about it always talk about visual illusions. But could Trid Phantasm create a non-visual illusion? Does the illusion have to use all 5 senses? Say, could it be a voice coming from somewhere, with no visual? A certain smell on the air, without a visual? Someone feels a tap on their shoulder AND hears a noise, and turns to find nothing there?

2) In the spell description, "They can create an illusion of anything the caster has seen before...". Does this limit the illusion to ONLY things the caster has actually seen? Does this mean the caster cannot create an illusion purely from his imagination? For instance, the caster has never actually seen a talking cat before, so can he create the illusion of one?

In some ways, the wording "has seen" implies that phantasm and trid phantasm are based around optical illusions, and these optical illusions can also have additional sensory illusions. Or is it just slightly poor wording on the author's part? (sorry, is that 3 questions?)

Nope, I'm staying the hell outta this one.

Since the spell is called Trid-phantasm, I'd imagine that it creates an illusion just like a trideo display would. 3D visual with audio and nothing else (that would fit the description of multi-sensory). Then the real question becomes "If I've seen an invisible man who was making noise, could I create an illusion of an invisible man making noise?". That would cover the phantom noise part of your question.

EDIT: Not forgetting the second question. You'd probably have to work out a list of stuff that you have or have not seen with your gm, especially if it's something off the wall like a 2.3 meter tall troll running down Main Street covered in flames and singing We Are the Champions or something.

Redcrow, this question is TOTALLY innocent and IN NO WAY related to anything that may or may not have happened in-game.

Seriously, in some ways I don't really care one way or 'tother. But I guess I see it one way, I'm curious if other people see it other ways.

(How do you see an invisible man ?!?!)

In this case I would argue that 'has seen' implies 'has visual reference for'. They don't want you creating the illusion of the extremely poisonous Outback Wiggling Danger Snake when you have no idea what one looks like (you've merely heard about it). However, you know what a cat looks like and how it would look when it talks, thus you could argue that you have a visual reference for talking cats.

I was actually referring to the fiasco on another thread, but you asked for it so here is my two nuyen on at least one of your questions.



As a GM I would definitely allow this because while the caster may not have seen a talking cat before, they have likely seen a cat and likely seen someone talking. So I don't have a problem with them combining the two. With that said, I also always reserve the right as GM to change my mind so that if I allow something and it quickly becomes overused and/or abusive it will have to stop. Even though the book may state that the caster can only create illusions of things they have seen before, I would probably allow the caster to use their imagination a bit from time to time with the understanding that it would grant anyone viewing the illusion a bonus to their resistance test. The more outlandish the illusion, the higher the bonus to resist. So a talking cat may only receive a +1 bonus to resist, while a cat riding a bicycle down mainstreet swinging a katana and singing "Princes of the Universe" is likely to net a much higher bonus to resist.

To avoid any potential misunderstandings let me say right here and now that this is merely how I would handle things and is not in any way a claim as to what is or isn't RAW or canon.

i would probably handle trying to make stuff that you have absolutely no visual reference for some kind of skill-based thing... sorta like trying to make clothes using fashion. if you want to make a bathrobe, no problem. if you want to make a 27-layer formal gown that would make most brides sob in despair at their pale imitation of a wedding dress, you're going to have to roll the appropriate skill.

in this case, i'm not quite sure what the appropriate skill would be, mind you.

oh, and also, this isn't D&D. you don't disbelieve the illusion into not existing, you resist the illusion. you might create an illusion of yourself standing 3 feet away from yourself, that doesn't mean everyone automatically believes the illusion of yourself is the real you when they fail their resistance test... it simply means they do in fact perceive the illusion at all.

likewise, you may create an illusion of a cat riding a motorcycle down the street and swinging a katana, and people will see it or not based on their resistance rolls (well, presumably people who resist are aware that there's something there in the case of a physical illusion, but they would know for sure it's an illusion). whether or not they believe it's real is another matter altogether... but some may assume it's just a crazy modified drone, for example. and very very very few, if any, would believe that it's just a regular housecat riding a motorcycle and swinging a katana.

This is where the line begins to blur between Entertainment and Phantasm - Entertainment is "obviously fake" illusions, so that might cover something like a cat riding a motorcycle swinging a katana while singing.

I think the reference to GM-fiat is very appropriate. Most of the game is intended this way. So yeah the GM has final say on anything. I guess that could be the key here - the spell IS very vague, totally left up to whatever interpretations the player and GM can agree on.

Another question: Why have the two brands of spells (Entertainment vs. Phantasm)? Why not just let the "believability" of the illusion be up to the caster / GM ? They even created a whole class of Illusion spell (Obvious Illusion), that is only used on Entertainment / Trid Entertainment.

I'm just ranting now, sorry...

The old Missions book (SR 2E?) had a collection of alternate adventures where the characters played anything from Docwagon employees trying to rescue a client from a warehouse filled with cockatrices (they were being shipped somewhere, and the cages broke open), to UCAS spec ops invading a mountain stronghold. In the Spec Ops adventure, the main villains used illusion spells to appear as angels, and a trid-phantasm equivalent to make the room they were in appear as heaven, and later, hell.

I'd say you should easily be able to create an image based on your imagination. The only real GM ruling would have to be in creating an image of something specific, that you have never seen before. Say you were on a run to extract a scientist, but have never seen said scientist (not even a picture). You would not, therefore, be able to create an illusion of that particular scientist. At least, not until you've seen what he looks like.

As far as the difference between obvious illusions and regular illusions, that's more of a GM call area. Take the following scenario:

Mage creates an illusion of a cat, wielding a katana, riding a bicycle down the hall towards some guards.

If Mage uses an obvious illusion spell to do so, then the guards can quite clearly tell that it is an illusion, and is probably not a threat, just a distraction for the real threat.

If Mage uses a regular illusion spell to do so, then the guards have a number of possibilities before them. Obviously, it is not a real cat, but since it appears to be a real thing, it could be any of the following:

1. A rather sophisticated, if absurd, drone. Obviously the guards would do what they could to destroy it.
2. A physical form of a spirit of some sort, probably here to kill them. They should kill it first.
3. A magically disguised intruder of some sort. Shoot first, investigate later.
4. A magically animated homunculus. Can't be good, better kill it.
5. A non-obvious illusion, shoot it to be sure, then find and geek the mage.

The point being that the first scenario puts the guards on alert looking for the Mage, where the latter scenarios mean the guards should probably deal with the illusion first, since it appears to be real.

YMMV-But to me multi-sense meanse it includes all senses (including taste, smell and touch--lick the troll). Yes you could make an illusion of a banquet and eat it and think your full. The minute the spell dropped though, you'd be hungry.