-	-	-	-	-
Dragon magazine	-	Dragon #43	-	1st Edition AD&D

If you have played Dungeons & Dragons or Advanced Dungeons
& Dragons for any length of time, you must have run across the spell
Phantasmal forces. Actually it’s called Phantasmal force in AD&D and
Phantasmal forces in D&D, but many of the suggestions below are applicable
to both. This article offers a more concrete approach to these
often troublesome spells, an approach meant to supplement rather
than replace the existing spells.

In the beginning, there was the simple Phantasmal forces spell and
nothing more. In the Original D&D volume Men & Magic it appeared,
and still appears, as a second-level spell whereby the Magic-User
created an illusion “of nearly anything the user envisions.” Any harm
done by the illusion became actual damage if the illusion was believed
to be real. In the relatively new D&D introductory rulebook, one
which predates AD&D, Phantasmal forces is listed as a second-level
Magic-User spell in terms virtually identical to the original version.

The only real advance thus far in the lore of illusions came with the
publication of the AD&D Players Handbook. There, Illusionists are
made into an official character class, and the old Phantasmal forces
spell is redescribed and expanded into a whole family of spells. These
spells, linked by compound crossreferences, are Phantasmal force, Improved
Phantasmal Force, Spectral Force, Permanent Illusion, and
Programmed Illusion.

The Phantasmal force spell is explained at far greater length than in
the D&D books, but the new description fails to give any more
guidance on the really troublesome aspects of the spell. The new
version allows the spellcaster to depict “any object, or creature, or
force” as the subject of the illusion. Is there anything a spellcaster
could envision that does not meet this description? Taking a broad
view of the word “force” as it appears here, the description takes in
everything in the universe, and is thus identical in scope with the “anything
the user envisions” language of the earlier rule.

One might argue that simple energy, like fire, is not a “force” under
the rule. After all, force causes mass to accelerate, as students of
physics know. But if we’re going to get technical about it, we should
note that true Newtonian forces exist in equations only and not in
reality. One could not create an illusion of a Newtonian force because
such forces cannot be displayed visually. Thus, we must accept a
loose idea of “force” here, or the rule becomes meaningless. The only
question left is why the wording was changed if the same meaning
was intended.

Also, it goes almost without saying that the “object, creature, or
force” requirements does not mean that a single object, or a single
creature, must be the subject of the illusion. An illusionary pit of
sharpened stakes, a text example, consists of more than one object. It
follows that the spell can be used to depict any number of objects or
creatures, so long as they all fit within the area of effect.

Another minor problem concerns illusions cast by monsters. A
Horned Devil has the power to create illusions, as do a number of
other creatures, but the Monster Manual does not say how far this
power extends. Is a Horned Devil’s illusion power confined to the 
equivalent of a Phantasmal force spell, perhaps combined with an 
Audible glamer?  This seems likely in VIEW of the new Wand of Illusion 
description in the DM Guide, which seems to equate the term "illusion" 
with the Phantasmal force-Audible glamer combination.  Still, 
one might ask whether a Rakshasa can create a Veil in order to 
"create the illusion of what those who have encountered them deem 
friendly," since it might be necessary for this creature to disguise the 
true nature of its lair in order to achieve this purpose. 

There are more serious problems with the spell description. Chief
among these is the idea of “disbelief.” According to the new rules, a
creature is entitled to a saving throw against the spell only if it initially
disbelieves the illusion. This throws up another barrier which the viewing
creature must overcome if it is to save itself. The problem is, when
does a creature disbelieve an illusion? The text gives no clue, so the
answer must be: whenever the DM decides that it does. This puts the
DM in a very uncomfortable position, for the success of the spell will
largely depend on the DM’s ruling, and a DM who has not thought
some about the problem could easily decide a hard case the wrong
way, thus antagonizing the players. The players will naturally dislike
anything that makes outcomes less certain; why bother with a Phantasmal
force when a nice, simple Fireball will do the job? Or a nice,
simple Stinking Cloud? There is a clear need of something that will
make individual applications of the Phantasmal force spell more predictable.

Judges Guild attempted to solve this problem for the old Phantasmal
forces spell with a system that appears in their Ready Ref Sheets,
Volume I, at page 17. This system makes the victim’s number of
levels/hit dice the basic measure of whether the victim believes the illusion
and is thus affected by the spell. Minor modifications are allowed
for the intelligence and wisdom of the victim and for the nature
of the illusion itself, but an idiotic Hill Giant still is affected less often
than a genius elf.

The system thus merges two distinct ideas. The first is that since
spells tend to fail more often when used against large/experienced
creatures, such creatures deserve better saving throws versus the
Phantasmal forces spell than smaller, less experienced ones do. This is
the basic idea behind saving throws in general.

The second idea is the modifications, which are based on an entirely
different theory, but do not account for the extreme cases. A Hill
Giant, with his low intelligence, would generally be less likely to become
suspicious of a pit that appears in front of him out of nowhere
than a genius elf, who is probably a Magic-User himself and is thus
alert to the possibility of an illusion.

This is a form of situational analysis; in effect, we are asking how
likely it is that a creature will figure out that it faces an illusion under
the individual circumstances. This probability depends on internal factors,
like the creature’s intelligence, and upon external factors, such as
whether the creature saw the illusion first appear or not.

The Judges Guild system merges the situational factors and a creature’s
general resistance to magic in one die roll. It is a basically sound
approach and is fine for use in D&D. In AD&D, however, it should not
be used. The new Phantasmal force spell separates the situational and
general factors. The latter are obviously accounted for by the saving
throw that is allowed if the creature first disbelieves the illusion. It
would seem, then, that the “disbelief” called for as a prerequisite to a
saving throw is meant to be based on situational factors only, since it
would be redundant to call for two saving throws in a row both based
on hit dice/levels.

Assuming this to be true, the next problem is to come up with a
reasonably simple system for determining disbelief, picking up where 
the rule description leaves off.  INT, which measures a creature's 
problem-solving ability, seems the most important of the internal 
factors.   WIS, in the form of intuition as to the best thing to 
do, should somehow be taken into account, though it is not as important 
as INT.  Previous experience with illusions is obviously 
of value to the potential victim of another one.  

As to the external factors, surprise is one factor likely to prevent the
victim of the spell from thinking clearly and should thus be counted as
a penalty to disbelief where present. The primary external factor, however,
is the situation itself. A suspicious image, like a dragon turtle on
dry land, gives greater cause for disbelief than the image of a troll who
has been living in the cave next door for twenty years. The following
categories are recommended for evaluating situations:

1. Information recommending disbelief. When an associate calls
out that an illusion is present, only an idiot would fail to try to disbelieve
the illusion. The same goes for creatures who know they face an
Illusionist.

2. Strong Suspicion. Here the circumstances are such that even a
creature of low intelligence might not believe its eyes. The illusion of
the Dragon Turtle on dry land falls in this category, as would an illusion
of a pit that appears from nowhere in full view of its potential
victim.

3. Suspicion. A situation belongs in this category if, of all the possible
explanations for what the creature sees, an illusion is the most
probable explanation. In answering this question, be sure to remember
that the number of possible explanations is limited by the knowledge
of the creature; an isolated caveman might not even know what
an illusion is. An example of a suspicious illusion is one of a pit that appears
out of the sight of the victim but in a place it knew to be solid
only a round ago.

4. Doubt. Here an illusion is one explanation, but other equally
probable explanations for the image exist. When a monster appears
out of thin air, it might have been summoned by a Monster Summoning
spell, or it might be an illusion; without additional information,
these alternatives are equally likely to the victim.

5. Neutrality. This is the default category for illusions neither expected
nor unexpected under the circumstances. An illusion is a possibility,
but some other explanation is more likely. If a wise and wary
troll came across a pit in a place it seldom visits, it would most likely
conclude that some worthless dwarves had dug it there. An illusion of
a crew of archers leading the way for the party (not seen to appear out
of nowhere) is perfectly neutral and non-suspicious.

6. Expected Image. Here the circumstances actually support the
victim’s belief in the illusion. In other words, the victim sees something
it expects to see, and the possibility of an illusion hardly ever crosses
its mind. An example would be the troll known by the victims to reside
nearby — assuming, of course, they were also unaware that a party
had already slain the troll; if they learned of this fact, they would be
strongly suspicious of the illusion.

It will be up to the DM to assess the situation each time an illusion is
used. Once a situation’s category has been selected the table below
should be used to determine the victim’s percent chance of successfully
attempting to disbelieve the illusion:

Intelligence                                                                    Situation

-	1	2	3	4	5	6
0 (Non-)	*	*	*	*	*	*
1 (Animal)	0	0	0	0	0	0
2-4 (Semi-)	0	0	0	0	0	0
5-7 (Low)	80	60	30	10	5	0
8-10 (Average)	90	70	60	30	10	0
11-12 (Very)	95	80	70	60	30	5
13-14 (High)	100	90	80	70	40	10
15-16 (Exceptional)	100	95	90	80	50	20
17-18 (Genius)	100	100	95	90	60	30
19-20 (Supra-genius)	100	100	100	95	70	40
21+ (Godlike)	100	100	100	100	90	50

Adjustments: + 20% if olfactory or thermal component expected but absent
    + 20% if audial component expected but absent
    + 10% if subject of spell is an Illusionist
    -10% if victim surprised (1st round only — see below)
    + 10% if victim’s wisdom is 15 or more

Notes: The adjustments do not apply for creatures of INT 4 or less —
their chance is always zero. For non-intelligent creatures, see discussion
below. A creature that makes its “attempt to disbelieve” percentage
then gets a saving throw to see if it actually does so.

This table is based on the intelligence/expectancy ideas developed
previously. A non-intelligent creature might enjoy immunity from illusions
under this system, since arguably such creatures have no mind
which can be affected by the spell. On the other hand, one might say
that an illusion simple enough to have meaning to a non-intelligent
creature, like a raging fire to a black pudding, could be used against
such a creature. In such a case the non-intelligent creature should be
treated as creatures of animal and semi-intelligence are.

Speaking of which, it is the intelligence range of 1-4 that fares the
worst under this system, for these creatures are smart enough to
comprehend the subject matter of illusions but not smart enough to
grasp the concept of an illusion. Since they always believe what their
senses tell them, they should never get a saving throw versus the spell.
The only real limitation on illusions usable against these creatures is
the “comprehension limitation” discussed below.

Creatures of intelligence 5 or higher can comprehend the unrealness
of an illusion and thus gain a percent chance of disbelieving it.
Creatures of low intelligence are quite vulnerable to plausible illusions,
whereas only an expected image would have a decent chance of fooling
a god. The adjustments following the table give some concrete
superiority to the Improved phantasmal force and Spectral force
spells. An illusionary raging fire that is totally silent and generates no
heat when approached would allow the victims a 40% bonus on their
disbelief percentage. Similarly, a silent, collapsing ceiling would be
“penalized” 20% (from the spell-caster’s point of view).

There are some situations in which an illusion will fail to harm its
victims regardless of their hit dice or intelligence. Of course, magicresistant
creatures who make their magic-resistance roll will not be affected
by an illusion. Creatures who cannot understand the harmful
nature of an illusion will not be affected, since the whole idea of the
spell is that the victim’s fear of harm causes the harm to be real. A
creature who does not understand the nature of the threat is in a position
no different from that of a creature which cannot see the illusion
at all. To a band of orcs an illusionary Sphere of Annihilation is just a
globe of darkness, thus it should not be able to harm them. On the
same theory, creatures which rely primarily on senses other than sight,
like bats, should not be affected by an illusion unless it has a
component that has meaning to them.

In theory, the Phantasmal force spell might work — when it does
work — as follows. First, the victim perceives the illusion. Next, the
victim understands the illusion, probably as something potentially
harmful. Then the victim either fails to disbelieve the illusion (or more
accurately, fails to attempt to disbelieve the illusion), or misses its
saving throw. Magical energy then does damage to the victim in accordance
with the victim’s belief of the illusion.

All four steps must be carried out for the spell to be successful. A
creature which cannot see or otherwise perceive the illusion never
gets past step one. The ignorant creature is saved by step two, at least
as far as actual damage is concerned. A third type of problem arises
when the victim of the spell is not allowed sufficient time to go
through steps one to three. For instance, in the case of an illusionary
lightning bolt or fireball there is no time for the victim to believe and
comprehend the illusion, since the harmful effects occur almost
instantly. A creature cannot be said to believe or disbelieve a lightning
bolt until after the bolt has come and gone. The logic of the spell
seems to require belief before harmful effect, and if we are to retain
any realism here at all, such illusions should not be possible because
minds don’t work that fast. In general, any illusion of a split-second
phenomenon should not be allowed.

Subject to these limitations, the foregoing table will give at least
some creatures a chance to save themselves from illusion spells in a
relatively rational way. Note, however, that the table should not be
used when a dungeon creature uses an illusion against player characters;
it is up to the characters to go through the sort of reasoning discussed
here and decide to disbelieve or believe what they are seeing.
As for dungeon creatures, each should be given its own disbelief roll
and saving throw, though 5- or 10-creature collective saving throws
could be used when individual rolls would be too much work. In the
case of a continuing illusion, a new disbelief roll should be made each
round, and each new roll should take into account changes in the
situation. A creature which is still within an illusion of a raging fire by
the second round, assuming it did not save against the spell in the first
round, would get its second round roll in category six, since the creature
believes the illusion and expects to get burned again if it remains
within the fire. If, however, an associate were to call out that the fire
was an illusion, the second-round roll would be in category one. Note
also that any penalty for lack of a thermal component would be
negated on the second and following rounds, since the creature “got
burned” on the first round. The purpose of a thermal component is to
make the creature feel the heat as it approaches the illusionary fire,
thereby reinforcing its belief that the flames are real. Similar reasoning
should be applied to the other penalties as well.

As the foregoing discussion shows, the Phantasmal force spell can
give rise to complex problems when used in actual play. But things
aren’t as bad as all that. The hard part will obviously be picking a
category that correctly matches the situation. A DM who feels
uncertain about which grade of expectancy to choose can always
open the floor for argument from the players, assuming that the
players have something worthwhile to say. Most illusions will fall into
classes 1,5, or 6. The other categories exist primarily to catch thoughtless
players who design incredible illusions, and it should not be necessary
to invoke them often in a good campaign.

One nagging problem remains unsolved by this system. Take two
parties of 5 first-level characters each. Neither party has any magic
items, and both are identical except for the fact that the second party
has a first-level Illusionist with it, instead of an additional Fighter.
Suppose that the first party encounters a Hill Giant as a wandering
monster. Chances are they will have to flee, possibly with casualties,
unless they are extremely lucky in melee. The second party, by
contrast, has their Illusionist cast an illusion of a 1”x2”x4” pit of
sharpened stakes in the path of the charging giant. From the table, the
giant stands a 40% chance of believing the illusion outright. If he fails
to attempt to disbelieve, he must then make his saving throw or fall in
the illusionary pit and take 6-36 points of damage (4-24 for the fall, 2-
12 for the stakes). After a few flasks of flaming oil and perhaps a
round or two of melee, the giant has had it. Thus, the party with the Illusionist
is a great deal more powerful than the other party, and will
gain experience a lot faster.

The POINT of this example is that the Phantasmal force spell is too
powerful to be a first-level spell. Its damage-doing effectiveness puts it
on a par with Hypnotic Pattern, Blindness, Stinking Cloud, and Web,
and it deserves to be ranked as a second-level Illusionist spell. If you
decide to do this for your campaign, Improved phantasmal force must
be made a third-level spell, and Spectral force must become a fourthlevel
spell. As a consolation to first-level Illusionists, there could be the
creation of a new first-level spell, Phantasmal Images. This spell is
similar to a Phantasmal force in all respects, save that it cannot do
actual damage to the viewing creatures. This by no means makes it
useless, for in combination with an Audible glamer or Ventriloquism
spell it can have great intimidation value in the hands of ingenious
players. Even without such extras, an illusionary wall still looks solid.
The Magic-User Phantasmal force spell is fine where it is. The Magic-
User’s lack of facility with illusion/phantasm spells explains its 3rd.
level rating.
 
 

NOVEMBER 1980