Player wants to make a silent image viewable only to See Invisibility...

[ksbsnowowl]

So my Beguiler player is asking if he can make an invisible illusion, using only one of the image spells.*

Can the spells do this?  I'm guessing not.  It makes an image.  It's there, period.  Everyone with eyes can see it.  Otherwise you make an image of ... nothing.  And no one sees anything, even with see invisibility.  Am I right in my assessment of the situation?


*I realize that if he had the Invisible Spell feat, then he could make a silent image of a creature, that would only be viewable via see invisibility.  The character does not have that feat.

[Captnq]

*I realize that if he had the Invisible Spell feat, then he could make a silent image of a creature, that would only be viewable via see invisibility.  The character does not have that feat.

I'm afraid that's it. However...

As a DM you could make the ruling that you can create an illusion using any of your senses.

If this is the case, then you could make an invisible illusion if you could see invisible.

[veekie]

He won't be able to make an invisible illusion without Invisible Spell yeah, though it could be argued that you could create an image of NOTHING where there is something actually there.

[mrorangesoda]

He won't be able to make an invisible illusion without Invisible Spell yeah, though it could be argued that you could create an image of NOTHING where there is something actually there.

Creating an image of nothing when there is something actually there is a glamer effect, whereas silent image is a figment spell. It could be rule 0ed, but I don't see how you could really argue for it.

[veekie]

Well, you COULD make an argument for it. It wouldn't necessarily work straight out.(e.g. an illusion of a very realistic painting of an empty corridor, placed over a not-empty corridor).

[phaedrusxy]

Well, you COULD make an argument for it. It wouldn't necessarily work straight out.(e.g. an illusion of a very realistic painting of an empty corridor, placed over a not-empty corridor).

Sounds familiar... (skip to 1:20).

[ksbsnowowl]

Creating an image of nothing when there is something actually there is a glamer effect...

Is that stated explicitly in the rules?  Not doubting, just want to see it.

Edit:  That was easy

A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

[mrorangesoda]

Creating an image of nothing when there is something actually there is a glamer effect...

Is that stated explicitly in the rules?  Not doubting, just want to see it.

Edit:  That was easy

A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

For further reference, here's the article series where they expand/discuss the descriptions- http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060207a. The whole series is really informative- when reading through the ph when prepping my own beguiler, I thought some things needed more clarification. My dm and I had a talk about illusions and what we both thought they could and couldn't do.

That MI4 clip is really cool. I think that'd be really hard for a spell to change on the fly without a fancy camera- I'd just make the party invisible...

[veekie]

Wouldn't be good at on-the-fly changes naturally. But the spell does take the caster's concentration.

[phaedrusxy]

That MI4 clip is really cool. I think that'd be really hard for a spell to change on the fly without a fancy camera- I'd just make the party invisible...

Like Veekie said, the spell requires concentration, and the caster can make it "move". So adjusting it for perspective shouldn't be a problem.

And it's one 1st level spell that lasts as long as you want, vs. one second level spell per party member that only lasts 1 min/lvl. So there is certainly a huge advantage to using Silent Image. If you want to avoid the argument about "making things invisible", just make the wall appear to be 1 foot thicker than it is, and have the party squeeze inside the "extra" 1 foot of wall, or whatever.