Can an Image Spell be disbelieved?

[TippetsTX]

Throw in a house-rule upgrade like PERSISTENT IMAGE (i.e. an 'image' that doesn’t disappear when touched) and you can have some real fun.

[TippetsTX]

Like Henry, my interpretation is based on the fact that in every instance where 'disbelief' is discussed, images are never mentioned.

From a design intent standpoint, I tend to see 'disbelief' as a check against the power that illusions have to do actual harm... a check that isn't required for images.

[hcobb]

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

Throw in a house-rule upgrade like PERSISTENT IMAGE (i.e. an 'image' that doesn’t disappear when touched) and you can have some real fun.

Double cost version of Maintain Image enchantment that recreates the image after a minute of downtime would match to a lot of the genre material for images over pits and such.

[Axly Suregrip]

Hi Bill,
Disbelief only breaks illusions. Images get broken by touch.

This is one of the few useful things an image can give you: many attempts to disbelieve it. For the mere cost of 1 ST, you can waste several of your foes' turns in moving only 1 and attempting disbelief.

Scouting, intimidation, cloning self/others/illusions are the other main uses for images.

[JohnPaulB]

This means that all those pesky animals won't be able to disbelieve the image either.

[Steve Plambeck]

Originally Posted by JohnPaulB

This means that all those pesky animals won't be able to disbelieve the image either.

Ah, but do they see the Image? If you see a slime react to an Image, then you know it's not an Illusion, right? And so you change your tactics accordingly. Maybe there's a reason to carry around a pet slime? :)

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Steve Plambeck

If you see a slime react to an Image, then you know it's not an Illusion, right?[...] Maybe there's a reason to carry around a pet slime? :)

Admiral Thrawn, in Timothy Zahn's Star Wars novels, used to carry around a couple of creatures who suppressed the use of the force locally. This isn't entirely different.

[Bill_in_IN]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Wizard rulebook page 17 "or the figure was NOT an illusion"
ITL 138 "if the figure was not an illusion"

Originally Posted by TippetsTX

Like Henry, my interpretation is based on the fact that in every instance where 'disbelief' is discussed, images are never mentioned.

From an intent standpoint, I tend to see 'disbelief' as a check against the power that illusions have to do actual harm... a check that isn't required for images.

Originally Posted by Axly Suregrip

Hi Bill,
Disbelief only breaks illusions. Images get broken by touch.

This is one of the few useful things an image can give you: many attempts to disbelieve it. For the mere cost of 1 ST, you can waste several of your foes' turns in moving only 1 and attempting disbelief.

Scouting, intimidation, cloning self/others/illusions are the other main uses for images.

Thanks guys.

This summarizes the main points of the reasoning for the general consensus on Discord that Images can't be disbelieved.

While this doesn't heavily impact my past games where Images were able to be disbelieved. it is a game changer in providing more value to images and image spells.