Eif's Magic Illusion Fails: An Unfortunate Legacy

The Eif magic illusion failure was a highly publicized incident that occurred during a performance by magician Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin at the Eif Theatre in Paris in 1856. The incident involved one of Robert-Houdin's most famous illusions, known as the "light and heavy chest." In this illusion, Robert-Houdin would invite a member of the audience to come on stage and try to lift a small, unassuming chest. The audience member would find it impossible to lift the chest, as if it were magically glued to the ground. Robert-Houdin would then take a small wand and tap the chest, instantly making it light enough for anyone to lift. However, during the performance at the Eif Theatre, the illusion did not go as planned.

The definition of illusion includes "made up stuff" that is "not real". The guy who makes it is guaranteed to know that this is made up stuff and not real. He KNOWS it. The only way he could actually believe it's real is if he is clinically insane.

DESCRIPTION This spell functions like shadow conjuration, except that it duplicates any sorcerer or wizard conjuration summoning or conjuration creation spell of 6th level or lower. since it comes in as a genuine thought in their stream of consciousness even if it is immediately inundated by all the other thoughts and experiences of the target saying the opposite would that be enough to give them a will saving throw.

However, during the performance at the Eif Theatre, the illusion did not go as planned. After inviting an audience member on stage to attempt to lift the chest, Robert-Houdin tapped the chest with his wand, but it remained immovable. The audience member struggled to lift the chest, clearly surprised and confused by the failure of the illusion.

Can an Illusionist choose to fail to disbelieve his OWN illusions?

Basically what the title says, can some caster using illusions purposefully believe they are real? Or to put it another way, can they disbelieve their own disbelief?

For instance, if the caster is up against a creature that has some gaze attack, can he use Shadow Conjuration to throw up a Wall of Stone, disbelieve his disbelief of his own illusion, and avoid the creatures gaze ability this way?

EDIT: edited to just talk about gaze attacks

I would consider the knowledge that I cast a particular illusion spell to be the necessary "irrefutable proof" that prevents me from even attempting a saving throw.

So, no, you couldn't do that at my table.

Basically what the title says, can some caster using illusions purposefully believe they are real? Or to put it another way, can they disbelieve their own disbelief?

For instance, if the caster is up against a creature that has some gaze attack, can he use Shadow Conjuration to throw up a Wall of Stone, disbelieve his disbelief of his own illusion, and avoid the creatures gaze ability this way?

EDIT: edited to just talk about gaze attacks

"A character faced with proof that an illusion isn’t real needs no saving throw."

under the illusion school description.

I am assuming greater shadow conjuration since i dont know any low lvl wall spwlls off the top of my head. So a 60% chance, isnt to bad. I cannot see bow you could ot disbelieve an illusion you cast.

Shadow: A shadow spell creates something that is partially real from extradimensional energy. Such illusions can have real effects. Damage dealt by a shadow illusion is real.

Shadow Conjuration, Greater

School illusion (shadow); Level sorcerer/wizard 7

DESCRIPTION
This spell functions like shadow conjuration, except that it duplicates any sorcerer or wizard conjuration (summoning) or conjuration (creation) spell of 6th level or lower. The illusory conjurations created deal three-fifths (60%) damage to nonbelievers, and non-damaging effects are 60% likely to work against nonbelievers.

Basically what the title says, can some caster using illusions purposefully believe they are real? Or to put it another way, can they disbelieve their own disbelief?

Only if he's insane.

Sane people don't believe in "make-believe". They don't truly believe in the Tooth Fairy or any other obviously made-up stuff. Only insane people believe in things that are not real; that' sort of the clinical definition of insanity.

The definition of illusion includes "made up stuff" that is "not real". The guy who makes it is guaranteed to know that this is made up stuff and not real. He KNOWS it. The only way he could actually believe it's real is if he is clinically insane.

Unless you get him drunk enough; perhaps drunk counts as temporary insanity in this case. Maybe.

For instance, if the caster is up against a creature that has some gaze attack, can he use Shadow Conjuration to throw up a Wall of Stone, disbelieve his disbelief of his own illusion, and avoid the creatures gaze ability this way?

EDIT: edited to just talk about gaze attacks

Now that's different.

Shadow Conjurations are partially real. Only figments and phantasms leave "translucent outlines" when you disbelieve them. Ergo, disbelieving a Shadow Conjuration of an Iron Wall means you still see the iron wall but you know it's only partially real. Because you still SEE the wall, it should still provide full cover from that gaze attack - in fact, you won't see that enemy at all.

ah, good point, i should have chosen an example thats pure illusion.

So the consensus is that (if youre using a spell like silent image of a wall): "No, you cannot disbelieve your own disbelief"

unless you're insane(at DM_Blake's table anyway)

If someone cast memory lapse or modify memory on you and you forgot you cast the illusion spell, sure. You'd be lacking that irrefutable proof.

Sane people don't believe in "make-believe". They don't truly believe in the Tooth Fairy or any other obviously made-up stuff.

The tooth-fairy IS real! She brought me a quarter. *nods convincingly*

If someone cast memory lapse or modify memory on you and you forgot, sure.

haha, sneaky. I like it

on a related note, what if someone casts sow thought on you with the thought "I think there's a wall there"

since it comes in as a genuine thought in their stream of consciousness (even if it is immediately inundated by all the other thoughts and experiences of the target saying the opposite) would that be enough to give them a will saving throw?

If someone cast memory lapse or modify memory on you and you forgot, sure.

Or - arguably - you might forget where all of the long-term illusions are. Illusory Wall is permanent - and you might not remember where exactly you cast it a year later.

So the consensus is that (if youre using a spell like silent image of a wall): "No, you cannot disbelieve your own disbelief"

unless you're insane(at DM_Blake's table anyway)

I don't know if we have enough data points to formulate a consensus yet.

You can say "at DM_Blake's table", and it's true. What I wrote is not a rules citation (well, some part of it actually was) that should be played everywhere or have specific house rules to change it. But while I didn't cite RAW, I did use simple definitions found in the English language.

Now while it's true that tables may not care at all about using simple linguistic definitions, I would hope that it's not very common. If it were, then our rulebooks would be useless. How could we understand what's going on in combat if we don't use simple English definitions of things like sword, damage, turn, attack, etc.? We couldn't.

In other words, every rule we read is interpreted through our language filters. When no rule exists, all we have are the language filters. If we ignore those, then we cannot even understand the framework upon which the rules are written. And if we're not abandoning our linguistic framework, then maybe my impression of illusionist vs. insanity might be applicable to many tables (even if its applicability only goes so far as to motivate the GM to house rule some other interpretation).

i wasn't trying to call you out or anything, i get its an interpretation. i would probably also rule it that way at my table, I have 2 characters that are clinically insane and it sounds like a fun rp opportunity. I was just trying to separate the general trend from your particular thoughts so that it didn't look like i was saying the whole thread agreed with you.

The effect is real if you believe it's real. So how does that make you insane?

"Needs no saving throw" is not the same as "automatically disbelieves" and I'm not sure why they'd choose the text they did if it wasn't to imply that you could choose for yourself to have a save, which you could then intentionally fail.

The only reason I wouldn't allow it is because it makes some illusion spells too versatile. But I have never seen someone quote rules text that doesn't allow the caster to believe the illusion is real.

And I may even allow it if the character was roleplayed well and the player didn't abuse the privilege.

Well, if you automatically disbelieve your own illusions, the reflection clause in Phantasmal Killer is pretty worthless.

The only way I could see it happening is somehow tricking yourself into believing youd messed up the spell and cast a summoning spell instead of an illusion spell. But id only let that go like, once, since its clever.

Let me further muddy the proverbial waters by adding an edge case:

Suppose a rogue, with no ranks in Spellcraft but several ranks in Use Magic Device, observes a wizard who used a wand to raise an opaque mist which blocked sight. The rogue takes the wand, and later activates it using Use Magic Device. The rogue has no knowledge and no skill to determine if the wand is really a wand of silent image or minor image, or a wand of some variant of obscuring mist.

Does this rogue seen through the illusion generated by the wand?

ooooo, *gets popcorn*, what does everyone think?

The only way I could see it happening is somehow tricking yourself into believing youd messed up the spell and cast a summoning spell instead of an illusion spell. But id only let that go like, once, since its clever.

Watch out for that.

It's what we rules lawyers (and real lawyers, too) call "precedent". Once you establish precedent, you might be stuck with it forever.

Depends on the table. Some might say the UMD gives you an idea of what the item does in order to use it, others might say its just like pushing a button.

If its the latter, he needs to make the save. If its the former, hed be aware it was some sort of illusion.

The only way I could see it happening is somehow tricking yourself into believing youd messed up the spell and cast a summoning spell instead of an illusion spell. But id only let that go like, once, since its clever.

Watch out for that.

It's what we rules lawyers (and real lawyers, too) call "precedent". Once you establish precedent, you might be stuck with it forever.

It doesnt fly at my table. I establish from the begining that if you come up with a clever use of a mechanic that im inclined to disallow, I will allow it one time for dramatic storytelling. Basically, if you impress me with your ingenuity but constantly using it would break the game, it becomes a divine (and unrepeatable) fluke.

I will point out that in the OP's example, a Disbelieved Shadow Conjuration wall of stone will still block line of sight. It's a transparent image overlay on a shadowy form. The shadowy form is still real and will block line of sight and effect.

The discussion is only relevant for silent image and the like.

The effect is real if you believe it's real. So how does that make you insane?

How could you believe it's real when you KNOW it is not real?"

You, the illusionist, are casting your own illusion spell. You know what it is. You know how it works. You know it's not real. YOU KNOW IT. In which case, there is no way you could believe it's not real, unless you're insane.

My mother used to work at the California State Hospital for the insane. Occasionally she took me out there to volunteer (I read to the inmates). I remember meeting a person who thought he was Charles Lindbergh. My mom had to tell me who that was. The guy really believed it and told me about his flight over the Atlantic. He talked about it all the time. I forgot his real name but it was something like Fred Smith, or whatever, but nothing like Charles Lindbergh. This was 6 years after Lindbergh died and the guy was young enough to be Lindbergh's grandson, maybe, but definitely not a man nearly 80.

That guy believed something that wasn't true. He should have KNOWN it was not true because he should have known who we was and that he didn't actually fly the Spirit of St. Louis over the Atlantic Ocean. But he believed it. And he was locked up in an asylum because he was insane.

When you KNOW something but believe something else, contradictory to what you know, then you're insane. If you're not insane, you really cannot just do it - you can't make yourself believe that which you know to be untrue. Impossible for a sane mind.

Of course, none of this has to do with magic or other forms of mind control which might FORCE a sane person to believe something they should not. But that's outside influences, very different from just making a conscious decision to believe it.

Questions like these are the reason I never play an illusionist. Too much room for variation on the DM's part.

I don't think it was defined in 3.5 but did they ever define in Pathfinder what qualifies as "interaction"?

did they ever define in Pathfinder what qualifies as "interaction"?

Probably because there are lots of different kinds of illusions that affect any one or more of our 7 senses, sometimes in different ways, so such a comprehensive list of definition would for one, be incomplete and for two, limit the creativity of the players and GM.

The effect is real if you believe it's real. So how does that make you insane?

How could you believe it's real when you KNOW it is not real?"

You, the illusionist, are casting your own illusion spell. You know what it is. You know how it works. You know it's not real. YOU KNOW IT. In which case, there is no way you could believe it's not real, unless you're insane.

My mother used to work at the California State Hospital for the insane. Occasionally she took me out there to volunteer (I read to the inmates). I remember meeting a person who thought he was Charles Lindbergh. My mom had to tell me who that was. The guy really believed it and told me about his flight over the Atlantic. He talked about it all the time. I forgot his real name but it was something like Fred Smith, or whatever, but nothing like Charles Lindbergh. This was 6 years after Lindbergh died and the guy was young enough to be Lindbergh's grandson, maybe, but definitely not a man nearly 80.

That guy believed something that wasn't true. He should have KNOWN it was not true because he should have known who we was and that he didn't actually fly the Spirit of St. Louis over the Atlantic Ocean. But he believed it. And he was locked up in an asylum because he was insane.

When you KNOW something but believe something else, contradictory to what you know, then you're insane. If you're not insane, you really cannot just do it - you can't make yourself believe that which you know to be untrue. Impossible for a sane mind.

Of course, none of this has to do with magic or other forms of mind control which might FORCE a sane person to believe something they should not. But that's outside influences, very different from just making a conscious decision to believe it.

Because the spell actually is real (or at least has a tangible/real effect) if you believe it is real. You KNOW it will have the desired effect if you BELIEVE it will have the desired effect. Id say never underestimate the power of the human mind to delude itself, but this isn't even a delusion, it's a matter of course.

In the case of that patient, the analog to a Pathfinder illusion spell would be, the guy believes he is Charles Lindbergh and therefore actually BECOMES Charles Lindbergh. Because magic.

Robert-Houdin, known for his quick thinking and ability to improvise, managed to diffuse the situation by making a joke about the strength of the audience member, suggesting that they must have been hitting the gym. This humorous reaction helped to alleviate any awkwardness or disappointment in the crowd, and the performance continued successfully. Despite the temporary failure of the illusion, Robert-Houdin's reputation remained intact. He was known as an innovative and talented magician, often credited with transforming magic from a disreputable street performance into a respected and artistic form of entertainment. The Eif magic illusion failure, while a hiccup in Robert-Houdin's career, did not hinder his long-lasting impact on the world of magic. Overall, the Eif magic illusion failure was an unexpected mishap during a performance by magician Jean-Eugène Robert-Houdin. The failure of the "light and heavy chest" illusion was quickly remedied through the magician's wit and improvisation, allowing the show to go on and preserving his reputation as a master of magic..

Reviews for "Eif's Magic Illusion Mishaps: A Comedy of Errors"

1. Sarah - ★☆☆☆☆

I was extremely disappointed with the "Eif magic illusion failure" performance. The tricks were poorly executed, and it was evident that the magician was not skilled enough to pull them off. The organization of the show was also lacking, with long periods of awkward silence and confusion as the magician fumbled through his tricks. Overall, I would not recommend wasting your time or money on this performance.

2. John - ★★☆☆☆

I attended the "Eif magic illusion failure" show with high hopes, but was ultimately left feeling underwhelmed. While there were a few tricks that showed potential, they were overshadowed by the numerous mistakes and failed attempts. It was clear that the magician lacked confidence and practice, as he stumbled through his routine and had to rely on awkward explanations for his mishaps. I appreciate the effort, but unfortunately, it fell short of my expectations.

3. Emily - ★★☆☆☆

The "Eif magic illusion failure" show was a major letdown for me. The illusions were poorly executed, with obvious sleight of hand and visible gimmicks. It was disappointing to see the magician's lack of finesse and skill, as it cheapened the overall experience. Additionally, the pacing of the show was off, with long pauses and awkward banter that did not add to the entertainment value. I expected better from a magic show and left feeling unimpressed.

4. Mike - ★☆☆☆☆

I regret attending the "Eif magic illusion failure" performance. The tricks were amateurish at best, and it felt like I was watching a beginner's magic tutorial rather than a professional show. The magician's lack of showmanship and charisma further dampened the experience, as he seemed unenthused and unengaging. I would advise anyone considering this show to look for a more skilled magician who can deliver a polished and captivating performance.

5. Laura - ★☆☆☆☆

The "Eif magic illusion failure" show was a complete disaster. The tricks were predictable and lacked any element of surprise or awe. It was evident that the magician was not well-rehearsed, as he frequently stumbled over his words and struggled to execute even the simplest illusions. The lackluster performance left the audience feeling bored and unimpressed. I would strongly advise against wasting your time and money on this disappointing show.

Exploring Eif's Failed Magic Illusions: A Case of Misdirection