Author Topic: Illusions now available!  (Read 11224 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kuroimaken

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 6733
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2008, 08:59:06 AM »
Quote
All at-wills are useful.
I beg to differ... All at-wills are useful under specific scenarios. A few examples:

Cleave: no good without a secondary target.
Reaping Strike: Only good after 21st level. Until then, it's like a regular attack. It's not even a minion-killer because minions are immune to miss effects.
Sure Strike: You need to hit, you don't care for how much. Depends on the weapon you use to deal damage, and the lack of the STR modifier to damage really hurts. Good for high-AC minions.
Tide of Iron: Stay away! But only good if your foe is your size or smaller. Since there are no means of playing larger characters yet, this means this particular at-will is only good on the first levels, where things are not bigger and badder.

And that's just the Fighter exploits. Wizard at-wills follow a different logic, by targetting different defenses instead, and their usefulness may vary depending on the monster's defenses and/or vulnerabilities/elemental defenses.
Gendou Ikari is basically Gregory House in Kaminashades. This is FACT.

For proof, look here:

http://www.layoutjelly.com/image_27/gendo_ikari/

[SPOILER]
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
My Unitarian Jihad Name is: Brother Katana of Enlightenment.
Get yours.[/SPOILER]

I HAVE BROKEN THE 69 INTERNETS BARRIER!


Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #41 on: June 23, 2008, 03:53:02 PM »
Illusory Ambush is better than Ray of Frost unless you intend to focus on cold spells.  -2 to attack, and according to what CustServe told me it gains the Psychic keyword, so Psychic Lock can be used with it to inflict a total of -4 to attack.  Pure gold, and relevant at every level.

Slow becomes less relevant at higher levels when many monsters have ranged attack options.

Uh, I talked to cust serv too, they gave me a slightly different picture of how that works.

Quote
Discussion Thread
 Response (Support Agent)   06/22/2008 02:00 PM
Daniel,

Damage does not grant a keyword. There are many powers that do a specific type of damage but the power does not have that keyword and does not count has having it for the purposes of any other powers, feats, etc.

Psychic damage normally has the Psychic keyword. The powers listed in that article do not.

No, it does not.

Good Gaming!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Joe
Customer Service Representative
Wizards of the Coast
1-800-324-6496 (US and Canada)
425-204-8069 (From all other countries)
Monday-Friday 9am-6pm PST / 12pm-9pm EST


 Customer (Daniel Thorpe)   06/22/2008 01:18 PM
I have heard a lot of ideas running around about how keywords work and retroactively gaining keywords based on damage. I simply wanted to clarify a few questions.

*Does a damage type automatically grant the keyword of that type?

*Is psychic damage covered under the "Illusion" keyword. (Referencing the "Class Acts: Wizard" article)

*Does the feat, Psychic Lock apply to powers with the Illusion keyword?

********************
Page Number: 55, 205
Book Name: Player's Handbook

That would indicate that Illusion spells can't benefit from Psychic Lock (among a bazillion other things)...

DemonLord57

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 164
    • Email
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2008, 05:48:51 PM »
...stuff...

Yeah, but Squirrelloid asked them, too, and led them to textual evidence that indicates that it does grant the keyword, so they agreed with him. Really, you have to lead CustServ to the answer if it's not apparent where the textual evidence is, because they will just make judgements on how they think it should work otherwise... not that there's anything too wrong with that, I just think it'd be nice if they looked at the RAW thoroughly and told us how it worked based on that... or tell us how the designers intended it, and failing those say that it is indeed unclear, and possibly give that information to the people who do the erratas. I'd rather get the answer that it's unclear (especially if it is) than get one that incorrectly tells me how it works.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 05:55:46 PM by DemonLord57 »

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #43 on: June 23, 2008, 06:18:26 PM »
Personally, I disagree with Squirrelloid on that point.  He sites page 55 which says
Quote
For instance, a power that deals acid damage
is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword.

I don't think that the above indicates that having a damage type necessitates the specific keyword.  It is an example of how a power's keywords might have been determined.

I believe that the psychic damage of the powers in the Class Acts article fall under the Illusion keyword.  Note that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the powers that does psychic damage lacks the psychic keyword.  I do not think that was a mistake.  I think that they filed the psychic energy under the Illusion keyword for these spells.

I'm very clearly in the minority, but as pg 55 also says
Quote
keywords define the fundamental effects
of a power.
Keywords define the effects, not vice versa.

There's also a nice little clause that gives keywords a lot of freedom.
Quote
A power that has the poison keyword might deal poison damage, or it might slow the target, immobilize the target, or stun the target. But the poison keyword indicates that it’s a poison effect, and other rules in the game relate to that fact in different ways.

But like I said, I'm in the minority.  :(

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2008, 07:34:40 PM »
Personally, I disagree with Squirrelloid on that point.  He sites page 55 which says
Quote
For instance, a power that deals acid damage
is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword.

I don't think that the above indicates that having a damage type necessitates the specific keyword.  It is an example of how a power's keywords might have been determined.

I believe that the psychic damage of the powers in the Class Acts article fall under the Illusion keyword.  Note that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the powers that does psychic damage lacks the psychic keyword.  I do not think that was a mistake.  I think that they filed the psychic energy under the Illusion keyword for these spells.

I'm very clearly in the minority, but as pg 55 also says
Quote
keywords define the fundamental effects
of a power.
Keywords define the effects, not vice versa.

There's also a nice little clause that gives keywords a lot of freedom.
Quote
A power that has the poison keyword might deal poison damage, or it might slow the target, immobilize the target, or stun the target. But the poison keyword indicates that it’s a poison effect, and other rules in the game relate to that fact in different ways.

But like I said, I'm in the minority.  :(

So you believe psychic resistance and psychic immunity doesn't apply to those illusion powers which deal psychic damage?

Seriously, those are your choices.  Either it gains the psychic keyword or it might as well be untyped damage (which is what it should have been anyway if they didn't want it to have the keyword) because nothing actually looks at the type of the damage except the keywords.

As far as I can tell, the whole point of damage keywords was to describe damage types quickly at the start of the power, and that dealing damage type X was necessary and sufficient for having Keyword X.  That's the reason to have a keyword system like they instituted.  If you don't do that, why bother with damage keywords?  (Acid => Acid, Psychic => Psychic, etc...). I honestly think the Class Acts work wasn't sufficiently reviewed, and that the person responsible didn't understand the design purpose behind keywords. 

Bottom Line: If it isn't supposed to have a damage keyword, why is the damage typed?
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #45 on: June 23, 2008, 08:07:40 PM »
Quote
Keywords help to determine how, or if, a power works when the target has resistance, vulnerability, or immunity to a damage type
- pg 55 PHB

Keywords don't determine resistances; they help determine them.  The damage type determines the resistance.

Quote
Resist: Resistance means you take less damage from a specific damage type. If you have resist 5 fire, then any time you take fire damage, you reduce that damage by 5.
- pg 276 PHB

Emphasis mine.  Note the lack of the word "keyword" in the resistance text.

As for Immunities, they are affected by keyword, but I'd like to point something out.

The number of creatures that are immune to the psychic keyword: 0.
The number of creatures that are immune to the illusion keyword: 2

I believe that the creatures that are immune to illusions should not take the psychic damage from an Illusion spell.  As an extention of that, I believe that a creature (if they come out with one) that is immune to the psychic keyword should be subject to illusion spells.

To reiterate the main response: Keywords don't affect resistance.  Actual damage type does.  The damage was typed to give creatures resistant to psychic damage an edge against an illusion (as makes sense).
Furthermore, I'd be immensely surprised if they release a creature that is immune to psychic but not immune to illusion.
If they do release such a creature, I would hope that they had very good explanation.  Otherwise, it'd be stupid

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #46 on: June 23, 2008, 09:25:24 PM »
Quote
Keywords help to determine how, or if, a power works when the target has resistance, vulnerability, or immunity to a damage type
- pg 55 PHB

Keywords don't determine resistances; they help determine them.  The damage type determines the resistance.

Quote
Resist: Resistance means you take less damage from a specific damage type. If you have resist 5 fire, then any time you take fire damage, you reduce that damage by 5.
- pg 276 PHB

Emphasis mine.  Note the lack of the word "keyword" in the resistance text.

As for Immunities, they are affected by keyword, but I'd like to point something out.

The number of creatures that are immune to the psychic keyword: 0.
The number of creatures that are immune to the illusion keyword: 2

I believe that the creatures that are immune to illusions should not take the psychic damage from an Illusion spell.  As an extention of that, I believe that a creature (if they come out with one) that is immune to the psychic keyword should be subject to illusion spells.

To reiterate the main response: Keywords don't affect resistance.  Actual damage type does.  The damage was typed to give creatures resistant to psychic damage an edge against an illusion (as makes sense).
Furthermore, I'd be immensely surprised if they release a creature that is immune to psychic but not immune to illusion.
If they do release such a creature, I would hope that they had very good explanation.  Otherwise, it'd be stupid

Except Illusion isn't a damage keyword, so being immune to illusion only makes them immune to the other aspects of the spell, as per the rules which claim that immunity only makes you immune to the relevant parts of the spell (not the entire thing).  The damage is clearly not illusionary (as damage can't be Illusion) its psychic or untyped depending on where you look and how you intend to interpret it.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #47 on: June 23, 2008, 10:01:16 PM »
I'm not going to argue that the people who released the article were geniuses.  It's clear that they weren't exactly going for reasonable powers, seeing as most of the powers are vying for the spot at best of that level...

It's possible that they misunderstood the point of keywords, or they could have misunderstood one keyword.  It makes sense to file the psychic damage from an illusion spell under the illusion keyword.

Following a train of thought, if a monster is immune to the illusion, then he wouldn't be subject to the negative effects of the illusion, including the damage.  To the mind, an illusion is real.  As an example, take people that have developed burns/swelling/etc from hypnosis.
Aside: also, shadow reality from 3.5

I see what you're saying about illusion not being a damage keyword.  It isn't; that's true.  At this point, all you can say is that the powers were poorly designed.  But they still don't have the psychic keyword.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #48 on: June 23, 2008, 10:07:15 PM »
I see what you're saying about illusion not being a damage keyword.  It isn't; that's true.  At this point, all you can say is that the powers were poorly designed.  But they still don't have the psychic keyword.

CustServe explicitly told me otherwise with relevant rules text quoted at them.  I have no reason to doubt that answer, and am sure they were aware of the relevant rules passage when they gave it because i explicitly supplied it.  It also matches up with the logic of the game system.

As I see it, there are only two tenable conclusions: (1) those powers have untyped damage or (2) those powers have the psychic keyword.  Anything else violates the system logic.  And every example I've seen where CustServe disagreed with the response they gave me asked questions which were far too open-ended.  Never ask how something works.  Quote the text, provide an interpretation, and ask if that interpretation is correct.  If they agree with your logic they will say yes.  If they disagree they will be forced to explain why.  (And seeing CustServe actually provide rules support for a claim would be a novel experience).

Edit: Basically, CustServe doesn't get to errata the rules.  So their claims must be true under the rules as written.  They can clarify where the text is ambiguous, but when they contradict the text they are wrong.  Period.  Making them cite text to support their claims is essential to their being a useful and valid resource.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2008, 10:12:33 PM by Squirrelloid »
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Faithless tbe Wonder Boy

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #49 on: June 23, 2008, 10:20:14 PM »
I see what you're saying about illusion not being a damage keyword.  It isn't; that's true.  At this point, all you can say is that the powers were poorly designed.  But they still don't have the psychic keyword.

CustServe explicitly told me otherwise with relevant rules text quoted at them.

Based on your post re: this issue, what CustServ "explicitly told you" was that, if you look at Acid Arrow, it has the "Acid" keyword.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #50 on: June 23, 2008, 10:36:27 PM »
I see what you're saying about illusion not being a damage keyword.  It isn't; that's true.  At this point, all you can say is that the powers were poorly designed.  But they still don't have the psychic keyword.

CustServe explicitly told me otherwise with relevant rules text quoted at them.

Based on your post re: this issue, what CustServ "explicitly told you" was that, if you look at Acid Arrow, it has the "Acid" keyword.

CustServe told me "That is True." in response to my interpretation.  They then used an example in the PHB of where this held.  "That is True" is the answer to my question, meaning my interpretation was correct in its entirety - he didn't even feel the need to elaborate.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Faithless tbe Wonder Boy

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 163
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #51 on: June 23, 2008, 10:43:30 PM »
CustServe told me "That is True." in response to my interpretation.  They then used an example in the PHB of where this held.  "That is True" is the answer to my question, meaning my interpretation was correct in its entirety - he didn't even feel the need to elaborate.

Either that, or CustServ was confused by your question, since you worded it in a pretty leading and confusing fashion.

You asked...

"Page 55 of the PHB strongly suggests that a spell which does damage of a given type also gains the keyword of that type. To whit: "For instance, a power that deals acid damage is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword." Literally, if it deals acid damage then it gains the acid keyword. Is this a correct reading of this passage, and is the implication general (if a power deals x damage type, it gains the x keyword)?"

While I can tell that the relevant part of the question is the "is the implication general" part at the end, I can very easily see someone from CustServ reading your question and thinking,

"Well, duh, flip to the PHB and Acid Arrow has the Acid keyword.  Why is he even asking this?"

Without asking the more specific question (such as starting with your (A) and following it up with a "(B) Based on the above, do the Illusion spells from Class Acts gain the Psychic keyword?"), I see your response as less valid than the direct answer of "No, it does not" to that same question.

I don't think CustServ is gospel by any means, and I think it was just sloppiness in the Class Acts article that is leading to this confusion.  (Oh boy, there's a shocker - the new version of Dragon Magazine might have some inconsistencies!  So might CustServ!)  That said, I do disagree with your decision that your answer is valid and his isn't, because you gave them a wall of text and tried to lead them into saying what you wanted to hear, and he didn't.

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #52 on: June 23, 2008, 10:59:51 PM »
They can clarify where the text is ambiguous, but when they contradict the text they are wrong.  Period.

I'd just like to point out that if they say that the Illusion spells have the psychic keyword that is contradicting the text.

I appreciate your suggestion on how to get the most out of talking to custserv.  I really do.
I'm not convinced that the guy who answered me was right, but I'm not convinced you are either.

There aren't any rules for "system logic".  There's certainly precedent for powers.  Powers in the PHB have keywords to define the damage done by the powers.  There is no rule that says this must be the case.

It can be argued that the Illusion spells should have the psychic keyword.  However, I still argue that the creators of the article intended to lump the psychic damage under the illusion keyword; effect keyword or not.

Rest assured that I will follow up my question with them and force them to look at the text and come to a conclusion based on that.

I'll grant you that if a damage keyword is necessitated for all powers that deal damage, the illusion spells released in the Class Acts article need the Psychic keyword.

(And it's shit like this that makes me want to disregard the Dragon and Dungeon Magazines.)

I think it was just sloppiness in the Class Acts article that is leading to this confusion.

This pretty much sums up my feelings about the thing.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #53 on: June 23, 2008, 11:07:22 PM »
They can clarify where the text is ambiguous, but when they contradict the text they are wrong.  Period.

I'd just like to point out that if they say that the Illusion spells have the psychic keyword that is contradicting the text.

I appreciate your suggestion on how to get the most out of talking to custserv.  I really do.
I'm not convinced that the guy who answered me was right, but I'm not convinced you are either.

There aren't any rules for "system logic".  There's certainly precedent for powers.  Powers in the PHB have keywords to define the damage done by the powers.  There is no rule that says this must be the case.

It can be argued that the Illusion spells should have the psychic keyword.  However, I still argue that the creators of the article intended to lump the psychic damage under the illusion keyword; effect keyword or not.

Rest assured that I will follow up my question with them and force them to look at the text and come to a conclusion based on that.

I'll grant you that if a damage keyword is necessitated for all powers that deal damage, the illusion spells released in the Class Acts article need the Psychic keyword.

(And it's shit like this that makes me want to disregard the Dragon and Dungeon Magazines.)

I think it was just sloppiness in the Class Acts article that is leading to this confusion.

This pretty much sums up my feelings about the thing.

Well, should either have the psychic keyword or should have untyped damage (spells with untyped damage - such as blood pulse - have no damage keyword).

When I say systems logic, I'm referring to why you would decide to include keywords as a design decision.  Is it explicitly stated in the PHB?  No.  But the logic is fairly obvious - the keywords are meant to be a quick summary of what the power does and let you make decisions about interactions of the spell/power with other effects based on them.  I'm not saying this is a good rules based reason, but it confirms what the rules text seems to be saying, and thus gives me some faith in that interpretation as being intended.

I also agree that the Class Acts article was sloppy.  I'm just not sure in which direction.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #54 on: June 23, 2008, 11:52:23 PM »
Yeah...

Like I said, if a damage keyword is necessary, then you're right, and the psychic keyword needs to be applied.

I'd like to see that an effect keyword could grant a damage type (within reasonable bounds obviously).

I have a hard time accepting that the mental strain of overcoming an illusion could be the reason for psychic damage being applied even when something is immune to illusion.

Bignormous edit:

Got a further response from the Custserv people.

Quote from: Daniel (me)
What powers (aside from the article) have damage types that aren't reflected in the power keywords?

I would like to think that psychic damage would fit under the Illusion keyword but the illusion keyword is an "effect" keyword.

pg 55 of the PHB lists damage keywords and effect keywords.
Psychic is a damage keyword whereas Illusion is an effect keyword.

For reference, here is the text regarding the two types of keywords.
"Damage Type: Many powers create energy or a substance
that deals damage to their targets."

"Effect Type: Some powers are classified according to
how their effects work."

Can effect keywords provide damage?

Are damage keywords necessitated in a power's description?

Was the lack of a damage keyword just an oversight in the making of that article?

Finally, having reviewed this again, would adding a damage type automatically grant a keyword of that type?

Thank you so much for your help!

Daniel

Quote from: Chuck (custserv)
Daniel,

There is nothing in the rules that links a powers keywords to its damage type, there are obvious designs reasons that they are the same. A fire power is most likely going to deal fire but it is not required.

Changing the type of damage you deal with a power in no way effects the powers keyword and also the other way around.

Please let me know if you need anymore help!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Chuck

This is quite interesting...  To me, this just further supports the idea that the powers in the article were designed badly.

(Also I'll be away until tomorrow, so I can't 'zactly defend m'self)
« Last Edit: June 24, 2008, 01:48:19 AM by Dan2 »

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #55 on: June 24, 2008, 05:54:13 AM »
Is it just me, or did they really not answer the most relevant questions you asked?  Maybe I'll post an addendum to my question and see what kind of in-depth response I get.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #56 on: June 24, 2008, 04:25:49 PM »
You're right.  They didn't really answer the question I asked, but the answer is still relevant.

That said, they kinda support you.

When I say systems logic, I'm referring to why you would decide to include keywords as a design decision.  Is it explicitly stated in the PHB?  No.  But the logic is fairly obvious - the keywords are meant to be a quick summary of what the power does and let you make decisions about interactions of the spell/power with other effects based on them.

Quote from: Chuck
There is nothing in the rules that links a powers keywords to its damage type, there are obvious designs reasons that they are the same.

Seems to me they acknowledge the existence of the "system logic" you talk about, but deny any rules pertaining to it.

I've updated my question again, and expect a response soon.

EDIT for response again...

Quote from: Daniel
You've been incredibly helpful so far; thank you.

"There is nothing in the rules that links a powers keywords to its damage type, there are obvious designs reasons that they are the same. A fire power is most likely going to deal fire but it is not required." - Chuck

I really didn't expect this, and wanted to ask you one, last thing pertaining to it; just to finish clarifying.

"A power that deals acid damage is an acid effect and thus has the acid keyword." - PHB

If I understand correctly, you are saying that this quote from the PHB is an *example* of design decision, and *not* a rule to give damage a keyword.
Is this correct?

Again, thanks so much. You've been more than helpful.
Great Gaming!

Daniel

Quote from: Chuck (custserv)
Daniel,

It is an example, that is why that sentence starts with "For instance".

Please let me know if you need anymore help!

We would appreciate your feedback on the service we are providing you. Please click here to fill out a short questionnaire.

To login to your account, or update your question please click here.

Chuck

I'd consider this an informed response.  He even went back to the page outside of what I quoted at him to further clarify.

It seems pretty clear to me...
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 12:47:03 AM by Dan2 »

X-Codes

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3941
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #57 on: June 25, 2008, 12:18:17 PM »
Quote
All at-wills are useful.
I beg to differ... All at-wills are useful...
Stop posting.

For the relevant argument, it would seem that CustServ is trying to say that a power that deals X damage is an X power, but an X power doesn't necessarily deal X damage.  Just an idea.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #58 on: June 25, 2008, 06:22:34 PM »
Quote
All at-wills are useful.
I beg to differ... All at-wills are useful...
Stop posting.

For the relevant argument, it would seem that CustServ is trying to say that a power that deals X damage is an X power, but an X power doesn't necessarily deal X damage.  Just an idea.

Except the illusion spells deal X damage but according to some CustServe answers they are not an X power.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Dan2

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Hong Kong
  • *
  • Posts: 1024
  • Wizicist
Re: Illusions now available!
« Reply #59 on: June 25, 2008, 06:46:11 PM »
Thanks for fielding that one Sqirrelloid.

I've been looking at other rules pertaining to similar things, and I think that your side has a great deal of merit.
(pg 226 - PHB)

The whole game seems to have been designed so that a damage type should go along with the corresponding keyword, but they never seemed to make it a rule.

It's something that I may very well implement as a DM, but I don't think that its the case RAW.

To be perfectly honest, I hope that such a rule is introduced in an errata (it's a good rule; ignoring my predilection for the illusion spells as they are), but I don't think that it's there now.