Illusion Hijinks

[ruy343]

So, I have a player who had their character just die in my campaign (actually, he committed suicide, likely because he felt that his build was based on a "trap" option of two-weapon fighting...), and he's wanting to roll up an illusionist. This player has a history of mix/maxing and trying to breaking the game, but kicking him out of the group is likely not to be an option.

That said, my question to you, dear forumites, is how munchkin can he get? What kinds of feats, spells, and/or development options could he choose to make his character too powerful? What rules text items could make him difficult to deal with?

He's already given me two leads, based on his interpetation:
-illusion mastery (the class benefit for the illusion school) allows him to make an object appear to be up to a 5-foot cube and make sound, but it requires an action to see through the "minor illusion" cantrip.
-He has informed me that his idea will ensure that the opponents are always at a disadvantage (and taking disadvantage on their checks).

What should I be scared of?

[DivisibleByZero]

What should I be scared of?

You should be scared of that player.
If he committed suicide because he thinks he chose a trap option (when TWF isn't a trap option in the first place, it's merely *not quite as good as* some other weapon choices) then pretty much no matter what he plays he's probably going to be a problem.

Explain to him that minor illusion creates very simplistic and small visual effects, which by RAW have to be static.
If you want more complex illusions, they require a slot (that's what higher level spells are for, more complex stuff).
If you want sound, non-illusionists require at least a 2nd level illusion (silent image is a 1st level spell, after all).
If you want movement, it requires a slot (silent image specifies that it costs your action to move it, minor illusion doesn't say anything about movement).
Once you get to third level illusions (with major image) do they start coming with sound and other senses included.

Minor illusion creates very small, limited effects. Things that an apprentice is learning/practicing. If he starts overdoing it with his effects, you'll need to reign him in.
I'm curious how he plans on creating disadvantage via minor illusions in a consistent manner when any interaction with it basically ends it immediately for the target. Yes, it requires an action to see through it.... unless you touch it.... or shoot through it.
I'm especially interested to find out how he expects to impose disadvantage on checks. Ranged attacks, sure, for one shot per illusion. Melee attacks, not so much. Ability checks, no way.

[hawklost]

Biggest thing he will probably do is place 5ft 'blocks' in front of the enemy to have them not be able to see people (and if he is a small creature, he will be fully hidden).

Ways to stop this from being OP: -(Does not have to be combined)
1) Require him to make the saves to see through his own illusions (Doesn't say caster automatically knows by RAW (obviously Only by RAW since it is stupid the caster doesn't know but sometimes you have to stop min/maxers that way))
2) If he uses it to block line of sight, as soon as any object interacts with it that the enemy can see, it is proven as an illusion (Say that the caster can see through a box and shoot a spell through it, now everyone who saw the spell knows the box is fake (per the spell description))
3) Remember with multiple enemies, one enemy can see through the illusion and then break it for all others by using #2 and walking into it.
4) Animals that have a good sense of smell might get advantage against the illusion depending on what he makes since it doesn't smell right (if he places a box inside a stone dungeon and they cannot smell any wood when they get close to it, they should get advantage on the investigation check)

He might also try to hide traps/ledge using an illusionary floor

Combined with the lvl 6 illusionists ability, he can have a 'conversation' between people by switching up the illusion every round.

He can show a dead body to distract people.

[EvanescentHero]

What's preventing you from kicking him out? He'd be gone in a heartbeat at my table.

[Fwiffo86]

He's already given me two leads, based on his interpetation:
-illusion mastery (the class benefit for the illusion school) allows him to make an object appear to be up to a 5-foot cube and make sound, but it requires an action to see through the "minor illusion" cantrip.
-He has informed me that his idea will ensure that the opponents are always at a disadvantage (and taking disadvantage on their checks).

What should I be scared of?

He may find that spellcasting is vastly inferior to what he actually thinks it's capable of. I had a player who uses only casters. He likes the spell changes, but noticed a severe cutting of his initially perceived capabilities.

Be warned. Your player will likely not be happy with any decision you make, as the spells are far from reliable, even at the higher levels.

As far as disadvantage, what on earth does he think that comes from? Disadvantage has a condition/trigger. It is not the default situation. As I recall, nothing forces disadvantage when dealing with illusions. Each one has clear descriptions of what you can/can not do with it.

[CNagy]

I'd start making liberal use of the "one free object/environment interaction per your turn." Just kicking dirt onto a minor illusion should reveal it for what it is.

[burninatortrog]

illusion mastery (the class benefit for the illusion school) allows him to make an object appear to be up to a 5-foot cube and make sound, but it requires an action to see through the "minor illusion" cantrip.

I think your player is going to be very disappointed with the minor illusion cantrip. Here's the RAW text on how enemies can see through it:


If you create an image of an object ... Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it.

If a creature uses its action to examine the sound or image, the creature can determine that it is an illusion with a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC. If a creature discerns the illusion for what it is, the illusion becomes faint to the creature.

Emphasis mine. The key thing to note is that the spell says "a creature can use an action to attempt to see through the illusion." The spell does NOT say "a creature must use an action to see through the illusion."

The spell offers many other ways for creatures to disbelieve the illusion. The first bolded clause explicitly calls out the fact that a creature can use its free "interaction with an object" to touch the image and automatically disbelieve it, no action required.

The second bolded clause is even more open-ended. At the DM's discretion, even the suspicion that the image or sound is an illusion is enough for a creature to see through it, no action required. This means players will have to get creative if they want to use minor illusion on an intelligent creature more than once. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Generally I prefer to avoid disappointing players, but RAW is RAW and you can only take power gaming so far. Alltogether, minor illusion is still a very versatile and useful spell, one of the best cantrips available. It's just not a combat spell that you can use to consume a creature's action every round.

[illyrus]

Phantasmal Force depends a lot on how you arbitrate it. Actually that's true for most illusions and generally I suggest a dedicated illusionist and GM sit down and talk through example scenarios and get on the same page on how things will probably play out.

Example:
PC: "I cast Phantasmal Force on the orc and shout 'Iron Maiden of Earth, come forth!'. If the orc fails his int save he sees an iron maiden rise out of the ground and entrap him, he should be restrained inside with no way to attack anyone and taking 1d6 psychic damage a round. Everyone should have advantage on him."

DM: "He screams in pain and begs to be let out"
or
DM: "Uh... sure, he'll spend his action every round to make an investigation check then"
or
DM: "No, that far exceeds the scope of the spell"
PC: "But hold person is the same level and they're worse off! It even says that they rationalize any inconsistencies!"

Let's say the DM goes with one of the former options, the player now uses major image in the next encounter to form a wall of stone with spikes coming out of it around half the baddies. Do the baddies try to beat on the spiked wall, inspect it to see if it is an illusion, or retreat to seek reinforcements or an alternate path?

Basically the DM and illusionist should try to be on the same page. This and the charm-style spells seem to be the ones I've generally seen arbitrated wildly differently between groups across all editions.

[Rhaegar14]

What's preventing you from kicking him out? He'd be gone in a heartbeat at my table.

This is an attitude I see on GiantITP a lot and frankly, I don't really understand it. A player has to be a SERIOUS and unrepentant troublemaker to warrant being kicked off my D&D table, because all the people who play in my group are my FRIENDS and kicking them out of the group can have pretty serious social implications beyond them no longer being present in the game. It's only a thing I've ever done once, and it was because everybody agreed that having the player in question at our table reduced the quality of the experience for everyone, and then beyond that most of us didn't actually like him as a person.

[Yagyujubei]

first, I hope you're making him reroll at a lower level than the rest of the team or at some other penalty, because there should be a penalty for dying, and killing yourself just because you don't like the build you have is way way worse.

second, I'm sure he's missing some of the finer points of illusion magic because the wording is pretty good at limiting crazy exploits, there are many threads about people trying to do crazy things that they didn't notice are illegal.

third, don't forget that YOU are the GM and if something is ruining the game for the rest of the team you can just rule it illegal. Even if it technically fits in RAW, remind him that it probably doesn't fit RAI and if it disrupts gameplay in a major way then it won't fly at your table.

fourth, if he complains about it, then just have the enemies they face start doing the exact same crap that he's pulling right back at him. nothing says that enemies have to be stupid. get some enemies with mage slayer, make sure casters have counterspell. if they're high enough level start introducing true sight into enemy repertoirs, etc. etc.


EDIT: also at rhaegar I just want to say that I'm a bit of a min maxer myself and even I can see how it can ruin the game for others in our sessions so I pull it back considerably to make a session fun for everyone. if someone wen't balls to the way and didnt even care about it they could ruin the game for everyone like i said, and if the game is no longer fun then why is the group even playing anymore? obviously talk to the person first, but if they refuse to change then they have to go.

EDIT 2: it's also a major pitfall of playing DnD with people you've been close friends with for a long time. it causes any confilicts in game to bleed into personal life and it's no fun...i kinda prefer playing with new people because of this.

[MrStabby]

I think it is fair to also say that this is a character that has chosen to specialise in illusions. They should have abilities and utility commensurate with their specialisation. If their chosen school is chosen by their DM to be of limited use then I think they have a right to complain.

I suppose I would suggest looking at things like grappling builds as a parallel example. It is a build where the PC has chosen a non damage related path focussed on a degree of battlefield control and by the act of specialising they have become very good at it. I would suggest an equivalent power level should be aimed at.

[RulesJD]

I think it is fair to also say that this is a character that has chosen to specialise in illusions. They should have abilities and utility commensurate with their specialisation. If their chosen school is chosen by their DM to be of limited use then I think they have a right to complain.

I suppose I would suggest looking at things like grappling builds as a parallel example. It is a build where the PC has chosen a non damage related path focussed on a degree of battlefield control and by the act of specialising they have become very good at it. I would suggest an equivalent power level should be aimed at.

This. This so many times to so many post in this thread. Why do DMs lose their collective minds at the very mention of literally any illusion spell? They are by far the most under utilized spells in the game and yet can provide the most entertainment. I would gladly applaud any player that wants to choose Illusionist wizard over the more mechanically powerful Evocation/Abjuration.

An Illusionist Wizard is a nice term for party buffer. They can provide all sorts of fun tricks for the party while generating very little for themselves. Stop being so afraid of illusions just because you can't come up with create methods of dealing with such things.

[AmbientRaven]

Others have covered it well, but I also play with intelligent creatures are more likely to disbelieve things that just appear.

I had a player who would make an illusionary wall to block off infantry. So the infantry walked through as a wall suddenly appearing isn't logical

[SharkForce]

Others have covered it well, but I also play with intelligent creatures are more likely to disbelieve things that just appear.

I had a player who would make an illusionary wall to block off infantry. So the infantry walked through as a wall suddenly appearing isn't logical

that's so true. there totally aren't spells that just create a wall out of nothing in D&D that could have been cast. and regular soldiers are definitely the sort of people who you would want to refer all your questions about arcana to, screw those uppity sages, they don't know squat about spells or magic.

ummm... no. that's just being a jerk. have them check if it's real (and get their investigation check)? sure. have them just automatically know that this particular wall that magically appeared is an illusion as soon as it appears? no. that's a load of crap.

a ball of fire coming out of nowhere and dealing enough damage in a second to incinerate a house is not logical. do your soldiers choose to not bother making a dex save against fireball damage?

a bunch of tentacles coming out of a tree and grabbing their friends and crushing them to death is not logical. do they just stand there and joke around with each other about how those guys are gonna feel so stupid after the illusion wears off?

in a setting where magic is possible, someone who is capable of making an illusion of something may also be able to make the real something. it is NOT logical to assume that anything which suddenly appears is guaranteed to be an illusion and automatically treat it as such. it is reasonable to apply some amount of testing, particularly if the testing does not appear to be too risky (as is the case with a stone wall, generally speaking). it is absolutely not reasonable to assume that it is an illusion and march on through without even slowing down.

[MrStabby]

that's so true. there totally aren't spells that just create a wall out of nothing in D&D that could have been cast. and regular soldiers are definitely the sort of people who you would want to refer all your questions about arcana to, screw those uppity sages, they don't know squat about spells or magic.

ummm... no. that's just being a jerk. have them check if it's real (and get their investigation check)? sure. have them just automatically know that this particular wall that magically appeared is an illusion as soon as it appears? no. that's a load of crap.

a ball of fire coming out of nowhere and dealing enough damage in a second to incinerate a house is not logical. do your soldiers choose to not bother making a dex save against fireball damage?

a bunch of tentacles coming out of a tree and grabbing their friends and crushing them to death is not logical. do they just stand there and joke around with each other about how those guys are gonna feel so stupid after the illusion wears off?

in a setting where magic is possible, someone who is capable of making an illusion of something may also be able to make the real something. it is NOT logical to assume that anything which suddenly appears is guaranteed to be an illusion and automatically treat it as such. it is reasonable to apply some amount of testing, particularly if the testing does not appear to be too risky (as is the case with a stone wall, generally speaking). it is absolutely not reasonable to assume that it is an illusion and march on through without even slowing down.

Actually this is where I see the dedicated illusionist being able to use his class abilities. A wall appearing from nowhere, silently and with no reason is very suspicious in a world where illusions can be cast. A suspicious guard would examine this newly appeared wall - possibly poking it if they are within reach. Casters who can create objects with a sharp snap as they come into existence are both more convincing and more rare and fewer enemies would think to try and use their action to disbelieve them.

[SharkForce]

there is no "sharp snap" described when a real wall of stone is cast. but if there was, why in hell would a regular foot soldier know such specific details about a level 4 spell? how do they even know it isn't a different version of the spell researched by a different person that doesn't make the "sharp snap"? why is the illusionist, who is an intelligent wizard (probably at or near the pinnacle of human intelligence), likely knows all about the subject of arcana, and can cast spells, not knowledgeable enough to just make the illusionary wall also make the "sharp snap" sound when it pops into existence?

the existence of magic means that when a wall appears out of thin air, you don't have any way of knowing whether it is a real wall or a fake wall unless you know what spell has been cast. so unless you saw the person casting it, and were able to identify the spell with arcana, you have no idea. maybe it's real. maybe not.

it is reasonable for the soldiers to perform some sort of tests to see if the wall is an illusion or not. it is not reasonable for the soldiers to automatically know that the wall is an illusion and walk right through it.

that said, even if it is an illusion, it should still delay them after being detected. because if you can make an illusion of a wall, you can make an illusion of the ground. and if you can make an illusion of the ground, you can cover a spiked pit trap. or that hill over there could be false, and inside it are 100 heavy cavalry waiting to charge your flank. or those trees could be providing cover for archers.

the presence of an illusionist of any variety and any level means you need to consider the possibility that anything you see is not there, and anything you don't see is there.

[ChubbyRain]

What's fun is when you teach creatures a specific tactics in order to screw them over later.


Enemy: "The first wall was fake, so the second wall must be fake too!"

Enemy: "Wow, this fake fire sure does burn..."

The illusionist put up a wall of fire illusion which the enemy learned was fake so the next time all 10 came running at us (we were running away) they thought the second wall of fire was also an illusion... Nope!

Moral of the story, Illusionist have other spells, don't forget about them having other spells.*

*to those that DM or play illusionist.

[Sullivan]

The idea of killing a character because a person did not like the build put a bad taste in my mouth. What should have happened was a conversation about switching builds to something he/she would like more which would have most likely happened with this being a game and all. That being said it's my personal philosophy to try and facilitate fun as well as the game as a dm. I would say that this player switching classes should only matter if he is taking away from everyones fun or falling into the "I attack the king" mentality.

I mitigate these two things in a few ways.

1. I always let a player play the build they want, but every build or concept comes with a conversation. You want to be a King? Okay, but here is your current situation...

2. Talk to everyone about what kind of game you're going to be running. Is it a bare bones campaign where magic is not the say all end all where running into a group of goblins leads to all or nothing fight for survival or is it a high fantasy where grabbling a dragon is totally within the scope of any player?

3. Have a conversation about role-playing and don't forget to award it as well as character development. This is a good time to catch something like a party full of lone wolf assassins.

4. if all else fails remind them of conversation number 2 and tell them that they can totally run the kind of game that they want to see and you'll be more than happy to play in it :smallbiggrin:

as far as what he is trying to push on you as rules, specifically the disadvantage, don't feel weird about saying "maybe those are the rules in the book, but they're not the rules in this campaign." I'm going to assume this person has not really dm'ed much because thats really enough for most players I know that have ran campaigns.

[D.U.P.A.]

What's preventing you from kicking him out? He'd be gone in a heartbeat at my table.

Sometimes there is need for some time for a player to find the most comfortable character, especially a new player, so there must be some room for testing various archetypes.



ummm... no. that's just being a jerk. have them check if it's real (and get their investigation check)? sure. have them just automatically know that this particular wall that magically appeared is an illusion as soon as it appears? no. that's a load of crap.


Minor illusion specifically says you cannot make greater illusion than 5 feet cube, how can you expect to create great wall of China with a simple cantrip. After all, it is minor, not major illusion. Other wall spells however are no illusion, but something better to not step into.

[MrStabby]

Minor illusion specifically says you cannot make greater illusion than 5 feet cube, how can you expect to create great wall of China with a simple cantrip. After all, it is minor, not major illusion. Other wall spells however are no illusion, but something better to not step into.

I think that this bit was about illusions in general, not just that one spell. But yes, I agree you need to abide by the rules of the spell.



I agree that if the player is new to the edition then they should have a bit of slack. It sounds like they are looking to play an archetype that requires quite a high degree of creativity - in contrast to what their previous character may have been. It is certainly different to rolling up fighter after fighter adjusting their abilities or trying to get better stats. I would certainly find it plausible that the decision is about playstyle rather than power.

[SharkForce]

Sometimes there is need for some time for a player to find the most comfortable character, especially a new player, so there must be some room for testing various archetypes.



Minor illusion specifically says you cannot make greater illusion than 5 feet cube, how can you expect to create great wall of China with a simple cantrip. After all, it is minor, not major illusion. Other wall spells however are no illusion, but something better to not step into.

well good thing there's a whole bunch of other illusion spells, many of which can be used to create (illusions of) walls then, isn't it?

[Vogonjeltz]

He's already given me two leads, based on his interpetation:
-illusion mastery (the class benefit for the illusion school) allows him to make an object appear to be up to a 5-foot cube and make sound, but it requires an action to see through the "minor illusion" cantrip.
-He has informed me that his idea will ensure that the opponents are always at a disadvantage (and taking disadvantage on their checks).

What should I be scared of?

1) What is this "Illusion mastery" of which you speak? I'm looking at the Wizard Arcane Tradition School of Illusion, and Illusion Mastery is nowhere to be found. Nor is anything that carries the benefit you've listed.

I'd be more concerned that he's making things up than anything else.

2) Minor Illusion: Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it. So any monster that sees a wall and then touches it will auto-comprehend it's illusory nature, walk through it and throttle the illusionist. This little caveat renders it pretty useless in combat, especially considering it requires an action to use.

What it would be good for it is blocking line of sight to the group's Rogue (assuming you have one) and giving them the ability to hide and then stealth over for a sneak attack. Of course any Arcane Trickster could do the same thing on their own.

If they want to try and fake-out enemies, they are going to be fairly reliant on your willingness to agree to anything at all. This would certainly be more useful for convincing enemies that they heard something else (i.e. the Wizard is hiding, and after making a noise they create the sound of a cat or owl or wind in the branches).


This is an attitude I see on GiantITP a lot and frankly, I don't really understand it. A player has to be a SERIOUS and unrepentant troublemaker to warrant being kicked off my D&D table, because all the people who play in my group are my FRIENDS and kicking them out of the group can have pretty serious social implications beyond them no longer being present in the game. It's only a thing I've ever done once, and it was because everybody agreed that having the player in question at our table reduced the quality of the experience for everyone, and then beyond that most of us didn't actually like him as a person.

Agreed, I immensely dislike it when people try to exploit misreading of the rules for unearned advantage, but I wouldn't resort to asking someone to leave unless they were truly disruptive.

On that same note, I'm shocked the guy had to have the character commit suicide in order to swap characters. If one of our players finds themselves really disatisfied with choices they've made we're typically willing to either let them retroactively make a change in design, or to just come up with a reason their character leaves and a new one gets added in.

[Shining Wrath]

One way to mess with an Illusionist PC ... not that you always SHOULD mess with them ... is the Horde of D20s. If there are 6 goblins, they all get to roll to see if they discern the illusion. If one does, he can tell the others and they gain a fresh roll with Advantage. In the case cited above of a troop of infantry, the odds that at least one guy spots the illusion, walks up, and swings his weapon through it a few times approaches certainty unless the DC to spot it is very high.

Illusions can be very powerful against the likes of Ogres and Giants - big, dumb foes. They don't work against hordes or intelligent foes.

[SharkForce]

One way to mess with an Illusionist PC ... not that you always SHOULD mess with them ... is the Horde of D20s. If there are 6 goblins, they all get to roll to see if they discern the illusion. If one does, he can tell the others and they gain a fresh roll with Advantage. In the case cited above of a troop of infantry, the odds that at least one guy spots the illusion, walks up, and swings his weapon through it a few times approaches certainty unless the DC to spot it is very high.

Illusions can be very powerful against the likes of Ogres and Giants - big, dumb foes. They don't work against hordes or intelligent foes.

checking whether most illusions are real without touching it calls for an investigation(int) check and requires an action. there is no chance that they will just walk up and "spot" the illusion generally speaking, without specific effort being expended on such things.

for some illusions, there is no way to save or investigate it at all (though truesight works, and they can become aware that it is an illusion, it just won't help see through it in some cases).

[D.U.P.A.]

well good thing there's a whole bunch of other illusion spells, many of which can be used to create (illusions of) walls then, isn't it?

Yes, but such spells require you to spend resources (in form of spell slots) of which you have limited number in a day. Also these spells (ex. phantasmal forces) have well defined rules, the Wisdom saving throw, the effect, the duration and all this. While the true cantrips like Minor illusion, Prestidigitation, Thaumaturgy, Druidcraft, etc have more of rp and fun value than anything else, it is nothing wrong if a DM disallow their effect to have meaningful choices in his campaign.

[XmonkTad]

Illusions in general require a lot more creative rather than mechanical prowess. You can end up hurting yourself a lot by making an illusion of the wrong thing at the wrong time (eg an illusory fire elemental underwater).
The flip-side to that is that there are not quite so many hard counters as there have been in previous editions. True sight and blindsense are pretty good at shutting down illusionists, but that probably won't be commonplace until higher levels.
There are much softer counters available though. Things like hordes and such have been mentioned above but the lowly Detect Magic can do the job in a pinch (you summoned a dragon that radiates an aura of illusion magic I wonder what that could be?).

From what you have told us OP, I can't speak to the creativity of your play but they probably won't be able to abuse the mechanics badly with an illusionist without DM fiat. Make sure you know the illusion rules fairly well so that he can't selectively read anything to you. The most obvious thing they'll try is using the illusions to mess with line of sight so he can gain advantage on attack rolls (or give the enemies disadvantage). This might not be as big a problem as you would think. He can't really take advantage of the cover on his own for offensive purposes (takes an action to cast the illusion) and he couldn't use it to the best effect even if he could as not many spells require attack rolls (notable exception: disintegrate). Defensive purposes are a bit stronger, but not that much more than just positioning yourself well on the battlefield (like behind something that isn't an illusion).
Higher level illusions should have more effect, which is exactly right. "Abuse" at that point is self-limiting.

Don't let your player kill their character to re-roll again. Talk to them about this. It's not a good thing; you're the DM and you shouldn't allow it.

[Giant2005]

I would certainly find it plausible that the decision is about playstyle rather than power.

Maybe I'm a touch jaded but I think it seems to be too much of a coincidence to simply be about playstyle.
Magic users have a terrible time at low levels with barely any spells and their cantrip damage being sub-par. That is the time when Martial characters excel and in particular the Dual-Wielder which is noticeably more powerful than the other options (Except perhaps a really high AC Sword-and-Boarder).
If the replacement character keeps the experience of the original character, it seems most likely to me that the player optimized a character for low level play with the absolute intention of replacing it with one optimized for high level play when the time was right.

[comk59]

I don't know if this has been covered before, but what happens if you cast an illusion over a source of light?

[ChubbyRain]

I don't know if this has been covered before, but what happens if you cast an illusion over a source of light?

If you believe the illusion is real it blocks the light, if you can see through the illusion (thus knows it's fake) then you can see the light.

However, if someone doesn't see the illusion (say around a corner) but the light reaches a place where that creature can see, ten they can see the light.

The illusion doesn't effect a creature unless they see the illusion. Unless your spell is not just "covering up" a light source but changing the spell itself (invisible spell from 3.5 was fun as hell) then the light source will be seen unless a creature is affected by the illusion.

[comk59]

Okay, I guess that makes some sense. But where exactly is the cutoff? Do illusions cast shadows only if you see the illusion before the shadow?

Or maybe a more relavant question, what if you cast an illusion on the only source of light? Are the only people affected people who were looking directly at the light? And if it's pitch dark, do they get to to disbelieve it even if they can't see it?

Ugh, this is hurting my head. What if someone had a camera somehow, and they took a picture of the illusion? I guess it makes sense that the camera wouldn't "believe" the illusion. But what if you look at something through a mirror? Is the mirror fooled? I need the psychic mind holograms in my game about magical elves to have internally consistent physics!!

Okay, obviously, I'm being a bit overdramatic here. But I also am DMing a campaign with a too-clever-for-his-own-good illusionist (Bard, but he likes illusions). I haven't had any problems yet actually, but I'm trying to think ahead.

[ChubbyRain]

Okay, I guess that makes some sense. But where exactly is the cutoff? Do illusions cast shadows only if you see the illusion before the shadow?

Or maybe a more relavant question, what if you cast an illusion on the only source of light? Are the only people affected people who were looking directly at the light? And if it's pitch dark, do they get to to disbelieve it even if they can't see it?

Ugh, this is hurting my head. What if someone had a camera somehow, and they took a picture of the illusion? I guess it makes sense that the camera wouldn't "believe" the illusion. But what if you look at something through a mirror? Is the mirror fooled? I need the psychic mind holograms in my game about magical elves to have internally consistent physics!!

Okay, obviously, I'm being a bit overdramatic here. But I also am DMing a campaign with a too-clever-for-his-own-good illusionist (Bard, but he likes illusions). I haven't had any problems yet actually, but I'm trying to think ahead.

The big thing to remember is that illusions are not real.

Only creatures that see the illusion think it is real.

There is two ways of looking at this and dealing with the light problem. The way I prefer to deal with it is like this.

Yes, creatures THINK it sheds light, when it really doesn't. What they are seeing if fake surroundings. Now if you have Darkvision and do this, you could allow creatures without Darkvision to "see" the room (as the illusion is projected into their minds). If they pass the Int save or whatever (or stumble into something you didn't put in the illusion) then they break the illusion and no longer can see.

The illusion isn't just an item sitting in an area. The source of the magic you cast may be in an area but it is then projecting magic into any creature that comes within LoS.

In all honesty D&D does a horrible job with illusions, it always has, it takes the vague approach and puts it in a system that is very specific driven.

One of myy favorite illusions is the Illusionary Bridge trap from 3.5, not sure exactly which spell let you do this but... If you are walking across this bridge and fail the will save you stay on the bridge. If you pass the will save you fall through the bridge because you now knew it was an illusion. Fun times fun times.

[XmonkTad]

One of myy favorite illusions is the Illusionary Bridge trap from 3.5, not sure exactly which spell let you do this but... If you are walking across this bridge and fail the will save you stay on the bridge. If you pass the will save you fall through the bridge because you now knew it was an illusion. Fun times fun times.

Shadow Conjuration (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/shadowConjuration.htm) Is the spell you're thinking of.

I have an idea for a warlock that uses illusions to their benefit, but I've never known if it would work. The basic idea is you cast Darkness on an article of clothing/jewelry and using the Devil's Sight invocation and the Mask of Many Faces invocation to let yourself see in darkness and cast a (free) illusion on yourself to make your clothing look like something different. If a creature sees through your disguise you're immediately hidden in a ball of darkness that they can't see through (so they can't help point out your illusion to another creature, because they can't see you). If they fall for the illusion, then it is opaque, and blocks the line of sight to the darkness. With Devil's Sight, you don't care about being stuck in a ball of darkness all the time.

Don't know if it really works though. RAW I think it does, but it's hard to tell. You sort of end up with Schrodinger's darkness.

[comk59]

That actually sounds hilarious. Would that be one of those shadow spells?

Yeah, the vagueries are throwing me off, but I can understand the concept of projecting an image into the mind of anyone within LoS. Although the munchkin in me is still making me curious about the mirror thing. I suppose it would have to be on a case-bye-case basis.

[ChubbyRain]

That actually sounds hilarious. Would that be one of those shadow spells?

Yeah, the vagueries are throwing me off, but I can understand the concept of projecting an image into the mind of anyone within LoS. Although the munchkin in me is still making me curious about the mirror thing. I suppose it would have to be on a case-bye-case basis.

Wotc has never really decided if D&D 5e will be a specific rules game or a vague rules game. Right now it is a rules heavy vague generalist type game.

It is annoying.

But yeah, think of illusions as a machine that beams a mental image of X into anyone's brains within LoS and it starts to work out better.

One thing I do is write down illusions/enchantments I'm using as a PC or DM that only effect the target on a piece of paper. Then I only let the target know what it is and let them act it out.

Oh and under the bridge is usually a monster like a gigantic pudding or something that the players have to fight from the inside.... At least if you have fun building encounters. :smallbiggrin: