Faerie Fire Displacer Beast

[Chalkarts]

Easy Q,
If I'm fighting a displacer beast and cast faerie fire will it reveal the DBs true position? Outlining the beast but not the illusory image.

[PhantomSoul]

Faerie Fire

Faerie Fire
1 Evocation

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V
Duration: Up to 1 minute
Classes: Bard, Druid
Each object in a 20-foot cube within range is outlined in blue, green, or violet light (your choice). Any creature in the area when the spell is cast is also outlined in light if it fails a Dexterity saving throw. For the duration, objects and affected creatures shed dim light in a 10-foot radius.
Any attack roll against an affected creature or object has advantage if the attacker can see it, and the affected creature or object can’t benefit from being invisible.



Displacer Beast

Displacement. The displacer beast projects a magical illusion that makes it appear to be standing near its actual location, causing attack rolls against it to have disadvantage. If it is hit by an attack, this trait is disrupted until the end of its next turn. This trait is also disrupted while the displacer beast is incapacitated or has a speed of 0.

Your Advantage from Faerie Fire cancels out the Disadvantage from Displacement, but beyond that you would need to talk to the DM to see if there's a cool-solutions bonus. (The Displacer Beast isn't Invisible, so Displacement isn't negated without DM ruling.)

[Aett_Thorn]

Faerie Fire


Displacer Beast


Your Advantage from Faerie Fire cancels out the Disadvantage from Displacement, but beyond that you would need to talk to the DM to see if there's a cool-solutions bonus. (The Displacer Beast isn't Invisible, so Displacement isn't negated without DM ruling.)

Agree with this, but if I were DM here, I would say that the Faerie Fire outlines the Displacer Beast more in the direction that they actually are. This would be a good narrative reason for canceling the advantage/disadvantage out, since it still doesn’t show you exactly where they are, but gives you a better idea.

[Joe the Rat]

Another take is that the displacement isn't a constant shift, so it is shifts relative position as it moves. The center real position glowy bit is being partially covered by the maybe-glowy false image.

[Chronos]

One might argue that the illusion of being elsewhere is invisibility for the real beast, combined with an image of the beast somewhere else, and that negating invisibility would thus reveal the beast's true position.

[PhantomSoul]

One might argue that the illusion of being elsewhere is invisibility for the real beast, combined with an image of the beast somewhere else, and that negating invisibility would thus reveal the beast's true position.

I'd say the Aett_Thorn route is a muuuuuuuch better way to go... ("There are more than one" being equivalent to invisibility doesn't really make sense -- would you rule Mirror Image to grant Invisibility?)

[BoringInfoGuy]

I'd say the Aett_Thorn route is a muuuuuuuch better way to go... ("There are more than one" being equivalent to invisibility doesn't really make sense -- would you rule Mirror Image to grant Invisibility?)

Different effect. Mirror image creates duplicates, but you can still see the actual castor. If the spell has one duplicate left, an enemy sees two targets, one being real the other an illusion.

With the Displacer Beast, you only see one creature. But it is not standing where it appears to be.

[PhantomSoul]

Different effect. Mirror image creates duplicates, but you can still see the actual castor. If the spell has one duplicate left, an enemy sees two targets, one being real the other an illusion.

With the Displacer Beast, you only see one creature. But it is not standing where it appears to be.

Hm, from the phrasing I can see applying it, you're right -- I doubt I would (you're already negating Displacement through Advantage), but I can see saying it counts as granting the Condition even if it isn't described that way. So I guess the comparison might be whether See Invisibility should affect anything.

[BoringInfoGuy]

Hm, from the phrasing I can see applying it, you're right -- I doubt I would (you're already negating Displacement through Advantage), but I can see saying it counts as granting the Condition even if it isn't described that way. So I guess the comparison might be whether See Invisibility should affect anything.
Despite pointing out that Mirror Image is a bad comparison for Displacement, I don’t really agree that the Displacement illusion requires the Beast itself to be invisible. Consider a fish in a tank. You think you can see where it is. But when it pokes its head above water, the head and body do not seem to be connected. The refraction of the water was tricking your eyes.

The Displacer Beast is magical. Is the effect more like refraction, where your eyes are being tricked to believe it is not quite where it appears to be? Is the beast invisible, and what you see is an illusion?

I believe it would be more like refraction, so you see the beast, just a bit to the left / right / forward / back / whatever of where it is.

But a good case can be made for the invisible reality projected illusion view as well.

[PhantomSoul]

Despite pointing out that Mirror Image is a bad comparison for Displacement, I don’t really agree that the Displacement illusion requires the Beast itself to be invisible. Consider a fish in a tank. You think you can see where it is. But when it pokes its head above water, the head and body do not seem to be connected. The refraction of the water was tricking your eyes.

The Displacer Beast is magical. Is the effect more like refraction, where your eyes are being tricked to believe it is not quite where it appears to be? Is the beast invisible, and what you see is an illusion?

I believe it would be more like refraction, so you see the beast, just a bit to the left / right / forward / back / whatever of where it is.

But a good case can be made for the invisible reality projected illusion view as well.

So we're in agreement... it's not invisibility even if it's a creative interpretation attempt, especially since it seems to go out of it way to not say "Invisible".