Always a favorite of mine!
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 1E How do you play an illusionist?
- Thread starter Shades of Eternity
- Start date
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
Do the words of the Mighty Gygax contradict themselves? Very well then, they are in contradiction. (For High Gygaxian is verbose, and contain multitudes.)
The actual answer if you want to parse it is that the specific ban in the PHB overrides the general allowance in the DMG. As does the specific allowance in the PHB for rings compared to the Ring of Wizardry.*
Now, admittedly this runs into two issues; first, the DMG technically came out after the PHB, so it should supersede it (for example, the monk mistake). But the specific limitations and allowances within a class that references items would overrule any other mention, unless otherwise enumerated.
Or, do what everyone does and run with whatever works for your table, because boy, there are a lot of weird rules tucked into different areas!
*Then again, this ring has additional limitations in the actual description, but can be harmonized because it doesn't go past the illusionist's ability to cast spells, and the illusionist is a (sub-class) of Magic User.
fuindordm
Adventurer
On the other hand, it's not THAT hard to adjudicate illusions with a reasonable DM.
For example:
For example:
- no save against illusions that are eminently reasonable for the environment: a guard walks in, a puddle of green slime on the floor, etc UNLESS the target chooses to interact physically with the illusion (or gets that difficult % roll from the DMG that is not a saving throw)
- Sometimes when interacting with an illusion it is too late not to suffer the nonmagical consequences, for example an illusory floor covering an open pit.
- failed save when interacting with an illusion of a physical hazard: at most 2d6/spell level psychic damage, possibly less depending on circumstances
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
The difficult % roll would likely come if the target accidentally interacted with the illusion without intent, e.g. in my move-out-the-wall story from upthread, if a guard had happened to brush against the illusionary wall while moving around.
Depends.
If the illusion is a believable one of the cavern collapsing on the Ogres, I'd say it's almost save or die for them (I've seen this done, and the results were spectacular!). Or, if the illusion is of a warrior and the warrior hits in combat, the damage would be that of whatever weapon the illusion is using.
The moment you start putting hard guidelines on illusions is IMO the moment you start losing what makes them fun.
I do have to admit I like the 5e approach (I know, I can't believe I'm saying this either) where you need to interact with an illusion and make an Intelligence (Investigation) check against the save DC. Though that does bring with it the quirk that characters lacking sufficient Intelligence can simply fail to ever see through an illusion...
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
We all know these people in real life.
Yes but in D&D, most people refuse to believe that sort of thing could ever happen to their characters, which is one of the problems illusions have always run into. People don't like to admit that they can be easily deceived. As humans, we heavily rely on our vision, which is not our strongest sense. The eye can be fooled quite easily by tricks of the light, mirages, and optical illusions which don't even involve magic, so you'd think illusions would just be a lot more potent than they are, but they come with all these caveats about believability.
Granted, we are talking about the era of gaming where you prodded everything with an 11' pole and it felt like half the Monster Manual was full of "it looks like something innocent but is actually a deadly monster".
Snarf Zagyg
Notorious Liquefactionist
As an aside, I was just thinking about the passage from Gygax regarding illusionists being so OP had to given them additional restrictions.
What was it with Gygax thinking certain classes were completely OP that he went out of his way to punish them despite all evidence to the contrary? The illusionist is one. The thief is another (seriously, read the section in the DMG on Thief abilities, which further curtails them because he doesn't want them abused ... I mean, the one thing I always worried about in 1e was those pesky thieves dominating the game with their OP abilities!).
That said, I do love the bit about the paladin's warhorse.
If the character loses paladinhood for any reason, there will be an immutable enmity between character and mount{.}
That's right, bud. Your horse will have it out for you if you don't get your tithing right. FOREVER AND IMMUTABLY.
What was it with Gygax thinking certain classes were completely OP that he went out of his way to punish them despite all evidence to the contrary? The illusionist is one. The thief is another (seriously, read the section in the DMG on Thief abilities, which further curtails them because he doesn't want them abused ... I mean, the one thing I always worried about in 1e was those pesky thieves dominating the game with their OP abilities!).
That said, I do love the bit about the paladin's warhorse.
If the character loses paladinhood for any reason, there will be an immutable enmity between character and mount{.}
That's right, bud. Your horse will have it out for you if you don't get your tithing right. FOREVER AND IMMUTABLY.
Yeah Gary had some strange ideas about the game*. But in his defense, I've seen players make the most laughable things seem OP in actual play. I once played a Rogue in a Pathfinder 1e game, and because I was reliably getting Sneak Attack, the first-time DM complained that "Rogues are OP!" and I couldn't stop laughing for five minutes!
Or the inevitable Monk threads where some exasperated DM complains about the "unhittable, untargetable, immune to everything, stun machine with 1000' movement speed" that is wrecking their game and those of us who have had terrible experiences playing Monks perk up and put on our best Sus Fry faces thinking "is this a troll post?"
*I mean hidden, secret rules are one thing. But this is the guy who gave an entire class a hidden, secret class ability and admonished DM's to not even drop hints about it! You know when they did this in Star Wars Galaxies, the entire playerbase freaked out, but in 1e? Business as usual!
Or the inevitable Monk threads where some exasperated DM complains about the "unhittable, untargetable, immune to everything, stun machine with 1000' movement speed" that is wrecking their game and those of us who have had terrible experiences playing Monks perk up and put on our best Sus Fry faces thinking "is this a troll post?"
*I mean hidden, secret rules are one thing. But this is the guy who gave an entire class a hidden, secret class ability and admonished DM's to not even drop hints about it! You know when they did this in Star Wars Galaxies, the entire playerbase freaked out, but in 1e? Business as usual!
Whizbang Dustyboots
Gnometown Hero
Are we talking about bards' magical pants surprise again?
Similar Threads
