D&D 5E Illusionist - is it as weak as it seems?

[Fanaelialae]

Illusions are fun at low level. Once you start fighting creatures with Blindsight and Truesight, it becomes far less fun. There are so many of them at higher level.

Whether an illusionist is strong or weak depends a lot on what the DM is willing to let him get away with (as has always been the case).

Also keep in mind that only the visual components of an illusion are ignored by creatures with Truesight / Blindsense. Conjuring a stone wall in front of a creature with Blindsense (using phantasmal force) is likely to cause that creature to veer away from it because it has a tactile component and is therefore "visible" to the creature. Causing the roar of a dragon to echo through the caverns you're in will affect (and potentially scare) even a creature with Truesight.

Illusions are best used interspersed with "real" spells, and as means of tricking the opposition into doing what you want them to do. For example, if pursuing someone, you can use illusionary walls of stone to channel them where you want them to go. They're unlikely to figure it out, since that requires physically interacting with the wall or taking an action to examine it. If they do happen to figure it out, however, make the next wall or the one after that a real one. Said someone runs headfirst into a stone wall that he believed nothing more than an illusion, and you nab him while he's reeling.

 

[I'm A Banana]

What are peoples thoughts on illusion spells?

The whole "as soon as you interact with them you know they're an illusion" thing seems to make them weak.

"Pantasmal" spells solve this problem pretty nicely.

You use "Illusion" spells when you want a group of critters to waste a round.

You use "Phantasmal" spells when you want one critter to be affected for a while.

 

[Jester David]

I enjoy that they didn't turn illusion into a blasty school of magic or include damage. We don't need tons of illusion spells doing psychic damage or being different from evocation spells solely because the line of flavour text says it's "shadow energy" or "phantom wounds".

The different schools of magic should play differently. Illusion has always been the creative person's school of magic, and I'm glad they left it in, and gave the specialist abilities that allowed them to make the most of the creative potential, doubling the effectiveness of your cantrips and allowing to adjust your illusions of the fly.

 

[Rhenny]

During the playtest, my buddy who played an illusionist and I found that in many cases, there was a huge compulsion to use non-illusion spells to help the party. Ie., flaming sphere, fireball, rope trick, etc.

The player really had fun with the illusions, but when push came to shove, a good fire spell with 1/2 damage on save would help out much more.

We got to thinking and started working on a fix. We gave the illusionist a special spell ability simply called illusionary spell (and I think we made it take up 1 prepared spell per castable slot). With this ability, the caster could replicate any conjuration or evocation spell (of a spell level that he could cast - using the same spell slot expenditure) as an illusory spell. The balance mechanism was that if the target or targets made their save, they were unaffected by the spell, and if the spell lasted for more than 1 round, each round the target could make another save to disbelieve. Another balancing factor was that if the creature had no mind, the spell would simply not affect it.

Although we only playtested the idea a little, we found that it encouraged the illusionist to cast more illusions, and the PC felt more like an illusionist. It also made adjudicating illusion spells much easier. Most of the time, the illusionist was just mimicking already existing spells. Of course, the illusionist could still use minor image, silent image, major image, etc.

Since then, nobody in my group has played an illusionist so I'm not sure how this idea would balance nor am I too sure how the 5e illusionist stacks up against other school casters (although I do think off hand that the illusionist is less desirable to play than the evoker, the enchanter, the transmuter, etc.).

 

[Mistwell]

Illusionists can be very powerful, or very weak. They take a creative player, and a DM who is willing to roll with things. It also helps if your fellow players are up for your unusual plans.

 

[ad_hoc]

I am with Jester Canuck on this.

The Illusionist does what it is supposed to do.

If you don't like illusions or you don't get much chance to use them in your game (social interaction and exploration aren't the majority of the game as they are designed to be) then you won't like it. That makes sense to me.

Illusionist also doesn't mean you can't cast other spells. Its main ability actually lets you cast more spells of other schools because it makes the illusion cantrip much better. Illusionists are highly versatile because of this.

That is good design to me.

If I was an illusionist the last thing I would want to be known for was being an illusionist. Illusions are subtle. Use them as needed. Illusionists should also use flaming sphere as needed too.

 

[lkj]

I'd just like to point out that Phantasmal Force is an amazing spell. It targets Intelligence, which can be easy to spot if the hostile creature is low on (animals, beasts, brutes etc.) and requires an action to break. If the creature doesn't spend an action to break the illusion, it will believe it to be real for a whole minute. I've been using this to turn tough encounters into trivial ones in the campaign I am currently running an Illusionist.

I honestly am enjoying my time as an Illusionist right now. You need to be creative to make the most of your spells, but if you manage to do that you can solve problems in ways no other school can even dream of. It's also nice to see some damage spells added to the Illusionist repertoire this time around.

Let me just agree on phantasmal force. There is a bard in the game that I run who has used it to marvelous effect. As for the discipline as a whole, I don't have enough game time in yet to say.

AD

 

[Eric V]

What are peoples thoughts on illusion spells?

The whole "as soon as you interact with them you know they're an illusion" thing seems to make them weak.

True. Also, I find any time you make efficiency of a class based mostly on DM fiat (which the 5e illusionist would be), then they tend to be underpowered. :/

 

[Eric V]

Maybe I can make illusions quasi-real if cast by illusionist. Not directly in the gonna-hurt-somebody realm, but possibly make them think the pain is real, etc. This is something to look at for sure...

4e did that sort of thing by having them inflict psychic damage...maybe that's a route you can go.

 

[Rune]

True. Also, I find any time you make efficiency of a class based mostly on DM fiat (which the 5e illusionist would be), then they tend to be underpowered. :/

Or overpowered. Or something in between.