D&D 5E How powerfull is a permanent blur item?

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Yea. Items that give +2000 damage aren't game breaking either. The DM just has to make sure the player with that item either can't get off the attack or misses if he does. I mean the item has no effect on monsters that aren't being hit so all we can say is such an item is "circumstantially potent".

I call BS.

Item's can be overpowered and game breaking without being an instant "I win" button in every circumstance.

You are very clearly arguing against something other than what I said.

 

[Caliban]

DM discretion, certainly. Truesight allows you to "automatically detect visual illusions and succeed on saving throws against them". And the cloak is a visual illusion, so the DM can decide that Truesight does more than detect the displacement effect, it negates it. However RAW the only thing that negates its' effect is damaging the user.

Not the only thing. Preventing them from moving negates it as well - grappling shuts it down, for example.

 

[Warmaster Horus]

I'll address both here, then. Not ever being hit is game breaking, even if you do not "over-rely" on attack rolls. This is because it would take a serious divergence for attack rolls to NOT be the primary method of reducing hit points. A DM would have to go out of their way to select monsters/NPCs that do not rely on attack rolls, and there are very few that do this. Even dragons, the titular creature of the game, rely primarily on attack roles to reduce hitpoints. So the other path would be to reduce the impact of combat as a resolution mechanic, which is another departure from the baseline. No problem in choosing to play that way, of course, just noting that given the wealth of intended play examples in the official products over all editions, combat is THE primary conflict resolution mechanic. And, again, within combat, attack rolls are THE primary damage vector.

...

D&D, like life, requires adaptation to challenges presented. In this case it is a Cloak of Displacement. It is very hard to hit a high AC character using the CoD with conventional attacks. However there are several convenient work arounds. Do ANY damage to the character wearing one, so Magic Missile, any save-for-half damage attacks and the like will remove the effect in some part until the PC's next turn. Truesight can help. Anything that gives an opponent advantage over the CoD player - Reckless Attack, Pack Tactics, Faerie Fire and so on, brings it back to a standard roll.

Might the DM have to 'go out of their way' to deal with this? Sure. The DM in question said the CoD was "literally game-breaking". If I'm a DM and the game is being broken, I have some level of responsibility in adjusting it to provide a challenging and entertaining experience for my players. That's what DM's there for. Does it mean every encounter has to be tilted to deal with the CoD? Of course not. But have having some tricks up your sleeve to keep the party on their toes is not a bad thing. Nor is pointing this out a condemnation of a poster.

 

[FrogReaver]

You are very clearly arguing against something other than what I said.

You know I can read you and understand you. You even gave me credit for doing so on the other thread. So please explain how what you are saying doesn't amount to "because the item isn't an I win button in every circumstance then it cannot be game breaking".

 

[Ovinomancer]

I am always striving to be more clear and to improve my ability to communicate. So maybe don't base whether or not you try something similar on the fact that you don't find me to be clear?

Rest assured, I do not look to you for such things. Nor is my pointing out your behavior an excuse for my behavior. You'll note the lack of 'you did it, so it was okay that I did it' in my post.

You didn't address the content of my post; you addressed your assumptions of why my post had the content it had.

Again, you seem to be willing to throw the first stone.

That is not at all what I said. Let me try it differently, for clarity:

By posting nothing but "You are unhelpful and I think you just told that guy to learn to play better" you have made an unhelpful post. You've been the pot, and have shouted out to me "Hey kettle, you are black." This is made more clear by way of the person you insist I wasn't helping not seeming to be present now to be helped even if you managed, while not actually yourself being helpful directly, to indirectly provide help to them by coaxing it out of me.

Ah, but that's not what I posted. I said that, and then offered suggestions on how to better present your case, including listing some options to reduce the reliance on attack rolls. See, I already followed my own advice -- I provided both a opinion, a critique, and some helpful suggestions!

 

[Warmaster Horus]

Not the only thing. Preventing them from moving negates it as well - grappling shuts it down, for example.

Grappling is an attack, no? I would assume it would be done at Disadvantage, too? Once grappled the effect would be in place. Add Web and other AOE grappling effects to the list of ways to reduce the Cloak's effectiveness.

 

[Caliban]

How powerfull is a permanent blur item? Specifically on +1 leather armor but it seems way overpowered for any item.

To actually answer your question - very powerful. If it has no limitations, then it's more powerful than a Cloak of Displacement, which can be shut off by doing damage to them (several monsters have damage auras, or damage you when you hit them, and several spells can give a similar effect, or just do damage without attack rolls) or by keeping them from moving (hold person spell, grappling, restraining them with magic [web, several other spells], sleep spell, etc.]

A permanent blur item, if you didn't add any limitations to it, would be very powerful on a high AC character, and moderately powerful on a low to mid AC character.

 

[FrogReaver]

Grappling is an attack, no? I would assume it would be done at Disadvantage, too? Once grappled the effect would be in place. Add Web and other AOE grappling effects to the list of ways to reduce the Cloak's effectiveness.

I believe grapple is resovled with an opposed skill checks not an attack roll.

 

[jaelis]

Grappling is an attack, no? I would assume it would be done at Disadvantage, too?

Grappling does not use an attack roll, so you wouldn't have disadvantage on your ability check.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

You know I can read you and understand you. You even gave me credit for doing so on the other thread. So please explain how what you are saying doesn't amount to "because the item isn't an I win button in every circumstance then it cannot be game breaking".

There is a difference of degrees. Or in the case of your intentionally-ridiculous example, magnitudes.

I item does not need to be an "I win" button in every circumstance to be game breaking. It just has to be an "I win" button in enough circumstances - which a cloak of displacement is not, given that it really only does anything at all in a single, very specific circumstance: when no one is doing anything harmful to the character that doesn't involve attack rolls, and the character already has a high enough AC to make accuracy of attack rolls low enough not to still hit while rolling with disadvantage, and nothing you are facing can see through illusions.