D&D (2024) Wizard (Playtest 7)

[Parmandur]

I'd imagine a big part of it is that Evoker is the one you can get for free on Beyond without having access to any books. which I think is the same for Champion, Open Hand, Fiend, Thief, etc. All the ones at the top, from what I can tell.

Beyond in 2020 actually provided data that showed the most popular Subclasses among only users who had access to everything, and limited to characters actually used: the SRD Classes were still dominant. I would suggest that WotC used the most popular Subclasses as examples: Chicken or the egg...?

 

[Neonchameleon]

See? This is a great example, and a clear use for silent image.
What isn't clear is how (and if) Malleable Illusions makes it better or different in any way. I don't think it does.

The obvious use for Malleable Illusion is quick changes and saving spells. The Disguise Self spell will only change your appearance once. A wizard with Malleable Illusion can play silly games by changing their appearance every time they go round a corner without utterly burning through their spell slots. Of course a warlock can simply take an invocation to cast a new disguise on themselves at will - but both of them have a substantially increased range of options over an ordinary caster who can just disguise themselves once per spell slot.

 

[Kobold Stew]

Here's something I started writing at the beginning of the playtest period (last August) about Illusion mafic, that I never finished.

Spoiler

Illusionist are awesome, or at least they should be. Unlike most wizard spell schools, the workings of the school of Illusion are the most subject to DM interpretation. I am hoping that One D&D will fix this: not nerfing the zany and fun opportunities that illusions present in play, but being clearer about how they work in combat.

The wording for low-level illusion spells outlines three common features (precise wording varies slightly, but doesn’t matter for now):

• Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it.
• A creature that uses its action to examine the image 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 creature can see through the image, and its other sensory qualities become faint to the creature.

I’ve marked these as separate points; the wording is not entirely clear that the first two are separate: Is using your action the same as “physical interaction”? I think not – these are two ways to determine whether something is an illusion: physical interaction or making a Intelligence (Investigation) check as an action. (In some spells versions of these sentences are in the same paragraph, in others different ones.) The result of either of these actions will be the third point: the ability to see through the illusion.

So we need a definition of “physical interaction”: we’re told “you can interact with one object…for free, during either your move or your action” (PHB 196), so you’re covered if you are physically adjacent to the illusion. Attacking the illusion at range should also count as physical interaction.

One improvement would be to Make Passive Investigation checks a thing. Currently only mentioned in the Observant feat, allowing a passive investigation check vs the Illusion’s DC should allow a “free” attempt to disbelieve, without the need of spending an action.

Anyways, I know how I've DM'd and as a player I have mostly avoided illusions, even though they can be gonzo fun.

 

[Stalker0]

See? This is a great example, and a clear use for silent image.
What isn't clear is how (and if) Malleable Illusions makes it better or different in any way. I don't think it does, RAW.

For better or worse, the language of "disbelieving" isn't part of 5e. You NEED to spend an action and win an opposed check (against a DC that every spellcaster is incentivized to max out), even if you are strongly inclined to believe it is an illusion

I do think that there's a real value in a passive investigation score, so that some characters instantly see though illusions without an action. It's intimated in the PHB, but never carried through. More than anything, I think this tightens up illusion magic. With that, then Malleable Illusion can give disadvantage (-5) to that check. Which makes it a really valuable investment.

Other questions:
A. Can I use Minor Illusion to create partial cover for an archer? Normally, yes. But what if it gets created mid-combat in front of everyone? RAW, you still can -- even if you see it being formed, you need to spend an action to get see through it. Now a DM might give advantage on the check, but there's no guidance, and it still burns an attacker's turn (or else they just accept that the archer has cover).

B. Does each individual in a group have to "disbelieve"? RAW, yes. What if one does so, and tells the others. Do they automatically see through it? Some would say yes. RAW says no. Again, this would be a reason to have a passive investigation score -- being told an illusion is there gives you (passive) advantage. And the characters who dump intelligence just can't see the sailboat (Mallrats reference).

C. And what range does examination work at? Do you need to physically interact with it? RAW, no. But at the same time, I'd like to think that being further than 30' (say) makes it harder to see through an illusion.

As I've said elsewhere, a half page of guidance could clear all illusion magic, and make it somethign that rewards creativity but leads to predictable responses from a DM, which simply isn't the case right now.

Throw it into the playtest comments. its unlikely to hit the PHB but it MIGHT hit the DMG, as they are talking about major revamps there.

I agree illusions are such an ubiquitous dnd thing that has very little guidance, and for something taht has such a wide range of potential power depending on DM interpretation, it would be good to have some better guideposts.

As you say, even something as simple as "how close do I need to be to something to interact with it" would be great.

 

[Moorcrys]

Malleable Illusion changes that. A true Illusionist can freely alter an ongoing illusion within the parameters of the original spell. The bear can be altered or transformed however you want, or "vanish into the trees" as an entirely different illusion takes the stage. Your Hallucinatory Terrain can be hit with a flash flood or a landslide. As long as the Illusionist spends the Bonus Action and remains within the limits of the spell, they can update or mold it however they please.

I’ve always wondered if malleable illusion can do something like refresh a mirror image spell to continually restore struck illusory forms of the caster. I’d allow it but I don’t know what’s intended.

 

[Kurotowa]

I’ve always wondered if malleable illusion can do something like refresh a mirror image spell to continually restore struck illusory forms of the caster. I’d allow it but I don’t know what’s intended.

Definitely not. Refreshing the duplicate count is not within the "normal parameters" of Mirror Image, in addition to being a massive unwarranted power boost. You might be able to get away with tweaking the duplicates to perform different actions instead of mimicking your own, for purely non-combat purposes.

 

[Yaarel]

For better or worse, the language of "disbelieving" isn't part of 5e. You NEED to spend an action and win an opposed check (against a DC that every spellcaster is incentivized to max out), even if you are strongly inclined to believe it is an illusion

I do think that there's a real value in a passive investigation score, so that some characters instantly see though illusions without an action. It's intimated in the PHB, but never carried through.

To see thru an illusion (now literally), the monster needs to make an Investigation check against the DC.

What is never clear to me: when does a monster "suspect" something is an illusion, in order to invest the action to do this?

Maybe it is better if viewers get a saving throw? Fail the save, then theres no suspicion. Win the save, then the monster suspects it might be an illusion.

Meanwhile, if the illusion is cast in front of them, perhaps they "win" the save and automatically "suspect" its an illusion. But still need to spend the action to try see thru it.


Also, Im unsure that Intelligence (Investigation) is always the best ability check to see thru an illusion. For example, if the illusion is impersonating someone, then a Wisdom (Insight) check seems appropriate to determine something is off.


I agree, the rules for illusion magic needs tightening. The rules need to be flexible and versatile, but the player − and the DM − need to have a clear idea about how to handle an illusion.

I’ve always wondered if malleable illusion can do something like refresh a mirror image spell to continually restore struck illusory forms of the caster. I’d allow it but I don’t know what’s intended.

Rules-As-Intended are likely, no. But it is a good question, to help clarify what illusions can do.

I agree illusions are such an ubiquitous dnd thing that has very little guidance, and for something that has such a wide range of potential power depending on DM interpretation, it would be good to have some better guideposts.

Exactly.

Heh, and the designers need to make sure any new rules dont ruin illusion for the players. We need clarity, not nerfs.

 

[Yaarel]

Re the Minor Illusion cantrip.

Its area of effect is awkward, a 5-foot cube. I prefer a space that is 5x5 and 10 feet tall, or perhaps a cylinder that is 5-foot diameter and 10 feet tall.

A 5-foot cube is large enough to fit an image of Human − but typically not one who is standing up. To make the spell less awkward I would prefer the spell area be tall enough without having to be weird about the position of the image.

 

[James Gasik]

I never took the 5' cube literally; after all, Medium-size creatures occupy the same space and many are taller than that but are obviously not 5' in all directions.

 

[Kobold Stew]

To see thru an illusion (now literally), the monster needs to make an Investigation check against the DC.

What is never clear to me: when does a monster "suspect" something is an illusion, in order to invest the action to do this?

Maybe it is better if viewers get a saving throw? Fail the save, then theres no suspicion. Win the save, then the monster suspects it might be an illusion.

Thanks for this. Why I like the idea of a Passive Investigation is that by calling for a roll, the DM makes the player suspicious, and it will change the action (and slow the game). A passive check allows the DM to say, at the start of the character's turn (maybe after others have gone) "The door is a dim outline, and you see three goblins with shortbows standing in the doorway."

It means the DM isn't describing the PC's mental state (you think something's amiss...) andthere's a clear response for player illusions (without "one of the orcs is naturally suspicious"). The passive check solves all of that.