D&D General Reification versus ludification in 5E/6E

[Hussar]

I was thinking more along the lines of skywrite--something that could be seen from miles away, not a couple hundred yards.


Precisely.

Heck, dancing lights has a range of 120 feet. You need a signal that can be seen for hundreds of yards? That will do. That can be seen for miles. A lighthouse isn’t much taller than that.

But the point is made. Why should magic missile be able to be used in a way that is obviously not intended by the spell - it must target creatures? Especially when there are numerous spells that can actually make signals as intended.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Illusionists are the perfect example here. Most tables won't even consider using them because it's too much of a gamble. Every single time you try to do something, you wind up playing Mother May I with the DM. It's endlessly frustrating and leads to all sorts of play break down.

“Most tables”? Source?

That's not going to be much of an argument... the DM is right.

Sometimes.

 

[Hussar]

“Most tables”? Source?

Sometimes.

You’re saying that most tables see regular use of illusions? That illusionists are a popular wizard subclass?

Seriously?

 

[Hussar]

Okie doke. You want some actual sources? Howzabout Critical Role?


There's the list of all spells cast by Critical Role. Note the very little use of 1st through 5th level illusions. Now, by illusions, I specifically mean spells that create some sort of image or hologram or something of the sort. Yes, some of the spells they cast come from the illusion school - blur, invisibility - but that's not what we're talking about is it? Spells like blur, invisibility or Hypnotic Pattern aren't what I'm talking about. Those spells have very specific rules and there's very little wiggle room for what you can or cannot do with those spells. Granted, Major Image got used a whopping THREE times over the course of the campaign. Hallucinatory Terrain a whole 4 times. Compared to the THIRTY FIVE times Polymorph got cast. Out of the nearly 100 sixth level spells cast, Programmed Illusion got used ... once.

So, yeah, I'm fairly confident in saying that most groups are not using illusion spells very often. Considering that illusions cast in the group account for what, about 1% of the spells cast? Maybe 5%? I didn't do the math, so, I'm sure the overly pedantic amongst us will do the counting.

 

[James Gasik]

I'm surprised Hallucinatory Terrain was cast at all, given how limited the spell is in 5e.

 

[Lanefan]

I keep stats for everything but never even considered keeping track of how often each spell gets cast. Huh.

 

[Hussar]

Heh. It is funny that @doctorbadwolf called me out to provide citations, when earlier in the thread @Lanefan was saying that his table almost never saw illusionists.

 

[Lanefan]

Heh. It is funny that @doctorbadwolf called me out to provide citations, when earlier in the thread @Lanefan was saying that his table almost never saw illusionists.

Which is true. They're gated behind some fairly high stat requirements - we roll our stats - which right there cuts down their potential numbers. Necromancers, our (homebrew) other mage sub-class, also see limited numbers in part for the same reason.

Add to that the fact that both these classes are considerably more specialized than is a typical mage and yes, it's expected (and borne out) that there won't be that many of them.

Note however that "not that many" by no means equals "none". They just split a big party in two in my game to go on two different missions, one part is all warriors and clerics - no sneaks, no mages - which I'm running now, the other part has a bunch of sneaks and mages including two multiclass illusionists (a Monk-Ill and a Thief-Ill).

 

[Hussar]

Which is true. They're gated behind some fairly high stat requirements - we roll our stats - which right there cuts down their potential numbers. Necromancers, our (homebrew) other mage sub-class, also see limited numbers in part for the same reason.

Add to that the fact that both these classes are considerably more specialized than is a typical mage and yes, it's expected (and borne out) that there won't be that many of them.

Note however that "not that many" by no means equals "none". They just split a big party in two in my game to go on two different missions, one part is all warriors and clerics - no sneaks, no mages - which I'm running now, the other part has a bunch of sneaks and mages including two multiclass illusionists (a Monk-Ill and a Thief-Ill).

Again, this is pretty much aligning with what I said. Illusionists and illusion magic are generally not used very much. I honestly didn't think that that would be controversial.

 

[Lanefan]

Again, this is pretty much aligning with what I said. Illusionists and illusion magic are generally not used very much. I honestly didn't think that that would be controversial.

It isn't.

What's controversial, to me anyway, is the degree of restriction you'd probably want to put on illusion magic thus likely ensuring "not many illusionists get played" would very soon become "no illusionists get played" because all the fun would have been stripped away from them.

As a player, I've run two very-long-term Illusionists (or nearest 3e equivalent in one case) plus a couple of one-hit wonders, so it's not like I personally never play the class.