Search results

Do not look at me that way. I'm real, i swear!

Yes, but you know that if interacting with an illusion does trigger rationalization, how do you investigate it? That's the conondrum. If you fail at investigating you are clearly also rationalizing everything you "learned" in your investigation. If you succeed, you realize it's an illusion...

lkwpeter I'm in for making a player roll for investigation if said player spends an Action interacting in some way with the illusion, if said interaction provides some sort of "examination". Attacking it, trying to break free of it, stuff like that. So yeah, i'm in for having the check done...

Yup. That for me is using an action, not wasting it. Even if you fail, you attempted something that could have given you a benefit. With "wasting" i meant something like "attacking an PF-bear". That, normally, yelds absolutely nothing since the target of PF simply rationalizes that the sword...

Not a mother language speaker here too. So we are on the same page. :D I thought about stating "directly" affecting something. But that should make an exception for "causing damage or other possible psychical effects" that coud result from such an interaction. Seeing a gigantic rock rolling...

I thought about it a bit. I don't think that i like this conclusions. I agree with them, i just do not like the wording. Can't really find a better way to put them, tho. It's mostly the "physically affect" that doesn't ring 100% correct. Also, it's not really only about objects, creatures for...

YOU might not give two figs, but the quote you posted does not start the way it starts and since YOU commented on "what are the rules for invisibility" YOU should give at least a couple of figs on what are the rules for invsibility IN FULL. The part regarding invisible creatures i commented on...

Yes, but this purely falls into DM adjudication and not the rules for hiding themselves that state that the initial roll is kept until a creature is discovered or stops hiding. It would be unfair, for me, to have a player roll again just because someone entered the scene since the "roll" is...

I hope you got that i was joking. Anyway: No, i would not deny it. I would deny you putting a pedestal with a key on it. Those are distinct objects. And while i agree that a complex objects can be made of different parts (you could make a balista, for example, made of different wooden, metal...

I honestly do not want to put myself into this discussion any more than what i already have, but i have to ask for clarity: What do you mean with "escaping detection"? I know that passage of the PHB, what do you read in it? Just out of curiosity.

Absolutely not game changing, i agree. I find it's just more consistent to rule it that way for any illusion that does not specifically allow such a change. It helps avoiding possible problems. It is impossible to restrain physically a person with an illusion. It's not however force it to make...

Also, "dead" for a swarm - and for any creature, really - mustn't really need to mean dead. A swarm could disperse, creatures hit by the blade might be so sick that are unable to move coherently and no longer be a threat. Said spiders could very well be feasting on the bodies of their fallen...

You need to CREATE an object, not remove one. You are creating the illusion of an image. That is fine. The creature would go "oh wow what a nice image, it seems like there's a pit here". You do not automatically trip it with peyote, nor make it believe that the image of the image is something...

This is not the point i'm making (referring to "1"), nor it does address my response to your point. It's not about how to deal with darkness, it's about what are the pratical effect on the gameplay of said darkness patch. Having people roll at "normal" level when all the fighting is inside the...

Yeah, to make that happen the actual floor has to disappear. You could not see "the floor going down" because the actual floor would still be there. You can create illusionary chains that are hanged to illusionary rings stuck into an illusionary protrusion of a real wall. You could not create...

On the other hand if monsters are scary, you no longer see them, so prehaps the fear runs off. And they also do not get any advantage they might have had before. You run into darkness because a situation is disadvantageous for you and you are trying to equilize it, not because it gives you and...

Not the intent of 5e. Can't blame someone for sticking to their design vision. I play to have fun. For me rolling for half an hour of "misses" is not fun. I do not care if the characters are there for half an hour playing blind whack-a-mole. And i do not think that anyone that had the...

Lulz aside, you need 1 hp to benefit from a long rest. Sorry dead person, no hard earned rest for you. By your own reasoning if this was to be read this way then the "a period" should not be there, and instead be "any". That's not what's there. There's the implication of some percievable...

Yes and No. I mean, the bucket is fine, but the loud noises, as presented, no. It has to be something visible. You can make a gigantic (well...10 foot) ringing bell however. Not without other abilities/powers Apart from the visible part, you also have to remember that you have to know what...

Don't mind if i do. That part was changed because it made zero sense. It's now "you are effectively blinded when looking at something that' in an heavily obscured area" - not a direct quote, but enough to give an idea of what the change was and how it affects things. Now, leaving aside that...