Search results

Hi, for my next adventure as a DM I want my party to pass a magic elven forest. The forest will try to stop the players from passing through it by influecing them with magic & disease. My aim is to make the Players use their advantages to pass through it. The following points are planned...

Thanks for all your input! Happy to hear that. There are quite a lot of interesting thoughts and suggestions. Some of them I already planned to work on. Some others are definitely giving me a clue about how people other than me (as the creator) consider these pages. So, your feedback is really...

Thanks for your reply! Sounds like a good idea. I will do so, when I have a bit more time. Within the next months I am planning to convert this whole character sheet concept into a generator, so everybody can create his own character sheets using his favored features from "tiles". Kind...

Actually, we are not far away in most points. Your example: 1.) You do see that the mosaic has black spots, just like it has red, purple, green ones and runes and whatever. You are investigating something you are already looking at, and want to know more about it. 2.) You either realize that...

Again: Neither do I argue how to use Perception/Investigation, nor do I argue that those checks are not valid in the situations that are stated in the UA Trap rules. I am absolutely fin My point is, that you can't investigate somehing that you haven't noticed. You wirte "Perception has already...

CAN WE PLEASE STOP DISCUSSING THE DEFINITIONS OF PERCEPTION AND INVESTIGATION? The skills are clear. And they are even clearer when reading the UA explanation I quoted. The problem is not the usage of any of those. The problem is that the Unearthed Arcana Traps Revisited article only asks for...

No, this is wrong. This is how it worked in 3E. In 5E Perception/Investigation works as described. There are several statements of the game designers. Furthermore, the rules I stated in "Unearthed Arcana Traps Revisited" make it quite clear as well. The problem is not the definition. The...

Hey all, there were times, where a lot of players had problems to differ between Perception and Investigation (maybe some people still do). But after some time it was quite clear: Perception means noticing things (through senses like spotting, hearing, tasting, etc.) while Investigation means...

The harpers perfectly fit! I never took them into account, because of their logo (harp). Always thought that would be a group of "crazy bards". *joking* ;-) Thanks a lot!

Hi, I am playing a rogue (chaotic/good). At the moment I am involved with the Zhentarim, because of opportunistic reasons. But I have a problem with their beliefs and alignment (evil). I hate nobles and I want to kill one of the Council of Six (Lady Zharrn Ophal), because she murdered my...

Investigation check: Hm...but that would somehow totally negate the "The target rationalizes any illogical outcomes from interacting with the phantasm" part of the spell's description. I believe, WotC would just have written that the investigation check would (or could) be triggered after the...

For the hundredth time, you are not able to physically hold a person with Phatansmal Force! Therefore, it's not possible to "create a full body force field that holds the target motionless". The example given in the spell's description says that the target can't step on the bridge, but it falls...

Just one question: Are you for or against asking for an INT (Investigation) check very early on? I read your post and agreed to your argumentation. At the end, I was surprised in the outcome, because I understand your wording that you would initiate the investigation of the illusion very...

In short: I like RAW. But this spell description is very vague. I think its necessary to also consider statements given by Jeremy Crawford/Mike Mearls as they specify the intention about rules. A few points, you are arguing about even seem very clear then. There is no "auto success" or "auto...

In my opinion, trying to get rid of the chains and investigating the spell via an INT (Investigation) check are absolutely two different pair of shoes: Let's regard the example of the bridge given in the rules: The target falls through it. Afterwards it still believes that the bridge exists...

I believe, that's actually the same point as discussing the meaning of "reasonable" in the suggestion spell. The illusion of PF must be backed up by evidence. If a player is able to create such an illusion, there is absolutely no reason to ask for an investigation check. The whole question about...

EDIT: The following is a personal summary of this forum thread: Please note, that I don't claim this to be the only way of interpreting the rules. Phantasmal Force is very vague and this thread was a try to find an interpretation that is consistent with the wording of the RAW and that is...

Well, I might misunderstand your words because of language issues, but I think that some status effects (e.g. blinded) are indeed possible to be triggered under certain circumstances. Jeremy Crawford said that it would be possible, if you "describe an illusory visible phenomenon that douses the...

I agree. I think, if the spell would create objects that affect creatures physically, it would just be too powerful and have big intersections with other spells. So, I believe the best way to consider, whether a specific object created with Phantasmal Force would be viable or not, is to apply...

I found several interesting posts from Jeremy Crawford: Object moving with target: Jeremy Crawford approved that the created object moves with the target. http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/09/14/phantasmal-force-on-a-bag/ Fighting creature moving: Analogous to that I would rule that if you create...