Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7586914" data-attributes="member: 6919838">"For what it's worth, I've never seen a DM make, even a stupid monster pause and attack a spiritual weapon. I've seen them make smart monsters use counter-measures like dispel magic though."In my games, perhaps unlike the OP, we di not assume a creature stands stock still weapon at side waiting to be tagged in when their initiative brings them into play.So, you are oretty much assumed to be swinging, jabbing, slashing back and forth during cimbats and your "attacks" are just resolutions of your opportunities that "get thru" or "get close". Basically, its like there is a real back and forth fight going on, but the camera zooms in for your close-up on your turn or your reaction. Rest of the time, you are still doing stuff but its "off-camera."That model or image has served us well across a lot of systems. As such, some miscellaneous back and forth that lets you get enough info to recognize a non-deceptive-by-design effect is what it is -  just assumed to hapoen during that "off-camera" time. Since no requirement to recognize it was part of the spell, we consider it no-action, off-camera. Seems obvious to us, right? Contrast with effects that do intend to deceive like Mirror Image or other types where a specific "way to suss out the trick" is defined as an attsck that hits or an action spent to investigate etc.Those clearly define the deceptive nature of their effects and move the "suss it out" stuff strictly into the "on-camera" action sequences.We dont usually cross-over the two enough, if ever, to cause problems enough to make us need to  house rule ways to counter the additional deceptive effects we moved from "off-camera" to "on-camera" issues.Go figure. If we do not add "on-canera" requirements to a spell, we dont then have to house rule to keep those new "on-camera" requirements from being a problem.</blockquote>

Verification