D&D 5E cloak of displacement and blindsight

[Caliban]

This is an age old debate. Does illusion create a holographic image (which blindsight would ignore) or does it affect the mind of the creatures perceiving the illusion in which case blindsight is still fooled?

I think if it was affecting your mind directly, you would get a saving throw - spells like Phantasmal Killer, Hypnotic Pattern, Weird, etc.

Most illusion spells don't offer a saving throw, unless you have a chance to interact with it and realize it's not real. Those would be "holographic" variants.

And even then, spells like Blur, Mirror Image, Invisibility, and Greater Invisibility don't have a save to ignore the illusion -they aren't affecting your mind, they are completely visual.

The Displacer beast and Displacer Cloak both have the illusion temporarily disrupted if you hit them. No saving allowed, you have to interact to the point of doing damage (or holding them in place, in the case of the Displacer Beast).

I don't see anything that would indicate the Displacement effect is something other than a visual illusion.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

RAW is clear. If it doesn't say that blindsight counters the cloak then it doesn't. Blindsight doesn't have any general rule that it counters illusions.

You can also argue that RAI is the same, since there are non-visual illusions, and the cloak could easily be displacing whatever it is that blindsight is sensing. On the other hand, The cloak seems to do exactly the same thing as the Blur spell, which is countered by blindsight, so perhaps it's simply an omission in the rules that it doesn't say that blindsight isn't affected by the cloak. Gripping hand, I'd probably rule that the cloak is a permanent blur effect and is countered by blindsight, but that's just my personal opinion.

At least I would rule that way if a cloak of displacement would ever show up in my games, which it wont. That thing is crazy OP, whether it works against blindsight or not.

 

[Oofta]

To the OP, I think it's called "flip a coin".

I can see both ways being justified, and there are IMHO no clear answers on this one. Some people are going to try to make a decision based on the letter of the rules, others try to make a judgement call on how things would logically work. Neither is right or wrong and it comes down to a judgement call and style.

I'd be curious what the answer would be if we did a survey.

 

[aco175]

If you were in darkness wearing the cloak normal sighted people would have disadvantage already from the darkness. I would think someone with blindsight would be using it in this situation and not be affected by the displacement. Now in normal light someone with normal sight would be a disadvantage from the displacement and someone with blindsight would be using normal vision and be affected by the disadvantage. At least for the first round until they pull their kung-fu movies stunt where they tie the headband around their eyes and now rely on blindsight. If someone only has blindsight like a grimlock then I would say he is not affected by the displacement.

 

[jaelis]

To the OP, I think it's called "flip a coin".

I can see both ways being justified, and there are IMHO no clear answers on this one. Some people are going to try to make a decision based on the letter of the rules, others try to make a judgement call on how things would logically work. Neither is right or wrong and it comes down to a judgement call and style.

I'd be curious what the answer would be if we did a survey.

"Survivor: Cloak of Displacement" ?

 

[Caliban]

I'd be curious what the answer would be if we did a survey.

A lot of us (myself among them) may be influenced by previous editions (specifically 3rd edition), where Displacement was a spell, not just a magical effect from a cloak or beast. In 3rd edition it was definitely negated by blindsight.

So a lot of people may just assume it still works that way. (And I think they'd be right. )

 

[jgsugden]

I'd rather just get the Sage to make a ruling and stick with whatever it is. You can read this a number of ways. I stick with mine, but I understand the others.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

If the illusion does not generate sound or scent to further the distraction, then no, it would not affect anything that does not use vision as it's primary way to "see" the environment around it.

 

[schnee]

This is totally great. We're literally religious fundamentalists here, going back to interrogate the original manuscripts, with biases towards the text based on the branch of the faith we were raised on.



IMO, the key word is the cloak 'projects' the illusion. That's visual. Blindsight sees through it.

Even if it were an illusion that works directly on a creature's mind, like Phantasmal Killer, those spells don't affect constructs.

 

[Caliban]

This is totally great. We're literally religious fundamentalists here, going back to interrogate the original manuscripts, with biases towards the text based on the branch of the faith we were raised on.

Have you not seen the debates about hit points being "all meat" or "luck, dodging, and meat"?