D&D (2024) Illusion Magic in 2024

[kigmatzomat]

Technically RAW would still stop those illusions on an attack as the arrow passing through them would be physical interaction and would show them to be illusions

Ah, but if the caster uses their action to Animate the illusion (which is able to sustain a conversation per Major Image) the illusions can dodge said arrows.

Which gets us to the nuhuh-uhuh-nuhuh loop of the archer and caster arguing if the illusion can dodge arrows. Rule hole! (I propose using the spell save DC as the illusions AC. Attack with disadvantage if the illusion is not a solid or for whatever reason the weapon passing through is plausible, e.g. arrows vs tall grass).

Yes, I think it's dumb too, but such is RAW sometimes. Then again, RAW keeps you from getting 4th level spell effects with 1st level spells. So maybe they were onto something and it was intentional

A spell, concentration and the caster's action each round. That's a non-trivial part of the illusionist's action economy. They spend their actions animating the illusions, so aside from Reactions and Bonus actions, they aren't doing much besides puppeteering illusions.


What happens if you use Major Image to make a scent? Can you physically interact that away? No, because they only said physical interaction applies to "image" . Why? The presumption is images are of solid objects in a game where intangible things exist.

If you Major Image a ghost, a person can stick their hands inside it and can feel unpleasant-but-not-damaging cold while they smell grave rot. How would that break versimilitude?

It doesn't which is why it's a hole in the rules. This would get the disadvantage on physical attacks against it in my propsed rules.

There's also nothing about being "assisted" on a Study action by being told something is an illusion, without someone else using the literal Help action. Imo, someone a character trusts saying "that's an illusion" gives advantage on the Study/attack roll.

 

[FrogReaver]

Ah, but if the caster uses their action to Animate the illusion (which is able to sustain a conversation per Major Image) the illusions can dodge said arrows.

That’s an absolutely huge leap.

Which gets us to the nuhuh-uhuh-nuhuh loop of the archer and caster arguing if the illusion can dodge arrows. Rule hole! (I propose using the spell save DC as the illusions AC. Attack with disadvantage if the illusion is not a solid or for whatever reason the weapon passing through is plausible, e.g. arrows vs tall grass).

Accepting your illogical leap isn’t required. Animated illusions cannot dodge arrows by RAW.

A spell, concentration and the caster's action each round. That's a non-trivial part of the illusionist's action economy. They spend their actions animating the illusions, so aside from Reactions and Bonus actions, they aren't doing much besides puppeteering illusions.

Okay.

No, because they only said physical interaction applies to "image" . Why? The presumption is images are of solid objects in a game where intangible things exist.

The RAW is that physical interaction reveals it to be an illusion.

If you Major Image a ghost, a person can stick their hands inside it and can feel unpleasant-but-not-damaging cold while they smell grave rot. How would that break versimilitude?

RAW isn’t verisimilitude.

It doesn't which is why it's a hole in the rules. This would get the disadvantage on physical attacks against it in my propsed rules.

Or a carefully considered necessity.

There's also nothing about being "assisted" on a Study action by being told something is an illusion, without someone else using the literal Help action. Imo, someone a character trusts saying "that's an illusion" gives advantage on the Study/attack roll.

Okay.

 

[TheSword]

I think this is the problem with illusions and reason that people get frustrated with them on both sides. They try and break the game to make them amazing without realizing that there will naturally be resistance to that.

On your action you can move the image but there is no way to make the image react to someone else’s action. The fog cloud won’t swirl in response to the passage of the arrow, neither will it in response to the PCs attacks from inside the cloud. That then shows everyone who can witness it that the cloud isn’t real and they can see through it. Same with painting wall.

Similarly for your ethereal creature - you don’t get to decide that it is unaffected by physical interaction. It isn’t just that the creature wouldn’t take damage from the arrow passing through - it won’t react to it in any way. People in that situation are likely to think the illusion isn’t real.

No variation of the rules is going to be created to give you the right to give your PCs mass improved invisibility with a 2nd level spell. This is a not a rules problem, it’s an expectation problem.

 

[TheSword]

On a side note - I tried to compile some reasons why I do think illusions are awesome in 2024

D&D General Thread 'Illusionists better in 2024'

Aug 31, 2024

[Edit: I’ve added in some thoughts on uses for illusions beyond the simple hide in an illusory crate.]

The New Improved Illusionist Subclass

So it feels like illusions have gotten a little bit better in 2024. To that end I thought I would do a direct comparison between 2014 Illusionists and their spells and 2024. To be honest it’s not a class I’ve played but I’m very tempted.

The subclass kicks in at level 3 now, which is not a big problem. Particularly when you see what they get.

Illusion Savant (Level 3) Instead of halving the cost of scribing illusion spells you...

• TheSword
• Replies: 40
• Forum: *Dungeons & Dragons

• 

 

[kigmatzomat]

That’s an absolutely huge leap.

Accepting your illogical leap isn’t required. Animated illusions cannot dodge arrows by RAW.

What RAW? Their movement rate by RAW is immense.

major Image
As long as you are within range of the illusion, you can use your action to cause the image to move to any other spot within range.

Since range is 120ft, that's up to 240ft of movement.

As the image changes location, you can alter its appearance so that its movements appear natural for the image. For example, if you create an image of a creature and move it, you can alter the image so that it appears to be walking.

Hmm. Seems like by RAW they can move about in any fashion.

Now, can the illusion be made to react to others?

Similarly, you can cause the illusion to make different sounds at different times, even making it carry on a conversation, for example

Carrying on a conversation is a back and forth exchange sustained over time. Verbal sparring, I believe it is sometimes called.

 

[FrogReaver]

What RAW? Their movement rate by RAW is immense.



Since range is 120ft, that's up to 240ft of movement.



Hmm. Seems like by RAW they can move about in any fashion.

You keep trying to support your claims with rules that don't actually say anything remotely close to what you claim. I mean, what the heck does being able to move it have to do with it dodging attacks? (dodging attacks being the actual claim we are discussing)

Now, can the illusion be made to react to others?



Carrying on a conversation is a back and forth exchange sustained over time. Verbal sparring, I believe it is sometimes called.

Another prime example of the same thing. It can specifically carry a conversation. That doesn't show it can dodge attacks.

 

[TheSword]

@FrogReaver is spot on. On your turn you can move the illusion in a set way but there is nothing that lets you move the illusion on someone else’s turn.

Illusions are extremely open ended, able to create almost anything, so of course there have to be limitations.