Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 9669523" data-attributes="member: 23484">Thanks for this. I think we both recognize the same issue.That's precisely not what the passage quoted says.If this is correct, then much more remains unclear for what happens with illusions in combat than the procedure I suggested. You've identified some of the issues here, but there are more. It's frustrating that 2-3 sentences could have removed the ambiguity.This is precisely the issue. Wall of Force is the edge-case I was thinking of (I didn't discuss it in the OP), in which case the Investigation roll sentence in the cantrip/first-level spell is to counter the specific case of a fifth-level spell. To me, this sounds improbable and does not reflect the way other spell descriptions are worded.I appreciate your crown jewels example. That shows there are conceivable circumstances out of combat where one might want to Study an illusion; and we could invent others. This is not the way I see players using illusion magic, however. If this is what is being envisaged, then I think issues arise specifically for the situation of hidden/invisible characters which you mention. That is already a rat's nest, and it is in those cases where doing anything other than attacking the suspected illusion becomes sub-optimal.The spells identify two ways explicitly of causing the illusion to fade, but a third implicit one is to be preferred. Thst would be a different kind of rule-writing failure than the hiding/illusion and weapon juggling situations.Yes they are!Cheers.</blockquote>

Verification