D&D 5E Illusionist - is it as weak as it seems?

[Shadowdweller00]

I don't have extensive experience with the Illusionist specialization yet. But at lowish levels it functions reasonably well. As for illusions themselves - while I lament the days of 1e and 2e where illusions could knock things unconscious, illusions up through 5e have been functional if used correctly. Major image should still affect creatures with blindsight (although not truesight, of course).

Some suggestions for would-be users:
* Use illusions to trigger ambushes and/or possible dangerous alpha-strike attacks from enemies.
* Confuse the enemy or draw attacks away from party members with illusory copies of the PCs.
* Use illusions to delay attacks on prime targets, typically including the caster.
* Obscure parts of the battlefield with illusory walls or the like.
* Use illusions to set up ambushes. For example - the party hides inside illusory rock outcroppings, extended dungeon walls, tents, cabins, and waits for some monster to come near. PCs, meanwhile, investigate or otherwise disprove the illusion so they can see through it. So while enemies approach, surprise happens. Often most effective with some sort of lure. A strange noise, for example, might induce a group of enemies hanging out in a room to come investigate.
* Use illusions to hide or draw enemies off in different directions. Muddy footprints or a blood trail, for example, leading away from the PCs.

 

[Eric V]

Or overpowered. Or something in between.

I guess I should have bolded part of it for you, Rune.

Quote Originally Posted by Eric V View Post
True. Also, I find any time you make efficiency of a class based mostly on DM fiat (which the 5e illusionist would be), then they tend to be underpowered. :/

There we go.

Any illusionist players out there felt their DMs made them too powerful via fiat?

 

[Rune]

A clever illusionist can win a battle before it starts. Or prevent it entirely.

If the DM rolls with it, that is.

 

[cormanthor]

I enjoy that they didn't turn illusion into a blasty school of magic or include damage. We don't need tons of illusion spells doing psychic damage or being different from evocation spells solely because the line of flavour text says it's "shadow energy" or "phantom wounds".

The different schools of magic should play differently. Illusion has always been the creative person's school of magic, and I'm glad they left it in, and gave the specialist abilities that allowed them to make the most of the creative potential, doubling the effectiveness of your cantrips and allowing to adjust your illusions of the fly.

I agree that illusion should not be a different flavor of evocation via shadow-magic or the like. Although I do like the idea of getting a go-to spell that functions better for you than standard (as in the suggestion to up the power of phantasmal force).
I also like the idea of increasing the "functionality" of illusions by including a tactile-feedback component, although I am going to have to look at the school on a spell-by-spell basis to validate this option.

But what you said about how the schools should play differently is exactly what I am after. I just don't think that WotC delivered enough incentive for a player to want to play an illusionist instead of another wizard that happens to be smart enough to use illusions where needed.

 

[Jester David]

I agree that illusion should not be a different flavor of evocation via shadow-magic or the like. Although I do like the idea of getting a go-to spell that functions better for you than standard (as in the suggestion to up the power of phantasmal force).
I also like the idea of increasing the "functionality" of illusions by including a tactile-feedback component, although I am going to have to look at the school on a spell-by-spell basis to validate this option.

But what you said about how the schools should play differently is exactly what I am after. I just don't think that WotC delivered enough incentive for a player to want to play an illusionist instead of another wizard that happens to be smart enough to use illusions where needed.

Illusions that you can touch feel a little like conjuration. Illusions shouldn't be about making usable things. Being able to adjust your illusions on the fly is pretty sweet for anyone focused on deception.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I am designing my own campaign world, and with the release of 5e, I opted to use that ruleset (for the most part). With that in mind, I've been pouring through the PHB staring at classes and their archetypes, looking for outliers. That's when I came across the Illusionist. Don't get me wrong; they've always been weak. But even the Diviner got a very nice boost into the realm of play-ability.

Basically, I'm left wondering -- am I missing something in regards to the power of the Illusionist (as compared to other Wizards), or is this arcane tradition in need of a home-brew overhaul? And if you recommend an overhaul, do you have any ideas to increase their power or player attraction?

The weird thing about the Illusionist school is that if you want to play an illusionist spellcaster, a level 2 Warlock can get Change Self and Silent Image as at will spells. The first in particular is awesome for illusionists (and this is what your recasting does - you can change your appearance in seconds).

 

[MonsterEnvy]

With no "forbidden schools" anymore and every wizard is a specialist, the real difference in the archetypes boils down to the granted abilities at 2nd/6th/10th/14th level. This is where I see the illusionist as weak.

• 2nd level: Cast a specific cantrip twice per round effectively. Nice, but not really something I can see being a big deal. If my rogue needs to distract a guard, he'll do it himself.
• 6th level: Take your turn to effectively re-cast your illusion spell? Only in game benefit seems (at first glance) to be no new save.
• 10th level: Legit. I like this. Take an illusion and turn it into a real game-mechanic effect. Like shadow magic was in 2nd edition. No changes needed here.
• 14th level: A great sounding ability until you get to the part where it doesn't do anything. 14th level and I can't whack a guy in the head with an illusionary barstool?

These are the types of issues I have with the School of Illusion, and why I see it as weaker than the others. Keep in mind: Evokers can cast illusions too.

The first power is that it makes the cantrip much better. As it allows you to give it both appearance and have it make sounds. If it's interacted with they will know it's fake but until then it can be very useful.

You misunderstood the 2nd power. It allows you to change the illusion. This allows many mind games from the illusion changing. It's effectiveness depends on scenario.

On the 4th thing. You just need to be creative it does not need to do damage. Make a cage around some people and make it real.

 

[Sunseeker]

I get the feeling that illusions are more an role-play element than a roll-play element. When my wizard cast major illusions, I had to constantly figure out how those things affected NPCs in combat. Causing the sky to darken and rain cats and dogs doesn't have any crunch-based rules on what exactly that DOES to those who witness it. Creating a beautiful spectral woman to distract the guards on the other hand, as opposed to making a massive ogre that attempts to battle them is much easier to adjudicate.

 

[DaveDash]

"Pantasmal" spells solve this problem pretty nicely.

You use "Illusion" spells when you want a group of critters to waste a round.

You use "Phantasmal" spells when you want one critter to be affected for a while.

I will look into the Phantasmal spells. But I imagine most of them are concentration and also don't last very long.

Also the problem with the Illusion spells is when one person interacts with the illusion (say fires an arrow through it), it's a real stretch to think that other intelligent creatures wouldn't see that and also realise it's an illusion.

3rd edition had permanent illusions that required will saves to disbelieve, I know because I've had to "make do" with the subpar 5th edition versions when doing conversions, which does make the 5e versions seem pretty subpar in combat (but probably better outside of combat).

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I get the feeling that illusions are more an role-play element than a roll-play element. When my wizard cast major illusions, I had to constantly figure out how those things affected NPCs in combat. Causing the sky to darken and rain cats and dogs doesn't have any crunch-based rules on what exactly that DOES to those who witness it.

It's bloody distracting I would imagine if nothing else. BBEG: "What? What!!?! No!!! He's getting KITTENS all over my beautiful dungeon!!!"