Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Shadowdweller00" data-source="post: 6842833" data-attributes="member: 6778479">Hmm...thought I had explained my views on this already, but I see my explanation was incomplete and poorly worded.  The answer is: DM discretion.  But as far as my opinion goes, any attempt to physically interact with the image would pass through and give a sentient creature good reason to suspect an illusion.  (Which is how I treat any other image spell that does not specify or suggest otherwise).  The difference being - that one cannot merely Investigate (with an ability check) the image from halfway across the room to determine that it is an illusion; and that the image does not become transparent on "disbelief".  Thus arrow attacks, hand shakings, and observing the image walking through a table would all provide solid evidence to a sentient observer that the image is either an illusion or that the image's subject is incorporeal.  (Unless maybe the physical interaction / attack is not clearly seen due to obscurement, distance, or being too fast for the eye to reasonably see...such as a bullet fired from a modern firearm).  But in the absence of this sort of thing or any other clear evidence, there is no chance for the observer to suspect that something is wrong.(And for the record, despite any possible authoritative-sounding language on my part, this is not at all a case where the text and/or intent behind it is so fantastically clear that there is only One True Interpretation).</blockquote>

Verification