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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="hafrogman" data-source="post: 6720335" data-attributes="member: 8858">I kind of like how you played it here, with the gnolls making reasonable decisions about who to target, rather than randomness.I'd assume something closest to the first option, which is that I have the spellcasting origin point and advantage benefit even if the illusion is disbelieved.  I was fluffing it as having to defend against two attacks, but in the wording it implies the advantage is just granted by distraction.  Like the aid another action from a familiar, the second attack isn't really a threat, but that movement in the corner of your eye, or the glint of steel at exactly the wrong moment provides the benefit.Trying to actually get someone to waste an attack would be more of a bluffing opportunity, or if I could hide main Lorenzo.  I didn't have an opportunity to cast spells this time, and the fact that only one Lorenzo can actually hurt you is kind of a dead give away.  Similarly I'd expect that if any (reasonably intelligent) foe in battle saw a weapon pass through the double, they'd know not to waste attacks in future (not just the one who actually attacked).So my thoughts is option 1, plus the fact that in certain special circumstances, I may get a wasted attack out of someone.  But even if they do, option 1 persists.  Like I'm behind a corner and I send fake Lorenzo out to "scout".  An archer fires at the target, and now knows it's an illusion, but later on when real Lorenzo steps out and both are flanking the archer, even though he KNOWS one is fake, it's still distracting on an instinctual level.</blockquote>

Verification