Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ccs" data-source="post: 7175081" data-attributes="member: 6803664">I bear in mind that I am NOT playing a boardgame, a miniatures wargame, or some computer game.&nbsp; Back &amp; forths about things are an integral part of D&amp;D.&nbsp; The DM must make judgment calls about things that happen during play.&nbsp; This is especially true when dealing with illusions &amp; how PCs/NPCs react to them.As a Player: I will cast my spell &amp; tell the DM the effect I'm intending to achieve.&nbsp; And then I'll go with whatever ruling is decided upon.As a DM I listen to what the player is aiming for &amp; try and reach a fair result.&nbsp; Sometimes I already have an idea, other times the player (or even the whole table) takes a moment &amp; discusses it.&nbsp; Sometimes the result will end up forming a standardized way of doing x.&nbsp; Other times it's just a ruling particular to this one instance.In your ex of making cover:&nbsp; Well, you're presenting the foe a smaller target by hiding behind cover.&nbsp; So it stands to reason they're likely aiming high/wide.&nbsp; Afterall, if all I can see is your head &amp; shoulders I probably won't be shooting at your abs or lower if I don't have a reason to think my shot could hit them....&nbsp; If you're hit even after the negatives?&nbsp; Well, shot on target &amp; you get tagged wherever is appropriate.&nbsp; No reason to disbelieve.If you're missed?&nbsp; Then at my table we roll a die.&nbsp; Say a d6.&nbsp; 3+ the shot was too high/wide, no reason to disbelieve.&nbsp; 1-2 = the shot hit your &quot;cover&quot; &amp; is seen passing right through. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused&nbsp; &nbsp; :confused:"&nbsp; data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />&nbsp; Now your foe realizes somethings up &amp; sees through the illusion.&nbsp; If he tells his buddies?&nbsp; They can spend a round trying to disbelieve it or directly interact with it (like by shooting their own arrows through it!).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ccs, post: 7175081, member: 6803664"] I bear in mind that I am NOT playing a boardgame, a miniatures wargame, or some computer game. Back & forths about things are an integral part of D&D. The DM must make judgment calls about things that happen during play. This is especially true when dealing with illusions & how PCs/NPCs react to them. As a Player: I will cast my spell & tell the DM the effect I'm intending to achieve. And then I'll go with whatever ruling is decided upon. As a DM I listen to what the player is aiming for & try and reach a fair result. Sometimes I already have an idea, other times the player (or even the whole table) takes a moment & discusses it. Sometimes the result will end up forming a standardized way of doing x. Other times it's just a ruling particular to this one instance. In your ex of making cover: Well, you're presenting the foe a smaller target by hiding behind cover. So it stands to reason they're likely aiming high/wide. Afterall, if all I can see is your head & shoulders I probably won't be shooting at your abs or lower if I don't have a reason to think my shot could hit them.... If you're hit even after the negatives? Well, shot on target & you get tagged wherever is appropriate. No reason to disbelieve. If you're missed? Then at my table we roll a die. Say a d6. 3+ the shot was too high/wide, no reason to disbelieve. 1-2 = the shot hit your "cover" & is seen passing right through. :confused: Now your foe realizes somethings up & sees through the illusion. If he tells his buddies? They can spend a round trying to disbelieve it or directly interact with it (like by shooting their own arrows through it!). [/QUOTE]

Verification