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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Treantmonklvl20" data-source="post: 6684755" data-attributes="member: 55582">The logic is that being unseen provides advantage/disadvantage, and it stands to reason that if you can't see through an illusion, whatever is obscured behind it is unseen.  That said, DM's are of course allowed to rule any way they want, and if they rule that the creature obscured behind an illusion isn't treated that way, then the example doesn't hold.That's the thing with these examples, they are intended to get you thinking about what can be done, not what you necessarily should do in your own group.  That's my intention with the guides as well.  Spells (especially versatile ones like illusion spells) provide versatility, and this is most effective when you marry with ingenuity IMO.Nothing wrong with a solid box. But something wrong with a box that the halfling can see through but the monster cannot.</blockquote>I'm assuming you are saying the idea is cheesy rather than disputing that you should be able to see into a hole in a box that is at your knees.  In which case, it's just an idea.  It's not intended to be something you should either find a flaw with or do yourself, but instead get you thinking about how you might use minor illusion (which I realized after listening that I referred to incorrectly as "minor image" for the entire bit) It is a matter of positioning, rather than the illusion not "affecting PC's the same as NPC's", just as an illusionary 4' wall will affect a halfling archer and human archer differently, regardless of whether they are PC/NPCReaction attacks need to be triggered.  If nobody else is moving out of melee, who else is triggering the attack?  Normally if you disengage, the creature doesn't get a reaction attack on your allies either.  The real question is whether the chance of doing cantrip damage is worth the chance of being hit by an attack.  I would say that in most cases, the answer to the question is no.I try to avoid words like "always" since D&D is a game of circumstance.  I like words like "usually" or "situational".  However, you will take damage as a Wizard.  Since you have fewer HP than your comrades, it makes sense to avoid it when you can IMO.  Naturally, if you think the opponent is a few HP from going down, this might have you reconsider, but generally I recommend caution in wizard tactics.Of course.  Again, I'm not saying that T-Rex is what you must do, only that mechanically, it provides the biggest bang for your buck when it is an option.  If it's not an option, obviously you need to do something else that is.  Again, just trying to get people thinking past "doing damage is all a wizard can do".  The conversation might be more in context if you listen to the Podcast I was replying to, where Steve suggests all a wizard is good at is doing damage.The tactic I'm recommending in the podcast is to cast the Silent Image, use Illusory Reality as a bonus action to make it real for one minute, then drop the concentration.  This is why I like this tactic better than traditional wall spells that require you maintain concentration.  Illusory Reality has its own duration (which is flat at one minute), independent of the spell it was modelled from.[/QUOTE]

Verification