Trickery Domain: As bad as it seems?

[MaxWilson]

Can one trick without a social component? I mean how can you trick without a person to be tricked.

Mind reading/control isn't trickery though. Trickery is a means to an end, manipulation through anticipation and deception, but if you bypass that means and jump straight to direct control, you're not a trickster. Charles Xavier is not a trickster like Coyote or Loki despite the fact that they can both make you do things and find out your secrets. With Coyote, you come away kicking yourself for not seeing through his schemes, but with Charles Xavier, you just come away feeling powerless and perhaps violated.

Intellect Devourers are not trickster mascots.

[stoutstien]

Mind reading/control isn't trickery though. Trickery is a means to an end, manipulation through anticipation and deception, but if you bypass that means and jump straight to direct control, you're not a trickster. Charles Xavier is not a trickster like Coyote or Loki despite the fact that they can both make you do things and find out your secrets. With Coyote, you come away kicking yourself for not seeing through his schemes, but with Charles Xavier, you just come away feeling powerless and perhaps violated.

Intellect Devourers are not trickster mascots.

So a man who ran a training program for mutant under the guise of a school wasn't a trickster? If I recall my old comic right he refused to use his powers to cause policy change in the government. Yea trickster is more snidely whiplash but it's very flat in flavor

[Deathtongue]

Mind reading/control isn't trickery though.

A changeling's ability to shapeshift doesn't make them a trickster by itself. Nonetheless, if they want to be a trickster archetype, it's an incredible boon. People were (incorrectly) giving examples of how Polymorph enables that type of roleplay. And the same goes for mind reading/control. Having those things doesn't necessarily make you a trickster, but if that is your goal then it's an incredible means towards that end. In a way that powerful healing or being incredibly tough or shooting fireballs or even teleporting or instantly fabricating items is not.

Let's go back to just mind-reading. When you can read someone's mind, especially if they can't read yours, it gives you a huge edge in social interactions. Some examples:

Trickster General during parlay: By the way, when do you expect reinforcements?
Rival Mark: I'll never tell you! thinking: General Guy is experiencing delays.
Trickster General: Aw.

Trickster Witness: What makes you think I'm not going to walk?
Prosecutor: I'm asking the questions here! thinking: wait until I present the DNA evidence from my satchel after recess

Trickster: Your lieutenants seem pretty loyal to you. Except for Screamstar.
Bandit Leader: Screamstar is one of us! thinking: I don't trust him.

etc.

The Trickster can then use this knowledge they wouldn't otherwise have to take an opponent totally off guard. The Trickster General can do a daring raid while their rival is unprepared. They can steal the DNA evidence from the satchel that the prosecutor thinks they don't know about. They can make an offer to Screamstar to betray their boss. So on and so forth.

[LudicSavant]

Agreed, mind reading is a high value ability for a trickster. As is dealing with the divinations of others.

[Tanarii]

Nope, except in your perception.

#accurate & /thread 😂

[Trustypeaches]

#accurate & /thread 😂

Still waiting for you to explain how Invoke Duplicity isn't DM-dependent.

[Dark Schneider]

Well some things are clear about Invoke Duplicity:
- A perfect "yourself".
- Can move with bonus action.
- Cast spells from it.
- Requires concentration. (1 minute)
- Gives YOU advantage to attacks, not any other or your spiritual weapon (as I read). This is due that the image is just like you, that distracts the foe but only for you, is not like a help action.

The only thing I see DM dependant is how you could use as an image of yourself for other purposes. Can it talk? It can "talk" because can cast spells with V component, but can emit sounds for other purposes?
Also, if touched the trick would be discovered?, because it doesn't say about having touch sense included, but says "perfect illusion". So it is supposed it acts like you.

IMHO yes, a "perfect illusion" without specifing perfect "image illusion" means the duplicate is just like yourself, acts like you, and can be moved using the bonus action, other actions requires your action like if was yourself. But can it manipulate objects?, in this case I think not, because an illusion purpose is interact with other beings, but not manipulation.

[Tanarii]

Still waiting for you to explain how Invoke Duplicity isn't DM-dependent.

Still waiting for you to successfully "explain" how Invoke Duplicity is DM-dependent.

[Deathtongue]

So for Invoke Duplicity, just how 'real' is the illusion? Can it make noise? Does it shift about in place to mimic your movement within a 5' square? Can it pass through objects you can see through, like jail bars or a Wall of Force or a door with a keyhole? Can it be manifested off of the ground? Can it be MOVED off of the ground?

The utility of Invoke Duplicity can vary wildly depending on the answers to these questions. So it is a pretty DM-dependent effect.

That said, while I can see it being useful at a lot of tables without much DM interpretation, it's still not an ability that's particularly useful for roleplaying the Trickster archetype.

[Tanarii]

So for Invoke Duplicity, just how 'real' is the illusion? Can it make noise? Does it shift about in place to mimic your movement within a 5' square? Can it pass through objects you can see through, like jail bars or a Wall of Force or a door with a keyhole? Can it be manifested off of the ground? Can it be MOVED off of the ground?

The utility of Invoke Duplicity can vary wildly depending on the answers to these questions. So it is a pretty DM-dependent effect.

So no more dependent than any spell or class feature, once you start trying to use it to do things not in the description.

[Deathtongue]

So no more dependent than any spell or class feature, once you start trying to use it to do things not in the description.

Please name for me a cleric class feature, besides Divine Intervention, that has as much ambiguity as Invoke Duplicity. The closest I can come up with is Visions of the Past, depending on how your DM defines significant. And it's still not as ambiguous as Invoke Duplicity.

[Trustypeaches]

So no more dependent than any spell or class feature, once you start trying to use it to do things not in the description.

Still waiting for you to successfully "explain" how Invoke Duplicity is DM-dependent.

Keep in mind I'm only saying the "unlisted" uses of Invoke Duplicity involving the illusion are DM dependent, such as having your illusion distract enemies and possibly make them waste attacks, or so on. These are the uses other posters argue make the Trickery Domain effective.

If we just judge Invoke Duplicity based on what's present in the description, however, it stinks. You trade your concentration for a second point to cast spells from and conditional MELEE advantage.

[Trustypeaches]

I posted a homebrew revision of the domain in the homebrew forum if anyone was interested.

Link to Forum post

Link straight to Homebrewery

[KorvinStarmast]

Okay, gonna break this down for you

The plural of anecdote is not data. For your future reference. When you make badly supported generalizations, you can expect to be called on them. You were. My dislike of a great deal of the discourse on the GiTP forums has to do with the attempt to digitize and numerically pigeon hole every small element of a game that is NOT a computer game.
A key variable in any play experience is, for example, the campaign the group is playing in.
Guides, while helpful, are narrowly focused and do not represent the broad spectrum of play experience.
What some of them do, on the other hand, is aid and abet those who have a particular form of optimization in mind. Which is cool.
Your argumentum ad populum fails.

My core agreement with most of the commentary on this topic remains:
Divine Strike psychic damage would have made more sense to me. (Easily fixed at any table that cares to)

Beyond that, if you aren't having fun playing a Trickery Cleric, you must be doing it wrong.

[Snowbluff]

The plural of anecdote is not data. For your future reference.

*rubs temples* The plural of anecdotes is not data, BUT the survey of people other than me not being 100% in agreement that "Trickery Cleric is good" is a fact. Hence, the fallacy doesn't apply because the statement is whether or not people agree with me, which directly contradicts your statement.

When you make badly supported generalizations, you can expect to be called on them. You were. My dislike of a great deal of the discourse on the GiTP forums has to do with the attempt to digitize and numerically pigeon hole every small element of a game that is NOT a computer game.

Then you provide evidence, which you did not, and your statement was blatantly evidence free and fact free. It's very light. Probably about as thinning as a celery diet.

The game is a system of logic like a computer game. Unless someone is homebrewing something, that is the logic we play with.

A key variable in any play experience is, for example, the campaign the group is playing in.
Guides, while helpful, are narrowly focused and do not represent the broad spectrum of play experience.
What some of them do, on the other hand, is aid and abet those who have a particular form of optimization in mind. Which is cool.
Your argumentum ad populum fails.

My core agreement with most of the commentary on this topic remains:
Divine Strike psychic damage would have made more sense to me. (Easily fixed at any table that cares to)

Beyond that, if you aren't having fun playing a Trickery Cleric, you must be doing it wrong.

Quantification is a valuable tool. If there is nothing mechanical about a class that fulfills an objective better than a similiar option, the class is a just bad. The point of these discussions is only partially anecdotal. The content of the class is the only thing that can be considered generally consistent between tables (and saying it's fine because of a fix is Oberoni). The Trickster Cleric is qualitatively bad at what it does, and is deficient at performing it's character archetype it's designed for compare to a broad list of other classes that do the same thing but better.

I think we all agree we can still watch an awful movie or play an awful game with some friends and still have fun. That doesn't make the game or movie any better than it is. If you're having fun, that's ok, but don't say that it necessarily means something is good.

[Trustypeaches]

Beyond that, if you aren't having fun playing a Trickery Cleric, you must be doing it wrong.

Clearly, the pinnacle of argumentation

[KorvinStarmast]

Clearly, the pinnacle of argumentation

Clearly, you utterly missed the point of the blue text. (On this forum, it is an indication of humor) I was trying to end the post on a light note.

[KorvinStarmast]

*rubs temples* The plural of anecdotes is not data, BUT the survey of people other than me not being 100% in agreement that "Trickery Cleric is good" is a fact.

You don't have to be "100% good" to be good. You have now moved toward a rather useless, zero defects standard, which I think neither of us would have championed when this discussion began.
There isn't a single cleric domain that isn't good as a PC class, since the cleric class in general is good. How well Trickery fits into your group, and into your campaign, has a pretty big error band which is part of why the guides and optimization efforts are at best "only partly good." That you place higher value on them isn't of any use to anyone but you.

Beyond that, I think we are at an impasse.

[Trustypeaches]

Clearly, you utterly missed the point of the blue text. (On this forum, it is an indication of humor) I was trying to end the post on a light note.

Blue text is sarcasm?

What kind of backwards hell is this place?

[KorvinStarmast]

Blue text is sarcasm?

What kind of backwards hell is this place?

No worries, my friend, it took me a few months to cotton to that local convention. Glad I could be of help.
Going back to Yorrin's guide, I am doing a thought experiment regarding dropping the concentration requirement for the Invoke Duplicity. It's a channel divinity thing ... I'll think about that for a bit. Trying to see what kind of loophole that might create.

[Trustypeaches]

No worries, my friend, it took me a few months to cotton to that local convention. Glad I could be of help.
Going back to Yorrin's guide, I am doing a thought experiment regarding dropping the concentration requirement for the Invoke Duplicity. It's a channel divinity thing ... I'll think about that for a bit. Trying to see what kind of loophole that might create.

Casting Spirit Guardians from your duplicate is the only thing I can think of being cheesy

[KorvinStarmast]

Casting Spirit Guardians from your duplicate is the only thing I can think of being cheesy

I think it would be neat, but IIRC the duplicate once hit is revealed to be an illusion.
Or does it?
If not, that would be tres cool as cheese.
edit ...
Hmm, nope.

As an action, you create a perfect illusion⁠ of yourself that lasts for 1 minute, or until you lose your Concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell).
The illusion⁠ appears in an unoccupied space that you can see within 30 feet of you.
As a Bonus Action on Your Turn, you can move the illusion⁠ up to 30 feet to a space you can see, but it must remain within 120 feet of you.

I can think of some other fun, but maybe there's more cheese in removing concentration from this than I appreciate.

[Trustypeaches]

I think it would be neat, but IIRC the duplicate once hit is revealed to be an illusion.
Or does it?
If not, that would be tres cool as cheese.
edit ...
Hmm, nope.

I can think of some other fun, but maybe there's more cheese in removing concentration from this than I appreciate.

I think the better solution would be to make it worth the concentration.

Here's what I'd do with it:

Spoiler: Invoke Duplicity Revision

Show

Channel Divinity: Invoke Duplicity
Starting at 2nd level, as an action, you create a perfect illusion of yourself that lasts for 1 minute, or until you lose your concentration (as if you were concentrating on a spell). The illusion appears in an unoccupied space that you can see within 30 feet of you. On your turn, you can move the illusion up to your movement speed to a space you can see, but it must remain within 60 feet of you.

For the duration, you can cast spells and speak as though you were in the illusion’s space, but you must use your own senses. Additionally, as an action, you may swap positions with your illusion if you can see it. This swap is done perfectly so it is impossible to tell that you have swapped places, and can be done before or after moving yourself or your illusion.

The illusion is utterly indistinguishable from you, and cannot be destroyed or dispelled. Physical contact with the illusion reveals it to be false, but does not make it disappear, and does not make the one who made contact with it any better at discerning the illusion.

[Beechgnome]

See, this has always been my understanding of the spell. Nothing in it's description says it disappears, only that it doesn't hold up to physical inspection.

So by all means ignore the duplicate wading through the battlefield...it can still inflict wounds on you and can't be harmed in any way... though it can be dispelled and can be gotten rid of if you lose concentration.

Isn't that how others read it?

[KorvinStarmast]

See, this has always been my understanding of the spell. Nothing in it's description says it disappears, only that it doesn't hold up to physical inspection.

So by all means ignore the duplicate wading through the battlefield...it can still inflict wounds on you and can't be harmed in any way... though it can be dispelled and can be gotten rid of if you lose concentration.

Isn't that how others read it?

But it's not a spell, as I read it, so "dispelling it" isn't an option for the enemy. What they can do is recognize that it's an illusion and ignore it. Losing concentration is a matter of hitting the cleric, not the illusion, and cleric failing the con save.

[Man_Over_Game]

But it's not a spell, as I read it, so "dispelling it" isn't an option for the enemy. What they can do is recognize that it's an illusion and ignore it. Losing concentration is a matter of hitting the cleric, not the illusion, and cleric failing the con save.

Dispel doesn't have to target the effects of a spell; it works fine on generic magical abilities too as long as they're identified as "magical".

The question is whether the illusion is technically considered magical or not. I can't read up on it to determine if it's explicitly labeled as "magical", and it wouldn't make sense if it wasn't, but that's a possibility.

[Trustypeaches]

Dispel doesn't have to target the effects of a spell; it works fine on generic magical abilities too as long as they're identified as "magical".

The question is whether the illusion is technically considered magical or not. I can't read up on it to determine if it's explicitly labeled as "magical", and it wouldn't make sense if it wasn't, but that's a possibility.

There are illusions and other magical effects that simply can’t be dispelled.

[Snowbluff]

I actually was suggested to use it with Spirit Guardians before I realized both were concentration. I did it and it wasn't that OP. I guess compare to a smaller, moving Sickening Radiance.

You don't have to be "100% good" to be good. You have now moved toward a rather useless, zero defects standard, which I think neither of us would have championed when this discussion began.
There isn't a single cleric domain that isn't good as a PC class, since the cleric class in general is good. How well Trickery fits into your group, and into your campaign, has a pretty big error band which is part of why the guides and optimization efforts are at best "only partly good." That you place higher value on them isn't of any use to anyone but you.

Beyond that, I think we are at an impasse.

I think we're reading different parts of what you said.

You said "only in your perception."

Subject was me.
IE, "only snowbluff thinks it's bad."
Wasn't "only" so the statement was strictly untrue, which is what I was pointing out.

[strangebloke]

See, this has always been my understanding of the spell. Nothing in it's description says it disappears, only that it doesn't hold up to physical inspection.

So by all means ignore the duplicate wading through the battlefield...it can still inflict wounds on you and can't be harmed in any way... though it can be dispelled and can be gotten rid of if you lose concentration.

Isn't that how others read it?

Physical inspection means an investigation check.

Which is an action. Athough if someone attacks it and the blow goes right through, they probably lets everyone know that's its not normal. But then, a stupid creature might not figure that out. A smart one might think the duplicate has etherealness on it.

Either way, its good for leading people on a merry chase while you follow behind, invisible. Even better if you can get eyes on it using a familiar, so that it can go places you can't. And then its also a great range extender. Healing word is great mostly because of its range, but with your duplicate in play that range isn't such a big consideration.

Seriously, if all the thing did was give you advantage on melee attacks for a minute (which it does do) people would be calling it decent.

It's a little wonky, but still useful, on theme, and entertaining.

Got an idea for a prankster who treats the duplicate as though he it was his evil prankster twin, frequently getting into arguments with the illusion, and calling him 'David.'

David was the name of his older brother who he lost years ago. His old partner in crime that he'll never get back.

[Trustypeaches]

Seriously, if all the thing did was give you advantage on melee attacks for a minute (which it does do) people would be calling it decent.

Considering it takes concentration and Trickster clerics in particular aren't good at melee outside Inflict Wounds, I would hardly call it decent if advantage was all it offered.