New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 26 of 27 FirstFirst ... 161718192021222324252627 LastLast
Results 751 to 780 of 790
  1. - Top - End - #751
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta View Post
    You spend a lot of time casting Minor Illusion over Firebolt in round 4? Sure you can always manage to pull something clever off, I'd never begrudge a player that. I've done some clever stuff myself, but I'd be lying if I said I spent more rounds trying to confuse foes than I did just Eldritch Blasting them.

    Dead is the best status effect. Nice snark though.
    Phantasmal Force is an illusion I'd cast in round 4. I might cast Silent Image to make a Wall of Stone to redirect or delay the enemy and not always when the party wants to make a tactical withdrawal. Major Image for a Wall of Fire works too. Using it to make believe I summoned a creature is useful to distract an opponent. Even if it's only one round for the opponent to realize it's an illusion that's one round it wasn't attacking the party, which can be a big deal depending on the opponent compared to my having used my action to cast the spell.
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  2. - Top - End - #752
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    mephnick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2012

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dudewithknives View Post
    The issue with doing that from a player perspective is that it is completely up to the DM whether he wants to let you win or not.
    Obviously it depends on the scenario and DM. It depends on a fair DM, but also on a descriptive DM. As a player I knew before I did it that if I "set the thing on fire" the NPCs would immediately rush to save it because the DM had outlined this group very well and I knew their motivations. That's the important part. It shouldn't be up to the whim of the DM, it should be an informed decision on the part of the player.

    But yes, if you have a inconsistent, new, or adversarial DM a lot of stuff in the game isn't going to work like you think it will.

  3. - Top - End - #753
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Phantasmal Force is an illusion I'd cast in round 4. I might cast Silent Image to make a Wall of Stone to redirect or delay the enemy and not always when the party wants to make a tactical withdrawal. Major Image for a Wall of Fire works too. Using it to make believe I summoned a creature is useful to distract an opponent. Even if it's only one round for the opponent to realize it's an illusion that's one round it wasn't attacking the party, which can be a big deal depending on the opponent compared to my having used my action to cast the spell.
    Phantasmal Force is a straight-up terrible spell though (My bad I mistook this for Phantasmal Killer. This seems like a fine spell especially for 2nd level).

    Like don't get me wrong I just learned Major Image as a 6th level Wizard and I'll probably always have it prepared. But Fireball is usually going to be a better use of that spell slot. Maybe as much as 90% of the time.

    That last 10% Major Image is going to be great but...Fireball is going to be more consistent.
    Last edited by UrielAwakened; 2017-12-06 at 12:17 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #754

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by mephnick View Post
    Obviously it depends on the scenario and DM. It depends on a fair DM, but also on a descriptive DM. As a player I knew before I did it that if I "set the thing on fire" the NPCs would immediately rush to save it because the DM had outlined this group very well and I knew their motivations. That's the important part. It shouldn't be up to the whim of the DM, it should be an informed decision on the part of the player.

    But yes, if you have a inconsistent, new, or adversarial DM a lot of stuff in the game isn't going to work like you think it will.
    Yeah, that has been my issue in the past, DM's who will not let you change their plot, beat certain npc or solve certain problems by being creative or using your resources carefully.

    EX.

    If the GM wants you to be low on spells to fight the last boss but you wipe out the group before him with good rolls and spent almost nothing, expect to fight another group or maybe another until he has it like he wants.

    If you are in a hostile situation with an NPC casting charm is just going to get the rest of the people to turn on you because, "He is trying to control his mind with magic"

    Forget stealth, the enemy will roll enough to see you.

    Forget throwing spells with a save, if the DM wants them to save, they will.

    The only thing you can do that the DM will not screw you on is straight normal combat.

    If he has an 18 AC, and you hit a 21 you cause damage. There is nothing they can do to hide that but bump their HP, which you can call them on.

    Ex. 2 weeks ago our group fought an evil warlock and his minion. I charged through his people and took a hit or 2 but i grappled and pounded him for about 5 rounds. He ended up having like 140HP... at level 7.

    The DM just told me he was not going to let me finish him until round 5 or six because he did not want me helping the rest of the group, so he added 100 extra HP.

    So what the hell is the point of the character i am trying to play if i am not going to be allowed to succeed even if I play it well?

    I have only ever played with 2 kinds of GMs

    1. the dictator who is going to do what he wants with the plot line and NPCs and you will not stop him or have any real sort of impact.

    2. the care bare who lets anyone get away with anything so people are never in danger at all.

  5. - Top - End - #755
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    mephnick's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2012

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dudewithknives View Post
    I have only ever played with 2 kinds of GMs

    1. the dictator who is going to do what he wants with the plot line and NPCs and you will not stop him or have any real sort of impact.

    2. the care bare who lets anyone get away with anything so people are never in danger at all.
    I'm very sorry. I hope you get to experience some good D&D at some point in your life. It really disheartens me how many people may have given up on what could be a life long hobby because of ****ty DMs.

  6. - Top - End - #756

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by mephnick View Post
    I'm very sorry. I hope you get to experience some good D&D at some point in your life. It really disheartens me how many people may have given up on what could be a life long hobby because of ****ty DMs.
    I have played DND for 19 years, sometimes the stories are absolutely amazing, and have played characters that evidently people I have never met have heard of, but I knew that in all honesty unless it says in a spell or ability that "X happens." that it was just whether the dm wanted me to succeed or not and what I rolled and what abilities I have do not really matter.

  7. - Top - End - #757
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dudewithknives View Post
    Yeah, that has been my issue in the past, DM's who will not let you change their plot, beat certain npc or solve certain problems by being creative or using your resources carefully.

    EX.

    If the GM wants you to be low on spells to fight the last boss but you wipe out the group before him with good rolls and spent almost nothing, expect to fight another group or maybe another until he has it like he wants.

    If you are in a hostile situation with an NPC casting charm is just going to get the rest of the people to turn on you because, "He is trying to control his mind with magic"

    Forget stealth, the enemy will roll enough to see you.

    Forget throwing spells with a save, if the DM wants them to save, they will.

    The only thing you can do that the DM will not screw you on is straight normal combat.

    If he has an 18 AC, and you hit a 21 you cause damage. There is nothing they can do to hide that but bump their HP, which you can call them on.

    Ex. 2 weeks ago our group fought an evil warlock and his minion. I charged through his people and took a hit or 2 but i grappled and pounded him for about 5 rounds. He ended up having like 140HP... at level 7.

    The DM just told me he was not going to let me finish him until round 5 or six because he did not want me helping the rest of the group, so he added 100 extra HP.

    So what the hell is the point of the character i am trying to play if i am not going to be allowed to succeed even if I play it well?

    I have only ever played with 2 kinds of GMs

    1. the dictator who is going to do what he wants with the plot line and NPCs and you will not stop him or have any real sort of impact.

    2. the care bare who lets anyone get away with anything so people are never in danger at all.
    Well, I hope you find better DMs one day.

    I have to point out, though, that with the dictator none of the rules will ever matter, so it's strictly a question of DMs not screwing up their players, not if the rules are good or bad.

  8. - Top - End - #758
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Corvallis, OR
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Well, I hope you find better DMs one day.

    I have to point out, though, that with the dictator none of the rules will ever matter, so it's strictly a question of DMs not screwing up their players, not if the rules are good or bad.
    Right. Can't fix an OOC problem with more rules, especially if the one with the problem is the arbiter of the rules (the DM).
    Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
    Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
    5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
    NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
    NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.

  9. - Top - End - #759
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    No. The rules are bad and UA is a better player than anyone else.
    Last edited by DivisibleByZero; 2017-12-06 at 02:00 PM.
    If you quote me and ask me questions,
    and I continue to not respond,
    it's probably because I have
    you on my Ignore list.
    Congratulations.

  10. - Top - End - #760
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Am I UA?

    That's a fun acronym that won't get confusing for others I'm sure.

  11. - Top - End - #761
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    GnomeWizardGuy

    Join Date
    May 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by UrielAwakened View Post
    Am I UA?

    That's a fun acronym that won't get confusing for others I'm sure.
    It's not that confusing.
    Quote Originally Posted by UrielAwakened View Post
    Sometimes I feel like we're just really good D&D players compared to other people.
    If you quote me and ask me questions,
    and I continue to not respond,
    it's probably because I have
    you on my Ignore list.
    Congratulations.

  12. - Top - End - #762
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    So what happens when the NPC mage casts an illusion of a T-Rex and it appears out of the blue (not from around a corner)? Am I as a mid level PC reasonable in assuming I need to ignore the T-Rex and injure the mage? Or am I meta-gaming? I can't help but realize as a mid level character it is unlikely the DM will throw a real T-Rex as a summoned creature, so it is likely an illusion. I can rationalize that even if my character believed it was a summoned T-Rex, injuring the mage is a better move than dealing with the creature, even if I were to suffer an OA.

    Now flip that around. If I, as the enemy NPC, see some fantastical monster I've never even conceived of, do I turn my attention to it, or do I continue to concentrate on the caster, who if it is real, likely controls it. Do I get called a bad DM for ignoring the illusion (even if my character believes it could be real)? (I wouldn't have my bad guy run through it or even within its OA range if I could avoid doing so, but by directing my attacks against anything else, I can see some players whining on occasion.)

  13. - Top - End - #763
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by DivisibleByZero View Post
    It's not that confusing.
    Pretty clear that was a tongue-in-cheek response to this sort of old-school D&D elitism:

    Quote Originally Posted by mephnick View Post
    They're not if you run spellcasting the way it's intended, without blurting out spell names like an anime character. Then they actually work. Imagine that.
    Especially ridiculous considering this is a forum dedicated to a comic where every single spellcaster does exactly that.

    For real how do you rationalize that counterspelling has always been blind when the 3.5 rules on counterspelling required you to have the same spell prepared as the enemy caster to counter it unless you were using the actual counterspell spell?
    Last edited by UrielAwakened; 2017-12-06 at 02:43 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #764
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    So what happens when the NPC mage casts an illusion of a T-Rex and it appears out of the blue (not from around a corner)? Am I as a mid level PC reasonable in assuming I need to ignore the T-Rex and injure the mage? Or am I meta-gaming?
    Has your PC seen a monster be summoned before? Do they have any reason to believe the mage hasn't summoned an actual creature?


    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    I can't help but realize as a mid level character it is unlikely the DM will throw a real T-Rex as a summoned creature, so it is likely an illusion. I can rationalize that even if my character believed it was a summoned T-Rex, injuring the mage is a better move than dealing with the creature, even if I were to suffer an OA.
    Would you complain if it turns out it's an actual T. Rex and your character gets bitten?


    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    Now flip that around. If I, as the enemy NPC, see some fantastical monster I've never even conceived of, do I turn my attention to it, or do I continue to concentrate on the caster, who if it is real, likely controls it.
    Generally a scary monster showing up will trigger the "fight or flight" response. How the NPCs react specifically depends of who they are.

    Though, a T. Rex is hardly an inconceivable monster.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    Do I get called a bad DM for ignoring the illusion (even if my character believes it could be real)? (I wouldn't have my bad guy run through it or even within its OA range if I could avoid doing so, but by directing my attacks against anything else, I can see some players whining on occasion.)
    If they ignore it completely because they inherently know it's fake without even trying, because how could the NPC fail, then yes, it's bad DMing. If they treat it like the illusion should be treated (they think it's real unless they have reasons not to), but still ignore it because of other reasons (ex: a goblin deciding keeping hitting the mage is better than flee and get picked up by the monster that appeared), then it's normal

    Quote Originally Posted by UrielAwakened View Post
    old-school D&D elitism
    You want to accuse others of elitism when you say "Sometimes I feel like we're just really good D&D players compared to other people."

    Quote Originally Posted by UrielAwakened View Post
    Especially ridiculous considering this is a forum dedicated to a comic where every single spellcaster does exactly that.
    Because it's a comedy pocking fun at the absurd of the game. You'd note that the times Elan used illusions efficiently, he didn't shout he was casting an illusion.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2017-12-06 at 02:50 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #765
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    You want to accuse others of elitism when you say "Sometimes I feel like we're just really good D&D players compared to other people."
    Okay nobody is this blind to sarcasm. I literally addressed that quote was tongue-in-cheek at the quoted post's expense within the same response. It's one line up even. I'm not gonna blue text stuff that's obviously making fun of someone who's being an &%^*#&(.

    Make an honest effort to at least follow the flow of the conversation please.
    Last edited by UrielAwakened; 2017-12-06 at 02:52 PM.

  16. - Top - End - #766
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    iTreeby's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    When it comes to getting advantage on the arcana check for having access certain casting lists, how does magic initiate, ritual caster, bardic spell secrets Eric factor in? Do EK have advantage on identifying all wizard spells or only the ones under fifth level or only certain schools? How about high elves?

  17. - Top - End - #767
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Has your PC seen a monster be summoned before? Do they have any reason to believe the mage hasn't summoned an actual creature?.
    Yes, AND If I had some intel on the caster and did not believe he was of the power level necessary to pull that off, then Yes. And while he might have an item that could do that, it would be meta-gaming on my part to assume that, since my character would never have heard of such a thing.


    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Would you complain if it turns out it's an actual T. Rex and your character gets bitten?
    Of course not. I would take it like the hero my character purports to be!


    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    Generally a scary monster showing up will trigger the "fight or flight" response. How the NPCs react specifically depends of who they are.

    Though, a T. Rex is hardly an inconceivable monster.
    It is where my character is from (either European-like medieval or Far-East like same). But appearing out of thin air following the enemy mage casting something means it is either an illusion or something summoned I am not familiar with. It might be frightening to behold, but that doesn't mean I know it has the potential to deal more damage than a Fulumph.


    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    If they ignore it completely because they inherently know it's fake without even trying, because how could the NPC fail, then yes, it's bad DMing. If they treat it like the illusion should be treated (they think it's real unless they have reasons not to), but still ignore it because of other reasons (ex: a goblin deciding keeping hitting the mage is better than flee and get picked up by the monster that appeared), then it's normal
    Maybe they suspect it is not real and act appropriately (not with confidence) in its illusory existence.

  18. - Top - End - #768
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    Of course not. I would take it like the hero my character purports to be!
    Ok, here's what I remember from 2nd Ed illusions. In 2nd Ed, you had to disbelieve, or else your character treated the illusion as real. Ie. an illusionary bridge you tried to cross was "solid" to you but your character never actually crossed it, an illusionary wall you "leaned against" you never actually put your weight on.

    Illusionary creatures were super effective because you could never tell if it was just an illusion or real unless you disbelieved.

    In 5e, the second you smash an illusionary creature in the face, it pops ... right?
    Argue in good faith.

    And try to remember that these are people.

  19. - Top - End - #769
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Meta's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Awaiting Reincarnation

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pex View Post
    Phantasmal Force is an illusion I'd cast in round 4. I might cast Silent Image to make a Wall of Stone to redirect or delay the enemy and not always when the party wants to make a tactical withdrawal. Major Image for a Wall of Fire works too. Using it to make believe I summoned a creature is useful to distract an opponent. Even if it's only one round for the opponent to realize it's an illusion that's one round it wasn't attacking the party, which can be a big deal depending on the opponent compared to my having used my action to cast the spell.
    I chose two cantrips to compare, but yeah I'm not against illusions or think they're bad. Just that they often are strongest at the start of the battle when reshaping the battlefield is most valuable.

    As an example, a trick I used a couple of adventures ago:

    Spoiler: Set up
    Show
    Triumvirate of hags living in a swap. Stone road runs along it, but there's a good deal of water on either side and some marshy islands. Probably 50/50 water/ground. When the PCs draw near, one of their number changes their appearance into an injured human. The other two cast minor illusion targeting the squares right in front of their Manticore ally. They make the appearance of half a black dragon snout, just the barest glimpse behind the dark marsh fog. Then they turn invisible and wait.

    Once the lead PC gets just at the very edge of vision of the human and the illusion, the manticore non-violently grabs the 'human' and dives in to the water.

    The PCs had to choose to follow the 'dragon' in to the water (they did) or let the innocent die. Then the invisible hags get to hit the rest of the party from the back.

    The fight ended up being decently challenging, until the Druid caught up and used an Octopus form to really swing the water half of the battle.


    This sort of trick is much more limited if the hags and manticore attempt it in the middle of the battle. The more PCs know about their opponents and the environment around them, the more possibilities they can eliminate. That's all I was saying with my initial statement, not sure how it ended up being that I think illusions suck.

    Edit @ Kruugan: Here's the text from Minor Illusion referencing what I think you're talking about: "Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it."
    Last edited by Meta; 2017-12-06 at 04:18 PM.
    Szilard has all of those sweet trophies for a reason. Awesome avatar is his handiwork.

  20. - Top - End - #770
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    Of course not. I would take it like the hero my character purports to be!




    It is where my character is from (either European-like medieval or Far-East like same). But appearing out of thin air following the enemy mage casting something means it is either an illusion or something summoned I am not familiar with. It might be frightening to behold, but that doesn't mean I know it has the potential to deal more damage than a Fulumph.
    Both of these are more problems with HPs and medium to high level D&D characters not fearing damage from monsters, as well as a CaS playstyle, than they are problems with illusions.

    If your hero PCs generally don't do anything except stand their ground against any enemy that comes because they know they can soak damage from it and/or will win any fight, then illusions used by the DM are far less powerful. But it also indicates that they never face anything they don't have to run away from to live, or worry about being one-shot by.

    Edit: I say problems, but many groups won't see either of those things as a problem. It's only a 'problem' for them insofar as illusions of monsters attacking them won't ever scare them away.
    Last edited by Tanarii; 2017-12-06 at 04:25 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #771
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta View Post
    Edit @ Kruugan: Here's the text from Minor Illusion referencing what I think you're talking about: "Physical interaction with the image reveals it to be an illusion, because things can pass through it."
    That's in the text for all illusions though (barring phantasmal force). Just saying, illusions seem less powerful than in this edition. Then again, the casters had to concentrate (like, really concentrate) on illusions or they didn't behave like they were supposed to, in 2nd, IIRC.
    Argue in good faith.

    And try to remember that these are people.

  22. - Top - End - #772
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Meta's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Awaiting Reincarnation

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by krugaan View Post
    That's in the text for all illusions though (barring phantasmal force). Just saying, illusions seem less powerful than in this edition. Then again, the casters had to concentrate (like, really concentrate) on illusions or they didn't behave like they were supposed to, in 2nd, IIRC.
    I didn't play 2e so I can't really compare. I can say there are a couple of defensive illusion spells that will be pretty solid in most battles though, like Mirror Image and Blur. Simulacrum is also ridiculous
    Szilard has all of those sweet trophies for a reason. Awesome avatar is his handiwork.

  23. - Top - End - #773
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Illusions that can't physically interact with anything without being revealed definitely require a bit more thought to use effectively.

    (Although if they don't fade away unless you take an investigation check, they're still useful for blocking sight. But I realize that's not the common interpretation for how the physical interaction clause and investigation clause interact with each other.)

  24. - Top - End - #774
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Pex's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by mephnick View Post
    Obviously it depends on the scenario and DM. It depends on a fair DM, but also on a descriptive DM. As a player I knew before I did it that if I "set the thing on fire" the NPCs would immediately rush to save it because the DM had outlined this group very well and I knew their motivations. That's the important part. It shouldn't be up to the whim of the DM, it should be an informed decision on the part of the player.

    But yes, if you have a inconsistent, new, or adversarial DM a lot of stuff in the game isn't going to work like you think it will.
    Wasn't me this time!
    Quote Originally Posted by OvisCaedo View Post
    Rules existing are a dire threat to the divine power of the DM.

  25. - Top - End - #775
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta View Post
    I didn't play 2e so I can't really compare. I can say there are a couple of defensive illusion spells that will be pretty solid in most battles though, like Mirror Image and Blur. Simulacrum is also ridiculous
    Ah yeah, but by illusion spells I meant the hologram ones where you decide what's shown: minor illusion, silent image, major image... am I missing one?
    Argue in good faith.

    And try to remember that these are people.

  26. - Top - End - #776
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    So, the new spell identification rules are terrible also because they nerf illusionists. Even if I cast the spell out of view and out of earshot of the enemy wizard, he now has an additional means of determining it is an illusion. He does not have to touch it. He does not need to make a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check. Even if he was thinking it could be different kind of spell he can now choose to attempt an Arcana check vs the effect he can see. (I don't have the new book, so maybe the optional rule has a paragraph about illusions I don't remember being discussed.)

  27. - Top - End - #777
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Breashios View Post
    So, the new spell identification rules are terrible also because they nerf illusionists. Even if I cast the spell out of view and out of earshot of the enemy wizard, he now has an additional means of determining it is an illusion. He does not have to touch it. He does not need to make a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check. Even if he was thinking it could be different kind of spell he can now choose to attempt an Arcana check vs the effect he can see. (I don't have the new book, so maybe the optional rule has a paragraph about illusions I don't remember being discussed.)
    If you try to identify the effects of an illusion, you're only seeing the false effects the enemy is showing you.

    Ergo, you're not seeing the actual effects of the spell until you can determine the spell is an illusion with an INT(Investigation) or other methods, meaning you can't identify it with INT(Arcana) unless you've seen the casting.

    Also something tell me that making enemy casters spend their actions identifying harmless special effects is worthwhile.
    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2017-12-06 at 08:57 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #778
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Unoriginal View Post
    If you try to identify the effects of an illusion, you're only seeing the false effects the enemy is showing you.

    Ergo, you're not seeing the actual effects of the spell until you can determine the spell is an illusion with an INT(Investigation) or other methods, meaning you can't identify it with INT(Arcana) unless you've seen the casting.

    Also something tell me that making enemy casters spend their actions identifying harmless special effects is worthwhile.
    I'm not worried about that too much in combat. I was more thinking about the pre-combat, investigative, distraction, con and bluff uses that are far more common than the in combat use of illusions. (in my experience - remember I don't recall a single instance of anyone attempting to cast an 'Image' spell in plain view of a known enemy).

    Also regarding your first sentence. I though the arcana check could identify the spell in effect. Once I know the spell I can ignore it (except line of sight where it might be hiding a real threat), whether or not I can see through it.

  29. - Top - End - #779
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2015

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    It does and you can.

    By the rules all it costs is a reaction as long as you see the person casting.

    Lol Jeremy Crawford.

  30. - Top - End - #780
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    ClericGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: The new spell identification rules are terrible.

    Quote Originally Posted by UrielAwakened View Post
    It does and you can.

    By the rules all it costs is a reaction as long as you see the person casting.

    Lol Jeremy Crawford.
    I'm sorry. In my example I am stating even when the person making the arcana check did not see the casting. In such cases it burns an action to identify the spell that you can see the effect of.

    Say the NPC wizard casts a major image of a wall of fire when he runs around a corner as he is pursued by the party. When the party races around said corner they see what looks like a wall of fire. The party sorcerer takes his action to make an Intelligence (Arcana) check. Why? maybe he is uncertain what the spell used to create this wall of fire was. Maybe there are other spells in the books that create a similar looking real effect. In any case, if he is successful, he identifies the spell as major image and confidently barrels through, encouraging his companions to do the same on faith that he knows it will not harm them.

    In this case he did not need to cast his dispel magic spell. The illusory wall did cause at least the Sorcerer to not dash that turn as he needed to use his action to make the arcana check and depending on initiative might have caused others to lose most of their movement for that turn, so the illusion might have done its job, but certainly caused less resource use than before this rule existed (other than the option of someone just barreling through the illusion in the first place - in which case whether this rule existed or not would not matter).

    There was certainly a case in our last campaign where a real wall of fire caused both sides to wait for the duration to expire (during which time they parleyed). If this rule had existed, been in play and the spell was an illusion, (ok, a lot of what ifs ) someone certainly would have attempted an arcana check during that parley and the outcome could have been different (than imagined). - hopefully you can see what I am trying to say.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •