Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Keenath Aug 06, 2015 10:57:32	I'm the GM in a game that just started with some level 1 characters.  I've been GMing for a while in many different systems, but never in 5th Edition until now.   In my first session, one of the players -- a wizard -- decided to create the Minor Illusion of a roaring monster just around the corner, in an effort to scare off a group of bandits in the middle of a fight.  I handled it at the time with a quick decision, but this is probably going to become a standard strategy, so I'm going to have to have a more serious rule for how to handle it, and similar situations.   Clearly the spell can create this effect (a roaring lion is specifically called out in the spell as a possibility), but it doesn't really address how to handle this in the actual spell text.  It says examining the illusion as an action can allow a skill check to notice it's not real, but since we're in combat, I don't see that as a very useful option.   Here's my thinking: Nobody's going to take an action to examine the illusion (what with being locked in mortal combat), so everyone hears the sound and treats it as a real noise in the environment.  But ultimately, the illusion spell is simply the method by which the wizard is attempting to do something, so the wizard should roll an appropriate skill check and I'll treat it as a contest.   In this case, since she wants to scare off the bandits, she should roll a Charisma (Intimidation) check, opposed by the bandits' Wisdom (Insight).   So, three questions:   Is that how you would handle this?  If not, what would you do instead that allows the player to use their spell in creative and useful ways, but does not step all over other spells (like, say, Fear) or make a simple cantrip overpowered? Mechanically, do those two opposed checks look good to you, or should I consider a different pairing of skills?  Should the wizard get some kind of bonus (advantage, proficiency) on her roll since she's using a magic spell and not trying to, like, actually intimidate them face-to-face? (My instinct is no.)  How does the target being a group versus an individual influence things? If the bandits lose the contest, what effect should it have? They can't all flee into the woods in a rout (which would be overpowered for a single roll of any sort), but having them all just nervously cluster together seems like a worthless result.  Possibly refraining from attacks in favor of taking defensive actions for a round?
#2 iserith Aug 06, 2015 11:30:28	1. Yes, if I thought that the wizard's goal had an uncertain outcome given his or her approach.   2. That seems reasonable, though just setting a DC would also be fine.   3. You have to get players to clearly state the character's goal and approach to make this determination. This ensures that the player's expectations are clear and makes it easy for the DM to adjudicate and narrate the result of the adventurer's action. For example, if the player says he or she casts minor illusion to create the sound of a roaring lion in order to get all the bandits to rout, you may decide that this isn't possible*. When a thing is or isn't possible, it's outcome is certain which means there is no roll. It just does or does not work. As another example, if the player says that he or she casts a minor illusion to create the sound of a roaring lion in order to get the bandits to move away from the doorway or to be temporary frightened, then you might decide this is possible, but the outcome is uncertain. Thus, it's time to make that ability check (opposed or otherwise).   * In general, I think it's good practice to let players know whether you think a particular goal and approach is or isn't possible before they make the attempt and "waste" their turn.
#3 Awakened_Gazebo Aug 06, 2015 14:56:33	2. Id set the DC at the normal spell save DC. A more competent wizard can make the lion sound more terrifying. In other instances where the wizard is specifically using the illusion to boost his own performance I think advantage would be cool on his persuasion, deception intimidate whatever skill roll.  opening a small chest with the " head" of the pelor priest in town, thereby "completing" the mission for the evil weremolerats and gaining their trust. Or make just make it succeed, depending on plot. concerning the target/group thing ehh I think that very much depend on whats going on, usually Id say safety in numbers, thereby making it harder to have everyone scared.   3. as iserith said. Id add that its ok to barter a bit between you and the player "No they wont all be stunned by fear, but those two guys there will loose their reaction and have disadvantage on XX" "ok, what about throwing in a bonus on intimidate when the barbarian roars  in initiative count 12 that his pride has arrived to tear human flesh" "deal!"
(Reply to #3) Keenath	iserith wrote:
#5 iserith Aug 06, 2015 15:31:46	Keenath wrote:
(Reply to #5) Keenath	I talked it over with my player, and we decided that since she's using the spell rather than her physical presence, it makes sense to have her roll like an Intelligence (Intimidate) skill check or some similar thing, rather than charisma.  Most of the time that means she's rolling her unmodified Int bonus.   If she's trying to affect a group, I'll generally just slap disadvantage on it, unless it's like a really BIG group or something.  Advantage for tasks that are smaller, and quicker, like... making a guard jump with a loud sound or something.
#7 Imaculata Aug 07, 2015 2:19:31	It's the spell that is doing the intimidation, and not the caster. So I would use their caster DC or a fixed DC, to do the intimidate check. Otherwise you are demanding spellcasters to invest points in their intimidate skill, in order for their illusions to be effective, which is silly. Especially given the fact that intimidation isn't what casters generally are best at. I'd remove a lot of the randomness out of this, so I wouldn't roll on intelligence or on charisma for the player. It's the monster that has to roll, not the player. Otherwise the player has an additional chance for failure, on top of the chance for the monster to make his save.   So I agree with Iserith here. Assign either a fixed DC (10, 15, or 20) based on how creative the illusion is, or use her caster DC.
#8 Rya.Reisender Aug 07, 2015 3:23:00	Maybe use caster DC but add +5 for a particularly good idea (similar to the passive ability advantage rule) and -5 for an idea unlikely to work (disadvantage). Or even easier: Give the target advantage / disadvantage based on how good the intimidation is, then you can just use your normale spell DC all the time.
(Reply to #7) Keenath	Imaculata wrote:
#10 Sorsohka Aug 07, 2015 6:39:57	Keenath wrote:
(Reply to #2) Coredump00	Slightly off topic...   iserith wrote:
#12 iserith Aug 07, 2015 8:33:03	Coredump00 wrote:
#13 Thrasymachus0 Aug 07, 2015 9:59:00	Out of curiousity - how would you have the bandits react if an actual lion had roared around the corner? If your players had summoned a lion or a Druid came to join the fight?   Normally when that happens, it usually seems as if enemies like bandits will either think "urgh another enemy to fight" or "we're already injured - best retreat now and come back later". Personally, I'd look at the optional rule for morale in those circumstances. The lion is real until they spend an action to discover it's not (or in some cases if they physically interact with the illusion right?)- but unless you have a real lions roar provide a fear/frightened effect I'm not sure why you'd do that with an illusion.   Also, at some point someone is going to realise there is an illusionist in the group (especially if you have reoccurring antogisists) - if your PCs kept coming up against illusionists, I'm sure they'd come up with ways to counter it. I'd also consider giving enemies advantage at this point/or an automatic check (probably not both).   I've been dying to play an illusionist myself - but combat illusions seem iffy to me (using something like minor illusion anyway) not without forward planning (like knowing what their fears/likes are or knowing who their existing enemies/allies are).   Tl;dr- illusions are real until the stated requirements are met - they don't gain special abilities beyond the thing they are (unless that is part of the spell),  the question is not "how does X react to the appearance of an illusionary Y" but "how would X react if Y appeared".
#14 Viddicus Aug 07, 2015 10:55:37	Here's what I'd do.   * Use a passive Investigation score of the bandits versus the spell DC. This makes the illusion more believable the higher level the caster gets, but also, very intelligent beings have a good chance to notice that something isn't quite right. A very stupid goblin is more likely to believe the illusion to be real, whereas a very intelligent caster is gonna have a better chance to notice the trick for what it is. To me, this is similar to passive Perception where you can automatically notice things without actively trying. Well, I think it's fair for people to automatically notice something being "off" with an illusion without actively trying.   * Allow a bandit a saving throw versus the spell DC but only if the bandit actively tries to disbelieve the illusion.   Now, in this case, Minor Illusion is severely limiting. You can create a sound or an image (not both). The believability is reduced if you create a roaring lion with no sound. Even the spell description states:   If a creature uses its action to examine the sound or image, the creature can determine that it is an illusion with a successful Intelligence (Investigation) check against your spell save DC. If a creature discerns the illusion for what it is, the illusion becomes faint to the creature.   This all being said, I'd grant situational bonuses (advantage or disadvantage) on the roll or even the passive Investigation based on the circumstances. The image of a monster without any sound I'd grant advantage for (the illusion isn't very believable). The image of footprints in the snow after a snow storm I'd give disadvantage for (the illusion is very believeable).
(Reply to #9) Awakened_Gazebo	Keenath wrote:
#16 Danny_Montanny Aug 10, 2015 7:32:48	As stated, it's all about goal and approach. If the DM decides the goal can happen with the approach, then they can adjudicate accordingly.   The thing you really have to think about in these situations is making sure you know your NPCs enough to adjudicate properly. Would this thing (lion's roar) have the desired effect on these guys? If so, to what degree? Come to an agreement with the PC on the matter and go from there.   If you decide on uncertainty, make sure it's one or the other side that the outcome is uncertain for, not both. This will save time and it keeps in line with the rest of the game. If you feel the illusion is dependent on the caster's skills, and would vary from castin to casting, use their magic skill as a basis. If you think it'd depend on the target, a saving throw is usually appropriate.
#17 Xeviat-DM Aug 11, 2015 18:32:29	Let us consider the value of a cantrip. A cantrip is worth about half a feat; two feats grant cantrips, and they each grant something else. A feat is also worth two skills, as a feat grants two skills. So, a cantrip effectively granting proficiency on a skill isn't entirely out of the question.   This is where I want a more robust skill system. What would intimidate do? Really, what would a single action without the expenditure of any resources do? Well, if they're mooks, a single action could kill them, so a single cantrip getting them to rout isn't absurd. If they're tough, then they won't rout, but maybe they'll group up and use the dodge action for a turn in preparation.
#18 Saeviomagy Aug 11, 2015 18:58:39	I don't think there's a roll involved. Think what the given foe would do if there really was a lion around the corner and do it. I'm thinking most foes might take into account the possible sudden appearance of a lion into their plan (ie - they sidle away from the corner), but if they're not running from armed and armoured adventurers, they're not going to flee a *possible* lion that *might* attack them.