Timeline for Is this homebrew "Mask of Illusion" spell balanced?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 18, 2020 at 11:51 | comment | added | Hobbamok | Yeah, I completely overlooked the gold cost (because most spells don't have any significant), but 500GP is way out of line. Raise dead is so expensive because you'll rarely do it. Maybe add 200GP for the 8th level version (since thats kinda permanent), but a 5th level slot should suffice | |
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:23 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Oct 14, 2019 at 20:48 | vote | accept | ZwiQ | ||
| Oct 5, 2019 at 15:53 | comment | added | illustro | There is such a thing as a passive check. The PHB defines a passive check as "... a special kind of ability check that doesn't involve any dice rolls". This is defined in the Ability Checks section of the Using Ability Scores section | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 13:22 | comment | added | Szega | @ZwiQ I consider it a quite interesting idea and would be disappointed to see it deleted. I urge you to collect any changes you deem necessary and post a follow-up question later. Making major edits to questions does not suit this site well. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 13:15 | comment | added | ZwiQ | @Molot: Thanks a lot for your feedback. I understand that many improvements can be made to the text, but I will not touch it any longer in order not to create an almost new question. I am kind of regretting my decision to post this question and am considering to delete it, but I do not want to ruin the effort you have spent on it. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 12:39 | comment | added | Mołot | @ZwiQ and now it looks like your spell is the only spell in the game that's unidentifiable no matter what, right? Because it is either "don't know" (failed check) or "false information" (successful check). Am I reading it correctly? | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 12:38 | comment | added | ZwiQ | @Szega: Thanks a lot for your answer. I will try to address some of the points you have raised regarding the text (not the context) and then you could update that part of your answer. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 12:36 | comment | added | ZwiQ | @Molot: I have modified the part of the text that relates to identification as major image. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 10:52 | comment | added | Szega | @Mołot The wording is simply so ambiguous and at places riddled with throwbacks to previous editions that I cannot be sure the OP meant to remove the requirement for spending a reaction or not. I do not understand your comments here. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 10:48 | comment | added | Mołot | I meant, it seems that all spells are recognizable when casting is observed, and I don't know any spell that simply blocks this. And this spell flatly says it is always miss-recognized. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 10:42 | comment | added | Szega | @Mołot Including any mechanic that is different from existing illusion spells will be detrimental to making it an effective deception. Unless only PC-s have access to it, as the DM is already handling knowing and not knowing it is an illusion at the same time and would not make a difference to them. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 10:36 | comment | added | Mołot | What about "another spellcaster seeing the casting will think that it is major image" without any checks? Removing ability to recognize spell, totally, seems off to me, but I'm not an 5e expert. | |
| Oct 4, 2019 at 10:25 | history | answered | Szega | CC BY-SA 4.0 |