![]() The duplicates move with it and mimic its actions, shifting position so as to make it impossible to track which cloaker is the real one. The cloaker's phantasms do not change other actions, so a cloaker does not make 4 attacks while its phantasms are up. The cloaker's phantasms simply mimic actions In the case of Mirror Image the roll is made by the target not the attacker but this otherwise works well - though it does give a very slight advantage to the attacker when two duplicates remain (35% to hit Cloaker, rather than 33.3%). With one duplicate, you must roll an 11 or higher. With two duplicates, you must roll an 8 or higher. If you have three duplicates, you must roll a 6 or higher to change the attack's target to a duplicate. An approach which I use at my table, and which has the advantage of using a d20, is to borrow from the rules specified in the related Mirror Image spell, that produces a very similar effect to the Cloaker's Phantasms action:Įach time a creature targets you with an attack during the spell's duration, roll a d20 to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates. Sdjz's suggestion, in their answer, is perfectly sensible. So, how you resolve that roll at your table is up to you. The odds of whether you hit the Cloaker or its duplicates instead are not directly specified. As the roll is random it doesn't really matter who makes it - but as the attacker will normally a PC, it's probably more satisfying for them to do it. So, you want to attack it, how do you determine what you hit?Īnyone that makes an attack against the Cloaker while its duplicates are active, 'rolls randomly to determine whether target the cloaker or one of the duplicates'. Doing so probably wouldn't be too unbalancing, as they'll still have disadvantage on their attack due to being blinded. If you want to rule it that way at your table, then, while I think it is clearly against rules as written, that's up to you. However, you're right, it is hard to argue that the guy actually affected by the bite, wouldn't logically know that one of them was continuously attached to their head and that that one must be the real one - and thus the victim at least shouldn't be at risk of targeting a Phantasm instead. Maybe you can rationalise that for your other PCs, that are just looking on, that the phantasms overlap continously, apparently moving on and off the victim's head. There's no provision in the rules for the Phantasms to be bypassed. The not very satisfying answer is that they are still confused by the phantasms, even if that seems counter-intuitive, because the rules say so - because magic. You might like to think of it in terms of a game of classic cup and ball misdirection.īut what about when the real one is literally attached to your head? How could you still be confused then? ![]() In my games I often describe it as all of the duplicates frequently appearing to come together and overlap then separate again, so that, even if momentarily you thought you knew which was which, you can't maintain it. Even after you've been bitten the Cloaker's duplicates are still 'mov with it', and 'shifting postition' so that 'it is impossible to track which cloaker is the real one'. So, when the real cloaker attackers, why is it still confusing as to which is the real one? Surely you know which has bitten you? ![]() There is no mention that these duplicates are capable of physically attacking, which would be abnormal for illusions, so according to the 5e design principle that ' spells only do what they say they do' it's reasonable to conclude that they cannot attack. Whenever any creature targets the cloaker with an attack or a harmful spell while a duplicate remains, that creature rolls randomly to determine whether it targets the cloaker or one of the duplicates. The usefulness of these illusory duplicates to the Cloaker is that: Magically creates three illusory duplicates of itself if it isn't in bright light. When a Cloaker takes the Phantasms action, it: The phantasms cannot attack, but they're still going to confuse you
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |