![]() ![]() Though, I wouldn't go this route if a key point of the plot involves lots of charms. The player gets to use a class feature, it feels good, and everyone's happy. It probably won't hurt anything to just let the monk end the charm. Screw the rules, just let them end it: Usually, being charmed isn't something that comes up a lot.Though, that is completely player dependent. But the player might grumble that they have to jump through a hoop that isn't specified in the rules to use a feature that they assumed didn't require a check. The Monk can notice it with a Arcana/Insight/Other ability check: This follows the Sage advice pretty closely, and allows the monk a chance to use their features.But this would force the monk's friends to help them by convincing them that they were charmed, or that they should cleanse themself, just to be safe. The sage advice suggests that a skill check could reveal the charm. The Monk can't detect the charm alone: This feels kind of dirty to me.With this, the DM has license to take this one of three directions: Discovery usually comes through the use of skills like Arcana, Investigation, Insight, and Perception or through spells like detect magic. It’s ultimately up to the DM whether you discover the presence of inconspicuous spells. You and your companions might deduce that you were beguiled if evidence of the spell is found. With that being said, the Sage Advice article for September 2016 states: ![]() Usually, it's closest to the rules to assume that if a feature doesn't say it grants you an ability to detect something, then you don't have the ability to detect it. Not inherently, but they can discover the charm ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |