Lunali sorry I don't quite understand your point I was recalling a use of modified memory on players that I found very clever and the players ended up enjoying...
My point was that the spell doesn't actually work the way it does in the story.
Lunali are you using modify memory on me? your point was the spell doesn't work like it does in the story before you listened to the story
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
The question was about modify memory, I have decided to give the Minotaur a chance to see that a spell is being cast on him, he will need a nat 20 because he is -2 int but there will be a chance to spot something is off. I will then make the wisdom saving throw for him, again will require a nat 20 due to wizard level, and then recount what he sees based on that roll.
Spellcasting is obvious to everyone. This is why subtle spell exists. He would absolutely know a spell is being cast, he just wouldn't know what spell it is.
But it's clear you very much want this to go one way. You want to control the moment of the big reveal and you don't want it to happen now. Saying "he has a chance to figure it out if he crits twice in a row" is just pretending like you're leaving the option open.
Heroes get taken over and controlled all the time in stories.
This is exactly the point people are trying to make. D&D is not a novel you're recounting to the players, it's a story you're telling together. You control the wizard. Allowing the wizard to control the players is really just you controlling everyone. The players might as well go out for pizza and have you call them when you're ready to let them participate again.
D&D has different flavors of mind control. Dominate person, for example is about manipulating the character. The player knows what's happening the whole time, and thus is in on it and can have fun roleplaying their character as being dominated. What you're trying to do is manipulate the players. They are not in on it. They cannot enjoy roleplaying someone who doesn't know something that they do. That is the line that people are saying not to cross. It makes you an unreliable narrator, which means they can't trust anything you say.
There is very little difference between you just straight-up lying to your players and you manipulating them through a third party that is conveniently too strong for them to ever suspect. They don't have any agency in this.
"The problem with that is that the characters are guaranteed to act the way they would normally, greatly increasing the success chance of the fake memory. I'm not a fan of any kind of mind control on PCs. If you're going to tell a story by yourself, you don't need me to play a character."
point was it's not RAW
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
The question was about modify memory, I have decided to give the Minotaur a chance to see that a spell is being cast on him, he will need a nat 20 because he is -2 int but there will be a chance to spot something is off. I will then make the wisdom saving throw for him, again will require a nat 20 due to wizard level, and then recount what he sees based on that roll.
Spellcasting is obvious to everyone. This is why subtle spell exists. He would absolutely know a spell is being cast, he just wouldn't know what spell it is.
But it's clear you very much want this to go one way. You want to control the moment of the big reveal and you don't want it to happen now. Saying "he has a chance to figure it out if he crits twice in a row" is just pretending like you're leaving the option open.
Heroes get taken over and controlled all the time in stories.
This is exactly the point people are trying to make. D&D is not a novel you're recounting to the players, it's a story you're telling together. You control the wizard. Allowing the wizard to control the players is really just you controlling everyone. The players might as well go out for pizza and have you call them when you're ready to let them participate again.
D&D has different flavors of mind control. Dominate person, for example is about manipulating the character. The player knows what's happening the whole time, and thus is in on it and can have fun roleplaying their character as being dominated. What you're trying to do is manipulate the players. They are not in on it. They cannot enjoy roleplaying someone who doesn't know something that they do. That is the line that people are saying not to cross. It makes you an unreliable narrator, which means they can't trust anything you say.
There is very little difference between you just straight-up lying to your players and you manipulating them through a third party that is conveniently too strong for them to ever suspect. They don't have any agency in this.
He knows a spell is being cast the wizard is going to say I am casting a spell to make sure there are no magical traps here before I open this.
I have no issue with the party figuring it out now, if I wanted to do that I would just let the Minotaur leave and then have the wizard tell the party later this is what I found if they come back to him. The wizard is taking over the minds of key people in the town with the aboleths help, he is replacing individuals with a changling while they are enslaved then putting them back in place. I didn’t direct the character to go to the wizard the player made that choice i am simply having the wizard react in the way they would based on the situation.
Once the players figure out that someone is using mind control then the cleric has ways to undo that, and there are NPCs who can help and so they can then find out the Minotaur was affected by a modify memory spell.
this is not the okayers being controlled this is a single situation that the player will think is not what they expected but the other characters will be very suspicious, they went to great lengths to get this thing and the people in the pub acted strangely trying to stop them.
"The problem with that is that the characters are guaranteed to act the way they would normally, greatly increasing the success chance of the fake memory. I'm not a fan of any kind of mind control on PCs. If you're going to tell a story by yourself, you don't need me to play a character."
point was it's not RAW
In part, yes. Also, there's a decent chance your players won't be as happy about you fooling them by bending the rules. Some people will enjoy a good story, like the people described in the one you posted. Others will be upset that the wizard somehow knew exactly how they would behave and set up a memory that matches up with the behavior of people he had never met. If you're going to change the rules of the game without telling the players ahead of time, you'd better be very sure about how they're going to react to it.
Lunali well if you insist I'll have to take your word for it, though I do find it strange you say the chance of success is increased the roll was made the fake memory was implanted, if anything the DM even hinted at things being amiss in the fake memory recall the book "all is not what it seems" and in the end the DM let them figure it out without remove curse or greater restoration
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
Lunali well if you insist I'll have to take your word for it, though I do find it strange you say the chance of success is increased the roll was made the fake memory was implanted, if anything the DM even hinted at things being amiss in the fake memory recall the book "all is not what it seems" and in the end the DM let them figure it out without remove curse or greater restoration
The chance of success is greater because there was no chance the targets would think it was a dream.
Lunali sorry I don't see were modify memory under raw has a chance that the character gets to think it was a dream? maybe I'm missing something here or there is some fundamental disconnect I just don't see it...
ah your referring to if a modified memory is to illogical is dismissed, perhaps as a bad dream... yeah hasn't it failed then? or maybe your saying as its being acted out the DM could insist your character likes pouring acid on himself?
sure a DM can abuse anything
though even in an acted out modify memory you could play out that scenario of a illogical or dismissed modify memory could be quite funny actually to start illogical scenes of an inept attempt at modify memory and see when the players start crying foul at which point the spell would fail...
I think in the end it's all a matter of trust between the DM and the players it is collaborative game between all parties after all
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
An Aboleth, outside of it's lair, is at the very top edge of Tier 2 and inside it's lair, it's Legendary actions combined with all it's other powers and abilities makes it easily Tier 3. This assumes it has no enslaved minions, and it's unlikely that would be the case. They are telepathic monsters with an 18 intelligence and an average of 135 hit points. They have Superior Darkvision, and a passive perception of 20. About the only thing attackers have going for them is that their natural armor class is only a 17, and on land they move only 10 feet per round. As if you could get them to come on land since in the water they have a 40 foot per round swim speed and can breathe just fine while inside a cloud of mucus that enslaves people.
Just fighting a single Aboleth would be pretty near impossible for Tier 1 player characters. Having a Tier 4 Wizard around, even if he's sitting pretty at home and sending weak copies of himself still means the players are just spectators in a story that is supposed to be about their characters.
The aboleth will absolutely be ok for them at level 5-6 this is a party of 8 PCs and I have thrown Aboleths at far smaller parties in the past. To give you a sense of their strength they recently dealt with 5 Chuul fairly easily after dealing with a series of smaller combats that day at level 3.
As for the wizard 20 years of running TRRPGs I know how to pitch a story, when the characters are fighting the aboleth wizard will be sitting at hime feet up hoping that either the party succeed or aiming to go in and finish up what they started and finish off the aboleth himself. He wants it dead, it has served its usefulness and now needs to be gone.
You can't pull a "I have 20 years of running games, so this will be fine" when you are asking a question to other people on a forum. They are here offering advice to you about how to run the game you're playing at your request, so it's not really fair to try to overrule objection/criticism/advice through this means. Your solution is not related to anything that I read anyone advising, so it doesn't seem like you really wanted help in figuring this out anyway.
I am sure that I don't know everything about your campaign, and wouldn't ever claim to. I only know what you're saying. For a 20th level wizard to want a very powerful creature gone, and to send a group of vastly weaker creatures to do it (if he is so averse to confrontation, it's hard to imagine he avoided combat all his life and is still 20th level) does make me wonder why he wouldn't just... sort it out himself if it was important to do so. He's even immune to its mind controlling magic, making it essentially useless against him. What would he do if they failed?
Regardless, D&D printed material is full of high level NPCs who bafflingly offer money to PCs for things that they could easily accomplish themselves, so it's not like this is out of line with a lot of existing canon. It's your story, you can do what you want with it.
Personally I tell my players in session zero that they will never permanently, or even for a session's worth of game time, lose control of their character. Losing temporary control in combat is one thing, but long-term control is quite another for the reasons I posted previously.
I don't think that there's any way that this scenario works out as fun for the players. If they know about the Modified Memory, it's weird. If they don't know, it's irrelevant. If they discover later on that one of their memories is false, they may become paranoid. Did the wizard ever have a whole conversation with them and wipe their memory? How do they trust that their characters know everything they should? It's a problematic mechanic all round.
Do let us know what happens and how it works out for the players.
Lunali sorry I don't see were modify memory under raw has a chance that the character gets to think it was a dream? maybe I'm missing something here or there is some fundamental disconnect I just don't see it...
ah your referring to if a modified memory is to illogical is dismissed, perhaps as a bad dream... yeah hasn't it failed then? or maybe your saying as its being acted out the DM could insist your character likes pouring acid on himself?
sure a DM can abuse anything
though even in an acted out modify memory you could play out that scenario of a illogical or dismissed modify memory could be quite funny actually to start illogical scenes of an inept attempt at modify memory and see when the players start crying foul at which point the spell would fail...
I think in the end it's all a matter of trust between the DM and the players it is collaborative game between all parties after all
If a wizard that doesn't know the characters is creating a memory, there's a significant chance the memory will go significantly against their "natural inclinations, alignment, or beliefs." By having the players act out the memory without telling them about the spell, you completely eliminate that possibility.
Lunali but the DM is the judge of that in both cases... so if the DM decides this wizard may have successfully cast the spell but is too inept to implant a logical memory he can play that out... could be really quite fun if you ask me give the players that haha scheming wizard we saw through your trickery! success moment either way it's totally up to the DM's discretion or were is this "significant chance" variable X dependent on caster Y knowing spell target Z I get the feeling you see this as a the DM is breaking the rules and cheating to win against the players type thing
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
Lunali but the DM is the judge of that in both cases... so if the DM decides this wizard may have successfully cast the spell but is too inept to implant a logical memory he can play that out... could be really quite fun if you ask me give the players that haha scheming wizard we saw through your trickery! success moment either way it's totally up to the DM's discretion or were is this "significant chance" variable X dependent on caster Y knowing spell target Z I get the feeling you see this as a the DM is breaking the rules and cheating to win against the players type thing
It is up to the DM's discretion, but what percent of DMs that do this actually take that into account instead of getting caught up in the story they want to tell?
Lunali true that may be a sadly (*high or was that *low but I think you get what I meant) percentage but I would count you or myself among it, I see it as a opportunity for some cool RP some inception type shenanigan's
*darn it got totally muddled with my would wouldn'ts there... sigh think I need some sleep new day let me try that again...
Lunali I think both you and I would take it into account, I see it as an opportunity for some cool RP some immersive inception style shenanigans
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
maybe just make him roll a d20 and you add the modifiers behind the scene. So the player rolls but they don't know its a saving through.
Sometimes i have players roll d20s to see where the story goes. When the story can go in a positive or negative direction i don't want to make the choice which would seem forced. If you do that at all, then them rolling a d20 can be disguised as something else.
You've got a continuum of ways you can play this with two extremes. Where you place your game on this continuum depends on your preferences (your mental model of what's real in your game world) and your players (how they prefer to play the game).
And that means how you execute this will depend on what type of players you have. If the players are extreme "free agency nutters" that don't like anything influencing their characters actions then they won't be happy with any form of charm spell. This scenario is never going to fly in any form, whether you roll a save or not, whether you narrate from the character's point of view or an external one. Remove their agency and they exercise their free will by throwing their toys out of the pram.
If they're extreme "immersion illusionists" they won't be happy knowing something their characters don't or even having any reminders that this is just a game. They'll object to making the save as this give them out of character knowledge. Give them out of character knowledge and they'll sulk that you're ruining their immersion. Ideally you'll make the save in secret and narrate things from the point of view of the character.
Fortunately most players are somewhere between the two. You know your players better than I do so I can't really suggest what you should do. Just make sure that what you do is true to your conception of your game world and is presented in a way that caters for the player's preferred style where possible.
If you haven't shown them the contents of the bag, then I would say that having the wizard "cast to see whether it's magic" to cast modify memory and then tell them, in the vaguest way, that the bag contains stolen goods or whatever. Don't elaborate too much, and make sure that you use the phrase "you remember him showing you...", "You remember seeing..." when describing it.
If the player already know's what's there, then you put your plot twist at risk by changing it, as it may draw suspicion on the wizard, who at present is a trusted NPC. If they've seen it and the player knows, then don't overwrite it - chances are they see knowing what's in the bag to be a trivial thing, and as soon as you tell the players they don't remember, then they will light it up as an important thing and probably mount a heist to get the bag back from the wizard!
Don't forget he can also cast an illusion to disguise the bag as something else, which doesn't directly affect the PC so could be a good compromise!
My point was that the spell doesn't actually work the way it does in the story.
Lunali are you using modify memory on me? your point was the spell doesn't work like it does in the story before you listened to the story
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
Spellcasting is obvious to everyone. This is why subtle spell exists. He would absolutely know a spell is being cast, he just wouldn't know what spell it is.
But it's clear you very much want this to go one way. You want to control the moment of the big reveal and you don't want it to happen now. Saying "he has a chance to figure it out if he crits twice in a row" is just pretending like you're leaving the option open.
This is exactly the point people are trying to make. D&D is not a novel you're recounting to the players, it's a story you're telling together. You control the wizard. Allowing the wizard to control the players is really just you controlling everyone. The players might as well go out for pizza and have you call them when you're ready to let them participate again.
D&D has different flavors of mind control. Dominate person, for example is about manipulating the character. The player knows what's happening the whole time, and thus is in on it and can have fun roleplaying their character as being dominated. What you're trying to do is manipulate the players. They are not in on it. They cannot enjoy roleplaying someone who doesn't know something that they do. That is the line that people are saying not to cross. It makes you an unreliable narrator, which means they can't trust anything you say.
There is very little difference between you just straight-up lying to your players and you manipulating them through a third party that is conveniently too strong for them to ever suspect. They don't have any agency in this.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I'd already listened to it before you posted it.
seriously your going to go with that? so your
"The problem with that is that the characters are guaranteed to act the way they would normally, greatly increasing the success chance of the fake memory. I'm not a fan of any kind of mind control on PCs. If you're going to tell a story by yourself, you don't need me to play a character."
point was it's not RAW
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
He knows a spell is being cast the wizard is going to say I am casting a spell to make sure there are no magical traps here before I open this.
I have no issue with the party figuring it out now, if I wanted to do that I would just let the Minotaur leave and then have the wizard tell the party later this is what I found if they come back to him. The wizard is taking over the minds of key people in the town with the aboleths help, he is replacing individuals with a changling while they are enslaved then putting them back in place. I didn’t direct the character to go to the wizard the player made that choice i am simply having the wizard react in the way they would based on the situation.
Once the players figure out that someone is using mind control then the cleric has ways to undo that, and there are NPCs who can help and so they can then find out the Minotaur was affected by a modify memory spell.
this is not the okayers being controlled this is a single situation that the player will think is not what they expected but the other characters will be very suspicious, they went to great lengths to get this thing and the people in the pub acted strangely trying to stop them.
In part, yes. Also, there's a decent chance your players won't be as happy about you fooling them by bending the rules. Some people will enjoy a good story, like the people described in the one you posted. Others will be upset that the wizard somehow knew exactly how they would behave and set up a memory that matches up with the behavior of people he had never met. If you're going to change the rules of the game without telling the players ahead of time, you'd better be very sure about how they're going to react to it.
Lunali well if you insist I'll have to take your word for it, though I do find it strange you say the chance of success is increased the roll was made the fake memory was implanted, if anything the DM even hinted at things being amiss in the fake memory recall the book "all is not what it seems" and in the end the DM let them figure it out without remove curse or greater restoration
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
The chance of success is greater because there was no chance the targets would think it was a dream.
Lunali sorry I don't see were modify memory under raw has a chance that the character gets to think it was a dream?
maybe I'm missing something here or there is some fundamental disconnect I just don't see it...
ah your referring to if a modified memory is to illogical is dismissed, perhaps as a bad dream... yeah hasn't it failed then? or maybe your saying as its being acted out the DM could insist your character likes pouring acid on himself?
sure a DM can abuse anything
though even in an acted out modify memory you could play out that scenario of a illogical or dismissed modify memory could be quite funny actually to start illogical scenes of an inept attempt at modify memory and see when the players start crying foul at which point the spell would fail...
I think in the end it's all a matter of trust between the DM and the players it is collaborative game between all parties after all
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
You can't pull a "I have 20 years of running games, so this will be fine" when you are asking a question to other people on a forum. They are here offering advice to you about how to run the game you're playing at your request, so it's not really fair to try to overrule objection/criticism/advice through this means. Your solution is not related to anything that I read anyone advising, so it doesn't seem like you really wanted help in figuring this out anyway.
I am sure that I don't know everything about your campaign, and wouldn't ever claim to. I only know what you're saying. For a 20th level wizard to want a very powerful creature gone, and to send a group of vastly weaker creatures to do it (if he is so averse to confrontation, it's hard to imagine he avoided combat all his life and is still 20th level) does make me wonder why he wouldn't just... sort it out himself if it was important to do so. He's even immune to its mind controlling magic, making it essentially useless against him. What would he do if they failed?
Regardless, D&D printed material is full of high level NPCs who bafflingly offer money to PCs for things that they could easily accomplish themselves, so it's not like this is out of line with a lot of existing canon. It's your story, you can do what you want with it.
Personally I tell my players in session zero that they will never permanently, or even for a session's worth of game time, lose control of their character. Losing temporary control in combat is one thing, but long-term control is quite another for the reasons I posted previously.
I don't think that there's any way that this scenario works out as fun for the players. If they know about the Modified Memory, it's weird. If they don't know, it's irrelevant. If they discover later on that one of their memories is false, they may become paranoid. Did the wizard ever have a whole conversation with them and wipe their memory? How do they trust that their characters know everything they should? It's a problematic mechanic all round.
Do let us know what happens and how it works out for the players.
If a wizard that doesn't know the characters is creating a memory, there's a significant chance the memory will go significantly against their "natural inclinations, alignment, or beliefs." By having the players act out the memory without telling them about the spell, you completely eliminate that possibility.
Lunali but the DM is the judge of that in both cases... so if the DM decides this wizard may have successfully cast the spell but is too inept to implant a logical memory he can play that out... could be really quite fun if you ask me give the players that haha scheming wizard we saw through your trickery! success moment
either way it's totally up to the DM's discretion or were is this "significant chance" variable X dependent on caster Y knowing spell target Z
I get the feeling you see this as a the DM is breaking the rules and cheating to win against the players type thing
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
I trust the players with the metadata.
"Now, <Player>, your character has just had modify memory successfully cast on them. The fake memory is <this>. Go for it."
It is up to the DM's discretion, but what percent of DMs that do this actually take that into account instead of getting caught up in the story they want to tell?
Lunali true that may be a sadly (*high or was that *low but I think you get what I meant) percentage but I would count you or myself among it, I see it as a opportunity for some cool RP some inception type shenanigan's*darn it got totally muddled with my would wouldn'ts there... sigh think I need some sleep
new day let me try that again...Lunali I think both you and I would take it into account, I see it as an opportunity for some cool RP some immersive inception style shenanigans
“It cannot be seen, cannot be felt, Cannot be heard, cannot be smelt, It lies behind stars and under hills, And empty holes it fills, It comes first and follows after, Ends life, kills laughter.” J.R.R. Tolkien, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
maybe just make him roll a d20 and you add the modifiers behind the scene. So the player rolls but they don't know its a saving through.
Sometimes i have players roll d20s to see where the story goes. When the story can go in a positive or negative direction i don't want to make the choice which would seem forced. If you do that at all, then them rolling a d20 can be disguised as something else.
You've got a continuum of ways you can play this with two extremes. Where you place your game on this continuum depends on your preferences (your mental model of what's real in your game world) and your players (how they prefer to play the game).
And that means how you execute this will depend on what type of players you have. If the players are extreme "free agency nutters" that don't like anything influencing their characters actions then they won't be happy with any form of charm spell. This scenario is never going to fly in any form, whether you roll a save or not, whether you narrate from the character's point of view or an external one. Remove their agency and they exercise their free will by throwing their toys out of the pram.
If they're extreme "immersion illusionists" they won't be happy knowing something their characters don't or even having any reminders that this is just a game. They'll object to making the save as this give them out of character knowledge. Give them out of character knowledge and they'll sulk that you're ruining their immersion. Ideally you'll make the save in secret and narrate things from the point of view of the character.
Fortunately most players are somewhere between the two. You know your players better than I do so I can't really suggest what you should do. Just make sure that what you do is true to your conception of your game world and is presented in a way that caters for the player's preferred style where possible.
If you haven't shown them the contents of the bag, then I would say that having the wizard "cast to see whether it's magic" to cast modify memory and then tell them, in the vaguest way, that the bag contains stolen goods or whatever. Don't elaborate too much, and make sure that you use the phrase "you remember him showing you...", "You remember seeing..." when describing it.
If the player already know's what's there, then you put your plot twist at risk by changing it, as it may draw suspicion on the wizard, who at present is a trusted NPC. If they've seen it and the player knows, then don't overwrite it - chances are they see knowing what's in the bag to be a trivial thing, and as soon as you tell the players they don't remember, then they will light it up as an important thing and probably mount a heist to get the bag back from the wizard!
Don't forget he can also cast an illusion to disguise the bag as something else, which doesn't directly affect the PC so could be a good compromise!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!