So here is a question for everyone. If you cast vow of enmity on an illusion does it go off and does nothing (wasting the daily Channel of Divinity) and does nothing happen and you still have the daily Channel of Divinity?
This became a debated topic at our game last night and no one could find any rule to clarify it in the rule books. It's being argued cause it's not a spell or a skill or feat. And it says creature and not target. I assume it is wasted but I could be wrong.
This likely comes down to how much of an ass your DM wants to be. 😝
In terms of Rules As Written the only similar cases are things like making an attack; for example, if you know there is an invisible creature nearby and you think you're close enough to attack it, then you're allowed to make the attempt, but if it turns out to be too far then the attack fails no matter the roll.
Your DM could absolutely choose to have Vow of Enmity function like that, i.e- the player picked a target that turned out to be invalid or out of range, so the ability is used but fails. This is unfortunate, but at least you learned something about the target I guess?
However, the way that the ability is worded it lists "using your Channel Divinity" last in the sentence describing the setup, so on that basis you could argue that spending CD happens only after you have chosen a valid target. If you go with this option then following this logic means you've still used your bonus action, as it's listed first. This does feel like it creates potential for an exploit, e.g- if you know a mage has created illusory duplicates of themselves (because they always do that in video games for some reason), then for only a bonus action you could automatically eliminate one as a possibility. Not much of an exploit though and you can justify it thematically as Vow of Enmity being a divine power, so while your character may not know the target is an illusion, their deity does?
Personally I'd go with the latter option, as it sucks for players to waste a resource through no fault of their own; it's bad enough when a caster's spell doesn't work.
A player declares that they wish to use an ability and how.
The DM determines whether it's possible to make the attempt from the character's perspective - e.g. if the target is out of range, or the player has not realised that the target is behind total cover and cannot be seen, if the player is trying to cast Locate Object to find a living creature etc. This is not about whether the rules apply, this is about ensuring that the player understands what's happening in the game world.
If the requested action is possible, the player marks off the use of any resources used to activate the ability - charges, daily uses, material components. They are used up.
The DM adjudicates the outcome of the use of the ability.
This is how every situation should be approached; otherwise players can learn additional information that they should not have due to rules determination, rather than because of what is happening in the game world.
Therefore in your specific situation:
The paladin declares she will use Vow of Enmity on a target creature.
To the paladin, the creature is a legitimate target. The illusion's effect is to deceive the paladin's senses. The ability goes off.
The paladin marks off the use of Channel Divinity.
The DM reasons that there is nothing in the ability description to suggest that the paladin knows whether or not the ability succeeds or fails. However, the illusory creature is treated as a creature for the purpose of attacking - you would never rule that a character cannot make an attack against an illusory creature, and you would also allow them to throw a Magic Missile at it (I hope you would anyway). You could rule that the paladin will then have advantage when attacking the illusory creature, which would seem fair, given the nature of the ability.
I guess the really important part of this is whether an illusory creature counts as a creature. I would rule that it does.
Vow of Enmity. As a bonus action, you can utter a vow of enmity against a creature you can see within 10 feet of you, using your Channel Divinity. You gain advantage on attack rolls against the creature for 1 minute or until it drops to 0 hit points or falls unconscious.
So you cannot target an illusion with your Vow of Enmity when you channel it. I would say the attempt to Channel it fails and nothing happens, thereby preserving that use of Channel Divinity as still unused.
I would rule the Vow simply fails to channel instead of using the resource.
Your oath allows you to channel divine energy to fuel magical effects.
Vow of Enmity. As a bonus action, you can utter a vow of enmity against a creature you can see within 10 feet of you, using your Channel Divinity. You gain advantage on attack rolls against the creature for 1 minute or until it drops to 0 hit points or falls unconscious.
It's purely the DM's call how that would go down, and would likely depend on the exact nature of the illusion too
In most cases I'd probably rule that the bonus action got burned for that turn, as the paladin did make the attempt, but the Channel Divinity use was not as there was no valid target for it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Vow of Enmity. As a bonus action, you can utter a vow of enmity against a creature you can see within 10 feet of you, using your Channel Divinity. You gain advantage on attack rolls against the creature for 1 minute or until it drops to 0 hit points or falls unconscious.
So you cannot target an illusion with your Vow of Enmity when you channel it. I would say the attempt to Channel it fails and nothing happens, thereby preserving that use of Channel Divinity as still unused.
I would rule the Vow simply fails to channel instead of using the resource.
I'd tend to use the same rule as for spellcasting, which is slightly different, but the same gist: nothing happens to the invalid target. The DM just has to decide whether the resource is consumed, and how the paladin can determine that the ability didn't work.
Here's what I think... if you attempt to target an invalid target with a spell or ability, the resource is spent and nothing happens, but the player realizes there's something wrong. Similar to attacking an illusion... interacting with it physically reveals it to be an illusion, so although the resource (spell slot, channel dvinity, ki, whatever) is lost, the illusion is functionally broken for that character in the process.
I say this because players benefit from the same thing. If you have an illusionist in the party who can trick the enemy into firing off... let's say a Blight at the illusory Treant they conjured, then that enemy has one less use of blight they can use on the party. How disappointing would it be, as a player, to pull off a creative illusion that clearly fools the enemy, but it doesn't actually accomplish anything? I mean... I guess it still wastes their turn even if they save their spell slot for later, but still... getting enemies to waste resources is kind of the whole point of illusion magic.
Here's what I think... if you attempt to target an invalid target with a spell or ability, the resource is spent and nothing happens, but the player realizes there's something wrong. Similar to attacking an illusion... interacting with it physically reveals it to be an illusion, so although the resource (spell slot, channel dvinity, ki, whatever) is lost, the illusion is functionally broken for that character in the process.
I say this because players benefit from the same thing. If you have an illusionist in the party who can trick the enemy into firing off... let's say a Blight at the illusory Treant they conjured, then that enemy has one less use of blight they can use on the party. How disappointing would it be, as a player, to pull off a creative illusion that clearly fools the enemy, but it doesn't actually accomplish anything? I mean... I guess it still wastes their turn even if they save their spell slot for later, but still... getting enemies to waste resources is kind of the whole point of illusion magic.
Yeah, ultimately it comes down to whether you think there's a real difference between casting a spell and tapping into a Channel Divinity or not
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Here's what I think... if you attempt to target an invalid target with a spell or ability, the resource is spent and nothing happens, but the player realizes there's something wrong. Similar to attacking an illusion... interacting with it physically reveals it to be an illusion, so although the resource (spell slot, channel dvinity, ki, whatever) is lost, the illusion is functionally broken for that character in the process.
I say this because players benefit from the same thing. If you have an illusionist in the party who can trick the enemy into firing off... let's say a Blight at the illusory Treant they conjured, then that enemy has one less use of blight they can use on the party. How disappointing would it be, as a player, to pull off a creative illusion that clearly fools the enemy, but it doesn't actually accomplish anything? I mean... I guess it still wastes their turn even if they save their spell slot for later, but still... getting enemies to waste resources is kind of the whole point of illusion magic.
This is more or less what I'd go with, per the rules on invalid spell targets in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. If there's a save, the caster gets that the target passed the save, but if not, the caster perceived that the target was unaffected. That doesn't necessarily mean that the caster knows it's an illusion, however. There could be any number of reasons the ability wouldn't work.
Channel Divinity isn't casting a spell, but there's no sensible reason not to use the same rules.
This is more or less what I'd go with, per the rules on invalid spell targets in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. If there's a save, the caster gets that the target passed the save, but if not, the caster perceived that the target was unaffected. That doesn't necessarily mean that the caster knows it's an illusion, however. There could be any number of reasons the ability wouldn't work.
Channel Divinity isn't casting a spell, but there's no sensible reason not to use the same rules.
Yea I'd say the same, resource used means resource spent.
I would probably not allow an auto-success on knowing it to be an illusion but advantage on finding out sounds reasonable.
I like the explanation where the actual target is within 10' but the PC is trying to target the illusion. The PC burns the ability, then attacks the duplicate (with advantage) swishing through the illusion, doing 0 damage to the actual foe. I interpret that the PC targeted the foe, but indicated an illusion, so the effect works, but they are now attacking the wrong vision.
As a few have said, if you try to say it doesn't go off, you've just told the players that this is an illusion. Say what you will about metagaming, but it's hard to NOT meta when a DM points out an illusion like that. A resource used is a resource used and you would have spent it at my table, possibly growing wiser during "swish swish" of attacking magical light. Same as any spell, if you can see it, you can target it. I play that illusions are valid targets and an active perception or deception VS the spell save of the caster will usually reveal it as a phony.
On a similar note, when a player is IN melee combat and their enemy casts the mirror image or other effects to create duplicates, I do NOT get my player to roll and se if he/she hits the real or fake unless the foe moves around. If your hero punches a guy in the face, then the guy says some mumbo-jumbo and 3 more of him appear, you still know what one you punched in the face. Essentially if the enemy doesn't do something to confuse the player about which image is real, the character knows, due to not being blind or brain-dead.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
I like the explanation where the actual target is within 10' but the PC is trying to target the illusion. The PC burns the ability, then attacks the duplicate (with advantage) swishing through the illusion, doing 0 damage to the actual foe. I interpret that the PC targeted the foe, but indicated an illusion, so the effect works, but they are now attacking the wrong vision.
As a few have said, if you try to say it doesn't go off, you've just told the players that this is an illusion. Say what you will about metagaming, but it's hard to NOT meta when a DM points out an illusion like that. A resource used is a resource used and you would have spent it at my table, possibly growing wiser during "swish swish" of attacking magical light. Same as any spell, if you can see it, you can target it. I play that illusions are valid targets and an active perception or deception VS the spell save of the caster will usually reveal it as a phony.
On a similar note, when a player is IN melee combat and their enemy casts the mirror image or other effects to create duplicates, I do NOT get my player to roll and se if he/she hits the real or fake unless the foe moves around. If your hero punches a guy in the face, then the guy says some mumbo-jumbo and 3 more of him appear, you still know what one you punched in the face. Essentially if the enemy doesn't do something to confuse the player about which image is real, the character knows, due to not being blind or brain-dead.
Illusions are kind of a mess in 5e, but mirror image at least explicitly says the duplicates are creating confusion and shifting around
Three illusory duplicates of yourself appear in your space. Until the spell ends, the duplicates move with you and mimic your actions, shifting position so it's impossible to track which image is real.
The caster shouldn't have to "do something", it's part of the spell description. Also, not moving from a square (that's got three duplicates of you in it) doesn't mean you're standing stock still in it. That's a pretty significant nerf to the spell you're applying
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The main issue with not losing the use of CD is that this becomes a free way of determining whether something is an illusion.
DM could still rule you use up the bonus action, so it doesn't have to be "free"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I'd rule that the Channel Divinity: Vow of Enmity is used, but grant no benefit since no valid target was affected by it in reality, hinting at the possibility that the creature is illusion.
As a few have said, if you try to say it doesn't go off, you've just told the players that this is an illusion. Say what you will about metagaming, but it's hard to NOT meta when a DM points out an illusion like that.
It doesn't have to be metagaming though. Maybe as someone mentioned, your deity sees through the illusion and thus does not send you the divine power or whatever. These abilities could have a logical, in-game explanation as to how they would not work on illusions and thus could be a legitimate means of detecting them.
It comes down to whether you think the additional "illusion detection" property of relevant features is an encounter-ruining DM buzzkill or a clever PC move that deserves a reward. I mean it's not like spamming Vow of Enmity on everything you see in case it might be an illusion is going to be a good tactic.
Personally as a player I don't like the "gotcha" aspect of losing potentially valuable resources on an illusion (Channel Divinity is one thing, but blowing your 8th level spell slot on an illusion can be a real bummer), so I don't inflict that on my players. But if you and your table find it fun then it would make sense to rule in a way that makes that tactic effective.
The whole point of an illusion spell is to get the other guy to waste something on a cheap illusion. An action, a spell or yes even a channel divinity. If you remove that penalty for any reason your just taking away the whole illusion spell. Or your giving the character who uses CD a special advantage just because they only get one or two a day.
Well a spell caster only gets one or two of their highest level spells a day so they should not have to be the only characters using up their resources on illusions right? Its only fare.
Channel Divinity is an ability granted by your god before you use it because of your past actions and his trust in your judgement. If you waste one well thats your fault not his. You loose the ability when you loose your god not when make a bad choice.
The whole point of an illusion spell is to get the other guy to waste something on a cheap illusion.
Usually, the point of an illusion spell is listed in the spell description
Most of them indicate that someone can use an action and make an Investigation check to see through them, but I can't think of any illusions for which that's the only way to detect them
Channel Divinity is an ability granted by your god before you use it because of your past actions and his trust in your judgement.
A character's Channel Divinity options are a product of whatever the player and DM in a game agree they are. As scatter suggested above, someone's CD could literally be a channeling, where their deity acts through them, and the deity isn't fooled by some pathetic mortal illusion spell so doesn't bother activating it without telling the character why. Or, in the case of a vengeance paladin, maybe there's no real divine element to it at all -- the pally is just focusing all their rage and contempt on a single target to gain advantage on their attacks against it
You don't get to tell other players what their characters, and their characters' abilities, "really are"
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So here is a question for everyone. If you cast vow of enmity on an illusion does it go off and does nothing (wasting the daily Channel of Divinity) and does nothing happen and you still have the daily Channel of Divinity?
This became a debated topic at our game last night and no one could find any rule to clarify it in the rule books. It's being argued cause it's not a spell or a skill or feat. And it says creature and not target. I assume it is wasted but I could be wrong.
This likely comes down to how much of an ass your DM wants to be. 😝
In terms of Rules As Written the only similar cases are things like making an attack; for example, if you know there is an invisible creature nearby and you think you're close enough to attack it, then you're allowed to make the attempt, but if it turns out to be too far then the attack fails no matter the roll.
Your DM could absolutely choose to have Vow of Enmity function like that, i.e- the player picked a target that turned out to be invalid or out of range, so the ability is used but fails. This is unfortunate, but at least you learned something about the target I guess?
However, the way that the ability is worded it lists "using your Channel Divinity" last in the sentence describing the setup, so on that basis you could argue that spending CD happens only after you have chosen a valid target. If you go with this option then following this logic means you've still used your bonus action, as it's listed first. This does feel like it creates potential for an exploit, e.g- if you know a mage has created illusory duplicates of themselves (because they always do that in video games for some reason), then for only a bonus action you could automatically eliminate one as a possibility. Not much of an exploit though and you can justify it thematically as Vow of Enmity being a divine power, so while your character may not know the target is an illusion, their deity does?
Personally I'd go with the latter option, as it sucks for players to waste a resource through no fault of their own; it's bad enough when a caster's spell doesn't work.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I'd rule as follows in all situations:
This is how every situation should be approached; otherwise players can learn additional information that they should not have due to rules determination, rather than because of what is happening in the game world.
Therefore in your specific situation:
I guess the really important part of this is whether an illusory creature counts as a creature. I would rule that it does.
Vow of Enmity states:
So you cannot target an illusion with your Vow of Enmity when you channel it. I would say the attempt to Channel it fails and nothing happens, thereby preserving that use of Channel Divinity as still unused.
I would rule the Vow simply fails to channel instead of using the resource.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
It's purely the DM's call how that would go down, and would likely depend on the exact nature of the illusion too
In most cases I'd probably rule that the bonus action got burned for that turn, as the paladin did make the attempt, but the Channel Divinity use was not as there was no valid target for it
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I'd tend to use the same rule as for spellcasting, which is slightly different, but the same gist: nothing happens to the invalid target. The DM just has to decide whether the resource is consumed, and how the paladin can determine that the ability didn't work.
No creature within 10 ft means you cannot use the Vow, and do not know why it fails to go off. You keep the use.
If the creature was within 10 ft but not in the space of the illusion (i.e. behind you), then it would go off as normal
Here's what I think... if you attempt to target an invalid target with a spell or ability, the resource is spent and nothing happens, but the player realizes there's something wrong. Similar to attacking an illusion... interacting with it physically reveals it to be an illusion, so although the resource (spell slot, channel dvinity, ki, whatever) is lost, the illusion is functionally broken for that character in the process.
I say this because players benefit from the same thing. If you have an illusionist in the party who can trick the enemy into firing off... let's say a Blight at the illusory Treant they conjured, then that enemy has one less use of blight they can use on the party. How disappointing would it be, as a player, to pull off a creative illusion that clearly fools the enemy, but it doesn't actually accomplish anything? I mean... I guess it still wastes their turn even if they save their spell slot for later, but still... getting enemies to waste resources is kind of the whole point of illusion magic.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Yeah, ultimately it comes down to whether you think there's a real difference between casting a spell and tapping into a Channel Divinity or not
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
This is more or less what I'd go with, per the rules on invalid spell targets in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. If there's a save, the caster gets that the target passed the save, but if not, the caster perceived that the target was unaffected. That doesn't necessarily mean that the caster knows it's an illusion, however. There could be any number of reasons the ability wouldn't work.
Channel Divinity isn't casting a spell, but there's no sensible reason not to use the same rules.
Yea I'd say the same, resource used means resource spent.
I would probably not allow an auto-success on knowing it to be an illusion but advantage on finding out sounds reasonable.
I like the explanation where the actual target is within 10' but the PC is trying to target the illusion. The PC burns the ability, then attacks the duplicate (with advantage) swishing through the illusion, doing 0 damage to the actual foe. I interpret that the PC targeted the foe, but indicated an illusion, so the effect works, but they are now attacking the wrong vision.
As a few have said, if you try to say it doesn't go off, you've just told the players that this is an illusion. Say what you will about metagaming, but it's hard to NOT meta when a DM points out an illusion like that. A resource used is a resource used and you would have spent it at my table, possibly growing wiser during "swish swish" of attacking magical light. Same as any spell, if you can see it, you can target it. I play that illusions are valid targets and an active perception or deception VS the spell save of the caster will usually reveal it as a phony.
On a similar note, when a player is IN melee combat and their enemy casts the mirror image or other effects to create duplicates, I do NOT get my player to roll and se if he/she hits the real or fake unless the foe moves around. If your hero punches a guy in the face, then the guy says some mumbo-jumbo and 3 more of him appear, you still know what one you punched in the face. Essentially if the enemy doesn't do something to confuse the player about which image is real, the character knows, due to not being blind or brain-dead.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Illusions are kind of a mess in 5e, but mirror image at least explicitly says the duplicates are creating confusion and shifting around
The caster shouldn't have to "do something", it's part of the spell description. Also, not moving from a square (that's got three duplicates of you in it) doesn't mean you're standing stock still in it. That's a pretty significant nerf to the spell you're applying
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The main issue with not losing the use of CD is that this becomes a free way of determining whether something is an illusion.
DM could still rule you use up the bonus action, so it doesn't have to be "free"
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I'd rule that the Channel Divinity: Vow of Enmity is used, but grant no benefit since no valid target was affected by it in reality, hinting at the possibility that the creature is illusion.
It doesn't have to be metagaming though. Maybe as someone mentioned, your deity sees through the illusion and thus does not send you the divine power or whatever. These abilities could have a logical, in-game explanation as to how they would not work on illusions and thus could be a legitimate means of detecting them.
It comes down to whether you think the additional "illusion detection" property of relevant features is an encounter-ruining DM buzzkill or a clever PC move that deserves a reward. I mean it's not like spamming Vow of Enmity on everything you see in case it might be an illusion is going to be a good tactic.
Personally as a player I don't like the "gotcha" aspect of losing potentially valuable resources on an illusion (Channel Divinity is one thing, but blowing your 8th level spell slot on an illusion can be a real bummer), so I don't inflict that on my players. But if you and your table find it fun then it would make sense to rule in a way that makes that tactic effective.
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
The whole point of an illusion spell is to get the other guy to waste something on a cheap illusion. An action, a spell or yes even a channel divinity. If you remove that penalty for any reason your just taking away the whole illusion spell. Or your giving the character who uses CD a special advantage just because they only get one or two a day.
Well a spell caster only gets one or two of their highest level spells a day so they should not have to be the only characters using up their resources on illusions right? Its only fare.
Channel Divinity is an ability granted by your god before you use it because of your past actions and his trust in your judgement. If you waste one well thats your fault not his. You loose the ability when you loose your god not when make a bad choice.
Usually, the point of an illusion spell is listed in the spell description
Most of them indicate that someone can use an action and make an Investigation check to see through them, but I can't think of any illusions for which that's the only way to detect them
A character's Channel Divinity options are a product of whatever the player and DM in a game agree they are. As scatter suggested above, someone's CD could literally be a channeling, where their deity acts through them, and the deity isn't fooled by some pathetic mortal illusion spell so doesn't bother activating it without telling the character why. Or, in the case of a vengeance paladin, maybe there's no real divine element to it at all -- the pally is just focusing all their rage and contempt on a single target to gain advantage on their attacks against it
You don't get to tell other players what their characters, and their characters' abilities, "really are"
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)