|
I have a question regarding Mirror Image and Displacement/Blur
If i cast Blur or Displacement, then Mirror Image, do all my images became blurred/displaced?
If yes, when someone strike one of my images, he has 20%/50% to miss it (thus making it not disappear).
If not, will the fact that myself is the only image blurred/displaced automatically nullify Mirror Image? (Strike the Blurred one!)
Each spell's mechanic is resolved separately, and logically (though logic doesn't always apply to the game rules) Mirror Image would be resolved first, followed by blur or displacement.
Visually, while the images from Mirror Image will appear blurred or displaced, that has no effect on Mirror Image's mechanic: if the attack roll is high enough, an image is destroyed. It is only if an attack happens to be aimed at the caster that the blur/displacement comes into play, resulting in a check against the miss chance.
Another way to examine it is to play to defender's advantage, which most effects in the game do: in this case, provided that there are any images at all from Mirror Image, any attack made against the target has at least a 50% chance of "missing" (which is equal to or better than blur/displacement), though it may hit an image well enough to dispel it. Only if the actual target is the subject of the attack does blur/displacement come into play.
|
Does blur/displacement work against spells? Sorry if this is a threadjack, I haven't been able to find anything that says it does or doesn't. It just says a miss chance against "attacks", and I have always wondered if that means melee/ranged only or would blur/displacement work against a fireball? Thanks in advance for any answer :)
|
Each spell's mechanic is resolved separately, and logically (though logic doesn't always apply to the game rules) Mirror Image would be resolved first, followed by blur or displacement.
Visually, while the images from Mirror Image will appear blurred or displaced, that has no effect on Mirror Image's mechanic: if the attack roll is high enough, an image is destroyed. It is only if an attack happens to be aimed at the caster that the blur/displacement comes into play, resulting in a check against the miss chance.
Another way to examine it is to play to defender's advantage, which most effects in the game do: in this case, provided that there are any images at all from Mirror Image, any attack made against the target has at least a 50% chance of "missing" (which is equal to or better than blur/displacement), though it may hit an image well enough to dispel it. Only if the actual target is the subject of the attack does blur/displacement come into play.
I have to disagree with you. In a previous ruling, it was said that blink and mirror image interact in a way that you first roll for the blink and if that fails then you go no further.
From that I would suggest the same works with blur, or displacement or any other effect that gives you a miss chance.
I would say that specific combination falls under "exception to the general rule" (rule being rule of thumb, not game rule). And for blink it makes sense: there is a 50% chance that you and your images are not there to be attacked in the first place, so it seems reasonable to resolve the blink effect first. With blur/displacement, you are still present, but the images which look the same as you do will still be there to be attacked.
While im just chiming in with my opinion. I would "think" it worked like Chemlak said.
I believe that your images are under all the same effects that you are. If you use a rod of wonder while under the effects of mirror image and turn yourself blue, all your images turn blue as well. If you have a miss chance due to concealment (from, say, obscuring mist) all your images are obscured as well. If you cast Blur, all your images are blurred as well.
Besides, it's just easier from a logistics standpoint. Roll your miss chance first, and if you miss, you can blow off all the rest. If you roll to hit first, you have to figure if you hit or if your miss got an image or if you missed entirely and THEN worry about blur or displacement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, what we had agreed here? Do Displacement helps the images as well or not?
I don't think there's been any consensus.
Mirror Image: "If the attack is a hit, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment. If it is a figment, the figment is destroyed. If the attack misses by 5 or less, one of your figments is destroyed by the near miss."
Displacement: "The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment."
Concealment Miss Chance: "Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally-if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck."
The attack roll is made (and resolved) before miss chance applies.
Three situations/options:
1) Attacker misses target AC by greater than 5. Nothing of note happens.
2) Attacker does not meet target AC, missing by 5 or less. The attack is not a hit, so the attack is not successful, so concealment does not apply. A figment is destroyed.
3) Attacker exceeds target AC, the attack is a hit. Roll to determine target/image.
3a) Target is real, roll miss chance and resolve.
3b) Target is image, WHAT DO?
James Jacobs' post mentioned rolling miss chance first, which personally I find easier, but is contrary to the concealment rules.
Displacement helps the images as well.
And your reasoning as to why it happens in that specific order is?
-edit- And if the image is considered both a creature benefiting from the miss chance and also as a defender avoiding being struck, why would it not do so when the attacker misses by 5 or less?
From the combat rules
"Attack Roll
An attack roll represents your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round. When you make an attack roll, you roll a d20 and add your attack bonus. (Other modifiers may also apply to this roll.) If your result equals or beats the target's Armor Class, you hit and deal damage."
Note, concealment and miss chances are not mentioned in those rules. Concealment is mentioned later.
The combat rules talk about hit and miss with attack rolls. The concealment rules talk about an extra roll to change a hit into a miss.
I don't see anything in the mirror image spell that specifically makes attacks on the images ignore the effects of concealment. Thus, if you hit an image, concealment can still turn that hit into a miss.
A near miss on the other hand is a bit of a grey area. Can concealment turn a near miss on a mirror image into a complete miss? There is no RAW to cover that.
Can concealment turn a near miss on a mirror image into a complete miss?
Concealment: "if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance"
Mirror Image: "If the attack misses by 5 or less, one of your figments is destroyed by the near miss."
Even though a figment is destroyed, it's destroyed by a miss, not a hit, and since there was no hit, concealment cannot apply.
Can concealment turn a near miss on a mirror image into a complete miss?Concealment: "if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance"
Mirror Image: "If the attack misses by 5 or less, one of your figments is destroyed by the near miss."
Even though a figment is destroyed, it's destroyed by a miss, not a hit, and since there was no hit, concealment cannot apply.
It is destroyed by a near miss. A normal miss does not destroy an image. Concealment can convert a hit into a miss, so it can turn a hit on an image into a miss. The rules for concealment do not specify what kind of miss the hit gets changed to, so we have to assume it is a normal miss, not a near miss.
So by RAW,
1. Concealment can turn a hit on an image into a miss which does not destroy an image.
2. Concealment has no effect on a near miss, because concealment only effects attacks that hit.
I always thought it was kind of dumb to apply concealment miss chance AFTER AC. I mean, if you are missing because you couldn't see your target very well, wouldn't that occur before your weapon glances off of there armor, or whatever?
With Mirror Image, I'd go:
1. Roll miss chance, if successful proceed, if not, end here.
2. Roll attack vs. AC, if it hits, proceed, if not, end here.
3. Roll to determine whether the attack is vs. caster or images.
Concealment can convert a hit into a miss, so it can turn a hit on an image into a miss. The rules for concealment do not specify what kind of miss the hit gets changed to, so we have to assume it is a normal miss, not a near miss.
I don't think anyone was arguing that a miss from concealment would destroy an image. But I agree.
So by RAW,
1. Concealment can turn a hit on an image into a miss which does not destroy an image.
2. Concealment has no effect on a near miss, because concealment only effects attacks that hit.
2 is correct, but 1 may still be unsupported.
Would an image benefit from concealment? Actual concealment, from dim lighting or whatever.
I think it would, since the die roll in mirror image is determining the target. And the target (the image) is within the concealment, so it has a miss chance.
But does it work the same way with the displacement spell? The spell only works on creatures, so a figment is not a valid target.
The flavor of mirror image is that they all look like you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly. Thus, if you're blue, the images are also blue. And if you're blurry, the images should probably look blurry as well. Since the flavor of displacement is that it's fooling the eye to make you appear elsewhere, it's a reasonable assumption that the images should also appear elsewhere. But there's a difference between looking the same (so someone can't tell them apart) and gaining all the benefits of an optically-based spell effect.
So while a figment should gain a miss chance from actual concealment, because the figment is granted concealment, it shouldn't be granted a miss chance from displacement, because it's not under the effects of displacement.
Concealment can convert a hit into a miss, so it can turn a hit on an image into a miss. The rules for concealment do not specify what kind of miss the hit gets changed to, so we have to assume it is a normal miss, not a near miss.I don't think anyone was arguing that a miss from concealment would destroy an image. But I agree.
So by RAW,
1. Concealment can turn a hit on an image into a miss which does not destroy an image.
2. Concealment has no effect on a near miss, because concealment only effects attacks that hit.2 is correct, but 1 may still be unsupported.
Would an image benefit from concealment? Actual concealment, from dim lighting or whatever.
I think it would, since the die roll in mirror image is determining the target. And the target (the image) is within the concealment, so it has a miss chance.
But does it work the same way with the displacement spell? The spell only works on creatures, so a figment is not a valid target.
The flavor of mirror image is that they all look like you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly. Thus, if you're blue, the images are also blue. And if you're blurry, the images should probably look blurry as well. Since the flavor of displacement is that it's fooling the eye to make you appear elsewhere, it's a reasonable assumption that the images should also appear elsewhere. But there's a difference between looking the same (so someone can't tell them apart) and gaining all the benefits of an optically-based spell effect.
So while a figment should gain a miss chance from actual concealment, because the figment is granted concealment, it shouldn't be granted a miss chance from displacement, because it's not under the effects of displacement.
I am not taking a position on whether displacement, blur, etc. spells give their benefit to the mirror images. That is a completely separate discussion.
If you just look at concealment and mirror images, you end up in a weird situation where by RAW, concealment protects your images from an actual hit, but not from a near miss. From there you can make an pretty solid argument that, by RAI, concealment should help with near misses as well. Since, the mirror image spell is completely silent on exactly how it interacts with concealment, it is a DM judgement call.
Strict RAW - Concealment protects images from hits, but not from near misses.
RAI - Concealment is a defensive bonus that could conceivable turn a near miss into a regular miss, and thus should probably protect images from near misses as well.