| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Is there a chance for someone unaffected by mirror image, such as a blind man or someone simply closing their eyes, to destroy an image?
If not, should there be? After all, a blind swing or shot may well pass through an image before hitting the real target.
"An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect (although the normal miss chances still apply)."
If the spell has no effect on the attacker, then, for that attacker there are no images. Therefore, there is nothing to be destroyed.
I would say only on a miss by less than 5 (or is it 4).
"An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect (although the normal miss chances still apply)."
If the spell has no effect on the attacker, then, for that attacker there are no images. Therefore, there is nothing to be destroyed.
I'd say there'd still be something to be destroyed.
Sure, if the attacker is blind normal miss chances apply unless the attacker has other means to pinpoint the target (namely, attacker will probably have to target a square instead of directly targeting the caster and even if he choses the correct square would still have a 50% miss change due to concealement)... but, if attacker picks the correct square, mirror images will be there moving around the real caster.
I'd say that a miss by 5 or less would still destroy an image when targeting the correct square, since those would still be randomly hit by the "near miss".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The spell description literally says if the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled. If you are invisible or the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect (although the normal miss chances still apply).
I would say that a blind attacker can't hit images.
Just like there's no chance of accidentally shooting allies without Precise Shot. Pathfinder doesn't do accidentally hitting something else. You hit or you don't.
It isn't totally realistic, but it it's consistent, which is also valuable.
What quibblemuch said.
No.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
good argument I see your point.
The point is that it's literally in the spell description that Mirror Image does jack and crap if the attacker is blind. And part of the effect of Mirror Image is the ability to destroy the images.
If you're pulling apart a spell description and say that this part is an effect of the spell, but that part isn't, you are in some deep house rule territory. The rules are pretty clear in this case.
Nope. Still wrong.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
the effect of mirror image is a bunch of images that give you a miss chance. even if your eyes are closed if you swing into his square and cut one in half it still goes poof. they don't cease being there because your eyes are closed
Please quote the part of the spell description that states that "if the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect except it still totally does and they can still hit the images". 'cause I'm not seeing it. A blind attacker can no more hit your mirror images than an area effect can.
I feel like "the blind attacker has a chance of missing you because they do not know where you really are" is already encapsulated in the rules for blindness. You do not create an additional chance of the blind person missing you because you have illusory duplicates.
If the blind attacker has another means of seeing (e.g. blindsight) to pinpoint precisely where you are and what you're doing so that they can attack you, that sense won't be fooled by purely visual illusions.
I mean for goodness sakes, the text of the spell specifies *exactly* what to do if you are invisible or the person attacking you is blind. I know this is the rules forum and people here can argue about anything, but the RAW is extremely clear.
|
A couple of things:
1) No. No images were harmed in the making of this attack. The spell has literally no effect on a blind (or closed-eyed) individual, and likewise that individual has no effect on the spell.
2) The way the rules are written for blindness/invisibility is rife for metagaming. If you are blind and cut the air, you should not know whether it's because you missed a person or because you swung at an empty square.
Here's what I do for blindness/invisibility:
1) I roll miss chance behind the screen for EVERY SINGLE ATTACK. If there's nobody there, the miss chance doesn't matter. But I roll it anyway.
2) If they swing at the correct square, AND they beat the 50/50, but they miss the creature, I check the other AC's. If their attack was enough to touch, but not enough to get through armor, I tell them they made contact. That gives them very important information, and I feel it's fair.
3) If I attack and stay invisible (say, with a will-o-wisp or greater invis), I tell them what square the attack came from. (Then I 5-ft step!)
These are absolutely houserule interpretations, but honestly, I feel comfortable using them even in PFS, because I feel they're fair and apply it fairly in both directions. I've never been challenged on it, though I did have one player tell me later, "I love the way you ran that, and I totally would, too. But it's not RAW." Which is true. By RAW, the player rolls the miss chance. I just hate that rolling a 20 and a 64 tells you that the enemy isn't there.
|
|
Also, btw, will o' wisps don't stay invisible when attacking. They can attack and then become invisible as a move action 'as per the spell', but they do become visible when they attack because it doesn't say otherwise. Pixies, on the other hand, can stay invisible while they attack.
UMR says a creature with natural invisibility does not become visible when attacking. But I can see your position and may change mine. Regardless, that's tangential to the current discussion :) .
|
2) The way the rules are written for blindness/invisibility is rife for metagaming. If you are blind and cut the air, you should not know whether it's because you missed a person or because you swung at an empty square.
You might know. Just because you are blind or they are invisible, doesn't automatically mean you can't locate the enemy, it just means you can't locate them with your eyes/sight. Your hand-to-eye coordination is terrible, but you still may know if you are swinging into an empty square or not.
No. You're either playing a game of cups or pin the tail on the donkey. No getting the best of both worlds.
Now, if you have blur up, do your mirror images also get a 20% miss chance? ;)
If a character has both Mirror Image and Blur or Displacement the effects stack.
First you roll to see if you actually hit the character (concealment), then you check to see if it was the character or an image that was hit. A miss due to concealment does not destroy an image.
Blindness / closure of eyes is it's own thing and negates all of the above.
An illusion cannot be blurred by another illusion. The illusion can look blurry because you are blurry, and you can be displaced, but by definition the illusion IS what it looks like. If you hit the blurry elf shaped illusion to the left of the elf, that is the image, you've hit the image, you pop the image.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An illusion cannot be blurred by another illusion. The illusion can look blurry because you are blurry, and you can be displaced, but by definition the illusion IS what it looks like. If you hit the blurry elf shaped illusion to the left of the elf, that is the image, you've hit the image, you pop the image.
The character become blury, the images copy the character.
If you roll => target's AC and fail to hit the target due to concealment (the attack roll is never against an image), nothing was hit. Not the target, not an image, nothing.
If you are successful with your attack against the character, including any additional rolls for concealment, you then check to see If an image was hit or the intended target. This is the final roll (baring immediate actions, etc.).
If I remember correctly, the defender only rolls for concealment when he would otherwise be successfully hit in the first place.
If I remember correctly, the defender only rolls for concealment when he would otherwise be successfully hit in the first place.
Correct. But you only roll for Mirror Image if the attack actually hits the target.
If the attack is a hit
.
This extends beyond just spell effects that grant concealment, e.g. fog, dim light, etc. Mirror Image does not, for example, suddenly negate environmental effects that grant concealment.
The spell description literally says if the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect.
That does not mean you cant effect the spell.
]
The character become blury, the images copy the character.
Not in dispute. But the image isn't actually blurry. The image is altering itself so that it looks like you do blurry. The images quasi existance in space is where it actually appears to be.
If you roll => target's AC and fail to hit the target due to concealment (the attack roll is never against an image), nothing was hit. Not the target, not an image, nothing.
That doesn't work. The images aren't concealed. Blur and displacement don't work on "you and your illusions" they only work on you. you can't miss them from concealment, so you only roll to see if you miss from concealment if you're swinging at the real mccoy.