2 Hit die's page

One thing that should be said is that Some DMS could rule that it is easier to spot illusions (such as Mirror Image figments) with non illuminating torches.

I personally would reward a player with craftiness to make this observation by allowing a slight modifier.

It is a "DM Judgment" thing quite like Invisibility being foiled by footprints in the dust, or Flour dust in the air around it - such judgments are necessary sometimes and still why a wise DM beats a computer game hands down.

I understand your point 2 Hit Die, and is a good point. I'll try to make it clearer, although I'm not siding with you, I also see the relevance of pointing this out.

Light is not just appearance. With the last update about it, the one that specifies that a Light focus can disclose the position of an invisible target, we have to admit that light is something tangible.

I think that what 2 Hit Die is trying to say is that if the figments could emit light, then they could emit fire(heat), lightning(static charge), acid, or whatever other tangible element, because at that level, there is no difference between them.

We all agree that images from MI can't emit heat or fire, so he concludes that they can not emit light neither.

---

If I recall it correctly, WS asked you how would you rule if a wizard would be carrying a torch, would the torch of the images glow? By your reasoning, it shouldn't.

---

RAW I see the relevance of your question, RAI I have to say that figments can't produce real effects, but they can produce false sensations that confuse their targets. In this case, a visual figment as MI, would produce the false sensation of light.

---

So concluding my reasoning: if what I thought was your reasoning about this problem is right, your mistake lies in thinking that a visual figment can't produce visual false sensations, which include light, and although visual sensations and light waves are not the same thing, they are close enough to include them.

EUREKA

You are closest anyone has been. However, note that the Figments cant produce light. A figment of a torch would not produce light, but a torch is not designed to neutralise Mirror Image. Faerie Fire is. The spell designers ensure no confusion with Ambient light by making FF surround the subject rather than becoming part of it. Hence it is never duplicated.

Fly is not "similar effects" to Fire

That petulant example proves what I was saying about how difficult it is to get a rules debate here.

You actually said this is a rules forum yet have quoted none.

Tell us what are "Similar Effects" (PF pg 280) then?

Darkness is an evocation spell, quite different to Illusions therefore - but Mirror Image IS an illusion like Blur...

Um, all of your statements are not actually found in the rules.

Again, please support your statements with rules, you only supplied a page number for your first statement.

Enemies do not 'outline' you as far as I know, whereas a billowing cloak or even form-fitting outfit can easily be said to 'outline' your body. Furthermore, enemies do not occupy the same square as you do. However, if a tiny enemy, such as a stirge, was attached to your body, indeed that would also be duplicated in the mirror image spell.

Modern targeting systems are only apparent to the targeter, not everyone else who is viewing the image of the targetee, unlike faerie fire, thus suggesting that faerie fire is indeed part of the target 'image' that gets copied.

etc.

You are arguing that a cloak surrounds or outlines the caster rather than is worn. What about underwear? Time for a reality check

FF is like a Flare gun fired to mark a target location for bombardment.

see p314 above and 290 as well as 197 for concealment explained.

Sure thing - MI on p314 "This spell creates a number of illusory doubles of you that inhabit your square"

Does "you" constitute Faerie Fire cast by an opponent?

"Surrounds" and "outlines" a subject is not you - those words are outside "you"

Enemies "surround" an opponent.Are they copied too?

Targets can be "outlined" on a modern targeting system. The outline does not come from the target it is imposed around the target by the HUD display

etc

This dude is probably trolling. He knows the PDT would not agree with him. It's better to ignore him just like he ignored people who asked him for a rules citation of his "energy field" explanation.

I'm out.. :)

Im "trolling"? Good gracious that is ridiculous! Im confining myself to rules-supported arguments about the interactions of these spells! If anything, im trying to dodge the personal attacks from other posters who are desperate to breach/distract the argument somewhere instead of staying on point.

Stay on point please if you have found a reference somewhere else in the rules. I would consider a 3.5D&D reference somewhere too.

Im only doing this for my players and for objective people interested in forming rules-based views on how the spells interact. Its a service to RPG DMing not a "trolling' exercise!

(drow are tough enemies and Ive got a lot more encounters with them)

2 Hit die wrote:

_Ozy_ wrote:

KISS, mirror image copies your appearance. If your appearance is outlined with a faerie fire effect, mirror image copies that.

Much simpler than your long list of rather odd ad-hoc reasoning.

Faerie Fire doesn't affect your appearance. it surrounds it. The words are "surrounds" and "Outlines"(290)

if you want to disagree, please argue using the rules first

A cloak surrounds my body as well, and yet mirror image duplicates that no problem.

You know what the rules say? Mirror image provides a miss chance based on multiple images. You know what faerie fire says? It removes miss chance based on concealment.

Using the rules, faerie fire has no effect on mirror image. That's the argument using the rules, end of story.

You WEAR a cloak. You are not "surrounded" by it

It does remove a miss chance based on concealment but is not limited to concealment only otherwise it would say 'Concealment only" instead of "Similar"

DARKNESS is Evocation (darkness) 263
BLUR is "illusion (Glammer)" 251
INVISIBILITY is "Illusion (Glammer"

So the apells affected by FF don't all have to be identical magically. They just have to be SIMILAR

Concealment is explained on p196-197. It concludes " Varying Degrees of Concealment: Certain situations may provide more or less than typical concealment, and modify the miss chance accordingly." Thats pretty open, I would suggest in future FAQ's Mirror Image be identified as a variety of concealment as it does just that (modify the miss chance accordingly based on varying typical concealment)

If Darkness (evocation) creates concealment, so MI seems to do so within this definition. I hope a Paizo person reads this

Some of you seem quite upset to concede the rules don't support Mirror Image is not neutralised by Faerie Fire.

You are perfectly free to do whatever with House Rules you like Im not against that. You can make Figments semi-real(like Illusion-Shadows which are semi real pg 211) or make other changes to the spell you wish but I do suggest before House ruling that you consider if you had a mage with only 1 2nd level spell to cast Blur or Mirror Image which would you cast if you were going into combat?

If you had Drow against you and you decided that Faerie Fire would not be useful with Mirror Image but Blur was, would you not prefer Mirror Image as you knew no likely/proximate spell could counter it?

Game balance is important too. Be careful of sentimental attachments to spells to prefer them over spells at the same level. let the rules show the logic. MI images are only Figments

It's interesting you bring up Occum's Razor.

Since you rezzed a 2 year thread simply to chide people as incorrect(years later), then rely on emotional logic while asking others not to do the same, keep saying the same things and labelling those who disagree with you as "fan boi".

Occums Razor dictates that the simplest explanation is the most plausible, that you are not here to have an honest discussion.

Mirror image is perfectly capable of copying the faerie fire because it is a burst effect. The subjects within the area are affected (that means the effect is on them and not the area itself, therefore MI has no trouble replicating in order to do its trick).

So you ignore the rules on Figments? I direct the grey_mage to my quote above " - you must believe Mirror Image is a super copying spell that copies the environment (surrounding FF) - then you must change the rules on figments to justify how it duplicates multiple FF illuminations to reconcile emanating light is not a real effect.Clearly emanating light is a real effect, which would allow figment creation of beacons, bright bonfires and other distortions of the rules."

Im interested in this thread recently due to recent event with drow in my game. Why do you attack my timing? Perfectly reasonable to look at it recently?

KISS, mirror image copies your appearance. If your appearance is outlined with a faerie fire effect, mirror image copies that.

Much simpler than your long list of rather odd ad-hoc reasoning.

Faerie Fire doesn't affect your appearance. it surrounds it. The words are "surrounds" and "Outlines"(290)

if you want to disagree, please argue using the rules first

Mirror Image is not a "superspell" I can see why players want to keep it immune to nerfing because they love it so, but as a sound bulletproof meta argument it should be equal to "Blur" and not better than it because it is immune to Faerie Fire. They are both level 2 illusions that obfuscate the caster for defensive combat.

Wheldrake - rewriting the rules on illusions - Figments don't produce any real affects. Illuminating/emanating light is real. Think of Figments such as "Photographs" They project images into the air but don't generate illumination or all figments would glow in the dark. Just accept 210 if you're still troubled.

alexd1976 - the first line of Faerie Fire says "A pale glow surrounds and outlines the subjects" This kills the debate because it only outlines real things, doesn’t change them. There is nothing for the Mirror Image to copy (I found the argument about figments fascinating academically because even if a DM insists on Mirror Image copying things surrounding the subject the copied Faerie Fire could not produce light/glow because its a figment)

Yuri Sarreth - Good grammar but be careful of re-defining the word "similar". Would of been easier to say "Concealment spells only" but why did it not? Because the reference to Similar is exactly that - "similar" but not "only" Concealment or "any other concealment" or some other clear demarcation.

alexd1976 - Not all spells state every single spell they interact with in particular ways hence the use of the word "Similar" which evidently refers to
1) Illusions
2) Obfuscating the caster
3) by using distorting images

Any confusion about the Grammar? Read the first line of Faerie Fire it tells you it surrounds the real subject rather than changing it. Still confused? Look at Page 210 it tells you the limitations of Figments - they are not real so cannot be faerie fired.
Still a fan boi of Mirror Image? - you must believe believe Mirror Image is a super copying spell that copies the environment (surrounding FF) - then you must change the rules on figments to justify how it duplicates multiple FF illuminations to reconcile emanating light is not a real effect.Clearly emanating light is a real effect, which would allow figment creation of beacons, bright bonfires and other distortions of the rules.

I suggest people use 'Occum's Razor' reasoning which is essentially KISS. FF "surrounds and outlines the subjects" Mirror Image can't copy that. Keep it simple

Quite water tight really.

2 Hit die wrote:

@ C4M3R0N - "I Feel"?

Don't use "Feel" to debate. Use "logic" "Reason"

Earlier you tried to say you could believe in a figments light and that is enough for it to read by. Too much "Feel"

Try referencing based on what is written in the book not "I feel". Its more rewarding to get to the truth that way.

"I feel" is good for feelings, for romance for socialising. Im not putting it down - it has its place - but not in forum debates as it leads to errant reasoning.

Hahaha errant reasoning... Says the person incorrectly quoting the rules.

Figment wrote:

A figment spell creates a false sensation...Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can...

I'd say it's clear that perceiving light is a false sensation.

And you seem to be stuck on the second bolded part. Nowhere here nor after here does it even say that light is one of the effects that they fail to produce like other illusions can. Not even in the part I didn't quote.
The first line of figments make it clear how it works. It creates a false sensation.
To answer your question of if you can read a book by a figment of a bonfire, well what spell was used to cast illusory figment bonfire? Cause that really is the deciding factor here.

How can you use the false sensation of light to read a book? that is nonsense. Your own reasoning - its in the subjects head because they believe it. How can they then read a real book that with that light?

It says on page 210 figments "CANNOT PRODUCE REAL EFFECTS"

Light is real!!!!!
OMG

No the light spell or torch does not negate mirror image it is part of the owner. Each image should not create light tho, which I addressed much earlier in the thread (page 1) Faerie Fire is uniquely designed to illuminate true subjects rather than be a light source. It just happens to produce light. I have discussed Faerie Fire as a counter to Mirror Image, not Torches, lanterns, light spells etc

If we look at blur and displacement for example, the do diffuse/displace light that may be held (such as a torch) but are overcome by Faerie Fire which generates a field that "surrounds and outlines the subject" (page 280)

Mirror image would do similar to a single light source which is why i have said consistently
i) More net light would not be created
ii) Faerie Fire would illuminate the real subject in a Mirror Image

A summary

1) Mirror Image creates Figments (p314)
2) Figments are not real (p210)
3) Faerie Fire works on Similar spells to those listed (p280)
4) Faerie Fire Area is "creatures and Objects within a 5ft burst" (p280)
5) Logical Conclusion - Creatures and objects are Real. Therefore only the real target is Faerie Fired.
6) Illusory distractions around (Blurred image in a Blur Spell, Displaced Images in a Displacement, Multiple Images in a Mirror Images) are not Faerie fired and therefore distinguished from the original that is.
7) (thanks to Skeld for the idea) "A pale glow surrounds and outlines the subject" (page 280) which does not change the subject and therefore would not be copied by a Mirror Image (unlike say Enlarge or Polymorph)

(BTW please be patient with repeating text - summaries show were the debate is at presently and people already repeat text when they quote anyways)

(I admit I made a typo earlier Faeire fire is on page 280 not 260)

@wraithstrike Light is not generated by Figments. Enough said.

Ioun stones are in a energy field of the owner. They interact with the owner granting abilities. They are personal enough but yes on the limits of their aura

Faerie Fire is an outside field imposed by an outside caster looking for the true subject - specifically to neutralise illusions that obfuscate it. This spell is designed to do this. It illuminates the true person

You are also correct that Grey_Mage did not say something personal by that comment but by saying "none" he/she did infer it.

@ C4M3R0N - "I Feel"?

Don't use "Feel" to debate. Use "logic" "Reason"

Earlier you tried to say you could believe in a figments light and that is enough for it to read by. Too much "Feel"

Try referencing based on what is written in the book not "I feel". Its more rewarding to get to the truth that way.

"I feel" is good for feelings, for romance for socialising. Im not putting it down - it has its place - but not in forum debates as it leads to errant reasoning.

This is a discussion, not a debate. Say your peace and move on. It is perfectly acceptable to differ in opinion without making inferences about other people's abilities.

However, it is disingenuous to request citations while making emotional arguments yourself (MI needs more counters).

Dispel magic is always popular.

Summon monster 2+. (1d3 eagles can result in alot of attacks that only need to miss by 5 or less, since mage typically don't have high ac this isn't a major concern).

Closing your eyes and blind fighting
AOEs to ignore the images
Lots of attacks bringing actual use to less optimal builds with 2WF and Flurry of Misses...

FF isn't needed to counter MI. It's only designed to buy the caster some breathing room for a couple rounds.

Absolutely I agree. Will you Practice what you are preaching and retract what you said earlier "... And none of your argument is relevant."?

None of my argument? that is quite an inference!

fretgod97s less cool relative wrote:

Quicker Rules Summary

1) Faerie Fire does not mention it counters or circumvents Mirror Image
2) Mirror Image does not mention it is countered or circumvented by Faerie Fire
3) Therefore, Faerie Fire does not make it any easier to target the real image of a mage protected by Mirror Image

Very much this. Rules do what they say they do. No more, no less.

Nope DM's have to interpret the rules

Why does the spell description say "similar effects" - instead of "Only concealment spells?" (or some other absolute)

What are "Similar" effects in other spells? You may not think Mirror image is similar to Blur or Displacement, but it is

1) an illusion
2) obfuscates the caster
3) Uses distracting illusory images to do so

Mirror images are figments so they cant do real things like emit light (thus couldn't emit the candlelight glow of Faerie Fire) but faerie Fire surrounds a target not changes it, so Mirror Image would not copy this in any event.

Faerie Fire singes out the real target and surrounds it in an aura. You can choose to ignore this but it is the first sentence in its spell description. " A Pale glow surrounds an outlines the subjects" (spell description on page 280). Clearly surrounding something is not the same as changing it

This is distinguished from a change to the subject that would be copied, such as Enlarge or Polymorph (thanks to a previous poster for that clarification). Therefore the "Mirror Image" does not copy it.

Although figments don't emit light (copied Faerie Fire or other Figments of light sources would not glow), this observation about surrounding the object is a stronger point as it makes copying it impossible - otherwise other things surrounding the caster eg ( soft Cover like a Bush or Vines) would also be copied in a Mirror Image.

Figment's cant produce light.

But I also think they would not reproduce Faerie Fire as it surrounds the target not is part of the target

Quite consistent.

How is reading a book by believed light going for you?

I not dodging I am using logic.

another debating technique is to provide two false premises and invite a choice. Both are flawed

Your're getting boring sorry. I'm going to do other things now and check back later

So you say a character could believe light is real and then read a book by it?

A is flawed for subjectivity. B is flawed as the spells are not identical. Light causes the object to emanate light and Faerie Fire surrounds the subject.

Both of your examples are wrong

2 Hit die wrote:

C4M3R0N wrote:

Moral of the story, at your table the level 0 cantrip light can best mirror image because the rules dont explicitly state that it cannot. While i love the attempt to really get down to the important stuff, you cannot say that something works one way because the book does explicitly state that it does not.

When cantrips beat higher levels spells at what theyre designed to do then you have a bit of a problem.

Nope I never said cantrip can defeat Mirror Image. This is your attempt to put your words in my mouth and claim they are mine. Quite a standard debating technique. Read what I have written

I have. You said that mirror image cannot reproduce the light present because it is a figment. Either A: it produces the perception of light, then faerie fire and light[/] can no longer beat [i]mirror image. Or B: it cannot produce the light and then light and faerie fire both beat mirror image. Its pretty simple.

No Figments cannot produce light as this is a real affect. the photo of a fire as i say above. Your point about subject perception is flawed. Or a character could believe the figment chair is real and sit on it. page 210. read it

Moral of the story, at your table the level 0 cantrip light can best mirror image because the rules dont explicitly state that it cannot. While i love the attempt to really get down to the important stuff, you cannot say that something works one way because the book does explicitly state that it does not.

When cantrips beat higher levels spells at what theyre designed to do then you have a bit of a problem.

Nope I never said cantrip can defeat Mirror Image. This is your attempt to put your words in my mouth and claim they are mine. Quite a standard debating technique. Read what I have written

Light is real or do you say that a figment of a bonfire will illuminate a room?

other posters see this is flawed. Read them they agree.

C4M3R0N wrote:

2 Hit die wrote:

Faerie Fire Surrounds the original not changes the original,.

Exactly my point - Glitterdust does not stop someone being invisible, it just shows a sparkling layer of dust on them.

Flower would show up where it struck the original. Faerie Fire never touches the original only illuminates it in an aura - like colouring around the outline of a picture without crossing the lines - a tiny gap between the faerie fire and the original exists.

the spell says "Surrounds and outlines the subject" (pg 260)not "Settles on the subject" - perfectly well designed spell to nerf defensive illusions!

Glitterdust wrote:

...visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell...

Your point here is void. Glitterdust uses similar or the same terminology here to explain the dust outlining things like how the faerie fire does. So at this point youve begun arguing with yourself in an attempt to say that one spell would work and the other doesnt, despite these things youve pointed out.

Edit: to accommodate an edit

2 Hit die wrote:

I read the book. page 260. You try it C4M3R0N :)

You must be reading a different book, or just picking and choosing parts to pay attention to. Cause youre arguing one thing does work and yet another doesnt based on the same few words

I am looking at Pathfinder Core Rulebook pages 280 and 290 amongst other pages mentioned above.

2 Hit die wrote:

Faerie Fire Surrounds the original not changes the original,.

Exactly my point - Glitterdust does not stop someone being invisible, it just shows a sparkling layer of dust on them.

Flower would show up where it struck the original. Faerie Fire never touches the original only illuminates it in an aura - like colouring around the outline of a picture without crossing the lines - a tiny gap between the faerie fire and the original exists.

the spell says "Surrounds and outlines the subject" (pg 260)not "Settles on the subject" - perfectly well designed spell to nerf defensive illusions!

Glitterdust wrote:

...visibly outlining invisible things for the duration of the spell...

Your point here is void. Glitterdust uses similar or the same terminology here to explain the dust outlining things like how the faerie fire does. So at this point youve begun arguing with yourself in an attempt to say that one spell would work and the other doesnt, despite these things youve pointed out.

No Glitterdust says "covers" (page 290). Please read the book. Save the thread for this topic

Faerie Fire Surrounds the original not changes the original,.

Exactly my point - Glitterdust does not stop someone being invisible, it just shows a sparkling layer of dust on them.

Flour would show up where it struck the original. Faerie Fire never touches the original only illuminates it in an aura - like colouring around the outline of a picture without crossing the lines - a tiny gap between the faerie fire and the original exists.

the spell says "Surrounds and outlines the subject" (pg 260)not "Settles on the subject" - perfectly well designed spell to nerf defensive illusions!

I no longer think Faerie Fire would be copied as it is not part of the original like Enlarge (thanks to Skeld).

Why?

I read the book. page 260. You try it C4M3R0N :)

"A Pale Glow surrounds and outlines the subjects" page 260

but not ON the target nor does it CHANGE the target like a polymorph or Enlarge! :)

Sorry Skeld

- so really - IT CANNOT BE DUPLICATED by mirror image!

AWESOME thanks :-)

No Figments do not produce light If you read on page 21o it says "They cannot produce real effects". Light is a real affect unless you think otherwise? perhaps it is is unreal?

The light cantrip would be like a caster carrying a torch or lantern. The original produces light but the images do not and ambient light is confusing.

However Faerie Fire targets the real image - it is designed to do this. Why wouldnt the blurred images all by faerie Fired then, or a displaced image show 'displaced' faerie fires?

It uses Magic (as greymage suggests this steps outside physics) to identify the original target and make it illuminate so it is distinguishable. By surrounding it in Faerie Fire not making the arget faerie fire itself (unlike Englarge or Alter Self/Polymorph)

Hence it works on Blur and Displacement - both spells that copy images and flit them around the caster - only the original is surrounded in Faerie Fire

Faerie Fire appears AROUND the target but not ON the target - hence it is not duplicated - page 260

(Thankyou for that)

2 Hit die wrote:

...*anything and everything*...

I'm now losing faith in humanity...

Mirror Image wrote:

...This spell creates a number of illusory doubles of you...

Does faerie fire affect you in anyway?

Then its part of the illusory doubles of you.

But doesn't provide light - any more than a photo of a torch does or a TV screen image of a bonfire creates light or heat

I'm not losing faith. I know there are some other intelligent people here that can understand this point and are content to simply read or waiting to join the debate.

2 Hit die wrote:

It seems Skeld agrees with me as I hold the line that Faerie Fire will not work on the images, it will only work on the original.

Woah, slow down there, tiger.

I actually don't agree with you. When I say that faerie fire doesn't interact with mirror image, I mean that it doesn't negate the effect of mirror image (because mirror image isn't a concealment bonus). In fact, I think that the images conferred by mirror image would all appear to be "faerie fired," just as the creature would be because mirror image creates "illusionary doubles," replicating any effects that change the appearance of the original. This is no different than if someone cast enlarge person on the original, I would expect the illusionary doubles to also be enlarged (matching the appearance of the original).

-Skeld

Magical (coloured) Light radiates off the original. The others don't. Not the same as Enlarge

Quick Rules referenced Summary for those who are confused by all the other junk such as personal attacks and unreferenced opinions.

1) Mirror Image creates Figments (p314)
2) Figments are not real (p210)
3) Faerie Fire works on Similar spells to those listed (p260)
4) Faerie Fire Area is "creatures and Objects within a 5ft burst" (p260)
5) Logical Conclusion - Creatures and objects are Real. Therefore only the real target is Faerie Fired.
6) Illusory distractions around (Blurred image in a Blur Spell, Displaced Images in a Displacement, Multiple Images in a Mirror Images) are not Faerie fired and therefore distinguished from the original that is.

Simple.

2 Hit die wrote:

Why is so few using any quotes from the rulebooks?

I am not going to buy into any more personal attacks - lets just keep it on to the logic.

You didn't quote any rules when responding to me, so *shrug*.

Also, people mentioning that they've been GMing as long as you have and that time as a GM is irrelevant to whether you are correct aren't personal attacks. Besides, you started it by implying that you know better than everybody else here because you've been GMing for a long time. So again, *shrug*.

Quote:

Also you are completely wrong about Magic Missile. Back in first/Second edition it used to nerf Mirror Image. Now in the spell description of Mirror Image it says "Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of the figments" therefore Magic Missle no longer works in Paizo's edition.

Magic Missile bypasses Mirror Image. It targets the true caster automatically. "Spells that do not require an attack roll affect you normally." So it doesn't destroy images but it does injure the caster. It works just fine.

Extra images of candles are, again, not a problem. No matter how much you want to create a real world analogy to disprove it you can't. Unless you can actually use magic, your point on candles creating more light in the real world is irrelevant.

Incorrect I used the reference to 1st ed to suggest I dont get criticalled - it was a defensive reference to a attack from someone else - re read it. I dont think old playing experience affects answers. Several veterans here did the old trick of dictating what is without using book references because they say so. I simply raised it to ignore the critical (and being a construct) - a joke that has become distracting to this thread purpose!

Back to the points you raised - Of course magic missle hits the caster - It doesnt neutralise Mirror Image (which Faerie Fire does) which is the point of this thread!

Fireball, icestorm etc works too to hurt the caster - etc. (this is not a high IQ point I am making Come on its not that hard. I am talking about a spell that Takes out Mirror Image as Faerie Fire does to Blur etc)

If Magic Missle could snuff out all the images by targeting each then it would be a good counter - as it used to in 1st 2nd edition - for example 5 missiles doing 5d4+5 is chicken feed damage at high levels but automatically knocking out 5 mages images would really help the fighter types attacking. Unfortunately it is decreed it no longer does.

It seems Skeld agrees with me as I hold the line that Faerie Fire will not work on the images, it will only work on the original.

Therefore it identifies the original.

Skeld quotes "Similar" which is often overlooked by most of you. If Faerie fire only worked on concealment it would say so (eg Only neutralises concealment). As I put above Mirror Image is "Similar" to the other spells as it is an Illusion defence spell which makes hitting the target harder. It is not a concealment spell but it is "similar" because it is a defensive illusion.

Grey mage - im sorry all your arguments about light are proving me correct, as you agree that only the original would provide the candlelight, which is my point. I agree with you in that Adventurers are not 'untrained eye' in a world of magic threats they are most certainly trained and would be keen to detect such flaws.

This argument about 'not enough data' to distinguish light presumes one torch would be the same to identify as one torch that provides light and one that does not. In a world with darkvision/infravision etc it would be extremely easy to distinguish between an illusion that does not give off light and real source that does.

Duplicating held light sources such as lanterns, permanent light torches, glowing swords etc may create the confusion you suggest - but Faerie Fire is a specific targeting affect designed to single out the original and illuminate it. That is why it is so good with spells such as Blur and Displacement

Illusions are not worthless, nor are they faultless - they often have flaws hence the saving throw to detect them. Mirror image has a random chance to detect it too.

The spell description of Faerie Fire says it works on similar spells to Blur Invisibility etc. Mirror Image is "similar" - in that it has an Original which uses an illusion to obfuscate it.

Faerie Fire negates Blur Displacement etc by identifying the original, thus distinguishes the true target in a Mirror Image.

Grey_Mage says - "I am well versed on the figments rule.

Spells do what they state. Nothing more nothing less. Anything else is homebrew territory."

Please explain how does a figment create light then?

Can players use Figments to create the light of a Bullseye lantern then? what about if a mage does a figment of the sun in the sky on a dark night - shouldnt that illuminate the whole area with sunlight?

As you say you are familiar with Figments - please explain referring to page 210?*

How is it the mirror images "can mimic the candle light well enough" (your quote) - like a photo(illusion) of a torch illuminating a room? or the figment illusion of a chair to sit on?

*( You are of course free to homebrew these anyway you like but I prefer adherance to the rules)

Why is so few using any quotes from the rulebooks?

I am not going to buy into any more personal attacks - lets just keep it on to the logic.

Some of you have written completely confused (The Black Bard ) Im not talking about figments affecting Mirror Image. I am saying that - because Mirror Image produces figments, figments are not real and cannot be faerie fired. Therefore the real target is faerie fired and thus can be identified as it is the only one producing light

Wheldrake - You cant be suggesting that all the rules are complete and don't require DM judgement. Ergo, the rules are not complete. Pages 402-403 cover situations where the GM has to make rulings, Gygax said plenty more in the past about DM judging rules. Tsk Tsk

Yuri Sarreth - You are the only person using a quote so so I will go into detail - firstly re-read the spell Faerie Fire - it says "similar effects" to concealment spells.

Mirror image provides a diceroll to hit the target based on an illusion. It is a "similar" defensive spell, while say Stoneskin is not.

Your quote "Noted in the spell description" is correct in that the spell description says "similar effects".

Debate about "Similar" would not exist if Faerie Fire said it 'only neutralises concealment' (or a similar absolute word or phrase like "Only")

Also you are completely wrong about Magic Missile. Back in first/Second edition it used to nerf Mirror Image. Now in the spell description of Mirror Image it says "Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of the figments" therefore Magic Missle no longer works in Paizo's edition.

Grey mage has done no reading about figments.

Goth Guru sees the logic but needs to switch off the electric lights and light 1+ candles in a dark room to see each creates its own light.

In summary
1) old dogs like me and young pups please restrain yourselves from trying to change the thread into a dog fight over age and experience, which will devolve into arguments about tertiary degree/s, career, how , many games you have etc. Pointless. If you read earlier I was merely trying to quash a juvenile comment that my argument had suffered a critical hit, which for those that do not know was not in the D&D rules in its 1st edition and was only an optional rule in 2nd ed (page 61 DMG2e), thus was not official until 3rd edition. I regret it now because swatting that fly has seemed to attract a swarm.

2) Can i ask people to please not post unless they quote from the rules in order to explain how each figment is faerie fired. This thread is about whether Faerie Fire will work on all the Images in a Mirror image so each will generate light and thus be indistinguishable from the real person.

The rules say that figments are not real objects so it seems they would be just pictures of flame, like a photo or TV image of a candle burning rather than actually emanating light.

The rules do not lend support to the notion that there would be 2+ candleflames generated by either
i)copying the original or
ii) each figment being faerie fired.

show me where this is wrong by page numbers and I will concede (with RULE quotes for those page numbers).
But please read before you quote or you risk oversights like Yuri not seeing the quote about Mirror image not being affected by Magic Missle, or Grey mage who seems to not have bothered to read pages 210-211)

Logic over emotion to win the argument please

2 Hit die wrote:

I have been DMing since 1st ed AD&D. Most of you are D&D newbees to me.
:-)

You would be surprised at a) how wrong you are and b) how little it matters.

c) prove I am wrong by using the rules - that would matter as it is the subject of this thread.

I need many replies as there are lots of errant posts and I would like to reply to each - putting it all in one reply is confusing.

It's quite simple - Mirror Images are Figments. You can't faerie Fire figments because they are not real objects.

Posters link Pink Norse Wolf are simply wrong. Look in the Core book Page 280. Faerie Fire works on "Area - Creatures and Objects within a 5-ft radius burst" .

The real person is a real target. They can be Faerie Fired. That makes them exposed. Figments are not targets. They Are not real. They are illusions. Read the rulebook quote for figments I used above (twice)

Diego Rossi is almost on point - he can see the logic that only the real thing can be faerie fired but still sticks to the Mirror Image still works anyway line. Why? Blur is nerfed. So is invisibility. What is it about this 2nd level spells that says it is immune to spells that identify the real target?

He strays off in the "Long list" - Physical Attacks are attacks and can fail. Area affect spells are not particular to nerfing this - they attack anything. Closing ones eyes has its own penalties. The "long list" is general and unspecified. There are no other spells from proximate level that neutralise Mirror Image (apart from the high level True Seeing, limited Wish etc). Faerie Fire is the one

Tell me where Figments are real objects and I will accept they can be Faerie Fired.

The rules are explicit. Figments are not real objects. Shadows are, they produce real effects (page 211) I would accept they can be Faerie Fired as they are "partially real". Not Figments (pg 210)

What is so unclear about this?

Everyone please stay on point - i never said Mirror Image is concealment. It is a spell that creates Figments. It says in the spell description on Page 314 of the core rulebook "School - Illusion (figment)"

Please stop trying to say I think it is a concealment

Also stick to the rulebook quotes please as it makes distracting noise otherwise. This thread is about the interaction between those two spells. Use the rules to prove your argument.

Fregod99 completely ninja'd my post - full crit backstab on 20 mins of writing. Well done.

But essentially, what he said.

I have been DMing since 1st ed AD&D. Most of you are D&D newbees to me. I am a DMing machine - a Construct, and thus immune to criticals; You're backstab was flatulent.

:-)

BTW the most important quote from the spell Faerie Fire is "...can be Blue, Green, or violet" (PF - Pg 280)

This would apply if the caster was outside on a summer day other otherwise had to deal with lots of ambient light in the vicinity.

(no house ruling there, I'm quoting straight from the book)

Making each of the multiple images glow in a coloured light would make each an object. The rules on illusions I have quoted clearly say they are not objects.

BTW House Ruling is good. Necessary if fact it is necessary to stop players who refuse to accept reason and the GM does to want to waste lots of time an energy on a long debate with them because they are truculent/stubborn etc. Some players need to be told "No" and sometimes asked to leave when they cannot accept a referee. remember that people.

I quote this rule:

"GM Fiat. The GM is the law of the Game. His reading of the rules should be respected and adhered to" (PF pg 402)

Amen to that.

(The rest of the posts are all Fan Boi for this spell Mirror Image and those that defend it and attack the logic from the books I have quoted).

If I was to for example concede that Mirror Image should be more powerful than Blur Invisibility and other spells of its same level, then pray-tell what spell counters it?

Tell me the spell that specifically counters it (not counterspell or dispel magic they are applicable to all).

I'm afraid there is no other one - - unless you apply the rules re Illusions and Figments I have quoted from the rulebooks above and properly curtail this spell that apparently has gotten out of control in many campaigns and become the "powerful low-level defensive spell that can significantly increase a mage's survivability" (to quote Fretgod99 above) which clearly trumps other Illusion-based defensive spells of level 2 which can be nerfed by Faerie Fire...

2 Hit die wrote:

My suggestion is that if for example you have a mirror image going on your major villain and a player of a low level character has gone to the trouble of memorising glitterdust or has access to faerie fire, (memorising these at the opportunity cost of a whiz-bang damage spell) your player would feel more rewarded for clever play if their countering spell worked instead of simply saying no, and turning mirror image into a superior spell (because it has no effective countering spells) which is questionable for visual reasons I explain above and from a metagame view basically unfair in gameplay.

Disagree with a lot of what you posted above (for instance, that mechanical limitations shouldn't be relevant to GMs).

But as to this point, put the shoe on the other foot. How would your players feel rewarded by allowing the BBEG's (or a mook's for that matter) spell to overcome the player's Mirror Image spell? Mirror Image is a powerful low-level defensive spell that can significantly increase a mage's survivability; you'd be trodding all over a significant investment and expectation of a PC for a debatable preference at best.

As for duplicating gaze attacks et al., this also isn't a concern since the images do not take actions to use any gaze attacks. It might look to a PC like any number of the images is making such an attack on the relevant creatures turn, but only one such attack actually occurs. And even if you could spot which creature actually made the attack when it happened, the images then mix and meander once again, making your ability to isolate the real image impossible.

Similarly,

2 Hit Die wrote:

Gwen - Sorry your statement "So the "candlelight" effect from faerie fire would cause the caster to shed light as a candle, and light levels would be increased (or not, depending on ambient light) accordingly." clearly demonstrates that you interpret mirror image as having the ability to generate multiple light sources. This is unacceptable as it thereby increasing the

...

1) Saying Mirror image is "powerful" and would disappoint players if it is nerfed proves my point exactly! Its only 2nd level! It SHOULD be equal to other spells of its level eg a Blur - but everyone else is strangely silent re any counter to it, arguing that it has none - in fact it should be exempted from any 'counters'!

(What is it about Mirror Image that people love so much, I scratch my head, perhaps its Monkey from Monkey Magic TV Show)

2) Of course I don't want illusions to duplicate spell effects no need to debate with that there - I am just raising the point if you make Mirror Image super good in duplicating then you risk that

3) Creating additional light is ridiculous. May I suggest you just get two candles in the room, switch off your monitor, and room lights, and make sure the room is perfectly dark then, light one candle, and notice what happens if you light a second - its a bit noticeable...If you need to try a third and fourth - yep faerie firing each image would be bright and effectively making each non-real figment an object!

4) Faerie fire is had to get, its on a Druid only list and Drow have it. it's not common. As a first level spell its great at countering second level but it has no other uses, ie unlike eg Dispel magic which could potentially counter all spells it can only counter a handful - 1 level above its spell level.

Please folks, just do what the spells say.

Faerie Fire counters CONCEALMENT, Mirror Image doesn't use concealment.

Assigning additional effects to Faerie Fire changes the rules of the game.

House rule territory.

Another false debate path

All my quotes are from the books, particularly (I repeat):

3.5PHB.p173/PF210 "Because figments and glamers are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding or delaying foes, but useless for attacking them directly. For example, it is possible to use a silent image spell to create an illusory cottage, but the cottage offers no protection from rain.”

Why should the multiple figments in a Mirror Image be faerie fired? They ARE NOT REAL OBJECTS

Perhaps you love this spell - and want it to have no counters - well then you're perfectly free to house rule it!

Where's the Weed? wrote:

Would faerie fire stop mirror images working?

No.

It does this:

"A pale glow surrounds and outlines the subjects. Outlined subjects shed light as candles. Creatures outlined by faerie fire take a –20 penalty on all Stealth checks. Outlined creatures do not benefit from the concealment normally provided by darkness (though a 2nd-level or higher magical darkness effect functions normally), blur, displacement, invisibility, or similar effects.

Stop there. You bold "Or similar effects" but don't elaborate on what these are. "similar"

but is not "Identical"!

Therefore, effects which are illusions designed to distort appearance are "similar"

Your own post identifies that this is not restricted to nerfing "concealment" - I never said Mirror image is concealment!

(This is a classic debating technique, to put words in the other's mouth and take the argument over there to win it.)

Im sorry I was very specific. I summarise:

1) Mirror image is a figment
2) Figments aren't real objects
3) faerie fire affects real objects
4) Therefore the real character is faerie fired and the images are not

It is quite clear water-tight logic

The figment images Mirror Image creates adjust based on the condition of the target. Per the spell description: "These images remain in your space and move with you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly."

There is no statement that says 'if you are carrying a light source, such as a lantern or torch, mirror image figments are ineffective.' Since no such statement exists, you cannot assume the light producing qualities of the Faerie Fire spell would trump the explicit effect of Mirror Image.

Glitterdust would make the entire square glittery. The target outlined would be glittery, therefore the images would also be glittery.

Throwing paint or chalk dust at the target could stain/cover the target. This change would then be immediately duplicated by the images.

While the light produced by Faerie Fire is generated at the position of the target, I suggest the disorienting nature of the movement of the target and the figments results in the viewer seeing the light as emanating from the square, with no chance to localize it to just the target.

Hey sorry friend it is the GM's job to constantly make rulings based on incomplete statements such as missing information so when i read you saying "You cannot assume" I am aghast - this is another dangersign - remember RPGs are "GM ruling" based - they are not wargames or MMORPGS with fixed rulesets that apply to all participants! The GM MUST regularly make assumptions to beget rulings in the gameworld!!!

Re your point, it is also flawed to suggest that Mirror Image can duplicate all visible magical effects. This idea of duplicating spell effects is dangerous ground, and with your logic leads to multiple gaze attacks because multiple eyes are generated or being able to read from multiple spells written on multiple scrolls because it appears multiple times.

At best Mirror Image (remember guys its a 2nd level spell )should create a poor imitation of the (magical) appearance of spells, and for most affects may only produce the picture of a fire or picture of a lantern as I illustrated above. It will also project the image of a another spell in play, such as Alter Self or a Mage Armour or a Flame Blade which are not designed for neutralising illusions, but should definitely not duplicate 'revealing' spells specifically designed to counter illusions.

True that the spell would have little benefit if a mundane lantern or torch could be easily discerned, and I agree these should be visible within the effect of the mirror image and therefore part of the illusion as they are copied so the original light fractals or deflects through them.

However, countering spells (not 'counterspells') such as Glitterdust and Faerie Fire should not be duplicated. They are by very nature a spell chosen by an opponent specifically to neutralise another spell effect. A glitterdust to neutralise a Invisibility and if cast at it, to neutralise a mirror image. Simply allowing Mirror image to nerf other countering spells and not exempting Invisibility, Blur and any other 2nd level defensive illusion spell increases the power of this spell that gets it singled out and favored as a superior second level spell better than its level-equals. Bad news for game balance.

My suggestion is that if for example you have a mirror image going on your major villain and a player of a low level character has gone to the trouble of memorising glitterdust or has access to faerie fire, (memorising these at the opportunity cost of a whiz-bang damage spell) your player would feel more rewarded for clever play if their countering spell worked instead of simply saying no, and turning mirror image into a superior spell (because it has no effective countering spells) which is questionable for visual reasons I explain above and from a metagame view basically unfair in gameplay.

Make your own super mirror image of 4th level that mimics spells designed to reveal illusions if you really want one that works that way.

Perhaps Glitterdust and Faerie Fire have a permutation built into their magical matrix designed to make simple image duplication difficult. You can have this nerfed in any Super Mirror Image spell you want to create.

2 Hit die wrote:

Detailed explanation:

Faerie fire works on objects designated as subjects by the caster of Faerie Fire, and the figments aren’t real so they objects and therefore eligible targets of Faerie Fire and definitely are not illuminated - ie they cannot shed the candlelight of Faerie Fire. Even if you believe that the Mirror Image figments created were demonstrating a picture of the real character's Faerie Fire they could not produce faerie fire candle light illumination (ie they would look artificial) - it is like trying to use the photo of a bonfire to illuminate your study or a TV show character using a torch to spotlight your lounge room.

Only the real character in a Mirror Image would actually produce the Faerie Fire Candlelight illumination.

As I understand it, your argument is that you would be able to tell which image was real based on the candlelight-level light emanating from the source of the spell.

Light emanates from a square to a designated distance, and I have never seen anything in the rules that says multiple light sources in the same square have any effect on the light level or distance. So three candles in the same square produce the same light level as one candle, and the light emanates out to the same radius. Mechanically, there should be no difference between one candle combined with two illusory candles and three candles as long as they are all in the same square.

All of the Mirror Images are in your square, and they shuffle constantly. So the "candlelight" effect from faerie fire would cause the caster to shed light as a candle, and light levels would be increased (or not, depending on ambient light) accordingly. The mirror images would automatically update to also *appear* to glow. Even if they do not *actually* glow (e.g., they do increase the light level nor do they change the distance of the emanation), I would argue that there is no way to tell, mechanically, which of the images is actually glowing.

Gwen - Sorry your statement "So the "candlelight" effect from faerie fire would cause the caster to shed light as a candle, and light levels would be increased (or not, depending on ambient light) accordingly." clearly demonstrates that you interpret mirror image as having the ability to generate multiple light sources. This is unacceptable as it thereby increasing the net light generated. Ouch. You're giving WAY too much power to this spell.

BTW 'Mechanically' - this justification should be Anathema to a GM. A GM is to arbitrate the fantasy-reality world within the games, so they should adjudicate without ever being 'blocked' or 'restricted' by mechanics.

PS
Oops : Missed a word above that might lead to more debate:

...the figments aren’t real so they AREN'T objects.

before getting too excited as there is no definition of what an 'object' except that (in PHB3.5 p165/PF 173 they always have hardness and HP (where it is clear that figments have no Hardness and No HP). Meanwhile a 'Shadow' illusion has some reality...

No, Mirror Image doesn't cause/rely on concealment.

You're trying to suggest that only the real caster would be revealed by the AoE. But even if that's the case (I wouldn't flavor the interaction that way), it does nothing to stop the effects of Mirror Image.

Nope see above

Faerie fire specifically says it counters 3 specific illusion/glamer spells because they are concealment effects... however Mirror Image is an illusion/figment and nothing in it's description say anything about concealing: mirror image creates illusory clones, that's not concealment it's cloning.

Incorrect see above

Democratus wrote:

As to whether the images are glowing or not, the rules are markedly silent on that matter. Were I a DM I would say that they do glow so that they look just like the original.

This makes sense.

Democratus wrote:

But even if a DM ruled that they didn't glow it wouldn't affect the functionality of Mirror Image. Any attack would still have a chance of striking an image - glowing or not.

And that would be a terrible ruling. It's the kind of "disconnect" that tanked 4E.

Doesnt make sense or you could create the figment-illusion of a fire or beacon or even the sun to emit light. Just like a photo

BTW Mirror image needs vulnerabilities, otherwise it is 'more powerful' than other defensive illusions of the same spell level - eg Blur, which is subject to Faerie Fire.

But if the target is highlighted (the images wouldn't be) surely the images are negated?

What about Glitterdust, would that bypass the images or would they all now look glittery?

The Weed inspired truth! See above

After reading the spell description, here's how I see it:

It's not a spell that requires an attack roll. So it won't affect Mirror Image.

Sorry incorrect see above

tonyz wrote:

Mirror image automatically updates so its images look exactly like you. So I'd say they'd start glowing when the original did. Still useful for negating fog, darkness, and the like, but faerie fire doesn't affect the effectiveness of mirror image.

This is how I look at it too.

Sorry incorrect see above