You can't take advantage of the Blind-Fight feat against blink. That is, you have a 50% miss chance with no rerolls against blink if you have the Blind-Fight feat.If you close your eyes, you completely ignore the effect of mirror image. Even if you're blinking with mirror images, you still ignore the mirror images.
If you're blind and swinging at a blinking opponent, there's a 50% miss chance (blindness) and a 20% miss chance caused by the opponent possibly being in the ethereal plane. You don't stack multiple invisible/blindness/total concealment penalties together -- there's just one. 20% of a 50% chance to hit is 10%. You have a 50% + 10% = 60% chance to miss if you're blind attacking a blinking opponent. That's still a lot better than attacking a mirror-imaged-and-blinking wizard. Actually, if you follow what James suggested with blink not stacking with displacement, then it would just be a 50% miss chance still. . . but I think 60% is fair for stacking abilities.
And in my opinion, that is still too good, which is why Blink will be gone once again in my campaign come tuesday... just as it has been since about 3.0 came out ten years ago. :p
The reason we changed the spell wasn't to make it work better. It was to make it be less complex in play; rather than having to recalculate an image's AC, the new version does that work for you by just saying if you miss a target by 5 or more you take out an image. Unfortunately, rewording the spell's text in this way does imply that you can't specifically attack an image anymore. That wasn't the actual intent of the spell. You SHOULD be able to target an image still, and a more open-minded interpretation of the spell's text would indicate that doing so is certainly possible.
The text: "If the attack misses by 5 or less" basically means that a mirror image's AC is equal to the target's AC – 5. So if someone wants to specifically target an image, say by throwing darts at multiple images or Great Cleaving them, he could do so since the image has an implied AC.
I think I'll take that as the running interpretation, as to not have to fully re-instate the 3.5 version. It's still a big upgrade for the wizard, because at higher levels AC-5 is far above the 10+Dex bonus the old mirror images had, but it's manageable.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Personally, I probably WOULD allow cleave/great cleave to take out mirror images, but folks didn't ask me how I would run things. They asked me for an interpretation of the rules as written, which, in my opinion, is a TERRIBLE way to slave yourself to the game. If you as the GM can't adjust the rules as you wish to make the game more fun for you and your players' play style, you might as well just be playing an MMORPG.
...or Organized Play.
I've made no secret of my preference, as a home-campaign GM, for my house-rules-heavy variation of the E6 version of D&D 3.5. My set of rules uses some of the Pathfinder changes, the same way it uses some of Monte Cook's alternate rules. It's what we like on a Tuesday evening.
But I think Paizo is awesome, and I want to do what I can to support the company, and so I run Pathfinder Society adventures where I can. And in that environment, I can't just decide that the rules for blink or mirror image are hokey and rewrite them, to the surprise of the wizards whose players are seated at my table.
Aside from one sliver of a special case, Organized Play is the only environment I'll be running the Pathfinder RPG rules at all. So it's important that I get them right.
And in my opinion, that is still too good, which is why Blink will be gone once again in my campaign come tuesday... just as it has been since about 3.0 came out ten years ago. :p
Oh.
The text: "If the attack misses by 5 or less" basically means that a mirror image's AC is equal to the target's AC – 5. So if someone wants to specifically target an image, say by throwing darts at multiple images or Great Cleaving them, he could do so since the image has an implied AC.
I think I would allow specifically targeting an image only if they could attack each image in a round, otherwise how do they know it is an image? I like cleave/great cleave working as long as your randomly determine which is the real target since a miss ends cleave/great cleave.
Creative Director
|
...or Organized Play.
For Org Play, if you really have an issue with how rules work, you need to run them by Josh. He's basically the overlord GM of that campaign, and thus his call is the one to follow there. I'd like to think that my ruling and his ruling for the way these spells work would be the same, but there are certain truths to how a massive org play campaign is run that means that some abilities and spells just can't work the same.
For me, org play is actually a relatively small fraction of my job responsibilities, so I tend not to couch my responses with it at the forefront in my mind.
|
Creative Director
|
I think I would allow specifically targeting an image only if they could attack each image in a round, otherwise how do they know it is an image? I like cleave/great cleave working as long as your randomly determine which is the real target since a miss ends cleave/great cleave.
The text: "If the attack misses by 5 or less" basically means that a mirror image's AC is equal to the target's AC – 5. So if someone wants to specifically target an image, say by throwing darts at multiple images or Great Cleaving them, he could do so since the image has an implied AC.
Honestly, that's actually the best interpretation I've seen.
Let cleave and great cleave work, but they still have to roll to see what they hit.
Remember some of the other things about blink before you get all hating on it:
1. You are ethereal not invisible, that's why blind-fighting doesn't work on it -- you are not on the same plane of existance.
2. You have a 20% failure rate on all spells you cast while under the effect of the blink spell. Nothing gets rid of this.
Losing 1 in 5 spells is huge.
Remember some of the other things about blink before you get all hating on it:
1. You are ethereal not invisible, that's why blind-fighting doesn't work on it -- you are not on the same plane of existance.
2. You have a 20% failure rate on all spells you cast while under the effect of the blink spell. Nothing gets rid of this.
Losing 1 in 5 spells is huge.
Having another stackable 50% miss chance for the melees to get through, which also screws them if they try the Blind Fight solution against Mirror Image / Displacement is "huger". ^^ Banned in my game.
Having another stackable 50% miss chance for the melees to get through, which also screws them if they try the Blind Fight solution against Mirror Image / Displacement is "huger". ^^ Banned in my game.Remember some of the other things about blink before you get all hating on it:
1. You are ethereal not invisible, that's why blind-fighting doesn't work on it -- you are not on the same plane of existance.
2. You have a 20% failure rate on all spells you cast while under the effect of the blink spell. Nothing gets rid of this.
Losing 1 in 5 spells is huge.
Whatever works in your game, however stackable it isn't. Replacing it is.
IF you cast both blink and displacement, you no matter what you would have a 50% miss chance that isn't bypassed by blind fight. In exchange you've given 2 third level spell slots and have a 20% ASF for the duration of the blink.
You would get the exact same effect from just casting the blink spell.
IMO displacement should either be a lower level, or Blink should be a higher level due to it's other abilities though.
Whatever works in your game, however stackable it isn't. Replacing it is.
IF you cast both blink and displacement, you no matter what you would have a 50% miss chance that isn't bypassed by blind fight. In exchange you've given 2 third level spell slots and have a 20% ASF for the duration of the blink.
You would get the exact same effect from just casting the blink spell.
IMO displacement should either be a lower level, or Blink should be a higher level due to it's other abilities though.
Well, I know that James ruled it as such, but *logically* one is concealment and the other is a miss chance. Anyway, I dislike that the already most powerful character on the field gets another quasi-immunity.
@Magnuskn
so your saying NO ONE should play an arcane spell caster in your game, if your taking away their only defense, not to mention they work great as defense against your players instant killing NPC's
In our last campaign when I used mirror image the enemies had no problem hitting my AC. we just rolled to se who was hit. one thing to remember is that if the wizard uses all of these defensive spells then he doesn't have as many offensive spells. If the wizard is willing to sacrifice offense to protect himself then how is he going to deal damage.
|
Creative Director
|
I'd have to agree... I don't see arcane spellcasters as being "the most powerful character in the field" at all. In games I've run, be the arcanists PCs or NPCs, they don't seem to break games or ruin things any more so than other classes do. So in my experience, all of this does seem like an overreaction. (shrug)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd have to agree... I don't see arcane spellcasters as being "the most powerful character in the field" at all. In games I've run, be the arcanists PCs or NPCs, they don't seem to break games or ruin things any more so than other classes do. So in my experience, all of this does seem like an overreaction. (shrug)
Naw, this isn't an overreaction. This is barely a protest. 100 pages of posts foaming at the mouth because Barbarians don't a Profession skill? THAT'S overreaction!
|
They asked me for an interpretation of the rules as written, which, in my opinion, is a TERRIBLE way to slave yourself to the game. If you as the GM can't adjust the rules as you wish to make the game more fun for you and your players' play style, you might as well just be playing an MMORPG.
I'm going to bookmark this quote. There is entirely too much focus on RAW and reading the rules like they are a straight-jacket.
|
|
In our last campaign when I used mirror image the enemies had no problem hitting my AC. we just rolled to se who was hit. one thing to remember is that if the wizard uses all of these defensive spells then he doesn't have as many offensive spells. If the wizard is willing to sacrifice offense to protect himself then how is he going to deal damage.
This is what I don't get, in most of my encounters my sorcerer is too busy doing unto others to worry about casting defensive buffs. The only time he would cast mirror image is if he's cornered and often that's not enough to really save him.
Yeah Ring of Blink is about as close as I usually get to defensive spells in and of themselves. Overland flight might count as a defensive spell but in and of itself isn't enough really, good positioning and smart thinking are more what the arcanist needs to stay alive.
And most powerful? Please, the cleric wipes his butt with the wizard everyday, especially after he steals all his spells with domains that also grant more abilities with NO cost to the cleric (unlike specialization), in addition to his already powerful spell selection, better BAB, Hit Dice, Save Throws, and armor/weapon choices.
@Magnuskn
so your saying NO ONE should play an arcane spell caster in your game, if your taking away their only defense, not to mention they work great as defense against your players instant killing NPC's
"Their only defense"? You are joking, right?
In no particular order:
- Mirror Image
Displacement
Blink ( well, not in my campaign anymore )
Fly
( Greater ) Invisibility
Project Image
Expeditious Retreat
Mage Armor
Shield
Dimension Door
Stoneskin
Tiny Hut
Wind Wall
Fire Shield
Interposing/Forceful/etc Hand
Repulsion
Mislead
Reverse Gravity
Not even to mention the offensive spells which can screw over melee who want's to close with the arcane caster. And, yes, I realize that no arcane caster will have all those spells up in a combat, but a few normally suffice.
And, hey, I am actually okay with that, too. I just object to one combination, which is Blink and Mirror Image, because that one unduly screws over melee when they finally manage to close with the flying invisible wizard who has Shield and Mage Armor up and Stoneskin on.
Displacement and Mirror Image can be dealt with, because that takes one feat: Blind-Fight.
But Blink and Mirror Image obligates me as a GM to equip ghost-touch weapons on the opponent(s) who is/are supposed to actually threaten the wizard, and I refuse to throw money at the party because there is one unbalanced defensive spell. So banned it is, once more.
@Magnuskn
I don't see your problem, I've played D&D for over 20 years and never had any problems with any of those spells. As a DM there are always creatures you can use to counter any of those, so you don't have to throw out ghost touch items to everything, and if you have one person that is doing all of that at once you are not doing your job as the DM.
Melee has always had a problem with killing a prepared spell caster, but what happens when named spell caster is not prepared!
you needlessly neuter your players cause you can't control the game.
ever since 3.0 came out I've seen an alarming number of players that play spellcaster play sorcerers over wizards. I understand the reason, but a sorcerer that devoted his casting to all those spells would be spending to many of their precious slots to know more about defense then attack. although some of the spells you named are useful as attack spells.
but in the end it is your game, and how you run it is your choice.
if you think that all that is bad, try having a character in your group that is a ranged fighter type that has multi-classe to maximize his Stealth skill to the point that no matter what you do as a DM there is no way to find him short of accidental. this character didn't use any of the spells you find so over powering. just took the right combination of feats and classes plus luck with magical items that added to DEX, INT and Stealth. I found a non cheesey way to defeat the character fairly with out directly targeting him, but in the end any combination of abilities have the potential for misuse. but you don't have to ban it out right, just tell them don't to this or say they don't work together as house rule. taking away the spell entirely, takes options that where meant to be in the game, away for players and limits your self as the DM.
Of course you can bring back the 2nd edtion rule on Mirror image that and area effect spell counters it!
at least that is the way any group I've played in use it!
lastly an easy counter to mirror image is any race that is immune to illusions, and there is a low level race that has that ability Duergar!
My main problem is with Blink, not Mirror Image. As I said above, the other combinations are okay. Anyway, it's banned and the affected player was mollified by me ruling in his favour in regards to item creation rules while adventuring in combination with a Ring of Sustenance.