Simple question, is there anything stopping a character - by RAW - from casting multiple iterations of mirror image?
School illusion (figment); Level bard 2, sorcerer/wizard 2
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S
Range personal
Target you
Duration 1 min./level
This spell creates a number of illusory doubles of you that inhabit your square. These doubles make it difficult for enemies to precisely locate and attack you.
When mirror image is cast, 1d4 images plus one image per three caster levels (maximum eight images total) are created. These images remain in your space and move with you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly. Whenever you are attacked or are the target of a spell that requires an attack roll, there is a possibility that the attack targets one of your images instead. 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. Area spells affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments. Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments. Spells that require a touch attack are harmlessly discharged if used to destroy a figment.
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).
It doesn't seem that there is, but my group seems to feel this would be OP and was not the intention of the spell. I can't see any reason to not allow it, if a PC is willing to cast multiple Level 2 spells on themselves (granted, I run low level adventures primarily).
|
There is something stopping it:
If you go to the Magic Section in the PRD/Rulebook, you will see this:
Combining Magic Effects
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:
Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves. More generally, two bonuses of the same type don't stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).
Different Bonus Types: The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types. A bonus that doesn't have a type stacks with any bonus.
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.
Same Effect with Differing Results: The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.
One Effect Makes Another Irrelevant: Sometimes, one spell can render a later spell irrelevant. Both spells are still active, but one has rendered the other useless in some fashion.
Multiple Mental Control Effects: Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as spells that remove the subject's ability to act. Mental controls that don't remove the recipient's ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.
Spells with Opposite Effects: Spells with opposite effects apply normally, with all bonuses, penalties, or changes accruing in the order that they apply. Some spells negate or counter each other. This is a special effect that is noted in a spell's description.
Instantaneous Effects: Two or more spells with instantaneous durations work cumulatively when they affect the same target.
Simple question, is there anything stopping a character - by RAW - from casting multiple iterations of mirror image?
** spoiler omitted **
It doesn't seem that there is, but my group seems to feel this would be OP and was not the intention of the spell. I can't see any reason to not allow it, if a PC is willing to cast multiple Level 2 spells on themselves (granted, I run low level adventures primarily).
The spell has an in built limiter and I would say you should stick to it.
the limter being 8 image maximum, so they can cast the spell multiple times to reach that 8 image maximum and cast more to top it up as it decreases but they can never have more than 8 images.
at low levels its pretty expensive spell slot wise to do this so it should be fine.
just have a few NPC's with AOE effects ever so often to keep the mirror imager honest and challenged during combat and you should be fine.
There is something stopping it:
If you go to the Magic Section in the PRD/Rulebook, you will see this:
...Combining Magic Effects
...
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.
...
Yeah, that looks absolutely right. Thanks a lot.
Yeah, that looks absolutely right. Thanks a lot.There is something stopping it:
If you go to the Magic Section in the PRD/Rulebook, you will see this:
...Combining Magic Effects
...
Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths: In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the one with the highest strength applies.
...
Note that this doesn't make the second mirror image irrelevant as I see it, it just means the number of images doesn't stack.
So if you have two castings of mirror image running, one with 5 images and one with 3 images, it would still take 8 hits to remove the effect - the first two hits would remove two images, leaving 3, and the last 3 images would take two hits apiece to remove.
After all, there would be two spells with 3 images apiece running; a hit would reduce one of the spells to 2 images (making it a lesser effect/lower strength) and it would no longer apply - but the other spell with 3 images would apply.
What it wouldn't do is change the chance of hitting the caster to 1 in 9, or with 3 images left, to 1 in 7; it would still be 1 in 4 because one of the spells would not apply.
An interesting tactic, and one that might give an opponent pause.
Note that this doesn't make the second mirror image irrelevant as I see it, it just means the number of images doesn't stack.
So if you have two castings of mirror image running, one with 5 images and one with 3 images, it would still take 8 hits to remove the effect - the first two hits would remove two images, leaving 3, and the last 3 images would take two hits apiece to remove.
I'm afraid you're incorrect. The way you interpereted it, what is the difference between someone with 8 images and someone with 5 images and 3 images? You say that they don't stack, yet both instances would require 8 "hits" to get rid of the images. That's stacking if I ever heard it.
If they stack, they stack (and the 5 images would add on the 3 for a total of 8), but if they don't they don't (in that case, a caster who rolls 5 images and then casts again for 3 images would gain no benefit from the second casting).
|
That was my initial reaction but it seems gbone is correct as the stronger spell supersedes but does not dispel the previous spell.
Now it could get tricky because there are two ways to interpret this regarding mirror image.
First
The stronger spell holds until all its images are removed. Then when the last image is removed via attack/duration the weaker spell takes effect. This gives the effect of destroying one mirror image spells figments first before the other one can be used. It also makes it feel more like two spells rather than 1 combined spell.
Second
When the stronger mirror image's number of images gets lower than the weaker one then the weaker one is now stronger and takes precedence. This gives a feel of two combining into one stronger mirror image.
I prefer the first interpretation.
That was my initial reaction but it seems gbone is correct as the stronger spell supersedes but does not dispel the previous spell.
Now it could get tricky because there are two ways to interpret this regarding mirror image.
First
The stronger spell holds until all its images are removed. Then when the last image is removed via attack/duration the weaker spell takes effect. This gives the effect of destroying one mirror image spells figments first before the other one can be used. It also makes it feel more like two spells rather than 1 combined spell.Second
When the stronger mirror image's number of images gets lower than the weaker one then the weaker one is now stronger and takes precedence. This gives a feel of two combining into one stronger mirror image.I prefer the first interpretation.
If two castings allows you to take more hits than one casting, that means that they stacked. If you've established that two castings of Mirror Image do NOT stack, then the only valid interperetation is one that results in two castings providing no additional benefit beyond that of the higher-resulting spell. Meaning, if you decide that Mirror Image doesn't stack, then only the higher of two castings provides a benefit, period. Allowing one to take effect and then the second take effect immediately after the first is used up effectively means that they stacked.
If the stronger casting (5 images) supersedes but does not dispel the lesser casting (3 images), then that means that once the five images are gone, the character no longer has any images. Full stop. Imagine it any way you want, but that's the definition of not stacking.
Allow me to clarify by using a very similar example. Let's say you cast False Life twice, once giving you 12 hit points, and another time giving you 8 hit points. Since the two won't stack (seeing as how they're from the same source), you have two spells active, but you only have 12 temporary hit points.
If you take four damage, the hit points are deducted from BOTH spells, leaving you with one spell giving you 8 hit points and another spell giving you 4 (though only the 8 would apply). In other words, once you've taken 12 hit points, all of your temporary hit points would be gone and both spells would end. The only benefit, however, is that if you cast the lesser spell an hour after the first one, and took very little damage, you'd still benefit from the lesser spell after the first one's duration has ended (assuming you haven't taken enough damage to deplete your temporary hit points). Also, if someone tried to dispel the effect, they'd have to dispell TWO spells to get rid of them all.
It's the same way with Mirror Image. If you cast it once and get 5 images, and then cast it again and get 4 images, you still can only take 5 "hits" before both spells are gone, because neither casting cares whether another spell is active. If you take a hit, and it goes to an image, both spells lose an image. Anything else would mean that they stacked.
|
|
I see what you are saying essentially the 3 images from the lesser spell become part of the 5 images from the greater spell (metaphysically speaking) so that you still have 5 images.
That sounds better than my crazy idea. In fact that was not even my idea someone else typed it, yea that's the ticket.
It's the same way with Mirror Image. If you cast it once and get 5 images, and then cast it again and get 4 images, you still can only take 5 "hits" before both spells are gone, because neither casting cares whether another spell is active. If you take a hit, and it goes to an image, both spells lose an image. Anything else would mean that they stacked.
Hm, it's a good point. But I don't think that's the problem - I think the problem is the interpretation of "applies," and that reverses my decision about it.
If you cast hold person on a snake it doesn't apply (and thus fails). Interpreting the spell rule the same way would have the same effect: the weaker spell would not apply (and thus would go away or be overridden by the stronger spell).
I think I agree with UltimaGabe - if the stronger spell is cast second, the stronger spell effectively replaces the weaker one, and if the stronger spell is cast first, the stronger spell makes the weaker spell irrelevant and it never applies/takes effect.
Overall, a very good question, giving valuable insight.