| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a game the other day one of my NPC's used Mirror Image to protect himself. One of my players, being a smartass, moved adjacent to this enemy and then declared he was closing his eyes, then swinging into the enemy square.
Since his eyes were closed, the enemy had total concealment (50% miss chance as if he were blind) and he claimed Mirror Image would afford no protection at all since he could no longer see his target. Basically the 16.67% chance to strike an illusory double was taken down to a 50% chance, and because the character had Blind Fight, he could re-roll this chance.
Seems to me this is an effective means of bypassing Mirror Image, especially if you have the Blind Fight feat. Mirror Image doesn't really do anything to fool a blind opponent as long as they can target your square, so can you intentionally blind yourself by closing your eyes and use your Blind Fight feat to actually INCREASE your chances of hitting?
yep.
| 2 people 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).
So he's quite right.
This is definitely one of those weird areas of the rules where the GM basically has to come in and adjudicate.
If the PC closes his eyes, can he open them again before his turn ends, thus not being blind on his opponents' turns? Or, since combat rounds represent a bunch of simultaneous actions in a six-second span, does he take the downside of being blind on his opponents' turns?
What about AOs that trigger during his turn, like Greater Trip? Can the PC shut his eyes, trip his foe, then open them when it's time to claim an AO? I've had that happen before as a GM.
Can the PC in this case have it both ways, claiming only the advantages of temporary blindness but not the downsides? Or can the PC not have it both ways?
It's also worth noting that the spell mimicks "your movements, sounds, and actions exactly." I've always found it weird that being blind to the illusion seems to make someone deaf to the illusion as well.
-Matt
Rules wise, yes. This topic has led to very heated arguments in the past, kinda like detect magic seeing invisible targets. I'm interested to see how people rule this in their home games. No one tries it in our games since NPCs rarely use it and our group is more about thematics of the game rather than "winning."
He did reduce his miss chance, but he gave every enemy a reduced AC because he also denied himself any Dex bonus to AC. If one of his opponents had Sneak Attack, they could get it from him closing his eyes. He also denied himself AoO opportunities while his eyes were closed.
Hi might argue that he only closed his eyes long enough to swing. I think that in order to not take the mirror image penalty, he had to close his eyes long enough, that opponents could get AoO if he provoked, and if he did it in successive rounds, then they enemies could get full rounds vs. the blind guy.
/cevah
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks! I like that interpretation. Spend a move action to "blind yourself" by closing your eyes and re-tuning your senses to fight only by your Blindsense.
Also, ruling that you blind yourself against incoming enemy attacks is a good counter.
If you want the benefit of a full attack action, I'd rule they could close their eyes but would have to do so until their next turn.
If you want the benefit of a full attack action, I'd rule they could close their eyes but would have to do so until their next turn.
This. Or more restrictively, you have to decide at the beginning of your turn whether you're closing your eyes or not (similar to dealing with gaze attacks).
Also (in SKR's post but not mentioned here yet): No images go away while you're swinging blind, so you're not helping the group any.
Closing your eyes to counter mirror image can be effective, but selfish and not long-term productive.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My experience says that's not actually true. A full-attack with Blind-Fight going is often enough to just paste the thing with Images running. Basically, the tactic turns mirror image into displacement and then makes displacement an inferior defense to mirror image.
When you're looking at eight images, popping a couple of them is just slow compared to sucking up the virtual-25% miss chance and wailing away.
The "choose at the beginning of your turn" way, mirroring gaze attacks, that seems like a solid way to run it.
-Matt
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
-_-
Oh no! Magic is being trumped by mundane means!
SMITE SMITE. Down you martial peasants! DOWN!
Rage aside. If you absolutely have to bring down the DM hammer on a mundane method of defeating a spell, I'd do it as Majuba said. Decide at the start of your turn.
I would let them reopen at the end of their turn however.
Personally, I'd nod sagely and say, "Well done."
Wow
I can totally undestand the "if you close your eyes the stay closed until the begining of your next turn", it is totally within the rules of free action.
but the move action rule would be awful.
The move action rule makes a sort of sense though. You must spend a moment to stop relying on your visual senses and start relying on the rest of your senses to pinpoint the targets location. This....we'll call it a "moment of adjustment" is represented by spending a move-equivalent action.
If you don't think it takes a moment, try it yourself. Close your eyes and you will see a mental image of your surroundings in your minds eye. This takes a moment to fade before your auditory senses become your primary means of detecting what is around you. In a swirling melee combat, this could become more pronounced. Your target isn't just standing still, he is moving and actively attempting to avoid your attacks (hence dex, dodge and other bonuses to AC, if any) so this mental image of where he was becomes distracting. It takes a moment for you to clear out that mental image and pinpoint where he is by auditory or olfactory cues alone. Someone with Blind-Fight has more experience doing this, hence the reroll of the miss chance if you have that feat.
Makes sense to me.
I can totally undestand the "if you close your eyes the stay closed until the begining of your next turn", it is totally within the rules of free action.
but the move action rule would be awful.
Aldarionn explains it very well, but from a game perspective, I believe the move-action rule version would allow you to do this and not be blind until the beginning of your next turn. A sort of either-or here, and I think both are very reasonable for use together.
So you can:
A) Close your eyes and approach/attack or full-attack your foe. Open your eyes at the beginning of next turn.
or
B) Close your eyes a moment to gather yourself, then single attack an enemy you were already adjacent to and open your eyes afterwards.
Wow
I can totally undestand the "if you close your eyes the stay closed until the begining of your next turn", it is totally within the rules of free action.
but the move action rule would be awful.
The move action rule makes a sort of sense though. You must spend a moment to stop relying on your visual senses and start relying on the rest of your senses to pinpoint the targets location. This....we'll call it a "moment of adjustment" is represented by spending a move-equivalent action.
If you don't think it takes a moment, try it yourself. Close your eyes and you will see a mental image of your surroundings in your minds eye. This takes a moment to fade before your auditory senses become your primary means of detecting what is around you. In a swirling melee combat, this could become more pronounced. Your target isn't just standing still, he is moving and actively attempting to avoid your attacks (hence dex, dodge and other bonuses to AC, if any) so this mental image of where he was becomes distracting. It takes a moment for you to clear out that mental image and pinpoint where he is by auditory or olfactory cues alone. Someone with Blind-Fight has more experience doing this, hence the reroll of the miss chance if you have that feat.
Makes sense to me.
I disagree. If I shut my eyes and just swing horizontally, chances are, I'm gonna cleave that wizard no matter what fancy illusions hes got up. This isn't any "Mind's eye" junk, I'm just swinging in such a way that I know I have solid chances of connecting if theres something in that square. A Greatsword has about a 4foot length. The enemy stands in about a 5ft by 5ft square.
Blindfight just means that I'm really really good at that.
If I shut my eyes and just swing horizontally, chances are, I'm gonna cleave that wizard no matter what fancy illusions hes got up. This isn't any "Mind's eye" junk, I'm just swinging in such a way that I know I have solid chances of connecting if there's something in that square. A Greatsword has about a 4foot length. The enemy stands in about a 5ft by 5ft square.
If that's true, why do you even need to close your eyes?
Perhaps he can... duck?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You would have to declare you're closing your eyes (I agree it would be a free action) until your next action. You would thus be affected as if blinded (-2 AC, No Dex bonus to AC, -4 to Dex and Str skill checks, 50% miss chance)is, overall, a bigger penalty than the spell so, by all means, shut your eyes and keep them shut while swinging at my wizard. (I would also rule that you would get no attack of opportunity if the wizard takes a move action to move 30 feet instead of a 5 foot step before casting)
And any enemy rogue would have a field day with you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(I would also rule that you would get no attack of opportunity if the wizard takes a move action to move 30 feet instead of a 5 foot step before casting)
That is the rule. No AoOs against foes with total concealment.
Why would you need to close your eyes if 'swinging the blade horizontally' is an easy way to hit him?
I think the point is that the magic work the way it is described. If you can see, you may try to strike the mage and might hit him or an image. If you can't see him, well, you deal with the usual penalties from being blind.
If I were running the game I would rule as someone previously said - close your eyes as a free action, but you are blind until your next turn.
If I shut my eyes and just swing horizontally, chances are, I'm gonna cleave that wizard no matter what fancy illusions hes got up. This isn't any "Mind's eye" junk, I'm just swinging in such a way that I know I have solid chances of connecting if there's something in that square. A Greatsword has about a 4foot length. The enemy stands in about a 5ft by 5ft square.If that's true, why do you even need to close your eyes?
Perhaps he can... duck?
Exactly. This is the sort of thing that kinda makes me angry. Sure he could duck, but could he realize exactly what I'm doing and take the measures accordingly before I cleave him in half?
I also think its ridiculous that closing your eyes for the half second it requires to swing your sword keeps you from reopening them till your next turn.
A savvy warrior should be able to counteract some low level trickery magic.
If I shut my eyes and just swing horizontally, chances are, I'm gonna cleave that wizard no matter what fancy illusions hes got up. This isn't any "Mind's eye" junk, I'm just swinging in such a way that I know I have solid chances of connecting if there's something in that square. A Greatsword has about a 4foot length. The enemy stands in about a 5ft by 5ft square.If that's true, why do you even need to close your eyes?
Perhaps he can... duck?
Exactly. This is the sort of thing that kinda makes me angry. Sure he could duck, but could he realize exactly what I'm doing and take the measures accordingly before I cleave him in half?
I also think its ridiculous that closing your eyes for the half second it requires to swing your sword keeps you from reopening them till your next turn.
The combat round and combat actions are just abstractions - a standard action is not one swing then spending the rest of the 2.75s stareing blankly into empty space.
A better example would be navigating a dark basement. Leave the lights off and go walk down the stairs and across the floor. Assuming it's furnished (or has lots of boxes to go around), it's possible because you are familiar with the layout, but you still bump into things.
Do it again, but this time flash the lights on for a split second, then do it. You JUST saw where everything is and can navigate better. This is why your mind needs to adjust to NOT seeing the enemy.
If you shut your eyes and swing horizontally, that wizard can duck. Since you're applying measurements and real life logic to a game of magic and a rules sytem, how much of that 4ft sword is in YOUR 5x5 square? Now how much extends into the wizard's? Better go get a reach weapon, nothing medium or smaller can even attack the enemy.
Not a whole lot when you consider arm length. For a 6ft tall person, thats about five feet.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Huh. SKR's post that Cheapy linked seems to double back on itself. First, he says there's a balance need for restricting the closing of eyes because it could be too good. But then he gives a breakdown of the pros and cons (better hit chance, but you don't help each other and you're boned once the baddies start readying action) and it really makes it seem like not that big a deal.
Personally, I'll gladly allow PCs (and NPCs) to close and open their eyes as free actions (on their turns). Then, as SKR points out, the baddies will react accordingly (bonus points if there's a rogue involved).
Wow
I can totally undestand the "if you close your eyes the stay closed until the begining of your next turn", it is totally within the rules of free action.
but the move action rule would be awful.
The move action rule makes a sort of sense though. You must spend a moment to stop relying on your visual senses and start relying on the rest of your senses to pinpoint the targets location. This....we'll call it a "moment of adjustment" is represented by spending a move-equivalent action.
If you don't think it takes a moment, try it yourself. Close your eyes and you will see a mental image of your surroundings in your minds eye. This takes a moment to fade before your auditory senses become your primary means of detecting what is around you. In a swirling melee combat, this could become more pronounced. Your target isn't just standing still, he is moving and actively attempting to avoid your attacks (hence dex, dodge and other bonuses to AC, if any) so this mental image of where he was becomes distracting. It takes a moment for you to clear out that mental image and pinpoint where he is by auditory or olfactory cues alone. Someone with Blind-Fight has more experience doing this, hence the reroll of the miss chance if you have that feat.
Makes sense to me.
I disagree. If I shut my eyes and just swing horizontally, chances are, I'm gonna cleave that wizard no matter what fancy illusions hes got up. This isn't any "Mind's eye" junk, I'm just swinging in such a way that I know I have solid chances of connecting if theres something in that square. A Greatsword has about a 4foot length. The enemy stands in about a 5ft by 5ft square.
Blindfight just means that I'm really really good at that.
So you are stating you should just be able to throw out a massive horizontal swing that is nearly guaranteed to connect? That can be done with or without closing your eyes. And show me where in the rules such an attack exists? Wouldn't such an attack cleave through all of the figments?
Certain things exist for flavor, and others exist for balance. Combat is an abstraction and while the rules try to mimic some sense of reality, this is not always the case. The point is, a spell should not be made less useful simply by someone closing or opening their eyes. There should be consequences to taking such an action such that there is a choice of action to be taken. This is for balance. Attempting to explain why is attempting to make the rules fit reality. It's not always perfect but it is necessary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think its ridiculous that closing your eyes for the half second it requires to swing your sword keeps you from reopening them till your next turn.
You are more than welcome to blind yourself for only a the time that you're swinging your sword. That doesn't mean you weren't swinging at the wrong image at that time - it just means you don't get to see through the image when you 'hit' it.
So you are sating you should just be able to throw out a massive horizontal swing that is nearly guaranteed to connect? That can be done with or without closing your eyes. And show me where in the rules such an attack exists? Wouldn't such an attack cleave through all of the figments?
Certain things exist for flavor, and others exist for balance. Combat is an abstraction and while the rules try to mimic some sense of reality, this is not always the case. The point is, a spell should not be made less useful simply by someone closing or opening their eyes. There should be consequences to taking such an action such that there is a choice of action to be taken. This is for balance. Attempting to explain why is attempting to make the rules fit reality. It's not always perfect but it is necessary.
To your first question. Probably. They can't right now, but they should be able to do something along those lines. In any case, the closing your eyes deal and just swinging horizontally is how I'd fluff avoiding Mirror Image and just taking the 50% miss chance.
Also please don't talk about any semblance of balance in regards to a Spellcaster shutting down a Martial. They have a million ways of doing so and you people don't want one less effective.
I dislike the idea of tacking on a bunch of penalties to punish the martial for clever thinking.
But this thread is just seeming like one steaming pile of "A Martial did something clever to avoid magic! SMITE SMITE SMITE."
EDIT: Try marking about waist high. Now try ducking underneath that. Within 6 seconds without fall down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I also think its ridiculous that closing your eyes for the half second it requires to swing your sword keeps you from reopening them till your next turn.You are more than welcome to blind yourself for only a the time that you're swinging your sword. That doesn't mean you weren't swinging at the wrong image at that time - it just means you don't get to see through the image when you 'hit' it.
I agree with the Pros and Cons of what SKR said. As a Martial, I would love having more options open to me. I actually enjoy the gamble of immediate satisfaction vs an easier time later. Options are a part of what makes tactical combat fun! If I can do anything to break the monotony of MOVE FULL ATTACK MOVE with some clever thinking, I for the love of the gods will.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion on the matter is that it's fairly simple to close your eyes and start hitting them. If you have blind fighting, it's not a half bad Idea. If not, then you're making yourself more vulnerable.
Obviously you lower your AC unless you have the feats, and even the basic only protects melee. You lose your AoO's since you give you enemies the miss chance, since there is a rule saying concealment does that.
Now would I limit someone by making them take a Move Action? Not a move action, no. Though I would make them keep em closed for at least a round for it to have an effect. Make it a real decision to counter it or not you know?
Personally, I'll gladly allow PCs (and NPCs) to close and open their eyes as free actions (on their turns). Then, as SKR points out, the baddies will react accordingly (bonus points if there's a rogue involved).
The problem here is that "reacting accordingly," as in taking readied actions, often is a worse idea than just proceeding as normal, since that denies full-attacks. Also, if the eye-closer has Blind-Fight or Uncanny Dodge, there really is no benefit to "reacting accordingly" in melee (there is with ranged combat in the case of Blind-Fight, though).
In other words, Blind-Fight is situational but awesome. I wish it had Wisdom 13+ as a prerequisite.
-Matt
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree with the Pros and Cons of what SKR said. As a Martial, I would love having more options open to me. I actually enjoy the gamble of immediate satisfaction vs an easier time later. Options are a part of what makes tactical combat fun! If I can do anything to break the monotony of MOVE FULL ATTACK MOVE with some clever thinking, I for the love of the gods will.
Then I don't see where we disagree.
Options:
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Options:
a) Want to hack through images? Eyes open.
b) Want to get a good swing in but stay on your guard? Burn a move-equivalent action to close and open your eyes.
c) Want to cut loose and cut down your enemy? Close your eyes as a free action and full-attack (or move and attack).
Though we kinda had to fill in the gaps in the rules, this seems like a fair and balanced way to run "temporary self-blindness."
-Matt
I would rule that you have to both close your eyes(which I consider a free action) and shove something in your ears(which is probably a full round action)
In making this ruling I would be removing:
"or the attacker is blind"
Or I would rule that you can close your eyes(a free action).
In making this ruling I would be removing:
"sounds,"
Because I don't feel that those two parts of the spell are compatible.
I'm probably going to let the caster choose between the two interpretations.
Alternatively I would allow my players to simply use the 3.5 version of the spell.
I think my spell casting NPCs will probably use that version because as a GM I feel it's adds to the flavor to say that 6 additional creatures appear.
Well mirror Image is an illusion spell, so wouldn't studying it and disbelieving be more effective, if you have a decent will save?
There is no saving throw to disbelieve mirror Image.
You don't get a saving throw for every illusion spell.
Hmm. I would argue that closing your eyes doesn't give you the 'blinded' condition. Especially if it was momentary. We blink all the time, and our minds filter it out just fine.
To actually become 'blind' would take a moment. Inflicting a status effect on yourself voluntarily is weird to begin with, but, it should still require an action to do so.
You can get into debates about what constitutes an action, or why some things require a move action and others require a standard, or a swift, or a free... but when it comes down to it they are all abstractions.
The act of intentionally inflicting the blind condition on yourself should require an action. Just as trying to blind someone else should require an action. You are doing something.
Honestly, I'm still on the fence whether this actually would even work. The part at the end of Mirror Image that seems to make this a possibility reads;
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).
So, the question then is... Is the attacker able to see the figments?
My vote is YES. They 'can' see the figments, but are choosing not to. But they still 'can' see them.
The only way to circumvent this is to literally blind themselves. Which should be duration based I think. Minimum duration would be a round. If they willingly blind themselves for 1 round, then this seems legit.
Simply closing your eyes for half a second is the same thing as being Blind.
Closing:
Yeah, sorry for walking through my reasoning in print...lol. But my vote would be to adjudicate this as Blinding yourself is required to defeat this spell, and being blind would have a minimum duration of 1 round. But that it is a free action to blind yourself.
And if you don't remain blind for the full round, ie open your eyes, then you're not 'blind' enough to count for ignoring the spell, because you 'can' see.
Well mirror Image is an illusion spell, so wouldn't studying it and disbelieving be more effective, if you have a decent will save?There is no saving throw to disbelieve mirror Image.
You don't get a saving throw for every illusion spell.
Sure you do. Here:
Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion.
A successful saving throw against an illusion reveals it to be false, but a figment or phantasm remains as a translucent outline.
A failed saving throw indicates that a character fails to notice something is amiss. A character faced with proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw. If any viewer successfully disbelieves an illusion and communicates this fact to others, each such viewer gains a saving throw with a +4 bonus.
Rikkan you dont get a save unless the specific spell saves you do. That is rules 101. Otherwise you could disbelieve invisibility spells also.
Nothing you quoted says it applies to all illusion spells.
Player: Sweet! Natural 20 on my Will save to disbelieve! Suck it, bad guy!
GM: Nice. Shame the spell doesn't allow a save.
Player: But... But... I succeeded, and the rules say that if you succeed [blah, blah, blah].
GM: You missed the bit where you weren't even meant to roll in the first place. It's hard to succeed at a save you don't make.
Player: Oh, fudge. Uh... Can I keep the 20?
Yeah that is why you need to study them first somehow. See this bit: "Creatures encountering an illusion usually do not receive saving throws to recognize it as illusory until they study it carefully or interact with it in some fashion."Rikkan you dont get a save unless the specific spell saves you do. That is rules 101. Otherwise you could disbelieve invisibility spells also.
Nothing you quoted says it applies to all illusion spells.
Now find the rule that says what type of saving throw you get against Mirror Image.