| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'll start by saying that this has made my head hurt. I already checked for a FAQ and (unless my searchfu is weak today) one doesn't exist. I did find several threads on this topic already, including one with a response from James Jacobs, but nothing that could be considered an official ruling.
The basic question is... If you have Displacement (or Blur) and Mirror Images, what is the order in which a targeted attack is resolved against you?
(A crit fumble would obviously negate either entire sequence as a miss)
- Concealment first. If your attack succeeds against the miss chance (20%/50%), compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
- Mirror Images first. Compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If roll indicates that the attack hits the real target, roll concealment. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
James Jacobs interprets here that "Mirror image doesn't kick in until you hit the target. So... check for miss chance. If you miss, attack ends. If you hit, then check to see if you hit the actual target or an image." I'll be honest, I do not understand how he came to that ruling and wish he expanded more on it at the time. And I'm aware that his post was his interpretation of the rules.
They asked me for an interpretation of the rules as written
The Mirror Image spell doesn't create illusions of you that have the same spell effects as you, it creates illusions of you as you appear. What I'm not following is why the Mirror Images are (possibly) conferred the effect from Displacement. So these figments, which "remain in your space and move with you, mimicking your movements, sounds, and actions exactly", when the caster is under the effects of Displacement, suddenly gain the effects of Displacement and the figments now have figments that appear 2' from the true figment? Your illusion effectively has an illusion. As far as Blur goes, those figments would just be a little fuzzy in appearance.
Ref:
wraithstrike points out on a related topic that your Mirror Images do not have your innate Spell Resistance. So a Scorching Ray versus a target with Mirror Images and Displacement would roll Spell Resistance only when it was determined that the attack was resolving against the true target. If a defense such as Spell Resistance only applies for the true target, why would concealment from a spell work differently?
Grick suggests here that "...So while a figment should gain a miss chance from actual concealment, because the figment is granted concealment, it shouldn't be granted a miss chance from displacement, because it's not under the effects of displacement."
Mike Kimmel suggests here that "Each 'image' certainly looks blurry, but it doesn't matter if a blurry part of it is hit or a more 'substantial' part is hit... it's all the same illusion, and any 'hit' destroys it. The blurry outlines of the images are not any more or less real than the non-blurry parts."
Going farther, if I cast Fearsome Duplicate while under the effects of Displacement or Mirror Image (or both), does the Fearsome Duplicate gain those effects? Again, the question of whether or not your beneficial spells confer to your duplication illusions.
And what about Mislead? Mislead creates a visible copy of you as you turn in invisible, would the Mislead illusion gain your benefits of Displacement and/or Mirror Images?
If Displacement's magical concealment is granted to Mirror Images, would a Protection from Evil prevent a summoned evil creature from touching you or any of your images?
I'll see you all at the bottom of the slippery slope...
I play exactly like @Create Mr. Pitt said in his post , never though it was a question that was in need of rules clarification , well if they make a FAQ , i will change this , until then it is the way that makes sense to me.
I believe the idea is that the mirror images aren't independent entities of you, simply sharing your space and your movements. So if they miss you due to a miss chance, that means they miss all of your images as well.
But I can't truly speak for his reasoning. I usually takes JJ's rules interpretations as RAI, but he is not considered an authority on the rules so I could understand it being ruled either way.
|
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.
The subject's outline appears blurred, shifting, and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).
Concealment Miss Chance: Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally—if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack.
So the theoretical order is:
The attack is a hit?see who is hit, the target or a mirror image
then
The attack become a miss thanks to blur?
no damage to the character nor to the mirror image. A miss thank to blur isn't a miss by 5 points or less, it is a miss.
That has a curious corollary, if you miss by 5 or less blur don't trigger and a mirror image is destroyed.
Most people that I know play in the opposite way: first roll the miss chance, and only if there is a chance of a hit resolve the effect of the attack die roll. It speed up play a bit.
- * -
Fearsome duplicate isn't a copy of your character mirroring his actions. It is a separate illusion with special properties. I wouldn't transfer the effcet of any spell you have on it.
The spell say "this duplicate always retains some vestiges of your actual appearance." Hardly a copy of you with your current spells in effect.
|
While I really want to agree with Mr Pitt I think stepping back from the rules and thinking about the situation it is clear the mirror image should takes precedence.
Why? you ask.
Let us say you have 3 mirror images up, and then cast a displacement. In your square there are 4 visible targets. One of them is "closer" to you (the displacement). If your opponent targets the displaced image, then the standard 50% miss chance takes effect.
If they target one of the mirror images, I'm not sure why you would say they have a 50% chance of not disrupting them.
I also note the rider at the bottom of mirror image
An attacker must be able to see the figments to be fooled.
Displacement specifically states :
The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment.
One can argue that if the displacement were to be effective on one of the mirror images (i.e. it gained concealment) then it would not be a valid target anyway (as the attacker wouldn't be able to see it).
--
End of day, discuss with your GM, but generally effects in d20 that are similar operate in an additive manner rather than a multiplicative manner. Having the mirror images protected by a displacement would seem to veer towards the later.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll start by saying that this has made my head hurt. I already checked for a FAQ and (unless my searchfu is weak today) one doesn't exist. I did find several threads on this topic already, including one with a response from James Jacobs, but nothing that could be considered an official ruling.
The basic question is... If you have Displacement (or Blur) and Mirror Images, what is the order in which a targeted attack is resolved against you?
(A crit fumble would obviously negate either entire sequence as a miss)
- Concealment first. If your attack succeeds against the miss chance (20%/50%), compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
- Mirror Images first. Compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If roll indicates that the attack hits the real target, roll concealment. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
James Jacobs interprets here that "Mirror image doesn't kick in until you hit the target. So... check for miss chance. If you miss, attack ends. If you hit, then check to see if you hit the actual target or an image." I'll be honest, I do not understand how he came to that ruling and wish he expanded more on it at the time. And I'm aware that his post was his interpretation of the rules.
They asked me for an interpretation of the rules as writtenThe Mirror Image spell doesn't create illusions of you that have the same spell effects as you, it creates illusions of you as you appear. What I'm not following is why the Mirror Images are (possibly) conferred the effect from Displacement. So these figments, which...
I got a mention, yeah!!!!.
Serious comment: The order has never been officially established, but you can't hit anything that benefits from concealment until you get past said concealment so I would roll the miss chance first. If it gets past that then you get to see if you targeted(not hit) an image or the actual creature, but really it does not matter.
Let's reverse the order of operations I described:
Let's say you target a mirror image instead of the real target, but then let's say you don't get by miss chance. Either way you don't hit anything. Concealment has to be dealt with.
Even if you target the actual caster, but the miss chance is off then you still don't hit anything.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reason why the figments benefit from concealment is because they look just like the caster looks. SR has no effect on how your look that is why SR does not apply, however if you are displaced then your images would also appear to be displaced. They(figments) are "mirror images", no pun intended, of you.
If I was blurry but my mirror images were not, I would look different than my mirror images, resulting in my attacker being able to specifically choose me instead of a random target. Also, if they look different (not blurry) they are no longer mirror images.
We met another case of mirror image + other spell creating an argument.
In our case it was glitterdust being cast on someone with mirror image up and the claim was made that now it should be possible to tell the real mage apart from the images as those would not be affected by glitterdust.
Back to topic: I found it best to let mirror image always work last as it creates the least problems.
Look at the following cases:
- MI+ invisibility
- MI+ polymorph effects
- MI+ Blink
Corner case: Does MI end if the caster dies? If not, does the corpse illusion created by a cloak of fiery vanishing look as if it had MI on it?
Mirror image would still work even after the caster died.
As for the cloak it I would say they become invisible instead of creating 5 piles of ash that are not there.
I'll start by saying that this has made my head hurt. I already checked for a FAQ and (unless my searchfu is weak today) one doesn't exist. I did find several threads on this topic already, including one with a response from James Jacobs, but nothing that could be considered an official ruling.
The basic question is... If you have Displacement (or Blur) and Mirror Images, what is the order in which a targeted attack is resolved against you?
(A crit fumble would obviously negate either entire sequence as a miss)
- Concealment first. If your attack succeeds against the miss chance (20%/50%), compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
- Mirror Images first. Compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If roll indicates that the attack hits the real target, roll concealment. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
James Jacobs interprets here that "Mirror image doesn't kick in until you hit the target. So... check for miss chance. If you miss, attack ends. If you hit, then check to see if you hit the actual target or an image." I'll be honest, I do not understand how he came to that ruling and wish he expanded more on it at the time. And I'm aware that his post was his interpretation of the rules.
They asked me for an interpretation of the rules as writtenThe Mirror Image spell doesn't create illusions of you that have the same spell effects as you, it creates illusions of you as you appear. What I'm not following is why the Mirror Images are (possibly) conferred the effect from Displacement. So these figments, which...
Very tricky wording...
Alright, lets break this down, Mirror Image says:
"These doubles make it difficult for enemies to precisely locate and attack you."
"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."
Displacement says:
"The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment. Unlike actual total concealment, displacement does not prevent enemies from targeting the creature normally. "
So displacement says, you act as if you had total concealment, but its not The actual rule for concealment.
In order to hit a creature, you must be able to pinpoint their location, their presence, etc etc.
A wizard that has displacement and Mirror image is standing 10 feet away from a Fighter.
The fighter sees the wizard 10 feet away from him. What he would physically see is 5 wizards crammed into 1 square. 3 of those are mirror images, 1 of them is a displacement and 1 is the real wizard.
The fighter approaches the wizard and swings.
Mirror image would be up first.
Lets say the fighter beats the wizards AC.
Roll a 1d4. On a 1, he hits the wizard, on a 2-4 he hits an image.
Fighter rolls 1. He is sure he has found his target, but wait! Displacement kicks in. Why?
Because Mirror Image says it makes it difficult for creatures to target you. Displacement says that it doesn't hinder targeting.
The fighter "succeeded" in targeting the real wizard, but now displacement kicks in and The fighter Rolls a d100. 01-50 He hits the wizard, 51-100 he hits his displacement.
There are 5 wizards, the real one has a doppleganger displacement next to him.
Why would this interpretation make sense? Say The fighter consistently fails his role to beat the wizards AC by 3. By mirror Image rules, the fighter is attempting to target the real wizard. And his near miss Destroys an Image. Slowly widdling down the images until there are 2 wizards left.
Now why wouldn't displacement kick in first?
If we went by that interpretation, then the fighter has a 50/50 chance of hitting the right target all day everyday. Displacement does not give each mirror image its own Displacement, Otherwise mechanically you would have 1 wizard, 1 displacement wizard, 3 mirror images, and 3 mirror image displacements. If this scenario was true, then you would do the 50% miss, on success a 1d4 roll to see if you hit the real wizard.
You make it sound as if displacement did turn you into two wizards, but that is not the case. There is only one wizard. But the real one is not where he seems to be.
Add in mirror image. Now you have X Wizards but none of those is where the true wizard is.
Thank you all for the responses so far! Threw the post up before bed hitting the hay, so going to play response catch-up here.
While it might not have the same spell effects as you, it has the same visual appearance of you; which is part of the effect of displacement and blur.
Visual appearance is one thing, the miss chance added via magic is another. I can have the visual appearance of a dragon, doesn't mean I have dragon traits.
Most people that I know play in the opposite way: first roll the miss chance, and only if there is a chance of a hit resolve the effect of the attack die roll. It speed up play a bit.
Actually, rolling images first would speed up gameplay if the images did not get your miss chance. In that situation you're only rolling your d4/6/8 (for qty=images+1) and not then rolling percentiles if the attack lands on an image.
Let us say you have 3 mirror images up, and then cast a displacement. In your square there are 4 visible targets. One of them is "closer" to you (the displacement). If your opponent targets the displaced image, then the standard 50% miss chance takes effect.
If they target one of the mirror images, I'm not sure why you would say they have a 50% chance of not disrupting them.
As per the rules, you can't directly target an image. If you were able to directly target images then I could see the argument for Displacement applying to them holding water, as targeting images would then become the immediate tactic for clearing up the illusion, but you can only ever target the creature.
Displacement specifically states :
The creature benefits from a 50% miss chance as if it had total concealment.
Yes, Displacement does state that. It specifically states that the creature gains the miss chance. The images are not the creature and while they take the image of the creature...still are not the creature.
I got a mention, yeah!!!!
Of course you got a mention... there are about 4 or 5 forum posters whose opinions I look for first in threads... you're on the list.
Serious comment: The order has never been officially established, but you can't hit anything that benefits from concealment until you get past said concealment so I would roll the miss chance first.
But that's the exact question here. Yes, you can't hit anything with concealment without first resolving concealment, but the question of "do the images gain your concealment?" must be answered first.
Concealment gained from lighting is one thing... if you're in a dark room and can barely see the images then they definitely should gain that concealment without Displacement even needing to factor in, but in this case the question of "does Displacement displace the images" / "does the appearance of being blurry from blur confer a miss chance without the magic of blur actually applying" still stands.
Why would this interpretation make sense? Say The fighter consistently fails his role to beat the wizards AC by 3. By mirror Image rules, the fighter is attempting to target the real wizard. And his near miss Destroys an Image. Slowly widdling down the images until there are 2 wizards left.
That's... kinda the goal of mirror images.
Now why wouldn't displacement kick in first?
If we went by that interpretation, then the fighter has a 50/50 chance of hitting the right target all day everyday. Displacement does not give each mirror image its own Displacement, Otherwise mechanically you would have 1 wizard, 1 displacement wizard, 3 mirror images, and 3 mirror image displacements. If this scenario was true, then you would do the 50% miss, on success a 1d4 roll to see if you hit the real wizard.
The fighter wouldn't have a 50/50 chance all day. The fighter would have a "one in X" chance (where X is the # of images + 1) of possibly hitting the wizard, and then if was lucky enough to meet the wizard's AC and roll to hit the real one, the fighter would still have a 50/50 chance of missing.
Let us say you have 3 mirror images up, and then cast a displacement. In your square there are 4 visible targets. One of them is "closer" to you (the displacement). If your opponent targets the displaced image, then the standard 50% miss chance takes effect.
There's no rule to say whether the mirror images are closer or further than the 2 feet given by displacement.
As I see it, if you have 3 mirror images and displacement, your opponent sees six of you - the displacement effect includes the mirror images. If your opponent hits anything in the displacement group, nothing happens. If they hit one of the 'real' mirror images, it is destroyed, and one of the mirror images from the displacement group is also destroyed.
As I see it, if you have 3 mirror images and displacement, your opponent sees six of you - the displacement effect includes the mirror images. If your opponent hits anything in the displacement group, nothing happens. If they hit one of the 'real' mirror images, it is destroyed, and one of the mirror images from the displacement group is also destroyed.
Displacement doesn't create a duplicate of you.
The subject of this spell appears to be about 2 feet away from its true location.
So in your example of 3 images plus one target, one observing this would see 4 wizards within a 5' square (assuming medium wizard). The mirror images would be where ever they came into existence in the square, the displaced wizard would be 2' from the real wizard, and the real wizard is effectively (though not mechanically) invisible. The only one displaced is the real wizard.
Lastly, there is a slight difference in the wording of Concealment vs Mirror Image. Mirror Image states that it comes into effect "if the attack is a hit" while Concealment states, "if the attacker hits".
I disagree with your interpretation.
"If the attack is a hit" means that the attack roll would resolve in a hit but the attack hasn't resolved yet
"if the attacker hits" means that the attack roll has resolved in a hit and the attack will hit the intended target
I think mirror images benefiting from displacement is far beyond what a 2nd level spell should be able to allow - and mirror image is already a very useful 2nd level spell.
If I were dealing with this situation, I'd have displacement only be able to affect the real caster. That means I'd apply the attack against the mirror image spell first and if the attack truly targeted the caster, only then would I apply displacement.
Concealment determines whether or not they hit.
Mirror Image determines whether they hit you or an illusory duplicate.
They must be resolved in that order. You have to hit first to determine of you hit the right thing.
You also seem to have a lot more invested on Mirror Image.
I've always interpreted Mirror Image to basically create double-vision (or triple, quadruple, etc) and that displacement makes it seem like looking through a fish eye lens or another lens designed to obscure or warp the light around you.
Clearly there are two camps here and apparently as far as the rules go , it isnt written doesnt which way is the correct one.
Like i said if it wasnt for this thread i wouldnt even have considered that you could roll mirror image first , so to me atleast it makes no sense to do so.
So the question is , what now really? FAQ?
I think mirror images benefiting from displacement is far beyond what a 2nd level spell should be able to allow - and mirror image is already a very useful 2nd level spell.
If I were dealing with this situation, I'd have displacement only be able to affect the real caster. That means I'd apply the attack against the mirror image spell first and if the attack truly targeted the caster, only then would I apply displacement.
The mirror Images are not benefiting from Displacement at all. You are, they only roll one miss chance to determine whether or not Displacement works.
Then after that's decided Mirror Image works normally also.
Your solution promotes metagaming, and essentially makes trying to use two defensive spells literally cancel each other out. If displacement only works on the caster, then there is not a damn point in having mirror image going because the players can identify which image of the caster is the caster.....
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Concealment determines whether or not they hit.
Mirror Image determines whether they hit you or an illusory duplicate.
They must be resolved in that order. You have to hit first to determine of you hit the right thing.
In order to resolve whether or not an attack hits, whether comparing to AC, concealment, or anything else, you need to have the target defined.
Let's say you have 5 targets in a 5' square. 4 images, 1 displaced real target. Your character tries to attack, picking a random one of the 5 available targets. Rolling miss chance before rolling to see which target you chose is the same as saying "you have to roll miss chance to see if you manage to even swing your sword into the 5' square".
As far as I'm concerned, you can't resolve concealment before you resolve what you're attacking.
Concealment determines whether or not they hit.
Mirror Image determines whether they hit you or an illusory duplicate.
They must be resolved in that order. You have to hit first to determine of you hit the right thing.
In order to resolve whether or not an attack hits, whether comparing to AC, concealment, or anything else, you need to have the target defined.
Let's say you have 5 targets in a 5' square. 4 images, 1 displaced real target. Your character tries to attack, picking a random one of the 5 available targets. Rolling miss chance before rolling to see which target you chose is the same as saying "you have to roll miss chance to see if you manage to even swing your sword into the 5' square".
As far as I'm concerned, you can't resolve concealment before you resolve what you're attacking.
It would make no difference at all.
Lets say you right , lets say you could say only the creature is affected.
Then you would select said creature to be the target and then you would roll 50% chance to miss right?
Fine , the issue is , IF YOU HIT said creature , THEN you have to roll for the images. (If the attack is a hit, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment.)
Then that means if you are only trying to hit the mage exactly , you must roll the 50% chance to miss , IF YOU HIT THE MAGE , then mirror image kicks in even if you are sure which one is the mage and which one isnt.
The mirror Images are not benefiting from Displacement at all. You are, they only roll one miss chance to determine whether or not Displacement works.
Then after that's decided Mirror Image works normally also.
Your solution promotes metagaming, and essentially makes trying to use two defensive spells literally cancel each other out. If displacement only works on the caster, then there is not a damn point in having mirror image going because the players can identify which image of the caster is the caster.....
If the images are not benefiting from displacement, then why are you needing to pass displacement before seeing if you accidentally hit an image? You are directly contradicting your position. Either the images are displaced and you would need to roll displacement miss % against them, or you need to resolve the images first.
Suggesting that you resolve displacement first is saying "when you go to attack the wizard, you correctly identify the real one instantly and thus need to roll displacement, but after that your sword arm gets confused and you might redirect your attack to an image"
I don't see how the spells would cancel each other out or promote metagaming. You can't directly attack images, and making an attack without needing to roll miss chance doesn't give you any more information than you already had.
Your solution promotes metagaming, and essentially makes trying to use two defensive spells literally cancel each other out. If displacement only works on the caster, then there is not a damn point in having mirror image going because the players can identify which image of the caster is the caster.....
I don't see how that makes sense. An attacker is faced with having to roll whether they hit the caster or a mirror image for every attack they make. That pretty clearly says that the attacker has no means of identifying the caster among the images.
How exactly checking mirror image first and then displacement causes the defensive spells to cancel each other out is beyond me. They're both protecting the caster - they're just doing it without the displacement also protecting the mirror images - which seems really excessive to me.
It would make no difference at all.
It makes a world of difference. If the miss chance doesn't apply to the images and you roll the image hit chance first then you simply destroy an image on a successful attack--same as you would if displacement wasn't in the picture.
It makes a world of difference. If the miss chance doesn't apply to the images and you roll the image hit chance first then you simply destroy an image on a successful attack--same as you would if displacement wasn't in the picture.It would make no difference at all.
Nope because you are trying to hit the mage right?
THE MAGE has displacement , to be allowed to hit him you need to roll a 50% chance to miss.
Therefore if you target him you need to roll a 50% chance to miss.
IF you hit him , then you would roll the images.
The only time this would make the world of difference like you said is if for some reason the attacker decided to NOT HIT the mage , yes the images dont have displacement if we use this logic , so they dont have a 50% to miss , BUT you also by targeting them has 0% chance to ever hit the mage to begin with , since you are not attacking him.
Order of operations doesn't seem to matter (except in the case of a near-miss to pop an image).
The real question being asked is "do the mirror images also benefit from blur/displacement?" I think the answer is yes, given reasons provided above.
Your solution promotes metagaming, and essentially makes trying to use two defensive spells literally cancel each other out. If displacement only works on the caster, then there is not a damn point in having mirror image going because the players can identify which image of the caster is the caster.....I don't see how that makes sense. An attacker is faced with having to roll whether they hit the caster or a mirror image for every attack they make. That pretty clearly says that the attacker has no means of identifying the caster among the images.
How exactly checking mirror image first and then displacement causes the defensive spells to cancel each other out is beyond me. They're both protecting the caster - they're just doing it without the displacement also protecting the mirror images - which seems really excessive to me.
If you are still applying both then yes, it's arbitrary which order they are rolled in.
I presumed the argument was that the mirror images do not have displacement on them.
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).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's try this another way...
You are standing in front of a table.
On the table are 5 identical bottles of coca-cola. One is greased up to make it super slippery, but the grease is not visible.
You want to pick one up.
Do you...
A) figure out if you picked up the slippery one first and just fail to pick up any bottle
B) figure out which one you're picking up and then find that it was or wasn't the slippery one, potentially dropping it if it was slippery
I think mirror images benefiting from displacement is far beyond what a 2nd level spell should be able to allow - and mirror image is already a very useful 2nd level spell.
If I were dealing with this situation, I'd have displacement only be able to affect the real caster. That means I'd apply the attack against the mirror image spell first and if the attack truly targeted the caster, only then would I apply displacement.
Yeah, I agree. If mirror images get displacement too, you don't negate 2 to 8 hits, but 4 to 16 - assuming they all get used up and the opponent has no means to reduce / ignore concealment. That would multiple times your hitpoints, likely.
Yeah, I agree. If mirror images get displacement too, you don't negate 2 to 8 hits, but 4 to 16 - assuming they all get used up and the opponent has no means to reduce / ignore concealment. That would multiple times your hitpoints, likely.I think mirror images benefiting from displacement is far beyond what a 2nd level spell should be able to allow - and mirror image is already a very useful 2nd level spell.
If I were dealing with this situation, I'd have displacement only be able to affect the real caster. That means I'd apply the attack against the mirror image spell first and if the attack truly targeted the caster, only then would I apply displacement.
That's kinda the point......
The issue is , you cant decide which bottle to pick up.
The spell dont give you the right to target the images directly , you can only select to target the mage himself and the mage himself is under the effect of displacement.
So you may know which one is slippery , you may not want to pick up the one that is slippery , but you have no option to pick any bottle but the slippery one.
The target of your attack is never the images , only the mage , to hit said mage you need to bypass the displacement , IF you hit said mage , then your attack may instead hit an image.
The issue is , you cant decide which bottle to pick up.
The spell dont give you the right to target the images directly , you can only select to target the mage himself and the mage himself is under the effect of displacement.
So you may know which one is slippery , you may not want to pick up the one that is slippery , but you have no option to pick any bottle but the slippery one.
The target of your attack is never the images , only the mage , to hit said mage you need to bypass the displacement , IF you hit said mage , then your attack may instead hit an image.
"I want to pick up a bottle of coca-cola but I'm not allowed to decide exactly which"
is the same as"I want to attack the wizard but I'm not allowed to decide which image of them to swing at"
Let's try this another way...
You are standing in front of a table.
On the table are 5 identical bottles of coca-cola. One is greased up to make it super slippery, but the grease is not visible.
You want to pick one up.
Do you...
A) figure out if you picked up the slippery one first and just fail to pick up any bottle
B) figure out which one you're picking up and then find that it was or wasn't the slippery one, potentially dropping it if it was slippery
This example is bonkers.
You have failed to understand the basic premise that is Displacement is a visual effect, and is described as such in the spell. The fact that all the cans look the same in the example is the point that you're missing.
It's more like: All the cans except one are slippery, but all look identical. If you pick up the right one you get to take a drink. If not, you drop the can and it explodes, reducing the odds of picking the wrong can next turn.
Another analogy: you don't know what's inside the box (Displacement) until you open it. You're not allowed to look inside the box and know beforehand whether or not you're going to get what you want out of the box (the mage) or get nothing (the image).
This example is bonkers.
You have failed to understand the basic premise that is Displacement is a visual effect, and is described as such in the spell. The fact that all the cans look the same in the example is the point that you're missing.
I'm sorry, but please re-read the post. I explicitly stated that the bottles were identical.
It's more like: All the cans except one are slippery, but all look identical. If you pick up the right one you get to take a drink. If not, you drop the can and it explodes, reducing the odds of picking the wrong can next turn.
I think you completely misunderstood my analogy. The revision as you describe would imply that the real bottle was the only one without displacement. In the analogy, displacement=grease.
Another analogy: you don't know what's inside the box (Displacement) until you open it. You're not allowed to look inside the box and know beforehand whether or not you're going to get what you want out of the box (the mage) or get nothing (the image).
Sure, let's go with this hidden box analogy. Let's say you have 5 identical boxes on a table. 4 contain candy, one contains a boxing glove that will punch you in the face. You open a box, were you punched or did you get candy? Can you answer that question without determining which box you opened? No.
Wow! Lots of contrary opinions here. IMHO, logic doesn't allow us which to determine first. You can see it both ways, as the above arguments on both sides demonstrate.
The RAW don't tell us which to resolve first.
James Jacobs says to do the displacement or blur effect first, checking for miss chance, and to relegate the multiple target selection from mirror image second. Although it's an arbitrary choice, it has the advantage of speeding things up.
In my group, we never use percentile dice. Just any die, odd hits (or a d10 and 1 or 2 misses for blur or lesser displacement). On a miss, no further dice need be thrown.
Yes, this is a valid FAQ request. Especially since it would be very relevant for PFS games.
To be fair i took a second look on the concealment rules.
Following those rules , then you may have a point:
"Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment. Make the attack normally—if the attacker hits, the defender must make a miss chance d% roll to avoid being struck. Multiple concealment conditions do not stack."
I always rolled the chance to miss first since it didnt actually matter and it was faster , but since you have to actually roll the attack first and the hit part comes first , then you may say that , if the images dont benefit from displacement since it says creature , then your hit is clean in their case without the 50% miss chance.
Personally i would still rule the images get the benefit , but i can now understand the ruling where one might say they dont.
Wow! Lots of contrary opinions here. IMHO, logic doesn't allow us which to determine first. You can see it both ways, as the above arguments on both sides demonstrate.
The RAW don't tell us which to resolve first.
I agree. I can see both sides of the argument, but (clearly) I have my opinion of how it should work.
Although it's an arbitrary choice, it has the advantage of speeding things up.
It doesn't speed it up though... You're still rolling a chance die on the attack. Whether it's a d% for miss or a d4/6/8 for images, it's still the same number of dice...if the images do not get your miss %. If the images DO get your miss chance, then the order it's done it doesn't matter one bit and you are rolling more dice regardless of what you 'hit'.
Rolling the miss % last also feels better as a player. It's like a last-ditch "saving-throw-like" defense against getting hit. I recall having done it that way in a 5-year DD3.5 campaign (as a player) and I liked being able to say "I took 37 point of damage? Wait a minute... (roll dice) Sorry, that dude missed me!"
Having a FAQ decision would help clear up any confusion.
This example is bonkers.
You have failed to understand the basic premise that is Displacement is a visual effect, and is described as such in the spell. The fact that all the cans look the same in the example is the point that you're missing.
I'm sorry, but please re-read the post. I explicitly stated that the bottles were identical.
It's more like: All the cans except one are slippery, but all look identical. If you pick up the right one you get to take a drink. If not, you drop the can and it explodes, reducing the odds of picking the wrong can next turn.I think you completely misunderstood my analogy. The revision as you describe would imply that the real bottle was the only one without displacement. In the analogy, displacement=grease.
Sure, let's go with this hidden box analogy. Let's say you have 5 identical boxes on a table. 4 contain candy, one contains a boxing glove that will punch you in the face. You open a box, were you punched or did you get candy? Can you answer that question without determining which box you opened? No.
Another analogy: you don't know what's inside the box (Displacement) until you open it. You're not allowed to look inside the box and know beforehand whether or not you're going to get what you want out of the box (the mage) or get nothing (the image).
But you don't get to pick which one you hit, and the boxes are most assuredly empty, unless they are mythic boxes which blind you when opened.
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).
Emphasis obviously mine.
Why would there be a need to cite multiple miss chances in the text of the spell if they could not all be applied (aside from the one specifically cited from being invisible)?
Rolling the miss % last also feels better as a player. It's like a last-ditch "saving-throw-like" defense against getting hit. I recall having done it that way in a 5-year DD3.5 campaign (as a player) and I liked being able to say "I took 37 point of damage? Wait a minute... (roll dice) Sorry, that dude missed me!"
Having a FAQ decision would help clear up any confusion.
Well, sure, if you're the player saved by the miss chance. But I like to roll it last as GM and watch the player's face fall when the scythe crit they scored on the BBEG turns from x4 damage into a miss. Priceless.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Personally, I'm not sure if the order matters, because IMO you have to roll to hit anyway to see if you miss by less than 5. Missing by less than 5 pops an image, regardless of why you miss, per the rules for mirror image.
In fact, to me if you would have hit the actual caster, but displacement causes you to miss, you now missed by less than 5 and an image pops. Missing by say, -3, is missing by less than 5.
So if you do concealment first, and concealment causes a miss, you still need to roll to hit because if you roll better than the target's AC-5, you pop an image.
But you don't get to pick which one you hit, and the boxes are most assuredly empty, unless they are mythic boxes which blind you when opened.
What you don't seem to be following is... just because you're not picking the box doesn't mean that you don't need to determine which box was picked to find out the result. Go ahead, change the example. Now there's 5 boxes just as before, 4 with candy, 1 with the boxing glove, but now there's a guy on the other side of the table wearing a D6 costume. He tells you, "open box number 4" and you have to comply. Do you know before opening box number 4 if you're getting punched? No. You only know that after opening it, and you only can open it after it was determined which one was being opened.
me, from upthread, quoting Mirror Image wrote:
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).
Emphasis obviously mine.Why would there be a need to cite multiple miss chances in the text of the spell if they could not all be applied (aside from the one specifically cited from being invisible)?
The added note about "miss chances still applying" are to make it clear that the standard miss chances for being blind still apply even though the illusion's added miss chances do not apply.
But you don't get to pick which one you hit, and the boxes are most assuredly empty, unless they are mythic boxes which blind you when opened.What you don't seem to be following is... just because you're not picking the box doesn't mean that you don't need to determine which box was picked to find out the result. Go ahead, change the example. Now there's 5 boxes just as before, 4 with candy, 1 with the boxing glove, but now there's a guy on the other side of the table wearing a D6 costume. He tells you, "open box number 4" and you have to comply. Do you know before opening box number 4 if you're getting punched? No. You only know that after opening it, and you only can open it after it was determined which one was being opened.
The added note about "miss chances still applying" are to make it clear that the standard miss chances for being blind still apply even though the illusion's added miss chances do not apply.
me, from upthread, quoting Mirror Image wrote:
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).
Emphasis obviously mine.Why would there be a need to cite multiple miss chances in the text of the spell if they could not all be applied (aside from the one specifically cited from being invisible)?
But does the game really differentiate between being blind and having your vision obscured? In obscuring mist, do you see the images perfectly and can choose to target them before knowing if the miss chance applies?
This really seems to be a case of starting with a conclusion (that mirror images cannot benefit from displacement), then trying to find a way to justify it.
Personally, I'm not sure if the order matters, because IMO you have to roll to hit anyway to see if you miss by less than 5. Missing by less than 5 pops an image, regardless of why you miss, per the rules for mirror image.
In fact, to me if you would have hit the actual caster, but displacement causes you to miss, you now missed by less than 5 and an image pops. Missing by say, -3, is missing by less than 5.So if you do concealment first, and concealment causes a miss, you still need to roll to hit because if you roll better than the target's AC-5, you pop an image.
What you've just described now adds a third possibility into the mix...
- Concealment first. If your attack succeeds against the miss chance (20%/50%), compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
- Mirror Images first. Compare attack roll to AC. If attack roll meets AC, roll to determine if image or real target. If roll indicates that the attack hits the real target, roll concealment. If attack roll doesn't meet AC but missed by 5 or less, destroy an image.
- Displacement first, but even if displacement misses, compare attack roll versus real target's AC. If the miss is by 5 or less, destroy an image. Otherwise the attack is a full miss.
But does the game really differentiate between being blind and having your vision obscured?
Why yes... yes it does.
In obscuring mist, do you see the images perfectly and can choose to target them before knowing if the miss chance applies?
I'm growing increasingly concerned that you are not actually reading my posts before responding and it's making it very difficult to return the favor. I appreciate the varied opinions and open dialog, but please follow without presumption.
Concealment gained from lighting is one thing... if you're in a dark room and can barely see the images then they definitely should gain that concealment without Displacement even needing to factor in, but in this case the question of "does Displacement displace the images" / "does the appearance of being blurry from blur confer a miss chance without the magic of blur actually applying" still stands.
Just to be clear, it should be obvious that this response applies to lighting and obscurement, but in case that was not obvious...
Miss chances gained by lightning, obscuring effects, blindness, etc should all apply to the images without question.|
|
Most people that I know play in the opposite way: first roll the miss chance, and only if there is a chance of a hit resolve the effect of the attack die roll. It speed up play a bit.Actually, rolling images first would speed up gameplay if the images did not get your miss chance. In that situation you're only rolling your d4/6/8 (for qty=images+1) and not then rolling percentiles if the attack lands on an image.
Only if you assume that blur don't work on the images, and that is not a valid assumption. Displacement? Maybe it work on the images, maybe it don't, but blur surely work. your images are identical to you, with all the visual effects.
You are covered with glitterdust? The images share the effect.You are blurred? The image are blurred
you have fire shield running and flames envelop you? Your images are enveloped in flames.
|
|
Personally, I'm not sure if the order matters, because IMO you have to roll to hit anyway to see if you miss by less than 5. Missing by less than 5 pops an image, regardless of why you miss, per the rules for mirror image.
In fact, to me if you would have hit the actual caster, but displacement causes you to miss, you now missed by less than 5 and an image pops. Missing by say, -3, is missing by less than 5.
So if you do concealment first, and concealment causes a miss, you still need to roll to hit because if you roll better than the target's AC-5, you pop an image.
If you miss because of blur or displacement you aren't missing by less than 5. You have missed, full stop. No defined margin, so you don't get any benefit or consequence of missing by a defined margin.
Blur and displacement turn a hit into miss. End of the effect.