Blur vs Mirror image

[habibo]

Hello simple topic here just trying to figure out wich one is generally a better spell they both are good but i can only choose one for my character i personally lean more towards Blur since you don't have to worry about losing all the images

[Louise Bishop]

Mirror Image is better mathematically. It does not last as long but it will prevent more Hits than Blur will.

[Errant Mercenary]

Mirror Image is hands down the best physical protection spell until a good while.

Mirror image shuts down most pure martials and monsters with just physical. Pit any martial vs a martial with mirror image and see what happens.

Sneak attack: Blur negates this afaik in Pathfinder.

[Fergie]

In general, Mirror Image is the best self defense spell against attacks in the game.

With that said, Blur has a few distinct advantages.
You can cast it on anyone, not just yourself.
If you are fighting a mob of octopi or other multi attacking types, it won't run out.
Blur has some advantages related to sneak attack and possibly hiding as well?
Blur is Verbal only, so that has a few advantages.

My suggestion is to get mirror image for yourself now, and then pick up Displacement later if you feel you want more defense for yourself and your team. Displacement is more then twice as good as blur (50% vs 20%) and can help PCs go toe-toe with hard hitters. Displacement however, is a rounds/level spell, so it will probably take one of your actions during a combat.

[Xexyz]

habibo wrote:

Hello simple topic here just trying to figure out wich one is generally a better spell they both are good but i can only choose one for my character i personally lean more towards Blur since you don't have to worry about losing all the images

You want Mirror Images. Since you don't want to be getting constantly attacked to begin with, it's much better to have a few high-likelihood missed attacks and use that time to get away than a spell that provides a low-likelihood miss chance that really only offers its value by being attacked a lot.

[Mark Thomas 66]

I've managed to make it through 8 consecutive combats without getting touched due to mirror image. Honestly Mirror image is better than a high AC in most cases and if combined with a high AC can get pretty insane since they have to come within 5 or less of hitting you to destroy an image.

[Zarius]

If you're wanting to avoid physical hits, roll up a piper and wear full plate. :P

Over all, it largely depends on what kind of combat you're in. Officially, the duration is the same, but you loose an image each time your bacon is saved by them, and it's over when they're all gone. You have a 1-in-(x+1), where X is the number of images you have left... but if you get targets by the archer or someone with a lot of attacks per round, you're doomed. Even at level 3, my party's ranger and bard could, combined, eat through your images in two rounds, assuming you were to get all 8 of the max.

By contrast, Blur is completely useless against my Oracle dropping a Bone Shaker on you and trying to yank your skeleton out of your body. Anything that rolls a saving throw, as versus an attack roll of some kind, completely bypasses it. I only need to see a tuft of your hair to ignore Concealment.

And both are useless against Cone of Fire, Fireball, or any other AoE attack. Blur won't stop it, and Mirror Image will be ended by it. Mark, your GM is kind if, after 8 combats, he hasn't done that to you.

[Zarius]

FYI, my Oracle also has a base AC nearing 30. With some buffs, an enemy with a total +12 attack modifier can't hit me except on a nat 20.

[Mark Thomas 66]

Zarius wrote:

And both are useless against Cone of Fire, Fireball, or any other AoE attack. Blur won't stop it, and Mirror Image will be ended by it. Mark, your GM is kind if, after 8 combats, he hasn't done that to you.

That's actually partially incorrect.

"Spells and effects that do not require an attack roll affect you normally and do not destroy any of your figments."

So while it won't protect you from fireball etc, they won't end the effect. Rather all of your images appear burned etc but mirror image will continue.

[Zarius]

OK, fair enough. But he's still being kind if he hasn't started hammering you with things that don't care. Or a buffoon. It's the GM's job to break you of the bad habit of using the same tactics over and over and over. Mine REALLY hates my oracle turtle. Only real armor he has is a kilt.

[Rysky]

Zarius wrote:

OK, fair enough. But he's still being kind if he hasn't started hammering you with things that don't care. Or a buffoon. It's the GM's job to break you of the bad habit of using the same tactics over and over and over. Mine REALLY hates my oracle turtle. Only real armor he has is a kilt.

Uh, no it's not. Not in the slightest. Countering them or providing them with new challenges is one thing, but constantly finding ways to shut down a player's tactics or play style is adversarial GMing.

Just because Mark's GM doesn't do that in no way shape or form makes that GM a "buffoon". If I had to pick between a game where we're all having fun vs one where the GM hates our characters and it's a us vs them mindset I'd take the first option in a heartbeat.

[Djelai]

Fergie wrote:

With that said, Blur has a few distinct advantages.

This.

Blur/Displacement is also less CL-dependent that Mirror Image, so you can cast it from srolls or wands and save your spell slots for more offensive spells.
Then you can pass the scroll or wand to your improved familiar, so he can cast it on you while you are using your precious standard action to meaningfully contribute to the battle on round 1 instead of buffing yourself defensively.

My 2 cts.

[Zarius]

Rysky wrote:

Zarius wrote:

Just because Mark's GM doesn't do that in no way shape or form makes that GM a "buffoon". If I had to pick between a game where we're all having fun vs one where the GM hates our characters and it's a us vs them mindset I'd take the first option in a heartbeat.

And, remind me, how is solving every fight the exact same way fun? Frankly, I reserve my turtling for situations where there's no other options. And our GM doesn't hate the character, he hates the fact that, with two spells and bardic inspiration, my AC hits 29, and I can then jack that up again with defensive actions. Frankly, it's my minmaxing habit he hates more than the character's ability.

[Rysky]

Neither Mirror Image or a high AC "solve" a fight, they let you survive said fight.

As for "solving" every fight the exact same way not being fun do you put that on the martial characters in the group too? The Barbarian solves things by hitting them with a Greataxe, does them doing that evey fight make it no fun for you or the GM?

[Snowlilly]

Errant Mercenary wrote:

Mirror Image is hands down the best physical protection spell until a good while.

Mirror image shuts down most pure martials and monsters with just physical. Pit any martial vs a martial with mirror image and see what happens.

Sneak attack: Blur negates this afaik in Pathfinder.

Most rogues built with any degree of optimization will have Shadow Blade, just so they can sneak attack in dim light.

*rogues encountered in APs/Scenarios have zero optimization, Blur will nearly always work there.

[Snowlilly]

Mark Thomas 66 wrote:

I've managed to make it through 8 consecutive combats without getting touched due to mirror image. Honestly Mirror image is better than a high AC in most cases and if combined with a high AC can get pretty insane since they have to come within 5 or less of hitting you to destroy an image.

Mirror Image stacks with Blur.

If an opponent misses due to Blur, an image is not lost.

[Snowlilly]

Rysky wrote:

Zarius wrote:

OK, fair enough. But he's still being kind if he hasn't started hammering you with things that don't care. Or a buffoon. It's the GM's job to break you of the bad habit of using the same tactics over and over and over. Mine REALLY hates my oracle turtle. Only real armor he has is a kilt.

Uh, no it's not. Not in the slightest. Countering them or providing them with new challenges is one thing, but constantly finding ways to shut down a player's tactics or play style is adversarial GMing.

Just because Mark's GM doesn't do that in no way shape or form makes that GM a "buffoon". If I had to pick between a game where we're all having fun vs one where the GM hates our characters and it's a us vs them mindset I'd take the first option in a heartbeat.

Exactly this.

It's one thing to occasionally run up an an opponent that the characters toys don't work up against.

It's just plain horrible DMing to build every encounter to shut down all the toys that make characters special every fight.

[voska66]

As GM I typically have bad guys take the 50% miss chance a close their eyes when wizard has mirror image up. Running monsters I find this works much much better than dealing with the images. So my player tend to use blur more often. 20% miss chance is better than 50% with eyes closed.

From spell Descritpion: "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)."

[Ferious Thune]

I'm not sure I understand. How is a 20% miss chance better than a 50% miss chance?

[wraithstrike]

It's better for the attacker

[Ferious Thune]

He said his players use blur more often because it's better. That's what doesn't make sense to me. I get why an attacker would close their eyes vs. Mirror Image, but that's still a better situation for the person casting the spell than blur is. I'm just wondering if I missed something in his post.

[Zarius]

Snowlilly wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Zarius wrote:

OK, fair enough. But he's still being kind if he hasn't started hammering you with things that don't care. Or a buffoon. It's the GM's job to break you of the bad habit of using the same tactics over and over and over. Mine REALLY hates my oracle turtle. Only real armor he has is a kilt.

Uh, no it's not. Not in the slightest. Countering them or providing them with new challenges is one thing, but constantly finding ways to shut down a player's tactics or play style is adversarial GMing.

Just because Mark's GM doesn't do that in no way shape or form makes that GM a "buffoon". If I had to pick between a game where we're all having fun vs one where the GM hates our characters and it's a us vs them mindset I'd take the first option in a heartbeat.

Exactly this.

It's one thing to occasionally run up an an opponent that the characters toys don't work up against.

It's just plain horrible DMing to build every encounter to shut down all the toys that make characters special every fight.

This may be true, but if EVERY fight is exactly the same, just scaled for level, how fun is THAT? Y'all are confusing the phrase "using the same tactics every time" with "he has to make every fight unique." If every fight can be solved by one guy blocking up a hallway and turtling while everyone else shots a bow over his head, BOOOOOOORING. Throw in a wizard with a lightning bolt? Now you've upset the same-old-same-old without doing a whole lot. Allow me to paraphrase myself, since I may have not been quite specific in my usage of vocabulary. If your GM hasn't used something to bypass your same, tired old strategy after eiht freaking combats, you're running with an uncreative GM. It's pathetic that the wizard, LITERALLY the scariest member of any ENEMY party to a player, has used the exact same tactic in eight consecutive fights and not been hit once. Burning hands. Fireball. WEB. I could go down the list and find you dozens of examples of SOMETHING the GM should have done to gum him up after the third time, just because the enemy should have been going "HOLY CRAPLERS! MAGE! MAGE! KILL IT!"

[Rysky]

Um, maybe your GM should stop having fights in 5ft hallways then?

As hostile as you're getting I'm thinking there's something deeper going on here.

I mostly play Barbarians, so essentially from my point of view every fight is more or less the same to me, and I have fun, and so do the others.

[Matthew Downie]

Zarius wrote:

If your GM hasn't used something to bypass your same, tired old strategy after eight freaking combats, you're running with an uncreative GM.

Some GMs run adventure paths / pre-written material / PFS scenarios, etc, and don't have time / inclination / PFS-permission to rewrite encounters to force the players to change their tactics. This is a valid type of game, and has some advantages (like making player decisions matter because they know they won't be automatically countered).

So when you write something like this, you're insulting many of the people reading it.

[Zarius]

That's... Not defensive, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to point out that they're misinterpreting what I said.

You play a barbarian. Fine. You hit everything with a great axe (or club). That's fine. That's one character, with a specific intended play style. And DPS IS a necessary. But you're telling me that your GM has, in every single battle you've EVER been in, used the EXACT same enemy group make up every time, just with the enemy leveled up for your level?

[Zarius]

Matthew Downie wrote:

Zarius wrote:

If your GM hasn't used something to bypass your same, tired old strategy after eight freaking combats, you're running with an uncreative GM.

Some GMs run adventure paths / pre-written material / PFS scenarios, etc, and don't have time / inclination / PFS-permission to rewrite encounters to force the players to change their tactics. This is a valid type of game, and has some advantages (like making player decisions matter because they know they won't be automatically countered).

So when you write something like this, you're insulting many of the people reading it.

You apparently haven't looked at those pre-defined arcs and campaigns. Enemy groupings aren't identical. They're varied and differing.

And the addition of ONE unit can wildly change how the party functions. Your barbarian with the great axe? Pit that against a Severist, see how long that works. Pit it against an enchanter or a conjurer or an evoker. How them will saves looking? Them reflex saves, when you aren't hitting a trap? Fireball from extreme long range, hold or charm at close range? Yeah...

If you're insulted that I said that a GM that can't throw a curve ball to the party is uncreative, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to upset anyone.

[Zarius]

I will point out however, that I know at least two GMs who agree with me, and one player who has quit more than one campaign because of EXACTLY the thing I'm describing. Boring, identicality in every encounter, causing the PCs to never really be at risk.

[Mark Thomas 66]

Using the exact same tactic.....casting mirror image....a DEFENSIVE SPELL that keeps casters from getting hit. Akin to wearing armor.

Deliberately seeking to crush said tactic for being effective is on par wit sending wave after wave of rust monsters, constantly using heat/chill metal or focusing on attacks that have nothing to do with AC solely because the fighter invested in full plate and a shield.

Ok you invested in your own survival let me make that useless just because. That's douchebag GM'ing.

I should also mention I'm very tactical and that Mirror image was one element of the character in combat, a preliminary step for the opening round.

If you decide....oh this guy likes mage armor, I'll make the next batch of enemies blind just because, yet somehow they all mob him to teach him a lesson.....you're being a douche. If the story creates a scenario that's against certain players' and characters strengths, that's a challenge, but the GM is the steward of everyone's enjoyment of the game, not some jerk who has to prove his superior tactics vs the players.

[Mark Thomas 66]

No one says it's Identical, and against completely different groups of enemies I can make the same tactic or spell work.

Using specific favorite elements is a part of the game. Ever hear of the signature spell feat? Combat tricks. Playing a character that develops a signature style is part of character development, not Booooorrriiinnng as you are noting.

And ironically your example of what you do with the oracle is probably the worst most irritating example of a repeat tactic, but as long as everyone is having fun, who the hell cares. If throwing up mirror image and blur and displacement every fight, is part of making my character legendary for being damn near untouchable, and we all enjoy that element of the story, I applaud the GM who is actually good at rule 1

: Everybody has fun.

[Errant Mercenary]

Mirror Image alone can make more than half of the fights in most APs at high levels irrelevant. Just how it is, regardless of whether it is good or bad for you game.

[The Steel Refrain]

Ignoring the sidebar discussion on proper GM tactics and whatnot, in my view, Mirror Image is usually better than Blur, though I acknowledge there are some instances where Blur might be preferable (lots of enemies or many attacks to pop the images, for example). The fact that enemies will sometimes close their eyes to take a 50% miss chance over straight up attacking an enemy with Mirror Image sort of makes the point.

If I only had access to one or the other, it would definitely be Mirror Image.

Realistically, I expect that many casters would still take and use Mirror Image if it was a 3rd level spell, rather than a 2nd level one, its that good. I've also seen several instances where martials will take steps specifically directed towards getting access to Mirror Image (like buying a spell storing ring, albeit the CL for that kinda sucks).

[BretI]

My sorcerer took Blur for one very simple reason -- it can be used on others. When there is a lot of melee, he can go invisible (bloodline spell) and cast blur on other people.

If you are only casting it for your own defense, Mirror Image is usually better.

[Balkoth]

Zarius wrote:

And our GM doesn't hate the character, he hates the fact that, with two spells and bardic inspiration, my AC hits 29

At what level?

Snowlilly wrote:

Most rogues built with any degree of optimization will have Shadow Blade, just so they can sneak attack in dim light.

What's "Shadow Blade?" Not finding it with some google searching or checking the rogue talents.

[Tarik Blackhands]

Balkoth wrote:

Snowlilly wrote:

Most rogues built with any degree of optimization will have Shadow Blade, just so they can sneak attack in dim light.

What's "Shadow Blade?" Not finding it with some google searching or checking the rogue talents.

I think he means Shadow Strike (a basic combat feat) that lets you sneak attack things with basic concealment (ergo dim light)

[Balkoth]

Gotcha, thanks.

[Ridiculon]

I've used Mirror Image to purposefully drain the op attacks of the enemy so my melee friends can move freely, its got some nice battle utility aside from just pure defense.

[The Steel Refrain]

BretI wrote:

My sorcerer took Blur for one very simple reason -- it can be used on others. When there is a lot of melee, he can go invisible (bloodline spell) and cast blur on other people.

If you are only casting it for your own defense, Mirror Image is usually better.

Good point!

[Garbage-Tier Waifu]

Errant Mercenary wrote:

Sneak attack: Blur negates this afaik in Pathfinder.

Not Unchained Rogue sneak attack! That explicitly is only negated by total concealment. Now a 20gp item no longer renders rogues useless :3

[Brother Fen]

Mirror Image!

[Gisher]

I would generally go with Mirror Image, but Blur is better in a few circumstances. For example, if you have taken the Moonlight Stalker feats then getting Concealment from Blur is very valuable.