]
The character become blury, the images copy the character.Not in dispute. But the image isn't actually blurry. The image is altering itself so that it looks like you do blurry. The images quasi existance in space is where it actually appears to be.
If you roll => target's AC and fail to hit the target due to concealment (the attack roll is never against an image), nothing was hit. Not the target, not an image, nothing.That doesn't work. The images aren't concealed. Blur and displacement don't work on "you and your illusions" they only work on you. you can't miss them from concealment, so you only roll to see if you miss from concealment if you're swinging at the real mccoy.
Step 1: ask yourself how your argument plays out in dim light.
Step 2: point out in RAW where concealment granted by a targeted spell is treated differently than concealment from environmental conditions in regards to miss chance.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
that's not an effect of the spell, its you swinging so close to him that you cut through an image and it disappears.
That interpretation of the flavor of the spell is all fine and well, but if you let that flavor affect the rules, you are in houserule territory.
And I really don't think the rules could be any clearer. You are just arbitrarily deciding that one sentence ("Whenever you are attacked [...], there is a possibility that the attack targets one of your images instead.") is part of the effect and thus doesn't work with blind attackers, but another sentence ("If the attack misses by 5 or less, one of your figments is destroyed by the near miss.") isn't part of the effect and thus still works with blind attackers. And I see absolutely nothing to support that.or are you saying because I can't see the image being cut in half it doesn't remove an image?
That is not only what I'm saying, that's what the rules are saying.
what about my party members or other people watching does it die for them?
No.
if it doesn't then why does it die normally when you cut through it?
Because it says so in the spell description.
Please FAQ the OP if this is confusing for you as well.
You first!
The roll for concealment occurs after the attack roll and prior to inflicting damage.
Citation?
.
Step 2: point out in RAW where concealment granted by a targeted spell is treated differently than concealment from environmental conditions in regards to miss chance.
Thats your problem. You are granting concealment from a spell to something that is not the target of the spell. Show me where that happens, "Raw"
|
I just hate that rolling (a hit) and a 64 tells you that the enemy isn't there.
You roll two dice for miss chances?
Seriously though, if you swing a massive greatsword through an empty space you should be pretty sure afterwards that there isn't an orc standing in it. Firing arrows is a bit different, admittedly.
I don't usually bother rolling miss chances unless there is something there to miss. Same rules apply to both sides.
The spell description literally says if the attacker is blind, the spell has no effect.That does not mean you cant effect the spell.
It would still be a bad plan to do so. Not only would the character with his eyes closed not be affected by the mirror images difficulties, he'd be able to help his sighted companions clear them. The way I see it, if he's ducking the effect of seeing the images, he shouldn't be able to clear them away.
Question!
How does the Oracle's 'Clouded Vision' curse factor into this if the target is outside the radius of their vision?
Clouded Vision: Your eyes are obscured, making it difficult for you to see. You cannot see anything beyond 30 feet, but you can see as if you had darkvision. At 5th level, this distance increases to 60 feet. At 10th level, you gain blindsense out to a range of 30 feet. At 15th level, you gain blindsight out to a range of 15 feet.
Citation?
The roll for concealment occurs after the attack roll and prior to inflicting damage.
Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment.
If the attack is a hit, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment
Per Mirror Image, you do not check the target (real or image) until after you resolve if the target is hit or missed. If you miss (successful concealment check), you never meet the conditions to trigger a check vs. Mirror Image.
Snowlilly, so you're saying to do it in the following order:
1) Check to see if you hit the target with your attack roll.
2) If yes, check versus concealment.
3) If you still haven't missed, check to see if you hit an image rather than the caster.
If you miss in steps one or two, you have no chance of popping any mirror images (unless you miss by 4 or less on the attack roll).
Am I understanding you correctly?
Citation?
The roll for concealment occurs after the attack roll and prior to inflicting damage.
Concealment gives the subject of a successful attack a 20% chance that the attacker missed because of the concealment.If the attack is a hit, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figmentPer Mirror Image, you do not check the target (real or image) until after you resolve if the target is hit or missed. If you miss (successful concealment check), you never meet the conditions to trigger a check vs. Mirror Image.
It doesn't have to be read that way.
Even if it did, you cannot extrapolate from a to b to c to d in a system unless that system has a lot more consistency than the pathfinder rule set.
And that's still doing nothing to address the counter argument that blur is making the images blurry when their target is the caster
I always thought with blinded that the 50% roll should really come first... its a way seeing that they are basically wildly swinging in approximately the right direction
Thats your problem. You are granting concealment from a spell to something that is not the target of the spell. Show me where that happens, "Raw".
Step 2: point out in RAW where concealment granted by a targeted spell is treated differently than concealment from environmental conditions in regards to miss chance.
You are granting concealment to the character. Mirror Image is not checked until after you resolve if an attack hits or misses.
..
More directly:
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.
The images are all duplicates of the casters.
Duplicate, in this context, means visually identical.
Concealment is a visual effect.
If the character is concealed (blurry, displaced, in dim light, etc.) so are the duplicates. They would not be identical if they were more, or less, visible than the caster.
This is also why Invisibility does not work with Mirror Image. The effects of the spell duplicate on the images, i.e. they are invisible as well. If the effects of the spell did not duplicate on the images, you would be left with images to attack, but no character. We know this scenario cannot be true.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that's still doing nothing to address the counter argument that blur is making the images blurry when their target is the caster
If the images were not blurry, they would not be doubles of the caster. They would be visually distinct.
If the images are blurry, they enjoy the same level of concealment as the caster.
Mirror Image states the images are doubles; there is no visual distinction between caster and image, i.e. the images must become blurry for the rules text of Mirror Image to be maintained. The same holds true for all other scenarios, e.g. displacement, fog, dim light.
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.
The disagreement in this thread seems to boil down to those who believe that the effect of mirror image is an image and those who do not.
Agreed. Some people want illusions to be real, have an actual physical existence, so they want the blind attacker who has no concept the images exist at all to affect the "real" images. But the spell clearly favors the notion these images are in the head(s) of the viewer(s) and not really there, without any physical properties - not projections in real space, but only in your head(s). Thus a Blind attacker simply has no effect on them.
There is nothing WRONG with a GM who chooses to house rule the figments are in fact projections that fade when struck. But it is not what the spell says.
In another thread this notion was also brought up by the question "if I close my eyes can I attack blind and ignore Mirror Images". If you are in the "real projections" camp, this must be true. If you are in the "illusion in your head camp" then closing your eyes will not help, because you were able to see the projections and once you see them, they exist in your head.
see: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qgza&page=3?Tricking-Mirror-Image-by-closi ng-your-eyes
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the images are blurry, they enjoy the same level of concealment as the caster.
They do not.
The caster IS blurry. The actual location is at point A. He's kinda blurry and an attacker might be mistaken in thinking He's at B and swing for B instead (about 1 time in 5)
The image LOOKS blurry. The image is distorted, it is pulled out like a funhouse mirror, but the image isn't blurry. It's faking it. The image looks like it's at point A it IS at point A, but in order to make itself look blurry it has to actually be in point B to make it look like the caster. If the funhouse mirror makes you look blurry , anywhere you hit a blur you're hitting the funhouse mirror.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But the spell clearly favors the notion these images are in the head(s) of the viewer(s) and not really there, without any physical properties - not projections in real space, but only in your head(s).
This is objectively wrong. The subschool of illusion that does this is phantasm. And mirror image is not a phatasmal effect.
There is nothing WRONG with a GM who chooses to house rule the figments are in fact projections that fade when struck. But it is not what the spell says.
It is exactly what the spell says. By it's subschool, by its effect line, by the fact that the images are not relative to each observer, (ie, when the monk pops a bunch of images, they dissapear for the fighter to swing)
If you are in the "real projections" camp, this must be true. If you are in the "illusion in your head camp" then closing your eyes will not help, because you were able to see the projections and once you see them, they exist in your head.
see: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qgza&page=3?Tricking-Mirror-Image-by-closi ng-your-eyes
There is no reason at all for that camp. The spell specifically says that if you're blind there is no effect. at all.
If the images are blurry, they enjoy the same level of concealment as the caster.
They do not.
The caster IS blurry. The actual location is at point A. He's kinda blurry and an attacker might be mistaken in thinking He's at B and swing for B instead (about 1 time in 5)
The image LOOKS blurry. The image is distorted, it is pulled out like a funhouse mirror, but the image isn't blurry. It's faking it. The image looks like it's at point A it IS at point A, but in order to make itself look blurry it has to actually be in point B to make it look like the caster. If the funhouse mirror makes you look blurry , anywhere you hit a blur you're hitting the funhouse mirror.
1. The images are visual only illusions. Looks are the entirety of the images existence. Since the images are doubles of the caster, if the caster looks blurry, so does the image.
2. Concealment is a visual only effect. If something meets the visual requirements of concealment it is concealed.
Not that this changes the fact that an attacker is required to successfully hit his opponent prior to checking for Mirror Image. A condition that is not met if the attacker misses due to concealment.
There is no reason at all for that camp. The spell specifically says that if you're blind there is no effect. at all.
I tried pointing that out back in the very first response to the OP. Quoted the text and everything.
It didn't seem to take.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1. The images are visual only illusions. Looks are the entirety of the images existence. Since the images are doubles of the caster, if the caster looks blurry, so does the image.
You're really not answering the point. Agree with what i'm saying or not, if you understood the point this would not be a response.
2. Concealment is a visual only effect. If something meets the visual requirements of concealment it is concealed.
The image does not.
The image does not have a spell on it
The image does not have a fake layer over it.
The image does not LOOK like it's somewhere that it isn't.
The wizard has a look and it has an existence in space. With an illusion, those are different.
The image has a look and it has a existence in space (which is why you can hit it) The image can't look anywhere without BEING there. So if you hit that, it pops.
Not that this changes the fact that an attacker is required to successfully hit his opponent prior to checking for Mirror Image. A condition that is not met if the attacker misses due to concealment.
This is not a fact.
edit: or to put it simply, in order to look like a blurry wizard, the image needs to be signifigantly bigger than a real wizard.
Imagine a halfling wearing a hat of disguise to look like a human. You pass a stick through the human "head" you don't touch the halfling at all. You pass a stick through an illusionary double of the halfling, you ARE passing a stick through the image. That POPS mirror images like a bubble
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok so, it totally makes sense from an abstraction stand point that a blind attacker could pop mirror images. That's something my intuition and emotions are telling me you should be able to do.
BUT. The rules don't actually appear to support it. Houserule away, I guess.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If a blind creature can pop images then the spell effectively just grant's 50% concealment until N near misses have been achieved as any attacker can close their eyes to go from a 1 in 8 to 1 in 2 chance of hitting while also chipping away at the images.
So i'm in the no you can't break images while blind camp.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My thoughts on the matter:
I'm pretty certain that the images look blurry if the caster does (otherwise mirror image doesn't work). Does that mean that each image has a miss chance? Most certainly not.
Blue (or a similar effect) is taken into account when the caster (not an image) risks getting struck. Mirror image is taken into account when the caster is struck of nearly struck.
Both spells have their full effects. There is no overlap. There is no weird stacking business.
I tried pointing that out back in the very first response to the OP. Quoted the text and everything.
It didn't seem to take.
Isn't the question fundamentally "does a blind person (who is not affected by mirror image) have a chance of destroying an image so that someone else doesn't hit it later" which could be imagining that the blind person swings a wide arc through the opponent's square passing through multiple images on its way to find purchase.
But I think both "there's no reason to make things this complicated" and also "area effects don't destroy images" lead me to believe the answer should be a hard no.
Isn't the question fundamentally "does a blind person (who is not affected by mirror image) have a chance of destroying an image so that someone else doesn't hit it later"
You can separate them out. Just because the images can't affect the swinger doesn't automatically mean the swinger can't affect the images.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
An image has to look like the caster and update based on his current appearance because otherwise once you hit and injured the caster his images would look unharmed and you could ignore them. So blur (and a later invisibility) works with the images.
And despite what the rules say, figments and glamours also have some mental component even if the aren't mind-affecting per se. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to see them as transparent when you disbelieve them while others still see the illusion. Something other than photon and sound wave manipulation (and heat that mysteriously doesn't heat anything up or inflict burns) is going on.
Okay, so things that can't pop a Mirror Image:
Blind characters
Magic Missile
AoE attacks
Things with an intelligence less than 1
Traps
...am I missing some?
The image does not.
The image does not have a spell on it
The image does not have a fake layer over it.
The image does not LOOK like it's somewhere that it isn't.
Just out of curiosity, how would you rule if someone cast disguise self and then mirror image?
How about alter self?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just out of curiosity, how would you rule if someone cast disguise self and then mirror image?
How about alter self?
These both work, because the images look just like you and the images actual locations and the images perceived locations are the same.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard has a look and it has an existence in space. With an illusion, those are different.
The image has a look and it has a existence in space (which is why you can hit it) The image can't look anywhere without BEING there. So if you hit that, it pops.
I had been waffling about blur and mirror image, but I thought this put it very well, and made the argument "click" for me.
You can't miss a blurry image because of magical concealment. A blurry image is still an image (albeit with soft edges) and goes *pop* when you hit it.
Hit the red on the wizard and you miss. Hit the black and you hit.
Hit the red on an image you hit.
|
|
You're not targeting the images anyways. If the 20% kicks in, it makes you miss altogether, not 'miss by 5 or less', so an image doesn't disappear. An image disappears if you miss by 5 or less. Missing due to concealment is not missing by 5 or less.The wizard has a look and it has an existence in space. With an illusion, those are different.
The image has a look and it has a existence in space (which is why you can hit it) The image can't look anywhere without BEING there. So if you hit that, it pops.
I had been waffling about blur and mirror image, but I thought this put it very well, and made the argument "click" for me.
You can't miss a blurry image because of magical concealment. A blurry image is still an image (albeit with soft edges) and goes *pop* when you hit it.
You can't miss an image due to concealment... all hits are hits.
I think you could miss from darkness you thought "the wizards" left arm was over there but it wasn't
I think you could miss from darkness you thought "the wizards" left arm was over there but it wasn't
Darkness (w/o darkvision) would be the same as invisible target or attacker being blind - e.g, mirror image does not effect the attacker because the attacker cannot see the images in the darkness - and whatever else that entails with regard to missing by 5 or less.
Here is the RAW you asked for:
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.If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack is not a hit.
If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack does not 'miss by 5 or less'.
How do I support the last statement? If an attack misses by 5 or less, that means if you add 5 to the attack, it would be a hit. If an attack misses due to concealment, adding 5 to the attack would still be a miss.
There are your RAW-backed facts.
You have to account for all rules applicable to the attack, not just the rules for one specific effect taken in isolation. You forgot to include the RAW for concealment, which is applicable in this instance.
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.
If the concealment roll is successful, the target is never struck and the trigger condition for Mirror Image is never met.
|
|
Here is the RAW you asked for:
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.If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack is not a hit.
If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack does not 'miss by 5 or less'.
You don't check for concealment unless you hit your target.
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 you resolve mirror image before resolving concealment.
If you missed by 5 or less, you pop an image. A blurred illusion is still an illusion, so hitting the blur is just as good as hitting anywhere else. An image doesn't benefit from blur the way a person does.
Er, yes, that's what I've been saying. If the target is missed because of blur, an image doesn't disappear.Here is the RAW you asked for:
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.If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack is not a hit.
If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack does not 'miss by 5 or less'.
How do I support the last statement? If an attack misses by 5 or less, that means if you add 5 to the attack, it would be a hit. If an attack misses due to concealment, adding 5 to the attack would still be a miss.
There are your RAW-backed facts.
You have to account for all rules applicable to the attack, not just the rules for one specific effect taken in isolation. You forgot to include the RAW for concealment, which is applicable in this instance.
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.If the concealment roll is successful, the target is never struck and the trigger condition for Mirror Image is never met.
That is what I have been stating. I even quoted both segments or RAW earlier.
|
|
the rule say you must make the conceal direct after being successfully hit, so the conceal is before mirror imageHere is the RAW you asked for:
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.If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack is not a hit.
If a target is missed due to concealment, then the attack does not 'miss by 5 or less'.
You don't check for concealment unless you hit your target.
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 you resolve mirror image before resolving concealment.
If you missed by 5 or less, you pop an image. A blurred illusion is still an illusion, so hitting the blur is just as good as hitting anywhere else. An image doesn't benefit from blur the way a person does.
Hitting an image is not "being successfully hit". Concealment wouldn't apply to images.