Can a blind attacker destroy mirror images?


Rules Questions

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Why does the text of blur get to override the text of mirror image?


KingOfAnything wrote:
Why does the text of blur get to override the text of mirror image?

Because Blur can prevent the triggering condition of Mirror Image from occurring.

If I never get hit, Mirror Image rules are never invoked.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Because mirror image can prevent the triggering condition of blur from occurring.

If I never get hit, concealment rules are never invoked.


_Ozy_ wrote:

I never said you missed the image due to concealment, I said you missed the person, the actual person, due to concealment.

If you miss due to concealment, then you do not satisfy the 'missed by 5 or less' which triggers the disruption of an image. You missed for other reasons.

For example, if I attack a person, and they use an immediate action to blink away, I didn't 'miss by 5 or less' and thus destroy an image, I missed because the person wasn't even there.

The Do I miss by 5 or less on a natural 1 FAQ suggests that missing only due to concealment would pop an image


Andy Brown wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:

I never said you missed the image due to concealment, I said you missed the person, the actual person, due to concealment.

If you miss due to concealment, then you do not satisfy the 'missed by 5 or less' which triggers the disruption of an image. You missed for other reasons.

For example, if I attack a person, and they use an immediate action to blink away, I didn't 'miss by 5 or less' and thus destroy an image, I missed because the person wasn't even there.

The Do I miss by 5 or less on a natural 1 FAQ suggests that missing only due to concealment would pop an image

no they do not assume this, to miss with a conceal you must have a successful attack which is not a near miss of 5 or less, they only say that a natural 20 and natural 1 count as normal for effect like mirror image

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So, with blur and mirror image active:

1) Roll the attack
2) Compare to AC
If >= AC go to A
Else go to B

A) Roll d(images+1)
If result = 1 go to C
Else go to B

B) If attack + 5 >= AC
Pop an image; end

C) Roll miss chance
If roll>20, hit
Else miss; end

Sound about right?


tchrman35 wrote:

So, with blur and mirror image active:

1) Roll the attack
2) Compare to AC
If >= AC go to A
Else go to B

A) Roll d(images+1)
If result = 1 go to C
Else go to B

B) If attack + 5 >= AC
Pop an image; end

C) Roll miss chance
If roll>20, hit
Else miss; end

Sound about right?

Correct. Miss chance is only triggered on a successful attack.

Unless of course you consider attacking an image a successful attack. But that would be an unusual interpretation.


toastedamphibian wrote:
2bz2p wrote:
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.

No, it is a figment, a false sensation, it is not all in the viewers head. That would be a phantasm.

Figments make it seem like a thing is there when it is not: false light, magic sounds, haptic feedback. Not mind affecting.

Glamers change the sensation of objects that do exist. Not mindaffecting.

Patterns are figments that also affect your mind. They are mindaffecting.

Phantasms are hallucinations, they are mindaffecting.

Shadows have actual substance and make my brain hurt if I think about them too much.

Right, now explain how striking that figment that isn't actually there causes your Touch Spell to discharge?


Stephen Ede wrote:
toastedamphibian wrote:
2bz2p wrote:
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.

No, it is a figment, a false sensation, it is not all in the viewers head. That would be a phantasm.

Figments make it seem like a thing is there when it is not: false light, magic sounds, haptic feedback. Not mind affecting.

Glamers change the sensation of objects that do exist. Not mindaffecting.

Patterns are figments that also affect your mind. They are mindaffecting.

Phantasms are hallucinations, they are mindaffecting.

Shadows have actual substance and make my brain hurt if I think about them too much.

Right, now explain how striking that figment that isn't actually there causes your Touch Spell to discharge?

Bolded the part for you.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Snowlilly wrote:

.

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"

If I can't be hit because I look blurred then the images also would have the same benefit.

I get that you are saying that you don't think they look like caster, but dont gain the benefits of looking like him, but that really doesn't make any sense.

Another example of how the images benefit even if the spell is not cast on them is blink.

It actually makes you go away so the mirror images would go away also, and therefore benefit from the miss chance.


John Bartley K7AAY wrote:

Topic Drift:

Thinking abt visiting friends in Morristown, what Pathfinder Society activity is there in Knoxville and East Tennessee?

Many thanks

john.bartley@gmail.com
https://www.facebook.com/johnbartley

thats.. kind of random. But heres a map of pfs locations


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
If I can't be hit because I look blurred then the images also would have the same benefit.

If you strike the blurry caster, you might hit the illusory blur instead of the real guy underneath. But if you hit the image, which is a copy of the blurry caster, there's no difference between the blur part and the rest; they're all part of the same mirror image, so are destroyed on a hit.

(Or I guess the mirror image could be an illusion, but the blur effect on it is an illusion of an illusion, so if you hit the blurry part, you don't harm the mirror image, which is a real illusion and not a fake illusion. Both interpretations make sense, in a blurry kind of a way.)


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Mirror images don't directly benefit from other spells. Blur won't work, blink won't work (even though they will look blurry and blink as appropriate).

Why won't it work? Because you can't directly target the images in the first place. You must always target the caster. Blur and blink only come into play when targeting the caster.

Shadow Lodge

Ravingdork wrote:

Mirror images don't directly benefit from other spells. Blur won't work, blink won't work (even though they will look blurry and blink as appropriate).

Why won't it work? Because you can't directly target the images in the first place. You must always target the caster. Blur and blink only come into play when targeting the caster.

With regards to blink, the images are moving back and forth between the ethereal plane, because mirror image affects the creature, and the creature is moving back and forth between the ethereal plane. As such, when a character attacks a creature who is affected by blink, the miss-chance must be rolled first in order to determine whether or not the creature, and therefore the images, are currently on the material plane. After it is determined that the caster is on the material plane, then the attack roll can be made, and mirror image can start affecting results.

I don't know if blur should work the same as blink, but I believe displacement should. In displacement's case, the miss-chance is to determine whether or not the creature is actually where he appears to be. The mirror image images follow where the creature actually is, not where he appears to be, but displacement needs to copy all visual effects (including magical) in order for it to function properly, so it copies the effect of the images on the caster. If a character misses the caster due to miss-chance, then it can't hit an image because the caster, and therefore the mirror image effect, is not where the attack was made.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The images cannot appear to be somewhere that they are not. An image that is displaced 3 feet to the left IS three feet to the left.

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:
The images cannot appear to be somewhere that they are not. An image that is displaced 3 feet to the left IS three feet to the left.

A character that is displaced 3 feet to the left, due to displacement, IS 3 feet to the left, but does not appear to be so. Any effects on that character are also 3 feet to the left, but do not appear to be so.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
The images cannot appear to be somewhere that they are not. An image that is displaced 3 feet to the left IS three feet to the left.

That isn't an actual game fact, at least that those images are identical things.

If the displacement spell moves visible light from one place to another, the visible light from the manifestation of an illusion can be shifted to another place. The 'image' at that shifted place is the image from the displacement spell, not the image manifestation location of the mirror image spell.

If you hit the displaced image, you are not hitting the mirror image, you're hitting the displaced image of a mirror image.

There's no reason to believe, based on the game rules, that that's the same as hitting the actual manifestation location of a mirror image.

If you hit my reflection in a mirror, you can break that mirror. If I take that reflection, and project it somewhere else, hitting that projected image does nothing to the mirror. Is there anything in the Pathfinder rules that would lead you to believe otherwise for the Mirror Image spell?

Or, to put it another way, if I look at a mirror image with an actual physical mirror, and I hit the image in that physical mirror with a sword, do I dispel an image? If not, why would the images created by other spells, like displacement, not work the same way?


Serum wrote:

]With regards to blink, the images are moving back and forth between the ethereal plane, because mirror image affects the creature, and the creature is moving back and forth between the ethereal plane. As such, when a character attacks a creature who is affected by blink, the miss-chance must be rolled first in order to determine whether or not the creature, and therefore the images, are currently on the material plane. After it is determined that the caster is on the material plane, then the attack roll can be made, and mirror image can start affecting results.

Miss roll must be made when rules say it must be made.

For blink, normally the rules don't exactly specify the point at which roll must be made... unless the attacker is capable of striking ethereal enemies. In this very moment, miss chance becomes clear:

Quote:
Physical attacks against you have a 50% miss chance, and the Blind-Fight feat doesn't help opponents, since you're ethereal and not merely invisible. If the attack is capable of striking ethereal creatures, the miss chance is only 20% (for concealment).

So, normally, a GM has the choice of when the blink roll is made, but for creatures capable of striking ethereals miss chance is ruled as due to concealment, and thus uses concealment rules (roll made after a successful attack). I'd also say the normal miss chance is also due to concealment, but as said, wording leaves that at GM's discretion.

Blur states it grants 20% concealment, so roll is also made based on concealment rules (after a successful attack).


Blink is kinda weird since half of the miss chance is NOT due to concealment, but rather not being physically there. Also, the two individual (20%) miss chances don't actually add up to 50%, but more like 36%.


Serum wrote:
A character that is displaced 3 feet to the left, due to displacement, IS 3 feet to the left, but does not appear to be so.

1) No. 2) Its irrelevant for what I'm saying anyway.

Quote:
Any effects on that character are also 3 feet to the left, but do not appear to be so.

No. The mirror images are all moving around the caster so you can't pick him out of a crowd. if an image is moved 3 feet to the left it IS three feet to the left. Displacement affects the caster, not the caster and something trailing around behind him.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I suspect some of you are WAY over thinking the matter. The spells only do what they say they do. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Aside from determining the order of operations, the spells shouldn't really have any effect on one another.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
No. The mirror images are all moving around the caster so you can't pick him out of a crowd. if an image is moved 3 feet to the left it IS three feet to the left. Displacement affects the caster, not the caster and something trailing around behind him.

Both displacement and mirror image affect the caster, and as such exist where the caster exists. Displacement must affect the location of the appearance of mirror image, being a glamour spell effect that is attached to the caster. If this was not the case, then we would be finding oddities in other spell effects, such as in an interaction with displacement and disguise self. In such a case, the caster would appear to be displaced, while the disguise self glamour would appear exactly where the caster actually is.


The images copy your appearance and motions. They do not benefit from every spell that you have on you, like fire shield. They only LOOK like they have fire shield going.

The entire point of displacement is that it doesn't look like displacement is doing anything. So it doesn't work on the images.

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:

The images copy your appearance and motions. They do not benefit from every spell that you have on you, like fire shield. They only LOOK like they have fire shield going.

The entire point of displacement is that it doesn't look like displacement is doing anything. So it doesn't work on the images.

Displacement is a glamour that causes the caster to appear to be in a location that it isn't. The result is such that the attacker is essentially blindly attacking into the square with no idea where the caster actually is inside of it, and therefore can only hit the caster by chance. If the caster has fire shield applied, then the glamour must also cause the fire shield appear to be in a location that it isn't, otherwise it becomes extremely apparent where the caster is. I state that the same is true for disguise self.

Displacement needs to copy all visual effects that add to your appearance, otherwise it cannot function properly. Mirror image adds to your appearance by adding a bunch images that look and move exactly as you do.


The images work just fine doing their job from their actual locations, which are all somehow crammed into your square.

Shadow Lodge

BigNorseWolf wrote:

The images work just fine doing their job from their actual locations, which are all somehow crammed into your square.

Is displacement discriminatory in how it affects different visual effects?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Serum wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

The images work just fine doing their job from their actual locations, which are all somehow crammed into your square.

Is displacement discriminatory in how it affects different visual effects?

Its discriminatory in it's target. The target is the caster, not his images.

In order to look 3 feet to the left the images have to go three feet to the left. Just like they can look like they have fireshield but they'll still die if you scorching ray them they don't actually have fireshield.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So if someone is blind, does blur still impact them?


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


So if someone is blind, does blur still impact them?

nope since you take the worst, being blind the opponent has total conceal (50% miss chance) and blur is you get conceal (20% miss chance)


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Serum wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

The images work just fine doing their job from their actual locations, which are all somehow crammed into your square.

Is displacement discriminatory in how it affects different visual effects?

Its discriminatory in it's target. The target is the caster, not his images.

In order to look 3 feet to the left the images have to go three feet to the left. Just like they can look like they have fireshield but they'll still die if you scorching ray them they don't actually have fireshield.

What do you mean by 'the caster', and why would you assume that visible manifestations of spells cast on the caster would not be included in the displacement?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Mechanically speaking, displacement has no effect on the images. You CAN'T target the images anyways, so it's largely a moot point.


_Ozy_ wrote:

If someone closes their eyes to try to defeat mirror image, they deserve all the pain that will come their way from deliberately choosing the blinded condition. Sneak attacks, loss of Dex to AC, heck not even knowing what square your enemies are even in. If your enemies notice you are closing your eyes, readied actions to move to different squares, and/or take their attacks while you're eyes are closed, will completely defeat you.

I see this proposed strategy (closing your eyes) to try and defeat mirror image, but every single time I've seen mirror image used by bad guys, party members just blow through the images in a round or two and kill the bad guy anyways. I seriously doubt closing your eyes would speed up that process substantially.

With a few Blindfight feats and the Blinded style chain, closing your eyes is no big deal.


wasting feats for something that might not come up is a big deal for most classes


From a simulationist point of view if the caster appears to 2 feet from his actual location, then so will the images. Otherwise it would be easy to pick out the caster.

On the other side mirror image is already a really good spell, and maybe it is good if the miss chance only applies when you choose the caster.

I thought the devs had given their opinion on this a while back, but I could not find it.

After reading displacement I changed my mind. I don't think displacement effects it. I was thinking of blur which has a visible distortion, and the images would look like that distortion. However I still don't know if this is a good idea for this to work, and I am not sure if it would work, since I think the PDT would dial this back in if they were to rule on it.

Here is an FAQ on mirror images and additional miss chances from other effects

The Exchange

vhok wrote:
wasting feats for something that might not come up is a big deal for most classes

Tell me it's a waste of feats when the campaign involves a great many casters or creatures with invisibility as a natural ability.

The Blindfight feats helped my fighter destroy so many tricksy opponents during a campaign that the other players decided it was nearly a must have.

It's a great work around for a simple and oft used set of spell defences.


To address the original question.

I would rule that blind people can destroy images (from the perspective of people who can see).

Why?

One subtle detail gets me over the line.

The second paragraph contains detailed rules on how images are dispelled and no allowance was made for blind characters being a special case. The third paragraph contains the text: "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)". This is quite an ambiguous statement. However, if this was intended to be a special case as far as dispelling images is concerned this text would have been included as part of the second paragraph. It was not. Instead this text forms a separate paragraph, it is a new idea that is only referring to whether the spell can be used to fool the blind. It is silent on whether the blind can affect the spell.

As a philosophical analogy: if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound? I think it does. But perhaps I am in the minority on that point.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

When it says "if you are invisible or the attacker is blind,..." means that you must proceed as if there was no Mirror Image in place, which means the attacker can not interact with the images.

If someone casts Mirror Image and Protection from Fire, and then is targeted by Scorching Ray rays, would you say that the rays hitting the images won't dispel them?

The same answer applies to Blur, Displacement.

In my opinion, and this is just a stand as a possible answer to those questions posed, the Images might looked like blurred, but they do not get any benefit from any spell casted on the defender.

Applying real world logic into how a magic system works, is not a good approach. I rather take in consideration the rule, brought into this debate by RV, that a spell does what it says it does, nothing less, nothing more.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
vhok wrote:
wasting feats for something that might not come up is a big deal for most classes

Well, for a Fighter it's great:

Blinded Blade Style Combat Blind-Fight, Perception 5 ranks While you are using this style, you gain a number of benefits whenever you are blinded or unable to see (including when you wear a blindfold or close your eyes). Under such circumstances, you do not take any penalties on Strength– or Dexterity-based skill checks due to blindness. In addition, you gain a +4 bonus on hearing- and smell-based Perception checks and gain the scent special ability with a range of 10 feet; if you already have scent, the range of your scent ability increases by 10 feet instead. Having this feat counts as having 10 ranks in Perception for the purpose of satisfying the prerequisites of the Improved Blind-Fight feat, as well as any feat that lists Improved Blind-Fight as a prerequisite. PPC:BoS
Blinded Competence Combat Blinded Blade Style, Blind-Fight, Improved Blind-Fight, Perception 10 ranks While you are using Blinded Blade Style and you are blinded or unable to see, you do not need to succeed at Perception checks to pinpoint the location of creatures within reach of your melee weapon, or your unmodified reach if you are not wielding a melee weapon. This ability functions like blindsense, except creatures you cannot see do not gain total concealment against you. Having this feat counts as having 15 ranks in Perception for the purpose of satisfying the prerequisites of the Greater Blind-Fight feat, as well as any feat that lists Greater Blind-Fight as a prerequisite. PPC:BoS
Blinded Master Combat Blind-Fight, Blinded Blade Precision (Blinded Competence?), Blinded Blade Style, Greater Blind-Fight, Improved Blind-Fight, Perception 15 ranks While you are using Blinded Blade Style and you are blinded or unable to see, your ability to pinpoint creatures’ locations using Blinded Competence improves to function likeblindsight rather than blindsense, and the range increases to 30 feet. In addition, you add half your character level to the DCs of Bluff checks to feint you in combat.

Scent, Blindsense and then Blindsight. Mirror Image, Invisibility? Ect- all are for naugt.

1 to 50 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Can a blind attacker destroy mirror images? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.