I mean the spell should probably be a shadow effect and not a figment, as the ability to just close/avert your eyes and get around any real threat is dumb when you aren't expecting everyone to be multiclassing casters and rogues to get a personal spell and a punishing effect like sneak attack. The images are supposedly substantial enough to stop your swings but not if you can't see them, and I guess you could say that's because you would get a will save to disbelieve each image but the result of that save doesn't matter because it's shattered anyway and that bit of hesitation is what causes you to pause, but when you swing a weapon at someone or shoot an arrow at a densely packed cluster of images, you wouldn't stop the attack once you barely connect, you follow through. Shadows have the physical substantiality to stop a swing while it breaks and because they aren't figments it wouldn't matter if you see them or not, close your eyes and still get unlucky and you shatter a mirror *shadow*.
Then you would actually need something like true sight, blind sight (although I'd argue regular images can fool blind sight), etc. to pickout the images from the real target and aim for the real target instead of one at random.
Just my 2cp if I were to rewrite it. As is, it's a little dumb yes.
As a side note, invisibility doesn't add to your stealth in a dark room (without someone with darkvision to thus not be affected by the darkness) as the opponent already has a -20 to perception or automatically fails a visible only perception check if you aren't moving/breathing right next to them. Similarly, a person in a silence spell automatically fails auditory perception checks.
Mirror Image is broken in oh-so-many ways. For example, if a Gargantuan dragon casts it, are the images in his square? He covers many squares, so if you're shooting said dragon with an arrow, the presence of the images isn't going to make you miss. And if they're not in his square (which is pretty much required if the spell is going to mean anything) they might not fit into the same room.
It was fine in old D&D and 1e AD&D when people didn't look at verisimilitude very closely, and all wizards were human-sized. But in 3e or PF it makes a lot less sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's reasonable to assume that if you occupy more than one square then the images also occupy those squares. Don't try to game it or logic it too hard. The spell makes attacks against the target miss based on 1 out of x copies chances. Any interpretation that doesn't lead to that result is almost certainly wrong.
It's reasonable to assume that if you occupy more than one square then the images also occupy those squares. Don't try to game it or logic it too hard. The spell makes attacks against the target miss based on 1 out of x copies chances. Any interpretation that doesn't lead to that result is almost certainly wrong.
This. Which also means if the dragon can fit in the room, all the dragon images can also fit in the room.
It's reasonable to assume that if you occupy more than one square then the images also occupy those squares. Don't try to game it or logic it too hard. The spell makes attacks against the target miss based on 1 out of x copies chances. Any interpretation that doesn't lead to that result is almost certainly wrong.
Its also reasonable to assume that mirror images are constantly shifting places merging and unmerging with one another as well as with the caster themselves… thus slightly distorting attackers causing them to swing too shallow, too far to the left or right, or overreach and swing past the actual target… mirror images don’t have substance to them, they function by misleading an attacker’s perception… they images don’t even have to surround the caster, nor is the casrwr necessarily standing still, the caster can very easily be taking small steps and moving as if they too were an illusory image standing to the left one moment and the right the next… the more images there are, the harder it can be to pin down the real one.
But that doesn't tie in very well with the 'gargantuan dragon in a room it can barely fit into' example. You're not going to accidentally swing your sword too far to hit it. And the images can be destroyed by hitting them with your sword, suggesting they do have some kind of substance. My interpretation is that they have enough substance to absorb your attack and prevent it damaging anything else. Why the image can only be destroyed when you have your eyes open is harder to explain; I have to fall back on, "because magic".
Why the image can only be destroyed when you have your eyes open is harder to explain; I have to fall back on, "because magic".
Actually have an argument against the popular belief that you can aim at a target affected by mirror images, close your eyes, and then attack to ignore the images… the fact that your eyes were open when you aimed means you are in fact still affected by the illusion… you picked a target to swing at or shoot with your eyes open, just because you closed your eyes before making the attack doesn’t negate the fact that you may have already been targeting a fake. To illustrate this better, imagine a wizard created 8 illusory copies of themself with a silent image spell, each copy occupies a different space on a 15ft square area. The wizard and his copies start running around those spaces randomly and then stop. You pick one to attack and then close your eyes before you make your attack, do you now automatically target the real wizard? Of course not, you still attack the one you chose before you closed your eyes, real or not. This situation doesn’t actually change with mirror images. Unless you are blind for the entire aiming process, you are subject to mirror images.
I tend to assume all the images are in the character's own space. After all, it still works the same when the character is trapped in a box.
But as for the 'close your eyes' trick, I say you have to close your eyes for a full round and suffer all the penalties of blindness for that time.
@Chell, I'm not sure if the example you made follows the "shooting while blind" rule either, where in you miss-perceive something so you don't get to "needle in a haystack" pick out your target, but simply choose the closest target in a general direction, roll your concealment chance, and then get to roll against whatever you happened to shoot at, friend or foe, real creature or image.
There's also still my point earlier, because while yes you can make a downward slash that will only barely trim off a bit of a would be target/image's flesh, a more obvious to be useful (at least in theory) attack would be sideways or at least diagonal (or even a thrust to center of image cluster) so you could cut through every image until you hit your target, but the game does not allow this and somehow the insubstantial images are enough to stop an attack outright. (Side point, this is also part of why X months back when I asked if illusory wall should be "solid enough" to stop someone who didn't disbelieve from just walking through. Because if a lower level figment spell can stop a violent and intentional force, why couldn't a higher level one stop a much calmer attempt to walk through a wall?)
@Chell, I'm not sure if the example you made follows the "shooting while blind" rule either, where in you miss-perceive something so you don't get to "needle in a haystack" pick out your target, but simply choose the closest target in a general direction, roll your concealment chance, and then get to roll against whatever you happened to shoot at, friend or foe, real creature or image.
There's also still my point earlier, because while yes you can make a downward slash that will only barely trim off a bit of a would be target/image's flesh, a more obvious to be useful (at least in theory) attack would be sideways or at least diagonal (or even a thrust to center of image cluster) so you could cut through every image until you hit your target, but the game does not allow this and somehow the insubstantial images are enough to stop an attack outright. (Side point, this is also part of why X months back when I asked if illusory wall should be "solid enough" to stop someone who didn't disbelieve from just walking through. Because if a lower level figment spell can stop a violent and intentional force, why couldn't a higher level one stop a much calmer attempt to walk through a wall?)
An illusory wall would in fact prevent someone who failed to disbelieve it from simply walking through. The illusion is tactile, meaning you can in fact touch it, and it feels real. While illusions may not be mind-affecting, they still play off deceiving a targets mind and perceptions. If you believe it to be real, then you do so in every way. When you reach out to touch the wall to see if it really is there, your mind tells you it is and you feel a real solid wall despite the fact that there is no solid matter there. If you disbelieved it however, your hand would pass through because your mind isn’t telling you that something is definitely there… if you were pushed into the wall, ran at it, or jumped into it however, you would pass through regardless because your false perception cant stop external momentum from throwing you through the wall. Simply walking or touching however, you would encounter resistance as your mind creates a real object where there is none.
If you want a RAW quote for that, it is simply the fact that the illusion is tactile. An illusion cannot be tactile unless it is either partially real (shadow) or creates a tactile resistance within the mind of those who are affected. Which, some might argue should mean illusions with tactile touch must be mind-affecting… but really they don’t… there are plenty of optical illusions in reality that create tactile sensations that aren’t actually real.
I tend to assume all the images are in the character's own space. After all, it still works the same when the character is trapped in a box.
But as for the 'close your eyes' trick, I say you have to close your eyes for a full round and suffer all the penalties of blindness for that time.
I can actually agree with this… if you close your eyes to avoid it, you are willingly accepting the blind condition for the entire round. You shouldn’t gain the benefits if you are unwilling to accept the penalties.
There's also still my point earlier, because while yes you can make a downward slash that will only barely trim off a bit of a would be target/image's flesh, a more obvious to be useful (at least in theory) attack would be sideways or at least diagonal (or even a thrust to center of image cluster) so you could cut through every image until you hit your target...
All of these would be very dependent on the type of weapon being used. a 5'x5' square allows quite a bit of variance on actual target location. Enough that any weapon that is not an AoE effect can easily miss.
Sideways slash with a dagger? If the real target is actually a foot back from the main mass, you miss.
Stab with a spear? If the real target is actually 2' to the side of the central mass, you miss.
Sideways or arcing slash with a greatsword? If the real target is actually 2' closer than the central mass you don't have the leverage you would expect/want from a greatsword. You might even strike them the hand guard instead of the blade. (this type of weapon would have the best change of hitting regardless of actual location, but the rules don't make the distinction based on weapon type/length/size).
Of course, if you want to make the reason that the spell works is that the images have some actual substance, that is fine. Its just not the de facto reason it works.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But now we're getting into really apples-to-oranges territory.
This game is a very abstract simulation. It's largely a 2-D simulation, at that. "Five foot square" is an ease-of-reference unit of measure, to establish limits on a common map. Same with the 6-second round, etc. Yes, of course Mirror Image would be of much more limited utility in real life, against a trained fighter striking at at the spellcaster in a skillful and considered manner. Where the game/simulation is concerned, however, the salient point is that the illusory doubles created by Mirror Image afford the spellcaster a chance of being missed by the attacker(s). Unless the attacker has a means of ignoring the illusory doubles, it doesn't matter how the attacks are delivered (in terms of horizontal or vertical cut, thrust, etc.). You could be a giant swinging an oak tree diagonally four times through that five foot square. If you miss by 6 or more, you're not hitting a figment or the spellcaster. If you miss by 5 or less, you're hitting a figment, not the spellcaster. Introducing common sense physics is enticing, of course, but inevitably (IMHO_ it breaks down the simulation, suspension of disbelief, or both.
If you miss by 6 or more, you're not hitting a figment or the spellcaster. If you miss by 5 or less, you're hitting a figment, not the spellcaster.
If you wear plate mail and a tower shield, the figments are harder to destroy. Therefore, the figment is protected by the armor. Therefore, it has substance and can actively block attacks, which also explains why swinging a big weapon doesn't help. My interpretation is logically flawless! (If you don't think about it too much.)
There's also still my point earlier, because while yes you can make a downward slash that will only barely trim off a bit of a would be target/image's flesh, a more obvious to be useful (at least in theory) attack would be sideways or at least diagonal (or even a thrust to center of image cluster) so you could cut through every image until you hit your target...All of these would be very dependent on the type of weapon being used. a 5'x5' square allows quite a bit of variance on actual target location. Enough that any weapon that is not an AoE effect can easily miss.
Sideways slash with a dagger? If the real target is actually a foot back from the main mass, you miss.
Stab with a spear? If the real target is actually 2' to the side of the central mass, you miss.
Sideways or arcing slash with a greatsword? If the real target is actually 2' closer than the central mass you don't have the leverage you would expect/want from a greatsword. You might even strike them the hand guard instead of the blade. (this type of weapon would have the best change of hitting regardless of actual location, but the rules don't make the distinction based on weapon type/length/size).
Of course, if you want to make the reason that the spell works is that the images have some actual substance, that is fine. Its just not the de facto reason it works.
The problem is the spell also stops you from "cleaving" (by both the feat definition and a more literal swinging through) multiple images: the spear would poke through multiple images, the dagger would still slash through multiple images, the guy eventually getting hit by the blunter part of the greatsword would still lose ~half of his images (never mind how hitting someone in plate armor like that with a 2 handed, even bladed, weapon doesn't matter if you hit with a sharp or dull part). I get the game isn't trying to model reality perfectly, but what would be a very good and easy flavor solution also happens to be a very good "balancing fix" to prevent people from just being flatfooted (a varyingly punishing effect) vs. a single creature with the spell without access to more powerful magic that can let you determine which is the real version.
|
I get the game isn't trying to model reality perfectly, but what would be a very good and easy flavor solution also happens to be a very good "balancing fix" to prevent people from just being flatfooted (a varyingly punishing effect) vs. a single creature with the spell without access to more powerful magic that can let you determine which is the real version.
I don't get at all what you are trying to say.
Mirror image doesn't make anyone flat footed.
Not knowing who is the real person out of several copies doesn't make you flat footed.
Not even Invisibility make you flat footed.
I am under the impression that you mean flanked or being denied your dexterity bonus to AC, both of which are noticeably different from flat footed.
They most certainly mean denied dexterity… since the common tactic to ignore mirror image is to close your eyes (therefore willing accepting the blind condition)… which if applied properly means you are blind until the start of your next turn.
Yes, I am referring to the ability to close your eyes and no longer being affected by the mirror images, or even not close your eyes but just avert your gaze totally from just that creature with mirror images to gain total concealment against just them. For all intents and purposes, being denied dex because you can't see something is the same thing as being flatfooted (with the additional -2 AC for not seeing them).