I can't find it in the new Player Core or GM Core. Now that I think about it, the devs are likely trying to remove some big problems this hazard presents.
1. It's ambiguous wording has been the cause of many TPKs. I've heard many tales of GMs and even adventure path authors not understanding how the mirror works and just wiping the players as a result.
2. The mirror only works against evil creatures and creates evil duplicates. Now that alignment is gone, what should it work against? Anything that isn't unholy? Can the PCs steal this mirror and point it at the BBEG, then toss the mirror down a Bottomless Pit in case he escapes?
I hope they bring it back in another book, even if it's heavily nerfed. It's a cool concept.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't find it in the new Player Core or GM Core. Now that I think about it, the devs are likely trying to remove some big problems this hazard presents.
Just because something isn't in the Core Remaster doesn't mean it was removed from the game.
Yes, if your GM decides to limit you to the Remaster books, then I guess you can't use it, same as before when some GMs limited players to only using Core or Core+APG.
But unless they removed the spell, it's still part of Pathfinder 2E.
To quote the Paizo BLOG:
It’s November 15th, and that means that Player Core and GM Core are now officially out! These remastered products bring a lot of exciting changes to Pathfinder Second Edition, but that doesn’t mean you have to ditch your older books or stop using the classes that don’t appear in Player Core. To help you use classes and other options that are affected by the Remaster changes, we’re presenting a handful of compatibility errata for the Pathfinder Core Rulebook, Advanced Player’s Guide, Secrets of Magic, and Dark Archive on the Pathfinder FAQ!
So check the FAQ and Errata page to see if they've removed the spell from the game, or made changes to it.
If your GM allows all official Paizo material, then you're good to go.
So, yeah. The only person who should be using that is the GM, and if you're the GM then ... just keep using it.
How should it be used, then? Evil creatures don't exist anymore, so should the word "evil" just be replaced with "unholy" throughout the hazard stats?
I think there are two kinds of evil in this game. There's the evil where someone desires to bring harm to others, which as a game mechanic is now covered by edicts and anathema instead. Then there's the beings who are evil not by choice, it's just that they are literally made of evil essence, like undead and demons. I think it's that second kind of evil that the unholy trait represents.
Then there's the beings who are evil not by choice, it's just that they are literally made of evil essence, like undead and demons. I think it's that second kind of evil that the unholy trait represents.Unholy clerics aren't made of evil essence.
Good point.
I think there are two kinds of evil in this game. There's the evil where someone desires to bring harm to others, which as a game mechanic is now covered by edicts and anathema instead. Then there's the beings who are evil not by choice, it's just that they are literally made of evil essence, like undead and demons. I think it's that second kind of evil that the unholy trait represents.
"Unholy" means "has signed on for the War In Heaven, on the side of the devils". "Holy" is the same on the angelic side. That's really all there is to it. It doesn't actually have any direct moral implications.
Now, it has a staggering boatload full of indirect moral implications, but all it means directly is whether you signed on the dotted line for this or that extraplanar power.
Those that have a weakness to Holy are sufficiently aligned with the devils that the conceptual weapon that the angelic forces forged specifically to destroy that manner of being works extra-well. The reverse is true for those things vulnerable to Unholy. Again, this doesn't technically mean that they're necessarily what any particular person might describe as "good" or "evil". Sure does suggest some stuff pretty hard, though.
The rules no longer have anything to say about whether any particular person actually is Good or Evil, and I'm finding I rather like that.
...though it might be cool to get some divination spells to let us pick out the edicts and anathemas of the people we're dealing with. Does the remaster have any of those?
|
Keep using it, it's not really a huge issue as far as adjudication goes when trying to "convert" it for PF2r, sure, the universal innate "element" of Evil isn't a thing in the system anymore but that doesn't really ruin the thing, at worst you'd simply have to sit down and watch any number of a dozen plus episodes of Star Trek that hinges upon the mirror universe and in the case where there is a PC that is substantially "bad/evil" enough that the original version wouldn't have worked with it just say that the mirror universe version of that PC was already killed in the mirror universe.
PS: As a sidenote, everyone should just go binge Deep Space Nine anyhow, it'll do ya good.
I think it's probably been left out as it is basically the Mirror of Opposition, a classic, very D&D thing.
I think it's probably been left out as it is basically the Mirror of Opposition, a classic, very D&D thing.
So is magic missile. We still have force barrage. Besides which, a lot of "classic D&D things" are actually taken from myriads of legends, myths, and public domain sources. Even the Tarrasque is based on a dragon in a French Christian myth. D&D doesn't have a monopoly on the "evil mirror dimension" trope.
TBH it was kind of a terribly designed trap maybe they just didn't think it was worth the effort.
A good rogue can usually spot these mirrors in advance. I can see it causing all types of problems if a party doesn't have a rogue or high perception type checking for traps.
The Darkside Mirror is a classic trap and item. Mirror of Opposition is another name it goes under. No way they get rid of it long-term. It's too cool a trap.
No way they get rid of it long-term. It's too cool a trap.That's not what people think of it in my experience.
Even my group that played an adventure where-in an orb of opposition was a plot device that produced a number of interesting enemies for them and allowed them to rescue a hero by dealing with his mirrored version still thinks of it as "that one stupid mirror that is just a TPK waiting to happen" because running into it in a straight up fashion tends to result in the group having to choose between a player sitting out while the rest of the players handle a ridiculously hard fight, or the player has to play their own stats but as the villain and actively try to take down their own party members.
And that's without getting into how obnoxious the thing is to run given that the level it's intended for means you can't disable it unless you took a feat and everything else about how the trap works is designed so that it is mandatory to defeat the duplicates it creates because it's indestructible and can't be actually disabled.
It's the kind of thing that causes paranoid behavior like smashing every mirror you see before you get reflected in it just in case, like how if a GM over-uses mimics the players will start poking everything with a stick or something before trying to interact with it normally.
It's old and overused and badly designed, dropping it from the game would be fine.
What? If you check for it and make the check, you notice it is an unusual mirror. You can destroy it avoid getting reflected in it if you make the check. It has a really low hardness and hit points unless there is a duplicate in existence.
I do understand if your players hate it, especially if the DM totally crushed them with it. I wouldn't consider it an item a DM should be throwing in a lot because it should be a sparingly used trap in a scenario the players can handle.
I can see how it is open to DM abuse or a very unpleasant player experience. I prefer such an item exists. They can be fun.
What? If you check for it and make the check, you notice it is an unusual mirror.
That's all you get though.
It's also a master proficiency check, which means that depending on your party you might not have the ability to detect it at all (even more true for the upscaled version in a certain AP which could only be detected by rangers and rogues when it was published). The retrieval check is likewise impossible unless you're encountering it as a low level threat.
Then if you do trigger it, it activates automatically (while also getting to do its routine on its own turn, effectively giving it two turns in the first round), which can basically be game ending on its own, depending on who it hits and party size (which is another issue with its design).
... And even putting all of that aside, it's a hazard that inevitably leads to direct PC vs PC combat, which is just frankly not something PF2 handles very well as a system.
Bad trap all around.
What? If you check for it and make the check, you notice it is an unusual mirror. You can destroy it avoid getting reflected in it if you make the check. It has a really low hardness and hit points unless there is a duplicate in existence.You are making an argument that analogs to "if the GM or author puts the pressure plate where you already weren't going to step except for on purpose, it's easy to avoid the trap connected to it."
And you're underselling the fact that to be able to succeed at the check is limited to particular character builds and even then it's a DC 34 to spot the thing which means you've got to have +3 on top of master proficiency's base to have a 50% chance.
The best case scenario being that you notice a trap and automatically defeat it (since no character at that level could reasonably fail to do 5 damage) is not a good argument in favor of the trap.
I can see how it is open to DM abuse or a very unpleasant player experience. I prefer such an item exists. They can be fun.This is such... I can't actually say the word here. You're presuming "DM abuse" when all I'm talking about is literally the most straightfoward and obvious use of the mirror, and then saying "they can be fun" with no explanation as to how you make a situation that probably boils down to opening the door to a room or stepping around a corner of a hallway and then the party is suddenly in a boss fight and a member down anything even resembling "fun."
It's just a nebulous implication that when you do it it's "fun" and when I do it I'm and abusive DM, even though the fact that I'm talking about it in player-favoring language is evidence of the opposite (an abusive GM would, by my estimation, love this item because of how ridiculously powerful it is or would be trying to figure out how to make it even worse for the party), and it's adding nothing of use to the conversation. You may as well have just said "get good."
Working real hard to get spun up?
What I mean by GM abuse or incompetence is tossing this in without any awareness of how you're going to use it such as by assuming some group wandering around all somehow or even half of them are reflected in the mirror.
People play this game to be surprised. A Darkside Mirror can be quite a fun encounter and surprise if the GM plays it well and uses it sparingly. It's a matter of understanding that this is a serious and unusual trap and should be an experience.
A singe player turned through the mirror can be handled by most parties.
You seem to be making this out to be some impossible to beat encounter that can't be spotted save by uncommon builds. I did not find that to be the case at all.
It's an interesting trap that can be used by a DM to scare the players and break up the usual play by having a player have to play how they would attack the party.
If your party hates it like you do, then a DM probably shouldn't run it.
The most restrictive interpretation of "a non-evil creature is reflected in the mirror" would be that the creature is standing in a spot from which their reflection would be visible, so only people directly in front of the mirror at the start and on the mirror's turn would be in danger. There are many cases where the mirror never gets the chance to force two different creatures to make a saving throw.
However, many marching orders have two PCs in front if the hallway is wide enough. If both of those PCs walk in front of the mirror at the same time (and they probably will), then there's a decent chance that both will be absorbed before they have a chance to walk out of the danger zone.
Complex hazards should only be able to have an effect as dangerous as this if it's unlikely for the hazard to apply the effect repeatedly. This is not unlikely enough, so the hazard definitely needs a nerf. That's why I was excited to see how the remaster addressed the mirror, but there's no mention of the mirror in GM Core.
|
If the question is "was it removed", well -
- it's not in the new book
- the mechanics were problematic to begin with
- the mechanics clash with the move to cut alignment from the game
- it's kinda close to an IP they want to step away from
So I'm leaning to yeah, it was removed.
---
I think the premise of the mirror is a cool enough concept - compare this to some of the Star Trek evil mirror universe episodes. But the actual mechanical execution is quite problematic.
* What does it mean to be reflected in a mirror? Seeing yourself in the mirror? That might have been the intent, but it's not what it actually says. If you're standing at an angle to the mirror you're still reflected, you just can't see your own reflection. In fact, it's really hard to spot that something is a mirror without being reflected in it, you'd probably need to be invisible for that?
* It's not clear whether the replacement is visible. It's pretty important to know this because retrieving someone the easy way needs to be within 10 minutes and the evil duplicate needs to be dead. But how do you know you have a sudden need to start killing your teammates?
* The sheer speed at which the mirror can generate additional duplicates is just really really high. In a few rounds the entire party could have switched dimensions. Which you can't really fix from the far side either, and can't be fixed with plane shift either. So as campaign derailment goes, there's not many things that can top this.
* How do you accurately determine the encounter budget of fighting some fraction of your own party, anyway? If you have to fight say, half your party, what hazard level is it really?
The whole thing reads to me more as a "concept piece" than as something that was actually thoroughly playtested.
Does smashing the mirror even return taken allies? I didn't notice anything in the text saying it does, there's the legendary thievery check to return them within 10 minutes and the 3 action move a mirror copy can take to reswap (which presumably after 10 minutes the taken party member could do from the other side)
|
|
However, many marching orders have two PCs in front if the hallway is wide enough.
"Marching Order" can be a somewhat nebulous concept in 2E, too, with the exploration system.
The Scout exploration action involves moving "ahead and behind the group to watch danger[.]" Where in the marching order does that leave the PC who's on Scout when initiative is rolled? In front or in back?
There's a reasonable argument to be made that a character using Avoid Notice is darting between sources of cover, not sticking to a particular place in the marching order.
This can make adjudicating the triggering of hazards a little fraught in the first place, even putting aside how wildly dangerous triggering this hazard can be.
It is a trap. It's supposedly be wildly dangerous. That's the fun of it.
If you players hate it, don't use it.
If you think your players will have fun with it, then make it fun.
Don't overuse it as these types of items are a freak out, special experience.
I still remember years ago running into a mirror of opposition. It can get crazy when that happens. Those are some of the most memorable times gaming when things go wild, even if you get wasted. You'll remember the experience.