D&D 5E Magic Missile vs. Mirror Image

[Caliban]

I feel that we are entitled to a better explanation. Yes.
His answer was akin to when you ask your parents why you cant do something and they say " Because I said so"
He literally gave a feeble explanation.

No Im not upset by the ruling itself. I don't care for it but that doesn't really matter. What I am upset with is the Nearly total Lack of explanation.

What's this "we" stuff? I understood how it worked before the clarification. Not my problem they didn't dumb it down enough for you in the first place.

 

[Brandegoris]

Why is it NOT an Attack but plenty of other similar spells ARE an attack? Oh..Because he said so?
WHERE is the explanation or his thought process?
MM seems an awful lot like an attack to me! LOL

 

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

Why is it NOT an Attack but plenty of other similar spells ARE an attack? Oh..Because he said so?

No, because the spell description does not say that it is an attack and it does not use the mechanics for an attack.

 

[Caliban]

Why is it NOT an Attack but plenty of other similar spells ARE an attack? Oh..Because he said so?
WHERE is the explanation or his thought process?
MM seems an awful lot like an attack to me! LOL

By the rules - an attack requires an attack roll.

Fireball is not an attack. (No attack roll, just a saving throw.)
Firebolt is an attack - it requires a D20 attack roll to hit.

Magic Missile is a special case because it doesn't have a saving throw or an attack roll. It just does automatic damage - which is probably why is has a magic item (brooch of shielding) and a spell (shield) specifically to counter it.

All three are offensive spells, but only one of them is an attack spell (specifically - a Ranged Spell Attack).

The MM spell does have some pretty odd rulings associated with it, but this isn't one of them.

 

[Brandegoris]

What's this "we" stuff? I understood how it worked before the clarification. Not my problem they didn't dumb it down enough for you in the first place.

You are super clever. Good one.
Be careful. You can put a smiley face on the end to pretend you aren't mad, but your angry is showing.
And its NOT clear. When I say "WE" I am referring to everyone else that has a problem with How Unclear it is.
Thus, the reason for the thread. If you like the way its written and it makes sense to you that's great, But insulting people that don't like it doesn't make you right. it just makes you a d*ck

 

[Lord Twig]

Personally I'm okay with the explanation that Magic Missiles are not an attack. It would be the same as Dissonant Whispers not being an attack. You choose a creature within range and they are effected by the spell. Fine.

But Dissonant Whispers is not an area of effect spell that only effects one creature. Because that would be stupid. Likewise Magic Missile is not an area of effect spell that effects 1 or more creatures 1 or more times. Because that would be equally stupid.

 

[Brandegoris]

By the rules - an attack requires an attack roll.

Fireball is not an attack. (No attack roll, just a saving throw.)
Firebolt is an attack - it requires a D20 attack roll to hit.

Magic Missile is a special case because it doesn't have a saving throw or an attack roll. It just does automatic damage - which is probably why is has a magic item (brooch of shielding) and a spell (shield) specifically to counter it.

All three are offensive spells, but only one of them is an attack spell (specifically - a Ranged Spell Attack).

The MM spell does have some pretty odd rulings associated with it, but this isn't one of them.

You just Stated the problem in your own post:

Magic Missile is a special case because it doesn't have a saving throw or an attack roll. It just does automatic damage - which is probably why is has a magic item (brooch of shielding) and a spell (shield) specifically to counter it.

Its a "Special Case". That's why this thread exists. It doesn't seem to clearly fall into one of the above rules.

I am glad that you are content to go with what the designer says to do without adequate explanation. I take umbrage with what I consider a design flaw? Doesn't mean I need it dumbed down. Quite the Opposite

 

[Caliban]

You are super clever. Good one.

At least you got one thing right.

You think you found a problem with my explanation, but you just showed that you don't understand it.

I restate it in even simpler terms:

No attack roll = not an attack.

Not an attack? Mirror Image doesn't help you.

 

[Caliban]

Personally I'm okay with the explanation that Magic Missiles are not an attack. It would be the same as Dissonant Whispers not being an attack. You choose a creature within range and they are effected by the spell. Fine.

But Dissonant Whispers is not an area of effect spell that only effects one creature. Because that would be stupid. Likewise Magic Missile is not an area of effect spell that effects 1 or more creatures 1 or more times. Because that would be equally stupid.

That would be the weird ruling for Magic Missile. It's strange, but I wouldn't call it stupid. Controversial, wonky even, but not stupid.

Magic Missile is pretty unique amongst the 5e spells. Every other damaging spell grants a saving throw or requires an attack roll.

 

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

You just Stated the problem in your own post:

Magic Missile is a special case because it doesn't have a saving throw or an attack roll. It just does automatic damage - which is probably why is has a magic item (brooch of shielding) and a spell (shield) specifically to counter it.

Its a "Special Case". That's why this thread exists. It doesn't seem to clearly fall into one of the above rules.

There is only one test given in the PHB and the basic rules to determine what is an attack. Magic missile does not pass that test. It is clear. It is unambiguous.

That magic missile does not require a saving throw is not evidence that it is an attack.