D&D 5E Magic Missile vs. Mirror Image

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

No. this is me explaining to you the spell as it is written. You select a target. The spell cannot discern the difference between an elf, a dwarf, a fighter or a rock. It merely goes to the target you selected.

All right.

It doesn't detect mage armor. It just hits despite it. Being a force attack, it can impact armor and still do damage.

Eldritch blast does force damage. Eldritch blast requires attack rolls. Disintegrate does force damage. Disintegrate can be evaded. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization.

It has no need to zip around to some sort of opening and hit there like you suggest.

Yet it is mechanically different from eldritch blast and disintegrate, and you offer no explanation as to why. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization.

It will go around a corner or cover, but that's it.

Its situational awareness and self-direction extend this far but no further. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization.

It also has no ability to tell the difference between one person and another. That's what the caster is for. The caster has seen his target and aims at it.

And never misses, necessitating the in-fiction explanation that the caster is much better with this one attack than with every single other one. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization.

The spell then avoids all but that target. It's not an intelligent thing.

Re-read those two sentences as you placed them in juxtaposition. Can you honestly not see the problem in saying that the spell avoids all cover, discerns its target, and never misses without having some kind of homing capability?

So.

No. this is me explaining to you the spell as it is written.

No. This is you rationalizing the spell as it is written playing the way you think it should play.

It merely goes to the target you selected.

You mean the image of the target you selected. Tell me, how do you play magic missile against a target who has blur up?

I am also curious about your allowing the images to be destroyed by save-based spells, and not just because that is expressly counter to mirror image as written. What ability scores and proficiencies do you give the images--the spell only gives their AC? More theoretically, does making the images susceptible to AoE spells not tip it back toward "screw[ing] over martials," who by and large have no way of reliably damaging the caster and potentially destroying all three images in a single turn?

I don't have a problem with anyone house-ruling anything they like in the game, though I personally would not want to play in a game where mirror image was completely rewritten. What I am really objecting to here is your insistence that there are profound and intractable flaws in the wording of these spells which make them behave erratically or absurdly if played as written. There are not.

 

[Maxperson]

You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization. You have made a capricious and arbitrary rationalization.

You probably think you're being clever with that. Instead it's fairly pathetic, and something I'd expect from someone in grade school, rather than an adult here on the forum.

I am also curious about your allowing the images to be destroyed by save-based spells, and not just because that is expressly counter to mirror image as written. What ability scores and proficiencies do you give the images--the spell only gives their AC? More theoretically, does making the images susceptible to AoE spells not tip it back toward "screw[ing] over martials," who by and large have no way of reliably damaging the caster and potentially destroying all three images in a single turn?

If you want me to answer you any further, you need to start responding with more maturity.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

You probably think you're being clever with that. Instead it's fairly pathetic, and something I'd expect from someone in grade school, rather than an adult here on the forum.



If you want me to answer you any further, you need to start responding with more maturity.

"And with this the debate is over! Maxperson concedes and the crowd goes wild!"
"This discussion is going to be remembered for many years, don't you think so Hank?"
"I sure do Bob, we've seen a number of unique plays, but in the end Maxperson just couldn't keep up. I'm sure this won't be his last debate though, he's hungry for victory and today's setback will only increase his determination."
"I hope you're right about that Hank, I'm looking forward to what new tricks Maxperson can bring to the next rule discussion. Now back to the studio!"

 

[Darkness]

Folks, please keep it civil. This is just an internet forum about pretending to be an elf, so it's pretty silly to fight over some spell or other. Much better to enjoy your time here.

 

[Arial Black]

So you think that it's perfectly rational to be able to target something that's impossible to track? I have a bridge to sell you.

According to the game system not only can save-based spells automatically target the real guy and not the images 100% of the time, attack roll based spells (and weapon attacks themselves) automatically target the real guy and not the images 100% of the time! Mirror image simply does not interfere with the initial attack targeting the real guy. In fact, in order to function, the attack must originally target the real guy! The caster/attack targets the 'creature' (100%)!

But if you are the guy protected by mirror image, then:- "Each time a creature targets you with an attack during the spell’s duration, roll a d20 to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates".

Meaning that if the original attack did not target you, then mirror image does not do anything to mess with that attack!

Meanwhile, magic missile is simply not capable of targeting an image because it can only target a creature.

There is no way in the game for an attacker to directly target an image! The only way for an image to end up being the target is if the attacker first targets the creature and then the result of a special d20 roll says that the attack targets an image instead of the creature the attack originally targeted.

Also, the FBI want a word with you about selling bridges to innocents who don't know the 5E rules well enough and therefore might be fooled by your scam.

 

[cmad1977]

The usual suspects show an unsurprising inability to comprehend a 1st level spell. Color me unsurprised.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Morrus]

The usual suspects show an unsurprising inability to comprehend a 1st level spell. Color me unsurprised.

Your worth isn't measured by how well you understand a D&D rule; it's measured how well you treat those who don't. You failed. We literally just asked people to be civil.

 

[Brandegoris]

Seems like Arial and his "side" for lack of a better word, have the right of it as the rules are written.
I don't think that's even a debate.
The problem once again is some people ( Me of course!), trying to rationalize it in a "roleplaying" way?
The rules do seem to be clear at this point, But visual-wise and Story-wise the way these two spells interact can be strange for some people. Hard do describe..

 

[Cognomen's Cassowary]

I would call that a fair summary, and I get that people want a clear narrative of the action. I just don't understand the difficulty with changing one's narrative to match the mechanics.

 

[Maxperson]

<A whole lot of avoiding the question>

I get that the rules are nonsensical. That wasn't what I asked. Given the fact that 1) the rules say it's impossible for anyone(that includes casters) to track the caster of mirror image, and 2) it takes as long to target with a spell as it does a weapon, do you think it's rational for a spell caster who has the exact same limitations as the fighter, to be able to target perfectly something that's impossible to track when the fighter can't?