Stacking Blur and Mirror Image

[werk]

Well a figmment can't reproduce a physical effect (again as pointed out by the FAQ).

So unless the cover (a physical barrier - where concealment is a "visual" condition) physically extends to where the MI is it can't benefit from it.

PHB pg 306

But that would require you to target the figment rather than the caster...

 

[Mistwell]

It's because your last post was made AFTER mine.

"Movement oriented effects, like bonuses to Dex, benefit the image. " Is compelling and makes sense. But I think you put too much weight on the visual description of the spell rather than the actual mechanics of how magic works in D&D (the game, not the place).


and...

You claim that MI is a movement effect, yet if the caster was hasted, the AC of the figments does not increase. "The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects. ...A hasted creature gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves."

Since it is not a size or dex modifier, the figments do not gain the benefit, but haste clearly says it is a modifier granted due to increased movement.

This is the difference between an ACTUAL movement effect and a fluff movement effect.

I don't see it as fluff. Any more than people seem to think "blur" means there is MORE of the image to hit. Both intepretations come from the same portion of the description.

I'll ask it again. If I am under the effect of a Cat’s Grace spell, does the Cat’s Grace spell effect benefit the image or not?

 

[werk]

I don't see it as fluff. Any more than people seem to think "blur" means there is MORE of the image to hit. Both intepretations come from the same portion of the description.

I'll ask it again. If I am under the effect of a Cat’s Grace spell, does the Cat’s Grace spell effect benefit the image or not?

No, it does not. Cat's grace affected the caster, and the image has the caster's dex bonus to AC as expressly called out by the spell. Specific vs general. The reason that barkskin doesn't carry over to the figment is the same reason blur doesn't.

Edit: care to comment on haste?

 

[SlagMortar]

That's just another analogy based on a fixed object blocking sight, and not a movement-oriented effect influencing the image. Movement oriented effects, like bonuses to Dex, benefit the image. Blur is a movement-oriented effect. The image is jumping about and moving at the edges very fast, making it harder to hit. It's not that there is a fixed object added to the image, but that the image is moving, that makes the FAQ answer compelling to me.

Concealment (such as from darkness) is caused by the target being difficult to see. If the concealment from blur is caused by movement, and not by making the target difficult to see, then, then I see no reason to treat concealment from blur the same as concealment from darkness. You said they should be treated the same, but now you are saying they are not the same.

Well a figmment can't reproduce a physical effect (again as pointed out by the FAQ).

So unless the cover (a physical barrier - where concealment is a "visual" condition) physically extends to where the MI is it can't benefit from it.

So you are saying that mirror images can gain the benefit of some kinds of cover, but not from other kinds of cover. If that is so, the images should be able to benefit from some kinds of concealment while not benefitting from other kinds of concealment.

 

[Mistwell]

No, it does not. Cat's grace affected the caster, and the image has the caster's dex bonus to AC as expressly called out by the spell. Specific vs general. The reason that barkskin doesn't carry over to the figment is the same reason blur doesn't.

You say no, but then you seem to mean yes. Cat's grace grants the PC a bonus to their dex. A bonus to Dex has as one of it's effects a bonus to AC. The bonus to AC from the bonus to Dex also carries over to the image. Hence, the EFFECT of the Cat's Grace Spell's bonus to dex applies to the Image. I don't see any other way to read it. If the effect of the Cat's Grace spell does not benefit the image, then the image should have an AC 2 less that it does under this scenario.

I think you are being shifty on your answer because you don't want to work out the ramifications of some spells having an effect on an image, and others not having an effect. And, well, that's just the way it seems to work so let's deal with it. Reduce would also have an effect on the image if cast on the PC. Some spells are going to change the AC of the image.

Edit: care to comment on haste?

I did but less directly apparently than I thought I had. Haste has a movement effect. So does expeditious retreat. So will accelerated movement (or something that gives you, say, a swim speed). Some movement effects will impact the image, and others will not. It depends on the movement effect. If the movement effect would make the image more difficult to hit because of the movement, then it in general will effect the image.

 

[Mistwell]

Concealment (such as from darkness) is caused by the target being difficult to see. If the concealment from blur is caused by movement, and not by making the target difficult to see, then, then I see no reason to treat concealment from blur the same as concealment from darkness. You said they should be treated the same, but now you are saying they are not the same.

I am saying ANYTHING THAT MAKES THE IMAGE HARDER TO HIT applies.

If you have trouble seeing the image, then it is harder to hit. If you have trouble landing a blow on the image because it keeps jumping around, then it is harder to hit. They are the same in that both make the image harder to hit.

So you are saying that mirror images can gain the benefit of some kinds of cover,

No, I have been referring to concealment, not cover. Cover can make an image harder to hit, but only if it is actual cover and not an image of cover (since that would just make the image of cover itself part of the image that you need to hit).

but not from other kinds of cover. If that is so, the images should be able to benefit from some kinds of concealment while not benefitting from other kinds of concealment.

I am sure there are some kinds of concealment that will not benefit the image, but right now I cannot think of any off hand.

 

[werk]

If the movement effect would make the image more difficult to hit because of the movement, then it in general will effect the image.

So...haste...?

 

[Mistwell]

And with that, I'm done.

I actually think you continuing to quote me out of context is a bit rude actually werk.

And it was doubly rude to then go back and edit your answer which I had already quoted and responded to at the time of your edit!

 

[Mistwell]

So...haste...?

Not going to answer that question a third time. If you have something you are not satisfied with concerning my first two answers, let's hear it. But you just asking the same question over isn't going to result in a different answer.

 

[werk]

Not going to answer that question a third time. If you have something you are not satisfied with concerning my first two answers, let's hear it. But you just asking the same question over isn't going to result in a different answer.

I really don't know how I can continue the argument, you haven't said anything salient.

Try using some game terms and maybe some rules text to support your argument and come back for another try.