Stacking Blur and Mirror Image

[irdeggman]

Mirror Image doesn't allow a saving throw in the first place...?

-Hyp.

Actually there is no entry at all for MI.

I would personally use the will (disbelief when interacting - see text) type of entry, but there is no entry.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Actually there is no entry at all for MI.

Because it's a Personal spell. They never have Saving Throw entries.

Some illusions can be disbelieved; others - like Invisibility, Silence, and Mirror Image - can't.

-Hyp.

 

[TheGogmagog]

And I'm not sure the best way to figure out a rule is by applying it in a totally artificial scenario that is itself outside the RAW;

I agree with this, the blanket over the head is a bad example. Using the tower shield for total cover might be, but I think everyone would consider the normal 10+dex AC to hit the tower shield.

I also agree with the FAQ, however as someone pointed out the difference between one 2nd level spell and two level spells that are allowed to 'stack' is one image. It's not worth fighting over, no matter what the opinions of the DM vs Player are.

I'm a bit suprised of the number of people who support the idea of no miss chance for images school of thought. I'll certainly give it more consideration in the future.

 

[irdeggman]

Because it's a Personal spell. They never have Saving Throw entries.

Some illusions can be disbelieved; others - like Invisibility, Silence, and Mirror Image - can't.

-Hyp.

And yet blur does have a saving throw.

Blur
Illusion (Glamer)
Level: Brd 2,Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
The subject’s outline appears blurred, shifting and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).

A see invisibility spell does not counteract the blur effect, but a true seeing spell does.

Opponents that cannot see the subject ignore the spell’s effect (though fighting an unseen opponent carries penalties of its own).

 

[irdeggman]

Because it's a Personal spell. They never have Saving Throw entries.

Some illusions can be disbelieved; others - like Invisibility, Silence, and Mirror Image - can't.

-Hyp.

Disguise Self has no entry for saving throw eithe - but the text talks about one when interacting with it.

I see this as real similar to the MI text, which is consistent with the "overview" way of how Illusion spells are interacted with (and their saving throws).

 

[phindar]

Blur's Save is because you can put it on someone else, who might resist. Cure spells are the same way (I say, realizing I'm going to have to look that up). Yeah, the SRD agrees with me. I mean, it doesn't say, "phindar, you're a genius!" but I think the intent is there. Mirror Image omits that because the game designers didn't forsee an eventuality in which a player would cast a spell on himself and resist it, which I think is probably a glaring oversight on the part of the developers. If I have learned anything as a GM, its that players will do anything.

 

[werk]

How do you feel about the blanket?

If the character puts a blanket on his head, does it distinguish him from the figments, or do they appear to have blankets on their heads too?

If they all have blankets, will successfully attacking an illusory blanket dispel the figment?

-Hyp.

I think this is brilliant.

It completely supports my interpretation in such a beautifully simple way. Yes, the visual created by the spell is replicated to the images, but the spell effect is not...for that reason.

Put another star on your monitor. star

 

[pawsplay]

"The figments stay near you and disappear when struck."

"Any successful attack against an image destroys it."



Is the shadow part of the illusion, or is the shadow created naturally because the illusion is opaque?

If the shadow is part of the illusion, I'd say yes - and you'd require an attack roll against AC 10 + size + Dex to do it.

-Hyp.

That's interesting, because figments are unreal and hence the illusion cannot be opaque. Can you also target the empty space between the image and the shadow?

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I believe that the reason the MI disappears when hit is because the observer is faced with "proof" that the illusion isn't real by actually hitting it. So if the observer hasn't hit it (that miss chance thing) then he has no proof. Now the text doesn't specifically state this but you can arrive at that conclusion by putting things together.

I think this adds a aspect to the spell which is not in the rules and could lead to problems...

If it was "you know you hit it but went though" as the reason the images disapear, Blur would make the images unable to be dispelled. You would hit a blurred target, but see your weapon not have any effect. There is nothing unbelievable about that, so the figment stays around. Forever, because that veiwer perception has nothing to do with whether you made your miss chance or not.

It also implies a "shared save" of all people fighting the caster, which is not the case of any illusion spells with a will (disbelief) save. (you can walk back and forth through a illusionary wall in front of the -1 will save meatshield and if he doesn't make his save on his own he'll be like "when did you learn to walk through walls?" ) By the spell, the effect is a purely physical one - If I summon a Spiritual weapon, set it attacking the mirror imaged caster and then turn my attention to healing my allies, the image the SW hits is "popped" without any need for someone to be observing the outcome.

I don't have a big investment in the issue one way or the other. My veiw is that the spell sets an AC for the images, and failing changes in the wording of the spell to allow sharing defensive spells or manuvers (as opposed to errata by FAQ) hitting that AC pops the images. Obviously other DMs are free to rule differently, but I would expect a caster who knew both spells to know how they did or didn't interact.

 

[Nail]

That's interesting, because figments are unreal and hence the illusion cannot be opaque.

What?!

Illusions can't be opaque? What ever gave you that idea?