D&D 5E Magic Missile vs. Mirror Image

[Maxperson]

It doesn't have to be rational. IT IS MAGIC.

That's a rather lazy excuse and incorrect. Magic has reason applied to it just the same as any other type of attack. You don't cast a fireball and do cold damage. You don't cast a fly spell and instead of being able to fly, you can breathe underwater.

You want logic? OK, here is my logic. It's about game balance. The logic is: a well-balanced game is better and more fun than an absolutely logically consistent one.

The spells are roughly balanced to mean that a player gets a limited resource which they expend to get a benefit. A low level spell is good at one thing with a significant weakness.

Mirror Image? Has a good chance of stopping two attacks over 1 minute. Doesn't stop Magic Missile.
Shield? Strong defense against one melee attack. Stops Magic Missile cold.
Those spells are balanced against each other.
A mage either 'solves' for defending against a Mage with Magic Missile, or Melee. Not both. Not at that level.

That's it.

Balance is overrated. Sacrificing rationality for the sake of balance is a poor way to go about things in my opinion. There has to be some balance, but there's a good amount of leeway to be had.

If you want D&D to be totally balanced, you might as well tell the makers of Monopoly that an iron can't own hotels.

I don't want it to be totally balanced.

 

[Maxperson]

1. That magic missile hits automatically because it does force damage,

I never said that.

2. That there is no narrative reason for the mechanical differences between magic missile and other spells which deal force damage, such as eldritch blast and disintegrate,

Or that. Hell, I never mentioned those spells at all.

3. That magic missile has self-directing capabilities but only within narrow and arbitrary limits,

I haven't said a single arbitrary thing here.

4. That the caster has to aim magic missile just as he or she would any other spell, but that he or she is simply much better at hitting with magic missile, and

I didn't say that, either.

5. That magic missile is unable to discern its target creature from cover, other creatures, and non-creatures, but it avoids everything except its target creature.

I did say that, and it's true. The spell language does not say that it has the ability to discern things, so it can't. It just homes.

You managed to get one thing correct, and a second partially correct. That's not a good average.

 

[schnee]

Balance is overrated. Sacrificing rationality for the sake of balance is a poor way to go about things in my opinion. There has to be some balance, but there's a good amount of leeway to be had.

Yes, because at the end of the day, everyone's favorite D&D stories aren't about how their character was able to do something cool and fun along with everyone else...

No, it's about how rational the rules were!

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, because at the end of the day, everyone's favorite D&D stories aren't about how their character was able to do something cool and fun along with everyone else...

Be a slave to balance, then. The most enjoyable games I've played had some balance. Enough to keep things reasonable, but weren't slaves to it. Excessive balance is boring.

 

[Arial Black]

It doesn't matter. All that matters is that it takes the same targeting and same amount of time to attack, fire a bow, or cast a spell. If any one of those can hit the caster of the Mirror Image without having to roll the d20, they all should be able to do so. If one has to roll a d20, they all should have to do so.

Rubbish! You made all those criteria up yourself!

Just because mirror image lets you automatically hit the creature you want to hit doesn't mean that swords/arrows/spells-that-require-an-attack-roll auto-hit too!

Just because arrows/etc. require an attack roll doesn't mean that hold person/magic missile/etc. must require an attack roll too!

The difference is simple: spells/attacks that require an attack roll need to be precisely aimed at the target, while spells that don't just require that the target can be seen and chosen by the attacker/caster.

The issue here is the targeting portion of the attack or spell, not the hitting portion.

The targeting portion of the spell or attack is 100% reliable. Targeting doesn't need a random roll, nor does it need to be aimed.

He does have to be able to know who the target is, though. If the target is impossible to track, then he doesn't know who the target is.

Yes, but mirror image doesn't make it impossible to target the creature, just impossible to know which image is the real guy. The 'target creature' is 'that guy with all the images', 100% certainty.

The issue with Mirror Image is that if you don't roll the d20, then you never really targeted the caster of the Mirror Image. You targeted the image instead.

Only if the attack/spell needed to be precisely aimed at the target. If all you have to do is choose 'the guy with all the images' then there is no aiming involved in choosing the target, therefore the swirl of images is irrelevant.

The wording of the spell is horrendous, though. It makes it seem like the sword swing is being re-directed when it is not. The sword swing at the caster doesn't suddenly veer left into an image. Rather, you thought the image was the caster.

Just like the wording of the shield spell makes it seem like the caster first gets hit by a javelin, then casts shield, then the javelin goes back in time and misses you instead.

Just because the shield is triggered by the game mechanic of 'being hit' doesn't mean that it actually represents being hit by the javelin before you cast the spell. What the game mechanics represent is that if the javelin would have hit you (measured by a successful attack roll) then you cast shield just in time to intercept the incoming javelin.

With mirror image the creature itself, game mechanics wise, is targeted and then (on a d20 roll) the target may be switched to an image. But what the game mechanics represent here is that if the attack needs to be precisely aimed then the attacker may aim at the wrong image. But, equally, if the attack does not need to be 'precisely aimed' then aiming at the wrong image is immaterial since no aiming was necessary in order to target the creature; the 'guy with all the images'.

 

[Inglorin]

Mirror Image is NOT about targeting. You target whatever you like, even the creature being protected by the spell. That only gets magically redirected to an image if you make an attack and if that attack hits. That is the spell. Rationalise it in game however you want. The rules are clear here.

Reminder to self: Don't post from work. Read the rules before assuming ;-)

If this wouldn't be the case there would be all kinds of problems. For example: Can I close my eyes and just hit the space in front of me? Sure, I get disadvantage (unseen target), but I am definitly not "targeting" someone there. Mirror Image can't interfere then.

 

[Maxperson]

Just because mirror image lets you automatically hit the creature you want to hit doesn't mean that swords/arrows/spells-that-require-an-attack-roll auto-hit too!

I never said it did. The d20 roll I mentioned is the one for Mirror Image. You know, the spell I'm talking about.

Just because arrows/etc. require an attack roll doesn't mean that hold person/magic missile/etc. must require an attack roll too!

Didn't say that, either.

The difference is simple: spells/attacks that require an attack roll need to be precisely aimed at the target, while spells that don't just require that the target can be seen and chosen by the attacker/caster.

There is no difference in targeting whatsoever. Every attack and spell that requires a target requires you to be able to see that target, and takes the same amount of time to attack/cast at that target. Unless a specific spell explicitly says otherwise.

The targeting portion of the spell or attack is 100% reliable. Targeting doesn't need a random roll, nor does it need to be aimed.

Which is utter nonsense. And I really do get that the rules engage in that nonsense. I'm just calling it out for what it is.

Yes, but mirror image doesn't make it impossible to target the creature, just impossible to know which image is the real guy. The 'target creature' is 'that guy with all the images', 100% certainty.

And if a spell can target him with 100% certainty, then so can a sword. If a sword has to roll to target him, then so should a spell.

Only if the attack/spell needed to be precisely aimed at the target.

It does. That's what target means. It's very precise.

If all you have to do is choose 'the guy with all the images' then there is no aiming involved in choosing the target, therefore the swirl of images is irrelevant.

Quote me the rule that says that targeting doesn't target a creature, but instead just generally means "A creature out there somewhere.". Targeting is specific, not broad.

Just like the wording of the shield spell makes it seem like the caster first gets hit by a javelin, then casts shield, then the javelin goes back in time and misses you instead.

5e is full of bad wording. Agreed.

With mirror image the creature itself, game mechanics wise, is targeted and then (on a d20 roll) the target may be switched to an image. But what the game mechanics represent here is that if the attack needs to be precisely aimed then the attacker may aim at the wrong image. But, equally, if the attack does not need to be 'precisely aimed' then aiming at the wrong image is immaterial since no aiming was necessary in order to target the creature; the 'guy with all the images'.

No it doesn't. Just like with the Shield spell, which causes the attack never to have hit you, Mirror Image causes you never to have targeted the caster. It's not a re-direction. Rather, it's you now having originally targeted an image.

 

[Corwin]

Mirror Image is NOT about targeting. You target whatever you like, even the creature being protected by the spell. That only gets magically redirected to an image if you make an attack and if that attack hits. That is the spell.

Not how the spell works at all. You determine if you will be attacking an image when you declare you are targeting the caster, before rolling to hit. And, if you find you are not targeting the caster, the images have their own AC.

 

[Inglorin]

Not how the spell works at all. You determine if you will be attacking an image when you declare you are targeting the caster, before rolling to hit. And, if you find you are not targeting the caster, the images have their own AC.

Thanks, fixed my post. Shouldn't post from work and without consulting the rules again beforehand.

So, what about "I close my eyes and attack the spot in front of me!" ?

 

[Arial Black]

Which is utter nonsense. And I really do get that the rules engage in that nonsense. I'm just calling it out for what it is.

I'm totally fine with the concept that attackers just have to mentally decide who to target, no aiming involved. 'Targeting' and 'aiming' are two separate things, both in the game and in real life.

And if a spell can target him with 100% certainty, then so can a sword. If a sword has to roll to target him, then so should a spell.

Since 'targeting' is just 'mentally deciding which creature to target' then both spell and sword do the same with 100% certainty.

If 'mentally deciding who to target' is all that is required (hold person, magic missile) then the fact that the target creature is a swirl of images is no impediment. You do not run the risk of aiming at the wrong image since you are not 'aiming' at anything! You are just mentally deciding which creature to target, and you are deciding to target 'the guy with all the images'.

If, in addition to 'mentally deciding who to target', the attack also requires that you precisely aim your attack at the body mass of that target, then conceptually you might aim at the wrong image.

It does. That's what target means. It's very precise.

Self-evidentally not. Not all 'targeting' needs precise aiming at a body mass. Not in the game, and not in real life.

Quote me the rule that says that targeting doesn't target a creature, but instead just generally means "A creature out there somewhere.". Targeting is specific, not broad.

PHB p204:- "A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect..."

"...To target something, you must have a clear path to it, so it can’t be behind total cover."

That's it. You don't have to aim at it, just mentally choose who to target.

For this thread, the target creature is 'that guy with all the images'. That is all that is needed so long as you can see it and have a clear path.

What if there are two or more creatures with mirror image on? Yes, you have to specify which swirling mass of images, but not which image.

Just like with the Shield spell, which causes the attack never to have hit you, Mirror Image causes you never to have targeted the caster. It's not a re-direction. Rather, it's you now having originally targeted an image.

Conceptually, yes. What's your point? Unless the spell requires precise aiming, you don't need to target a specific image, just know which creature you want to affect.