You're probably right - but it's not much fun (and seems awfully nit-picky for a free-flowing game). Fun will win over strict adherence to the rules at my table I guess.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E Magic Missile vs. Mirror Image
- Thread starter Xeviat
- Start date
You're probably right - but it's not much fun (and seems awfully nit-picky for a free-flowing game). Fun will win over strict adherence to the rules at my table I guess.
Brandegoris
First Post
"Hits" refers to a successful attack roll? I dint know that. I am actually interested on the source for that if you have one Arial?
Given that the targeting is based on vision it seems amazing to me that the caster can choose the right target from 4 identical images (one of which is real)?
Thanks for the reminder on how tightly packed these mirror images are [MENTION=1560]Corwin[/MENTION] - that does seem a ridiculously close - nothing like I've ever seen in a movie!
Brandegoris
First Post
Exactly. And also how does he KNOW which one is real since they look the same and mimic one another? Is it ALWAYS the dude in the center? I don't think so or else whoever created that spell has zero common sense and almost wasted their time creating the spell!
Yeah, that's the thing, isn't it? I picture it almost more like a variation of blur. Or maybe a minor variant of displacement. Where you are splitting, merging, shifting, and moving through duplicates of yourself tightly within your '5-foot square'. Its not a bunch of illusions of yourself independently dancing around distinctly separate from you.
What a lot of people seem to think they are getting is this:
In 5e, not so much. More like this:
Attachments
Yeah - but that also makes it seem like it should be super easy to hit the real target... Does a mirror image really deflect a blow? (I know it does in the RAW, but in the imagination?
) It seems much more believable that you attack a "fake" copy accidentally. The "reality" of this seems quite off TBH.Careful now. It sounds like you are flirting dangerously close to the precipice of a HP=meat debate. And nobody wants that...Yeah - but that also makes it seem like it should be super easy to hit the real target... Does a mirror image really deflect a blow? (I know it does in the RAW, but in the imagination?
Arial Black
Adventurer
For targetting purposes it doesn't matter what else the wizard can see (images or anything else), just that he can see the ranger.
It must also be pointed out that the way vision works is that our brains construct an image based on electrical impulses which are stimulated by photons hitting a retina. We see nothing but images!
What it looks like is four copies of the ranger swimming in and out of each other in the same 5 foot space. The wizard knows where the ranger is for purposes of choosing to keep him safe from the fireball. The only thing that the images mess with is targetting the ranger with an attack roll. The spell has no other function.
Arial Black
Adventurer
And I get that there are some of you that will cry about the Rules as written, But I don't care
My idea of fun is to rise to the challenges presented by using my PC's abilities in a cool and sensible way.
I know what my abilities do; they are written in the rule-book.
If I use my abilities and, instead of using the rules, the DM just makes stuff up on the spur of the moment then there is no direct connection between the decision I made to use that ability and the effect that had in the game. It's like everything I do becomes like wild magic; no cause and effect that I could know.
This is surreal. I don't find it fun at all for the rules to be 'whatever the DM thinks is fun on a whim'. It's like I'm watching the dreams of a mental patient, rather than being the protagonist in an adventure.
YMMV.
Yep that makes sense now that I've got a better understanding of mirror image (though I now don't like the name of the spell because it's misleading
Something like "Flickering Image" would have been more appropriate...)
