Blur + Displacement + Mirror Image?

[Lamoni]

That still does not make any sense to me. If I declare I am attacking the caster, and we ignore the square he might be in, what if he is actually in a square I am not next to, or do not threaten, yet somehow I hit him?

Maybe you missed part of my post.

Therefore, I think of them as each having their own square (which makes rolling to see if you attacked the caster or a figment make sense), but I treat the caster and the figments as only occupying one square because it just becomes easier.

So in our games, it would look like this...

Example:

O = Me
C = Caster

O
C

The figments are only imagined and assumed to be there, but the caster remains in his one square. Therefore, you can't say that you are attacking the caster unless you are next to him. And yes, we could say we are attacking that square rather than the caster, but you need to remember that we are all imagining that there are several figments surrounding the caster at the time so we don't. Again, this is all for simplicity. The people we game with have no problem retaining the suspension of belief and imagining the mirror image spell without representing it on the grid. You are welcome to do otherwise, but like you said,

It doesn't make sense.

The spell is just very difficult to represent on the battlemat.

 

[RigaMortus]

IMC, a caster can target as many images as he can cast missiles. Ie, if there is an opponent with 7 mirror images and the caster can cast 5 magic missiles with one go, he can target 5 of the 8 possible targets (and possibly hit the caster of mirror image too with one of the missiles). If an MM hits an image, the image disappears.

Displacement/BLur does not prevent the MM from hitting. I'm not sure about Blink, but I think that would not help either, as MM is force effect.

That is the way it should work, and that is the way I have always played it, pre-3E. Unfortunately, in 3E, the wording of MM and MI is poorly worded and it doesn't work like that.