Can Mirror Images Flank?

[Jack Haggerty]

Aha! There it is, Ki Ryn, you and I are using two different methods for randomly determining whether the target is a figment. In our game, we instead randomly determine whether the attacker targets a figment... Do you see the difference?

For example... the necromancer casts MI, and creates 8 images. The DM now places 9 identical counters to represent the necromancer and his images, but he secretly keeps track of which counter is the real necromancer. On the necromancer's turn, the images move at the same time as him, directed by him, so long as they all end up within 5' of each other. The characters must decide which "counter" to attack, and hope they guess right.

Of course, you must trust the DM (or the player) not change their mind, should an attacker guess right. I will admit that it's a lot of bookpeeking, though it makes the spell a little more "fun".

And I'll also admit that I hadn't considered the "attack the image in the middle" scenario too hard... I simply had the images move back into a group at the end of the caster's turn.

[EDIT:ignore]Really, the only problem I have with having all the images in the same square is trying to imagine 1d4+caster level of these images stacked up that way when the caster is 10th level or better... But hey, its fantasy roleplaying, right?[/EDIT:ignore]

I just noticed, while rereading the spell, that there is a maximum of 8 images.

When I've run the mirror images as having their own squares, we ran into some problems (other than flanking)...

 

[ForceUser@Home]

Aha! There it is, Ki Ryn, you and I are using two different methods for randomly determining whether the target is a figment. In our game, we instead randomly determine whether the attacker targets a figment... Do you see the difference?

For example... the necromancer casts MI, and creates 8 images. The DM now places 9 identical counters to represent the necromancer and his images, but he secretly keeps track of which counter is the real necromancer. On the necromancer's turn, the images move at the same time as him, directed by him, so long as they all end up within 5' of each other. The characters must decide which "counter" to attack, and hope they guess right.

Of course, you must trust the DM (or the player) not change their mind, should an attacker guess right. I will admit that it's a lot of bookpeeking, though it makes the spell a little more "fun".

Man, nine counters? That sounds like a real pain in the butt. When someone attack a person buffed with mirror image in our game, the attacker just rolls a die to see if he attacks an image or the caster. The caster is always a "1." All images are assumed to be in the same 5-ft square as the caster.

 

[Junkheap]

Man, nine counters? That sounds like a real pain in the butt. When someone attack a person buffed with mirror image in our game, the attacker just rolls a die to see if he attacks an image or the caster. The caster is always a "1." All images are assumed to be in the same 5-ft square as the caster.

Exactly what we do except for some reason we use the highest number. eg 7 images 8 is the caster and so forth. And yes all images are on the same square.

 

[Shirt Guy John]

Why would mirror images flank?
A: The foe considers them all a threat, and thus must defend from both sides.

That's how I would work it...

We've never really used mirror image, but I thought that the idea of using a counter for each one and keeping track of the real one was the way to go. If not, it's really a mis-named spell in my books.

 

[0-hr]

. The DM now places 9 identical counters to represent the necromancer and his images, but he secretly keeps track of which counter is the real necromancer. On the necromancer's turn, the images move at the same time as him, directed by him, so long as they all end up within 5' of each other. The characters must decide which "counter" to attack, and hope they guess right.

Oh ok, that would work too. I just don't have that many figures! Do the players have to shut their eyes while the DM shuffles the figures around each turn?

 

[IceBear]

We just randomly roll each round to see if the character hits the right target. It's probably because we've never REALLY looked at the details of the spell in 3E - we just play it like we did in 2nd Edition. We just keep track of the number of images remaining, but not where they are or anything like that. So, while we probably don't assume they're all in one square, the end effect is the same.

I do agree that a case could be made for having the images flank, but I also rule on the side of designer intent - the spell was never intended to provide such a powerful offensive use. I think it's a great idea for a Greater Mirror Image though

IceBear

 

[ForceUser@Home]

I think it's a great idea for a Greater Mirror Image though

IceBear

There you go!

 

[Kershek]

If the images flank, I'm playing a Rog/Wiz next time I'm a player!!! This would be better than blink for scoring sneak attacks! Gimmee a ring of mirror image...

You don't even need that - just have the Wizard make potions of Mirror Image and give them to the fighters. If the Wizard doesn't have Brew Potion, then have him make a potion with the Cleric who probably does have the feat.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Not a bad idea--how about:

Shadow Image (Shadow)
Sor/Wiz 5
Target: Personal
Duration: 1 rnd/level
Range: Short
Effect: 1d4 images+1/4 caster levels
Save: None
SR: N/A

This spell creates 1d4 images plus 1 image per four caster levels. These images are partially real, possessing ten hit points plus one per caster level. They initially appear around the caster and blur and move through him in a manner similar to the mirror image spell.

The caster has limited control over the images and is able to move them anywhere within the range of the spell as long as no two images are more than twenty feet from each other. Any images which pass outside of the twenty foot range from another image or pass outside of short range cease to exist.

The images appear to do whatever the caster does, casting a spell or attacking. Since they are not fully real, however, any "attacks" by images are made at the caster's base attack bonus -5 and are attempts to Aid Other (caster selects attack roll or armor class).

Shadow images have an armor class equal to 10+caster's dexterity modifier+caster's int (or cha for a sorceror) mod.

A successful dispel magic or similar effect targetted on one of the images ends the spell.

Unlike mirror images, Shadow Images are partially real and are therefore able to provide flanking bonusses and take attacks of opportunity (using the caster's attack bonus -5 and inflicting 1/4 damage). The movement of Shadow Images also provokes attacks of opportunity. As semi-real images, Shadow Images are subject to being cleaved or whirlwind attacked. They are, however, immune to any area effect spells whose area includes the caster, and appear to take damage just like the caster but do not wink out. (Although any images not in the area of effect of an area effect spell that includes the caster wink out as do any images in the area of an area effect spell which does not also catch the caster). Targetted spells effect the images normally.

Hmm. That ends up getting a bit complicated--especially with the area effect and attack of opportunity rules. It also has to stretch the definitions of Shadow magic in order to make area effects work in a manner similar to mirror image. Given the vulnerabilities of the images, it might be better as a 4th level spell too. What do ya'll think?

The only thing I'm sure of after writing that is that I'm definitely ruling that all mirror images remain in the same 5 foot square as the caster from now on. It makes things much simpler (and keeps the spell more balanced too).

We just randomly roll each round to see if the character hits the right target. It's probably because we've never REALLY looked at the details of the spell in 3E - we just play it like we did in 2nd Edition. We just keep track of the number of images remaining, but not where they are or anything like that. So, while we probably don't assume they're all in one square, the end effect is the same.

I do agree that a case could be made for having the images flank, but I also rule on the side of designer intent - the spell was never intended to provide such a powerful offensive use. I think it's a great idea for a Greater Mirror Image though

IceBear

 

[Anubis]

Okay, I'm NOT going to read every post in this thread. I'll merely give an answre to the question along with a reason.

The answer is NO, mirror images do NOT give flanking bonuses. EVER.

Why? Simple. Flanking comes from two characters who threaten the same opponent being exactly opposite each other with regards to said opponent. Since mirror images can't threaten an opponent (it's an illusion, not real), because you have to be able to attack the opponent to threaten the opponent, and mirror images can't attack for real, they just look like they do, they can't grant flanking bonuses, plain and simple.