Can Mirror Images Flank?

[IceBear]

Sorry for the tone of my earlier post, ouini, I think we're probably closer to the same view than it seems in this thread, because I have made several rulings with would have been *horrible* were it not for the players actually going out of their way NOT to use cheesy rules or loopholes. However, one thing that I try to remember on this forum is that other people than my players will see my rulings and in their groups the ruling may have horrible consequences. Thus, I try to argue for the rules as I feel the designers intended (and not always how I would rule).

As I said, I agree that the argument to allow it is a valid one. To me, if the target has no idea which image is the real one, then he should be treated like he's flanked - but that's outside of the game rules. Within the game rules, I have used mirror image for so long that I know the designers' intent was not to allow mirror image to be used offensively. That, plus the balance issues that would arise if I allowed it is why I'm ruling against what, in real life, I would support.

Now, that said, I would allow other illusions spells (like major image) to provide flanking. I would allow that because the only thing that these spells do is create illusions - there aren't any other benefits to the caster. So, if the caster spends an action to make the illusion believeable flank the target (and thus, can't self flank) then I'd allow it.

You know, if the ruling on the mirror image also included something where the images that are used to flank are then destroyed (the target realizes after they attack that they are illusions as they didn't cause any damage) then maybe I would consider allowing them to flank as the caster is offsetting the defensive benefits of the spell by destroying the images on his own. Still feel that it would be a little powerful for a 2nd level spell with all the multiple sneak attacks it could generate.

As for examples, the only example I would suggest is one where a party consisting of a rogue, fighter, wizard and cleric is fighting a group of hobgoblins. The wizard, standing behind the rogue and fighter casts mirror images and gets enough images that he can put one in flanking position for the rogue and the fighter (it's an in close melee). I think that's a common enough example.

IceBear

 

[Uller]

...On the necromancer's turn, the images move at the same time as him, directed by him...

Allowing the caster to specifically direct the locations of the images is a BIG power boost to the spell (even if you don't allow flanking). I've always seen the images moving of their own volition. If you want to give the caster control over them, you might want to _at least_ make it take a move equivalent action to do so (if not a standard one). Even moving a Flaming Sphere requires a MEA!

 

[ouini]

IceBear,

I also think we share nearly the same view. And I can't truthfully say that if I played with rules-mongering munchkin min-maxers, I wouldn't completely disallow the tactic, soon before finding another group with which to play. In that scenerio (most scenerios), arguing with players would be as you described: more trouble than its worth.

I also let believable illusions flank until they're disbelieved. And I also would put severe limitations on Mirror Image flanking if I ever allowed it, an example being your idea of images that flank then are destroyed. Or making it a difficult, concentration-based, or time-consuming action to position the images. Or on a battle-board, make the player figure out how he's going to get the images into position, with the understanding that his only control over them is that he can make one stand still or draw one towards himself. There are myriad ways to limit the implementation and make it challenging, costly, or give it the potential for disaster.

Your example is a little complicated because the mage is trying to 'create' multiple flankers. I'd probably rule that the wizard would have had to spend a previous turn or two moving around the target trying to get the images into position (assuming the target stays in one spot). Then on his turn, if he had managed to get one or both images into place, and if the mage wanted to stay in his safe spot, he'd spend his action 'faux' attacking (bluffing) while concentrating to keep the images in place. If the enemy has since moved, or the mage fails one or more or his rolls, or some enemy already clobbered him or one or both of his flanker images, then one or both may not be viable flankers any more. Then the tactic could only be called a marginal victory, and would have wasted a few rounds of his time to boot.

On a battle board, if the player was willing to spend time on this type of problem (maybe working out a system with me where the mage player is the only one who knows who is who), I may let serendipity rule -- if an image is in a flanking position, let the mage try to keep it there and attacking.

And of course I'd take pointers and ideas from the group if they pointed out flaws, better strategems, or especially a simpler and more elegant method of implementation.

...To me, if the target has no idea which image is the real one, then he should be treated like he's flanked - but that's outside of the game rules...I know the designers' intent was not to allow mirror image to be used offensively. That, plus the balance issues that would arise if I allowed it is why I'm ruling against what, in real life, I would support.

Whether on this forum or in my own game, though, I try to make decisions on rules based on gaming as I would like it played. To paraphrase Larry Kramer, "If you want to live in a world where you can use rules that make sense and trust your players, then trust your players and use rules that make sense, and you will live in that world." Others out there may like less GM/player antagonistic roleplaying, too, but they may not know to try it unless they see it themselves or read of it on a board.

 

[IceBear]

Ah see, this is where the misunderstanding comes in. You say that with my example you wouldn't allow it because of the complexity of the movements involved. What I thought you were arguing, because that's what I understood others to be saying, was that the images could just be moved at will with no cost to the caster.

See, several people in the pro-flanking camp are referring to the passage in the spell where it states that all images could be within 5ft of each other to mean that my example would be perfectly ok for mirror images flanking because the wizard casts the mirror image spell and then the images come into being and he just places them within 5ft of each other and him and the flanking scenario would just occur natually with no effort on the part of the caster. That's what I was arguing against.

Now, if you're going to require concentration on the part of the spellcaster to move them into position (to which the other faction will point out that there is nothing in the spell description requiring that - not that I'm arguing with you, just pointing out what I *thought* you were arguing for) then things get a little better (though the thought of easily setting up multiple sneak attacks with a 2nd level spell is still a little too much for me. Anyway, to me it sounds like if you'd allow flanking, you wouldn't be running with the mirror image spell as written, but adding your house rule to it to incorporate the mechanism to allow flanking - which is a completely different kettle of fish than just allowing the images to flank as the rules are currently written.

IceBear

 

[ouini]

IceBear,

Sorry my posts weren't more clear to you. But really it's just another everyday case of the GM having to fill in gaps in the rules, since the rules are well-intentioned, but don't spell out every option when dealing with imaginative players. They can't sanely be expected to do so.

The writers knew this, which is why the rules share the spirit of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution spells out some duties and limits the government has, but the writers were worried that it would be misinterpreted as being the limiting factor when determining people's rights -- that freedoms not spelled out in the Constitution would not be assumed to be a citizen's right by default. They warned against this, as the writers of the core rules spelled out that the books are simply guidelines.

I'd say figuring out a way to allow Mirror Images or Major Images to flank doesn't contradict the rules as written. For one thing, neither can contradict the rules -- the possibility is never even mentioned. For another, the 'rules' say to use what works for you, which is a terribly general but very neat fill for all the stuff they didn't cover. And it works.

Happy gaming to you.

 

[IceBear]

Ok...just have to reiterate the point here again, I *do* come up with rulings to fill in the gaps like this. I don't want you to think that I'm a STRICT by the book, you can't do it if it's not in the rules DM. I've been DMing too long to be that restrictive, so PLEASE don't think that I am - I just get that impression from the tone of your last post, but maybe I'm mistaken. I make off-the cuff rulings every game. However, this is the OFFICAL rules forum, and if you state that mirror images can be used to flank then by the rules you only need to put a mirror image into flanking position (which is quite easy to do when you cast the spell), and this turns a spell that has always been a defensive spell into a powerful offensive spell too.

You have to ignore your current group and think about the min/maxers out there when you argue on this forum. If a rogue/wizard uses mirror image to flank in one fight and it is a successful tactic, don't you think he will try to do in every fight possible? Seriously, it's human nature to use every advantage to win so I know that the player will try it. Then you *will* have to come up with a house rule (I consider anything that comes up in every adventure - as opposed to a one time case ruling like the original attempt to flank might have been - a house rule) in order to keep it from being abused. Again, you might have players that won't take an inch and try to turn it into a mile (I know mine don't with polymorph), but you do have to consider those players when you make a ruling on the RULES forum. It's because of this (and the historical precedent on this spell) that I look at the rules and decide not to allow the mirror images to flank.

There are some rules (like why does a dragon only get a 5ft step, why can't a wizard scribe a cure spell from a bard, why are certain stats used by some spellcasters and not others, etc) that don't really make a lot of sense and if a player wanted to argue them there wouldn't be much to counter with other than GAME BALANCE. There comes a point that a ruling might make sense, but if it destroys game balance then it's a bad ruling. In *general* (maybe not in your group or mine, but in general) that's what would happen if mirror image was allowed to set up flanking.

IceBear

 

[ouini]

IceBear,

This rules forum is often for arguing how the literal written word should be interpreted. Beyond the name-calling and B.S., there's actually a demand for that kind of feedback.

But in that vein, if I state Mirror Images might be used to flank, then from that point on I'm on my own. There is no "by the rules" for when, if, or how. I must consciously choose how to play it.

This is often the case. So when I post, I just present whatever option I think the asker might enjoy playing, whether that's what I think I'd do in such a situation, or simple pedantic rules-interpretation.

You, for one, sound like you GM reasonably and have a fair-minded group. I'll keep posting what I think makes sense, fun and game-wise. Because even in a rules forum, there may be players willing to forge their own path instead of picking one out that's faint or non-existant in the books.

 

[kreynolds]

Somebody, please, set this thread on fire and put it out with a sledgehammer.

 

[Ristamar]

Somebody, please, set this thread on fire and put it out with a sledgehammer.

But we haven't yet prodded the real meat of the matter... And that question is, "Can you flank Mirror Images?"

Chew on that.

 

[mikebr99]

But we haven't yet prodded the real meat of the matter... And that question is, "Can you flank Mirror Images?"

Chew on that.

Sure!!! And if you make your Intimidate check, all the images will flee.