Displacement + Mirror Image

[lukelightning]

It's my understanding that the illusionary duplicates created by mirror image exactly replicate the caster, including spell effect (hence invisibility makes all your images invisible too).

So it seems that casting displacement along with mirror image is a great tactic; not only is the assailant faced with multiple targets, it also has a 50% miss chance to even strike an image, so your duplicates will last a lot longer.

 

[phindar]

What I used to do in 2e was Blur followed by MI, but I like the way you're thinking. I can't remember what Blur was in 2e (maybe an AC bonus?) because its been 7 years since I played that character, but it is likewise a miss chance these days.

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

I do believe you are correct -

glitterdust wouldn't stick to the images post creation however... just you.

 

[lukelightning]

I do believe you are correct -

glitterdust wouldn't stick to the images post creation however... just you.

How come? The images duplicate you, and the spell specifically states that if struck by an area attack they react appropriately.

 

[werk]

I do believe you are correct -

glitterdust wouldn't stick to the images post creation however... just you.

Hehe, yeah, it doesn't stick to the images, just the caster, and the images look like the caster, so...


To the OP, yes, MI is resolved like an attack at the caster, including all defenses. The MI only comes into play if you hit the caster, then you roll to see if you hit a figment or the caster.

 

[lukelightning]

To the OP, yes, MI is resolved like an attack at the caster, including all defenses. The MI only comes into play if you hit the caster, then you roll to see if you hit a figment or the caster.

Actually you first figure out if the assailant is targetting a mirror image or not (since its AC is only 10+dex+size modifier). Most people seem to play it as if all the images are in your space, but really they can be all around you as long as they are within 5' of at least one other image, so you could actually have something like 6 images in a 30' line, or whatever. This, of couse, causes all sorts of confusion with things like line of sight, attacks of opportunity, etc.

 

[moritheil]

Actually you first figure out if the assailant is targetting a mirror image or not (since its AC is only 10+dex+size modifier). Most people seem to play it as if all the images are in your space, but really they can be all around you as long as they are within 5' of at least one other image, so you could actually have something like 6 images in a 30' line, or whatever. This, of couse, causes all sorts of confusion with things like line of sight, attacks of opportunity, etc.

Which is why most people assume that the images are more or less where the caster is.

Does anyone remember the infamous declaration that a caster could string a bunch of mirror images over a ravine, then attack the ones in the middle to pop them and see which side of the ravine he winds up on? (I can't remember who stated it - Hyp?)

 

[werk]

Actually you first figure out if the assailant is targetting a mirror image or not (since its AC is only 10+dex+size modifier). Most

DOH, you're right. So, why would a displacement affect the figments?

 

[lukelightning]

DOH, you're right. So, why would a displacement affect the figments?

Because the spell effect on you is duplicated on the images. If you turn invisible, so do the images. So if you are displaced...so are the images. Leading to a weird situation in which an illusion is not where it actually appears.

 

[werk]

Because the spell effect on you is duplicated on the images. If you turn invisible, so do the images. So if you are displaced...so are the images. Leading to a weird situation in which an illusion is not where it actually appears.

If you cast mage armor or shield on yourself? Why would a miss chance confer but armor would not?

(Yes, I'm playing devil's advocate)