Illusion spell questions: Silent Image and Mirror Image

[Kershek]

I really could use answers to these questions for my new Gnome Illusionist who is too creative for his own good I would like official responses over house rules if possible.

Silent Image questions:
1. Silent Image is used to erect a wall in front of archers. It looks real until they interact with it and get a save. If they fail the save, they think it's real. If the wall doesn't move or change, and none of the archers made their save, do they ever get to retry? Or is it real to them for the time it is visible?

2. If the wall gets moved and reshaped, do they get a save retry for seeing something that a wall shouldn't be doing, even without interacting with it?

3. Can you make an image that conceals an area? For instance, can I make an illusion that looks like darkness in an area? How about obscuring mist? If I tell my party members I'm going to do it ahead of time, can they automatically disbelieve? This would allow opponents to have a large penalty to attack, while my allies would have an immense upper hand against flat-footed opponents that couldn't see. I can see an argument saying they would only get a +4 to their save as listed in the PHB. But if I show them the spell ahead of time outside of combat, you would think they could automatically disbelieve it.

4. Can you make Silent Image similar to a poor-man's invisibility spell? For instance, bandits approach to loot our wagon. Can I use Silent Image to make it seem the wagon has disappeared and, in its place, is an empty area of road?


Mirror Image questions:
I don't have mirror image yet, but I wanted to get something resolved. Let's say I have 4 mirror images and they are all standing in a line 20 feet long. If someone tries hitting an image, I roll to randomly determine if I get hit or an image gets hit, as the spell describes.

1. However, let's say I want to move and attack someone (perhaps even with a flank from one of my own images). Are all images open to attacks of opportunity?

2. How do you determine which one is really me if you roll randomly as explained above to determine if I get hit?

3. In fact, how do you ever determine which one is really me and still allow me to be any one of the images randomly?

4. If I make a touch attack against an opponent and not all my images are close enough, does that affect which images the opponent perceives to be illusion?

5. If I have 4 mirror images standing in a 20 foot long line and none of them move, yet they appear to be weaving in and out of each other, could this allow me to move from on end of the mirror image line to the other without getting attacks of opportunity?


I'm not trying to "get around" the rules at all. I'm trying to see where the boundaries lie. I don't want to give our DM fits about these questions without a good foundation to explain myself with the core rulebooks as my proof. If my DM has to make all these ad-hoc rules, not only will consistency be threatened, but the level of arguments between everyone playing will mire the game down in no time. I can't seem to find answers to these questions in the core rulebooks, errata, or Saturday's revision of the D&D FAQ, but hopefully I've missed something.

 

[Artoomis]

Silent Image is a figment:

Figment: A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.) Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language the character can speak. If the character tries to duplicate a language the character cannot speak, the image produces gibberish. Likewise, the character cannot make a visual copy of something unless the character knows what it looks like.

Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, illuminate darkness, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding or delaying foes, but useless for attacking them directly. For example, it is possible to use a silent image spell to create an illusory cottage, but the cottage offers no protection from rain. A clever caster, however, can take pains to make the place look old and decrepit, so that the rain falling on the occupants seems to fall from a leaky roof.


So:

A wall? Sure - no save unless they intect with it (maybe an arrow goes through the wall?) One save, unless the situation changes somehow, but them copntinuing to interact with teh image is not changing the situation.

Move the wall? Well, if they see a wall move when a wall does not normally move, I'd call that "interacting" and give them a save.

Conceal an area. Well, sort of. You could create the illusion of a box over the wagon that was painted to match the road and surroundings. From a distance, that would probably work.

As for Mirror Image:

I don't think you control the images at all, so no worries about AoO's etc. - only one for you as you move by or cast a spell, though it might hit you or an image as usual.

However, this sentance:

While moving, the character can merge with and split off from figments so that enemies who have learned which image is real are again confounded.

implies that it is possible to learn which image is you (like with a lucky attack), which would then be a known fact until your turn, at which point you move (even if only a 5-foot move) and teh images are all mixed up again.

 

[0-hr]

From the SRD:

Figments cannot make something seem to be something else.
...
Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they
cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions
can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support
weight, provide nutrition, illuminate darkness, or provide
protection from the elements.
...
A character faced with incontrovertible proof that an illusion isn't real needs no saving throw.

If you touch an illusionary wall, your hand goes right through it (it cannot produce a real effect such as resisting your hand). This is incontrovertible proof that the wall is fake and so you automatically disbelieve it. It's a lot like a hologram, as soon as you touch it, you realize it is not solid.

Illusions can hide something by putting an illusion around it, but they cannot make something appear differently than it is. They cannot make something invisible. You cannot make a wagon seem to be something other than a wagon. But you could put an illusionary house or some such around the wagon so that the wagon was completely hidden from view. Of course, if someone goes inside the house, there's your wagon

I agree that warning your friends about an illusionary mist would grant them a +4 on their saving throw. To give them an automatic save, you need to offer them some absolute proff that the mist is fake. Perhaps, given time, your DM would rule that hearing you cast that particular illusion spell would count as proof for them.

 

[kreynolds]

1. However, let's say I want to move and attack someone (perhaps even with a flank from one of my own images). Are all images open to attacks of opportunity?

First of all, you're images don't help you flank because they don't threaten an area.

Only one AoO against you per violation, not one AoO for you and each of your images.

2. How do you determine which one is really me if you roll randomly as explained above to determine if I get hit?

Don't worry about it. You don't roll. The DM does. Besides, it's a DM secret.

3. In fact, how do you ever determine which one is really me and still allow me to be any one of the images randomly?

Once someone figures out which one is really you, you can just shift back into and out of the images to confuse people again. It's in the spell description.

4. If I make a touch attack against an opponent and not all my images are close enough, does that affect which images the opponent perceives to be illusion?

What do you think!? Yes. But, you're a spellcaster, so stay outta range anyways.

5. If I have 4 mirror images standing in a 20 foot long line and none of them move, yet they appear to be weaving in and out of each other, could this allow me to move from on end of the mirror image line to the other without getting attacks of opportunity?

I wouldn't think so. You're still moving. The images don't hide that.

You know, now that I think of it, what a crappy spell description!

 

[0-hr]

I think that 87% of the problems with Mirror Image would be solved if they change this line;

These figments separate from the character and remain in a cluster, each within 5 feet of at least one other figment or the character.

to this:

These figments separate from the character and remain in a cluster, each within 5 feet of the character.

If you keep all of the images within the same 5x5 area as the caster, then this spell is actually playable.

 

[Kershek]

Thanks for the responses. I forgot about the figment description that says you can't make something seem to be something else. Glad that's out of the way.

Ki Ryn explained that putting your hand through an illusionary wall makes your hand go through it. Let's say you were in the situation that I mentioned where three kobold archers saw a wall appear in front of them. Would you run up to it to touch it or run around it? If you didn't run up to touch it, there would be no save. If you did run up and touch it, according to him it would be incontrovertible proof it doesn't exist and you automatically disbelieve. I'd assume the same would be said for throwing a rock through it. Where is the middle ground where you'd actually have to roll to save?

Kreynolds said not to worry about which of the images is really me when someone rolls to attack me. Unfortunately, it does matter since it could make the difference between me getting in a touch attack or having to move so far as to provoke an AoO. Take the following possibility, where M# is myself and my images, and O# are opponents:

M1M2
M3M4
M5M6
O1O2

In this case, if it's random and unknown to me which of the M's I am, then I don't know if I need to move nowhere, 5 ft, or 10 ft to do a touch attack. If it's 10 ft, then the opponents get an AoO. But wait, you don't get AoOs on images. Therefore, I must be in the back row. If I were an NPC and the opponents were PCs, they would know I was in the back row.

Another question that arises - can I direct my images to move where I want, or do they move in the exact direction I move?

One more - If someone chooses to overrun an image, can the image just step out of the way?

I have no idea how to abjucate this. It's very confusing. Any help would be appreciated.

 

[kreynolds]

Kreynolds said not to worry about which of the images is really me when someone rolls to attack me.

That's right. Don't worry about it. You're the player. It's the DMs job to see if he hits you or not.

Unfortunately, it does matter since it could make the difference between me getting in a touch attack or having to move so far as to provoke an AoO.

It doesn't make a difference at all. The only thing your images do is make it harder for bad guys to hit you. That's it. They don't hide your movement. You need to know where you are on the battlemap, but don't worry about where your images are placed, and don't bother placing them, because it doesn't matter.

You have no control over where your images are placed. They just make it harder to hit you. That's it.

Another question that arises - can I direct my images to move where I want

No. They follow you.

One more - If someone chooses to overrun an image, can the image just step out of the way?

Not unless you step out of the way.

 

[Kershek]

Ok, it does make it a lot easier if I don't put them on the map. Now it makes sense what Ki Ryn was saying about keeping all images within the same square as the caster.

What do you think about the Silent Image of the wall I was talking about?

 

[Macbrea]

My original post last night got ate in the move. So, I will write the short version of it, again.


Silent image and Minor image are additive spells. They allow you to add things to the scene. So, you cannot make the wagon disappear. You could make a wall appear and if the archers were firing at you they would probably stop. Why? In a world of magic were people can put up walls of stone archers will expect such things. If suddenly there is a wall in front of your target you will probably choose another target. As you know your arrows cannot pass through the wall. Why would you fire at it in the first place?

Hallucintory terrain allows you to change the terrain but you cannot remove objects from it, such as people or equipment. To do this you would need invisibility. Invisibility is one of the few spells that can remove the ability to to see the object from the object. It isn't mind effecting so it changes the light not the mind of the person that is viewing it.

As to wether you could add fog to an area the answer is yes. That is an additive effect to the area. Darkness might be a problem as its subtractive and therefor shouldn't be allowed. If you wish to cast darkness use the spell for it.

Now, comes as to wether your allies are affected by you laying down an illusion. The answer is you cannot change the area of effect of your spells unless you are the arch mage prestige class. So, if the effect is line of sight. Then everyone in the line of effect is effected by the spell. You can give them advantages to disbiieving it by telling them its an illusion, which are +4 to disbief checks.

As a general rule to help your DM:

All the minor illusions are additive to a scene.
Invisibility and improved invisibility are subtractive.
Shadows are partially real and should be treated as such.

 

[Macbrea]

Oh, for people that ask why a silent image (1st level) wall should be allowed when there is a spell of higher level called Illusionary wall (4th level). Illusionary wall is permanent.