Is a touch spell discharged if you strike a mirror image?

[Plane Sailing]

I'm sorry if this is a stupid question that has an obvious answer, but I just realised that I'm not sure how I would want to handle this situation.

If a wizard or cleric casts a touch spell (say shocking grasp or inflict serious wounds) and then attempts to hit a target protected by mirror image - does that cause the spell to discharge as the mirror image pops? or does it pop the mirror image but not discharge the spell?

The SRD information about touch spells says

Touch Spells and Holding the Charge: If the character doesn't discharge a touch spell on the round the character casts the spell, the character can hold the discharge of the spell (hold the charge) indefinitely.

The character can make touch attacks round after round. The character can touch one friend (or the character can touch his or her self) as a standard action or up to six friends as a full-round action. If the character touches anything with the character's hand while holding a charge, the spell discharges. If the character casts another spell, the touch spell dissipates.

(my emphasis included)

Mirror image says

The figments stay near the character and disappear when struck.

(amongst lots of other stuff)

What do you think that answer to this is? I'm leaning towards the "not discharged by mirror image" but I'm not quite sure yet.

Cheers

 

[IceBear]

Yeah, that's a good one. How about having the spellcaster holding the charge make a Will Save? If he succeeds, he doesn't release the charge as he hits the image and if he fails then he wastes the charge.

Failing that, I'd have to go with the charge is not lost. The image isn't really there, and thus there isn't anything for the charge to "conduct" into even if the image is struck.

IceBear

 

[jasper]

have to say they lose the charge.
They try to smack mirror image 1 and it has some substancance.

 

[IceBear]

Do figments have "substance"?

IceBear

 

[gfunk]

Here is the appropriate quote for figments in the SRD:

"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."

Since figments can't "support weight" I think your hand would simply pass through it w/o a discharge.

 

[IceBear]

Exactly. I could buy the argument that the caster might think he hit something and release the charge (thus my idea about a Will Saving Throw if you wanted to), but if you didn't want to get that technical I'd rule that the charge isn't lost.

IceBear

 

[jasper]

okay if the hand will pass through it.
then the sword will pass through it
then the mirror image will not
disappear.

 

[IceBear]

The sword isn't doing damage to the image, it's just the way the spell works - If an image is struck by something then it vanishes. Yes, the sword and the hand strike the image as they pass through, but neither deals any real damage or provide any resistance to the strike, but it qualities as a "strike" for the purposes of the spell. This spell has some quirks - you could hit something with a rock and make it disappear but a fireball would not. Just chaulk it up to it's how it works. I think the rationalization is that if you see something get hit and yet the attacking object passes through it then you know it isn't real and thus the image vanishes for you. The only problem is, if someone walks into the room after two images were dispelled, why wouldn't they still see those two images? See, it gets to be weird, so they just say that if the image is struck it vanishes.

Since a touch attack is discharged when you touch something (and you aren't touching a mirror image any more than you're touching a hologram) I don't think the spell would be discharged.
If my players WANTED the spells to be discharged, I'd require a Will Save to see if the spellcaster was fooled into releasing the charge into the air by the illusion. I don't think I'd automatically state that it was lost.

IceBear

 

[Zenon]

Per the SRD under Mirror Image:

Enemies attempting to attack the character or cast spells at the character must select from among indistinguishable targets. Generally, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment. Any successful attack roll against a figment destroys it. A figment’s AC is 10 + size modifier + Dexterity modifier. Figments seem to react normally to area spells (such as looking like they’re burned or dead after being struck by a fireball).

With this in mind, I would judge that a touch spell would be discharged after the successful touch attack roll required.

After all, if you're going to call it the other way, then you might as well say that Magic Missile spells ignore the figments too, passing through them "unerringly" to strike the target.

All the above are opinion, but I would vote to keep it simple and discharge the spell.

 

[Henrix]

I'm with IceBear.
I'd consider the touch attack to be a miss, for purposes of discharging the touch spell, just as if you were trying to attack someone blindly and failed the miss chance.

Otherwise we'd be left with a strange situation if the touch attacker shut his eyes (to get a 50% miss chance, rather than the 80% miss chance afforded by four mirror images), we'd have to adjudicate whether he mistakenly hit one of the mirror images when he missed.