Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Artoomis" data-source="post: 194115" data-attributes="member: 111">Ah, but where it really count is, say, a high level cleric attempting to hit the mirror imaged mage with Harm.NOW it's a big deal to figure out how it works.I think it's prefectly fine and in accordance with the rules and the intenet of the rules for illusions and such to say that the touch spell is released (the charge is no longer held) when you &quot;hit&quot; a mirror image.Since you &quot;can&quot; hold a charge, one presumes that you can also choose to not hold a charge, and I further infer that when you hit something intentionally you are intentionally releasing the charge into whatever you hit.&nbsp; If what you hit is a figment, than you released the charge anyway - but to no effect since there was actually nothing to hit.If you run it this way, it will have consistency with higher level illusions that have tactile components - you didn't really/i] hit anything, but you believe you did.&nbsp; To maintain that belief, you release the charge - of course nothing really happens except the charge is gone, but you think something does because of the illusion.So, in summary, you can choose to stop holding a charge, but whether you do so when you &quot;hit&quot; an illusion is a good question.&nbsp; A good argument can be presented either way.Neither side of teh argument would affect how you rule on incorporeal creatures - you simply don't hit them, nor do you think you have hit them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Artoomis, post: 194115, member: 111"] Ah, but where it really count is, say, a high level cleric attempting to hit the mirror imaged mage with Harm. NOW it's a big deal to figure out how it works. I think it's prefectly fine and in accordance with the rules and the intenet of the rules for illusions and such to say that the touch spell is released (the charge is no longer held) when you "hit" a mirror image. Since you "can" hold a charge, one presumes that you can also choose to not hold a charge, and I further infer that when you hit something intentionally you are intentionally releasing the charge into whatever you hit. If what you hit is a figment, than you released the charge anyway - but to no effect since there was actually nothing to hit. If you run it this way, it will have consistency with higher level illusions that have tactile components - you didn't [b][i]really[/i][/b][i]/i] hit anything, but you believe you did. To maintain that belief, you release the charge - of course nothing really happens except the charge is gone, but you think something does because of the illusion. So, in summary, you [i]can[/i] choose to stop holding a charge, but whether you do so when you "hit" an illusion is a good question. A good argument can be presented either way. Neither side of teh argument would affect how you rule on incorporeal creatures - you simply don't hit them, nor do you think you have hit them.[/i] [/QUOTE]

Verification