Magic Missiles vs Mirror Image

[Hypersmurf]

Mirror Image explicitly gives multiple targets that the caster must select from and the targeting rules state that the caster must select, hence, there is no "all missiles hit the caster since the images are figments" rule either.

Nor, indeed, any "All missiles target the caster but some might hit a figment" rule.

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus2]

What happens (or can you?) when you Great Cleave a mirror image? Does it even work?

 

[KarinsDad]

What happens (or can you?) when you Great Cleave a mirror image? Does it even work?

Not literally according to RAW (i.e. you are not dealing damage to a "creature" when you hit a figment), but many DMs allow it due to the limited utility of Cleave and Great Cleave.

 

[Justin Bacon]

The distinction between a "legal" and "not legal" target for the spell would, in fact, make the targets distinguishable, IMO.

Not to the enemy while he's making his selection. Only after.

Not a bad argument, but not one explicitly supported by the spell description which seems to be the standard desired here.

Tangentially, even if you conclude that spellcasters should be allowed to distinguish an image from the original in this fashion, the argument that the entire magic missile spell should fizzle is questionable: The wording of the magic missile spell suggests that you aren't required to shoot every missile you're entitled to, so a missile without a legitimate target should just cancel that missile (not fizzle the entire spell).

 

[Justin Bacon]

What happens (or can you?) when you Great Cleave a mirror image? Does it even work?

There are two questions here:

(1) If you hit and destroy a mirror image, should you get a Cleave attack off it?

(2) If you hit and drop another opponent and then choose to target a mirror image with your Cleave, what happens?

In both cases you have a situation where the word "creature" is being used as a necessary condition: You must "drop a creature" in order to take a Cleave attack. And your Cleave attack must "target a creature".

The former is definitely the way it should be. However, I would errata/house rule the Cleave feat to make ANY melee attack a legitimate follow-up to dropping an opponent. There's no reason I shouldn't be able to use the feat to (for example) cleave through an orc and bash down a door with a single powerful blow.

But, by pure RAW, you would not be allowed to take a Cleave attack after causing a mirror image to disappear. Similarly, if we accept the general interpretation in this thread, if you dropped one opponent and then attempted to Cleave through a target which turns out to be a mirror image, your sword would... I dunno... Freeze in mid-air or something. Or maybe, since there's no rule for Cleave (as there is for magic missile) that says the attempt fails, you would simply be allowed to choose a legitimate target.

In other words, your Cleave feat now allows you to have an ineffable sense of what targets around you are illusionary!

But what's our alternative?

Typically, for example, you can't cast a magic missile at an inanimate object. Should you allow a character to work around this limitation by allowing them to have a compatriot cast an illusion on the inanimate object to make it look like a orc, and then casting their spell? Probably not.

Of course, maybe the real problem here -- with both Cleave and magic missile -- is that the targets of those abilties are goofed up. The reason why we're instinctively annoyed that the magic missile or Cleave shouldn't still strike the chair illusioned to look like an orc is because we don't really understand why bolts of force or an angry barbarian's sword shouldn't just smash up that chair.

So if you cleared up some of those targeting issues, you could fix the rest of the problem by saying something like: "Illusions can be targeted normally be actions, spells, and other abilities, but will not be affected unless they would normally be so or if the spell specifically says so." Or something like that.

Because, on the flip-side, you don't want a metal door illusioned to look like a wooden door affected by a warp wood spell (or something like that).

 

[Hypersmurf]

Not a bad argument, but not one explicitly supported by the spell description which seems to be the standard desired here.

Well, the fact that when you stick the caster with a dagger, he bleeds, while when you stick a figment with a dagger, it vanishes, means that the images are pretty distinguishable after target selection has been made. How is that different?

Tangentially, even if you conclude that spellcasters should be allowed to distinguish an image from the original in this fashion, the argument that the entire magic missile spell should fizzle is questionable: The wording of the magic missile spell suggests that you aren't required to shoot every missile you're entitled to, so a missile without a legitimate target should just cancel that missile (not fizzle the entire spell).

As it happens, that's how I run Magic Missile, failing on a per-missile basis for invalid targets, but I don't agree that it's supported by the wording. You're not required to launch all your missiles, but if you explicitly select a target that's invalid, that's not a decision not to launch that missile... it's a decision to launch a missile in such a fashion that the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform.

-Hyp.

 

[pawsplay]

Hypersmurf, a figment does not result in an invalid targeting of the spell. Zero creatures is, after all, up to five creatures. The spell would still go off. You have some room for argument that the spell does nothing to a figment. However, the spell can be directed at what you supposed is a creature. Why would the spell indicate it does not damage inanimate objects, if there was not conceivable condition under which it could be cast at them?

Target or Targets: Some spells have a target or targets. You cast these spells on creatures or objects, as defined by the spell itself. You must be able to see or touch the target, and you must specifically choose that target. You do not have to select your target until you finish casting the spell.

Nothing there suggests the spell fails if you cannot find a legitamate target. It simply may be ineffective.

Now, in the case of magic missile, I would rule it blows up the mirror image. Why? Because the figment of mirror image is designed to mimic the original person, and takes injury as usual, and acts as if affected by area effects. I believe that the description of mirror image, although it does not list direct damage spells specifically, indicates that the figments are affected as though a creature. Although figments are not normally vulnerable to magic missile, because mirror image creates a duplicate that can be attacked or appear to be affected by magical damage, magic missile would have an apparent effect.

. The figments stay near you and disappear when struck.

A missile of magical energy darts forth from your fingertip and strikes its target, dealing 1d4+1 points of force damage

That would support the notion that a magic missile can strike a figment.

. Generally, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment.

That would indicate that in some cases, the target is selected first, and then the determination is made if it is a figment. Obviously, if the figments do not all occupy the same 5' square, that determination may not be technically necessary.