Mirror Image and Combat Reflexes

[ZuulMoG]

Isn't that like saying that if I cast Charm Person at an ogre, it fizzles since the ogre is a giant rather than a humanoid... unless I believe it's a humanoid disguised as an ogre?

No. It means that Magic Missile only fizzles (completely fails) if the caster attempts to target what he believes is an invalid target. If the MM caster believes his target is valid, the spell works, up until the point of impact (which is of course utterly asinine, force is force, and should do damage to objects (accounting for Hardness) the same as people/creatures).

This insane nit-picking of the rules is counterproductive. Can't we just use our common sense instead?

The current definition of Magic Missile is stupid, broken, and dumb. There is no justification for the current rule, and lots of justification for the interpretation I gave above. Let the spell target any discrete object (not part of something else, like an eye, wrist, etc...) whether it's living or inanimate. Does a bullet care if it hits a wall or a person? Does a fireball? Do Melf's Minute Meteors? Then why does MM? Ans: It doesn't, but someone didn't think of my interpretation when they were doing 3.5, and some people are unable to use their own capacity for reason and interpretation, and so we have this thread.

There is NO sensible reason for MM being unable to target a MI figment. NONE. Stop the madness, people! Rules are great to have, but some of them are just plain stupid, and need to be re-thought.

If the MM rule was correct, there would be no need for this discussion about it's affect on MI.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No. It means that Magic Missile only fizzles (completely fails) if the caster attempts to target what he believes is an invalid target. If the MM caster believes his target is valid, the spell works, up until the point of impact (which is of course utterly asinine, force is force, and should do damage to objects (accounting for Hardness) the same as people/creatures).

Belief has nothing to do with it, though.

Either you target something valid, in which case the spell works, or you target something invalid, in which case the spell fails.

If Magic Missile were

Effect: one or more missiles of force (see text)

Magic Missile creates one dart of force, plus one per two caster levels after the first (maximum of five darts). These strike unerringly at whatever target or targets the caster designates, as long as no two targets are more than 15 feet apart. The darts deal 1d4+1 damage to creatures, but no damage to inanimate objects.

... or something along those lines, it would behave as you describe. But Magic Missile isn't an Effect spell; it's a Target spell. If the target is invalid, you don't even get the dart... whether you believe it's valid or not.

-Hyp.

 

[RandomPrecision]

So, has anyone actually played where magic missiles completely negate mirror image (or vice-versa) in the manner that some people are arguing for?

 

[Caliban]

So, has anyone actually played where magic missiles completely negate mirror image (or vice-versa) in the manner that some people are arguing for?

Yes. In most of the games I've played in, the MM spell can negate one image per missile.

It's not something that comes up that often to be honest.

 

[Storyteller01]

So, has anyone actually played where magic missiles completely negate mirror image (or vice-versa) in the manner that some people are arguing for?

Not I. Pick your targets and hope you hit. Images disappear as their 'damaged'.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

MM has hit MI images in every campaign I've ever played in.

 

[dcollins]

Yes, MMs take out MIs in the same way in my games.

 

[ThirdWizard]

This insane nit-picking of the rules is counterproductive. Can't we just use our common sense instead?

The current definition of Magic Missile is stupid, broken, and dumb. There is no justification for the current rule, and lots of justification for the interpretation I gave above. Let the spell target any discrete object (not part of something else, like an eye, wrist, etc...) whether it's living or inanimate. Does a bullet care if it hits a wall or a person? Does a fireball? Do Melf's Minute Meteors? Then why does MM? Ans: It doesn't, but someone didn't think of my interpretation when they were doing 3.5, and some people are unable to use their own capacity for reason and interpretation, and so we have this thread.

Emphasis added.

I would like to point out that this is nothing new to 3.5. This is nothing new to 3.0. If you check the AD&D book you will find that magic missle could not damage a non-creature. This isn't a mistake, this is how the designers wanted magic missile to behave. Reason and interprietation, not really. It never could, nor was it ever intended to, disrupt mirror images. Going against this is not only going agaist the RAW but the very spirit of the rules.

Inanimate objects (locks, etc.) cannot be damaged by the spell, and any attempt to do so wastes the missiles to no effect. Against creatures, each missile inflicts 1d4+1 points of damage.

House Ruling it is fine if you want, [edit]I'm not against House Rules[/edit]. But, I don't think claiming common sense is right here, since it was never intended not to affect any non-creature.

 

[Fieari]

I've decided that this is how I'm going to rule it in my games:

Figments are not valid targets for MM. This means you simply can't target figments with MM. You can attack the caster though, even if you don't know which one is the caster. Thus, you send ALL your MMs at the caster, or split your missiles up between the caster and another valid target, like his buddy over there.

I then roll to see if the MM hit the caster, or a figment, as per the text of MI. If the spell hit a figment, the figment winks out.

Note that I targeted the caster, but still hit the figment with the spell. That's because the spell text of MI seems to specifically allow this. More specific rules trump more general rules, and thus the MM can hit the figment in this and only this case. But you can't split the missiles up between multiple figments, because they aren't valid targets.

I think this is what the RAW says that I should do.

 

[ZuulMoG]

Fieari,
That's the best compromise I've seen.

MM is still a stupid spell taken RAW. Force that only hurts flesh or animated objects? How can it tell if an object isn't animated? Are MM's sentient? If they are, then why don't they ignore the MI's and hit the MI-protected target after passing through the images? Stupid, stupid, stupid. Just because an obviously poorly-constructed rule in in the SRD, doesn't mean we have to enslave ourselves to it.

And here's a thought people, if each MM has to pass Hardness, most of them will still do no damage to inanimate objects, in accord with the spirit of the rules.