Mirror Image and Combat Reflexes

[Cheiromancer]

I find myself agreeing with werk and Hypersmurf.

With regard to Combat reflexes and AoOs: Images are not creatures. So it is the mage with Mirror Image that provokes the attack of opportunity, and this AoO has the normal chance of hitting an image rather than the mage.

With regard to Magic Missile: Images are not creatures. If a mirror image is targeted, the missile fizzles. If it hits the caster, then all the images appear to have been hit, and they move around so that the identity of the caster is concealed.

As Hypersmurf notes, this answer contradicts the FAQ, which seems inclined to treat the figments as creatures.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

Area effect spells don't get rid of mirror images, correct?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Correct, OtM.

 

[werk]

With regard to Magic Missile: Images are not creatures. If a mirror image is targeted, the missile fizzles. If it hits the caster, then all the images appear to have been hit, and they move around so that the identity of the caster is concealed.

I would run magic missle the same as a melee attack. They always target the MI user, regardless of which image they target. No fizzle, valid target. Each missle would look like it hits all targets, some hit figments, which wink out.

The key here, targeting a MI user, is that the DM decides (randomly) whether the MI user or an image is hit, player can only target the MI user, not the figments.

I know this is an interpretation. If interpreted as above, what problems could result?

 

[Pinotage]

Or, the missiles targeted against the figments would fizzle, while that targeted against the actual creature would work.

That could work. One has to ask whether that would help you identify the real image given that presumably the images copy the real one in any event? Why doesn't a fireball destroy them in any case? Are they only vulnerable to physical attacks?

Pinotage

 

[dshai527]

The 5ft per image thing has always bothered me. It raises too many questions as to how each individual image affects the area around it. They don't threaten so any person who is near an image but not near the caster would realise it when the image did not try to protect itself from his presence as if the caster himself were really within threat range or the person was within the threat range of the caster. Would the image near him provoke an AOO if the caster (we'll say 15 feet away) tries to cast a spell? I'm sure i could come up with hundreds more questions and I realise it would be best just to say its magic and move on but I have always felt best to use the all in 5ft square like many have already stated.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Or, the missiles targeted against the figments would fizzle, while that targeted against the actual creature would work.

If the spell targets an invalid target, the whole spell fizzles, doesn't it? Not just 1 effect of the spell.

 

[Pinotage]

I don't see that. Based on "Generally, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment" I see the following options:
(1) Aim your missiles at one target. As this is the "general" case, roll randomly to see if you targeted the real thing or an image.
(2) Aim your missiles at different indistinguishable targets. Not the "general" case, in this instance you hit both the real thing and a number of images.

In some sense there can't be a difference between targeting the real guy and mirror images, because the spell itself says they are "indistinguishable".

I think I commented briefly on my reply to Patryn, but is (2) valid if the targets are figments? If they are indistinguishable from one another do they form a valid target for any spell being both figment and creature at the same time? Or at least that's what I'm reading from your last statement.

Pinotage

 

[Cheiromancer]

I would run magic missle the same as a melee attack. They always target the MI user, regardless of which image they target. No fizzle, valid target. Each missle would look like it hits all targets, some hit figments, which wink out.

The key here, targeting a MI user, is that the DM decides (randomly) whether the MI user or an image is hit, player can only target the MI user, not the figments.

I know this is an interpretation. If interpreted as above, what problems could result?

You are not using complete sentences, and I don't know exactly what you mean by some of your fragments. What does "No fizzle, valid target" mean? Surely you can't specify your target as "the caster of the Mirror Image" can you? Otherwise you might as well cast a "flesh to stone" at a line-up of murder suspects and say "I target the murderer." Murder case solved!

If you could name the caster as the target of the spell you would run afoul of the wording of Mirror Image:

Enemies attempting to attack you or cast spells at you must select from among indistinguishable targets. Generally, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment.

If you have to select among the indistinguishable targets, you can't just say "the real spellcaster" is your target. And if you choose an invalid target, the spell fizzles. However, the word "generally" makes it ambiguous. If this is not one of the general cases, then maybe you can specify the real spellcaster. The wording of the magic missile spell says that a MM is enerring, supporting your interpretation, but I think this refers to the ability to ignore cover and anything less than total concealment, not to ignoring the presence of indistinguishable targets.

The missile strikes unerringly, even if the target is in melee combat or has less than total cover or total concealment.

So each spell potentially trumps the other, but both are slightly ambiguous. In ruling on an ambiguity, I would favor the defensive spell over the offensive spell. The same way a mind blank trumps effects that might overcome it. I would be heartened by the fact that a reading which favors magic missile would seem to depend on being able to target someone based on indetectable characteristics (being the real caster), which I think would be a mistake to allow.

[edit]Oh, and I think if you fired magic missiles at various targets, only the ones that were aimed at images would fizzle. I know of no reason to think that a multi-target spell would fizzle if one of its targets was invalid. After all, you can cast a 1 person/level spell even if you don't have enough people? And surely a non-existent person is an invalid target?[/edit]

 

[werk]

What does "No fizzle, valid target" mean?

The spell does not fizzle because it has a valid target.

Surely you can't specify your target as "the caster of the Mirror Image" can you?

No, but regardless of which image they target, they are actually targeting the MI user. The figments are indistiguishable and randomly chosen for effect, so there is no need to have them target 'the third image from the left' or some such...completely irrelevent to the outcome of their action.

If you could name the caster as the target of the spell you would run afoul of the wording of Mirror Image: Enemies attempting to attack you or cast spells at you must select from among indistinguishable targets. Generally, roll randomly to see whether the selected target is real or a figment.

(Emphasis added) Selecting from indistiguishable targets does not mean that they actually pick a target. I read it as they attack what they think is the MI user and the DM decides the affect. They are effectively targeting the MI user.

If you have to select among the indistinguishable targets, you can't just say "the real spellcaster" is your target.

I beg to differ. I propose that they can ONLY target 'the real spellcaster' it's just that the result is not that straitforward.