Mirror Image and Combat Reflexes
- Thread starter MojoGM
- Start date
Storyteller01
First Post
WOuldn't NOT allowing these make the spell overpowered for its level?
You can't AoO a figment if you believe it is (or may be) real, and you cannot target the images with specific spells. I imaging Melf's Acid Arrow, as well as other targeted spells, will also be affected by this ruling (does a Acid Arrow fizzle when cast on a M.Image? It isn't meant to target a figment...).
The only way you can hit the wizard is to attack directly on your turn (going through preset defenses, and hoping you hit) or react with area effect damaging spells (hitting your friends in the process, if they're in melee).
Isn't this rather powerful for this level of spell? Was this what the designers originally intended?
You can't AoO a figment if you believe it is (or may be) real, and you cannot target the images with specific spells. I imaging Melf's Acid Arrow, as well as other targeted spells, will also be affected by this ruling (does a Acid Arrow fizzle when cast on a M.Image? It isn't meant to target a figment...).
The only way you can hit the wizard is to attack directly on your turn (going through preset defenses, and hoping you hit) or react with area effect damaging spells (hitting your friends in the process, if they're in melee).
Isn't this rather powerful for this level of spell? Was this what the designers originally intended?
Last edited:
dcollins
Explorer
Storyteller01 said:
No, it's certainly not. The mirror image spell specifically says you can target the images with attack spells. Again, "Enemies attempting to attack you or cast spells at you must select from indistinguishable targets." The area-effect-spells business is a wholly separate and distinct issue.
Storyteller01
First Post
dcollins said:
Just looking at the MM arguements.
If you cannot target an image with a MM, can you target it with anything else?
Tatsukun
Danjin Masutaa
OK, I have bee pondering this for a while now, and I have come up with another possible idea…
The adept casts MI and a whole bunch of ‘adepts’ appear. (I am still unsure if they should be in the same square)
If a mage casts MM at the group, targeting each ‘adept’ with one missile, the spell works.
The missiles fly out and hit their targets. All the targets react as though they were an adept just hit with a MM - they yell “ouch, man alive! That hurt! Or some such-.
Of course only one was the real adept, and he actually got hit. The rest were just faking, since the missiles fizzled out at the moment of impact (wrong target type).
That keeps the detector thing from happening. Also, it doesn’t invalidate the whole spell (that one MM still hit the real adept).
Now, here’s what’s hurting my brain now. If there’s a total of 5 ‘adepts’ (one real, 4 copies) and you fire MMs at 3 of them, how do you determine if you hit the real one? Is that introducing a miss chance to MM ????
-Tatsu
The adept casts MI and a whole bunch of ‘adepts’ appear. (I am still unsure if they should be in the same square)
If a mage casts MM at the group, targeting each ‘adept’ with one missile, the spell works.
The missiles fly out and hit their targets. All the targets react as though they were an adept just hit with a MM - they yell “ouch, man alive! That hurt! Or some such-.
Of course only one was the real adept, and he actually got hit. The rest were just faking, since the missiles fizzled out at the moment of impact (wrong target type).
That keeps the detector thing from happening. Also, it doesn’t invalidate the whole spell (that one MM still hit the real adept).
Now, here’s what’s hurting my brain now. If there’s a total of 5 ‘adepts’ (one real, 4 copies) and you fire MMs at 3 of them, how do you determine if you hit the real one? Is that introducing a miss chance to MM ????
-Tatsu
Storyteller01
First Post
Tatsukun said:
My guess? The real one always gets hit (and the others react accordingly). Since the images shift position every round, you won't know which image is always getting hit.
But then this leads to the wizards lack of control (but I want to target that guy? Why cant I?).
Prefer the image=target method myself. SOOOO much simplier...
Last edited:
ThirdWizard
First Post
Regarding Acid Arrow and MM:
You can cast acid arrow at anything: a tree, an amulet, or the ring on someone's finger. You can cast it on a spiritual weapon, a figment illusion, or just straight up into the sky. This is because it has the "Effect: one arrow of acid" line in the description.
Magic missile is different. It can only be cast so that it targets a creature. It's like charm person in this regard. You can't just cast charm person up in the air, on an amulet, or even on a Giant. If you try to do these things the spell just won't do anything. Same with magic missile. Cast the magic missile on the air, an amulet, or anything else that it cannot target, and it won't work.
And, magic missile cannot seek the real caster. It says in the description of the spell itself that you have to pick out a particular target. You can't say "Hit the wizard" and the spell will do it. You must point out which figment(s) the spell will be hitting.
The spell doesn't care what you call the target. The spell only cares if you pick out a particular creature and if that creature is a valid target. I can see a guy with an apron and cleaver and say "I'm casting magic missle at that butcher there," and just because he's not a butcher doesn't mean the spell suddenly doesn't work. If it did it would be a great way to detect all sorts of things. "I'm going to cast magic missile on that evil guy there." Or, "I'm going to cast magic missile on that serial killer there." There's no divination involved.
You can cast acid arrow at anything: a tree, an amulet, or the ring on someone's finger. You can cast it on a spiritual weapon, a figment illusion, or just straight up into the sky. This is because it has the "Effect: one arrow of acid" line in the description.
Magic missile is different. It can only be cast so that it targets a creature. It's like charm person in this regard. You can't just cast charm person up in the air, on an amulet, or even on a Giant. If you try to do these things the spell just won't do anything. Same with magic missile. Cast the magic missile on the air, an amulet, or anything else that it cannot target, and it won't work.
And, magic missile cannot seek the real caster. It says in the description of the spell itself that you have to pick out a particular target. You can't say "Hit the wizard" and the spell will do it. You must point out which figment(s) the spell will be hitting.
Dannyalcatraz said:
The spell doesn't care what you call the target. The spell only cares if you pick out a particular creature and if that creature is a valid target. I can see a guy with an apron and cleaver and say "I'm casting magic missle at that butcher there," and just because he's not a butcher doesn't mean the spell suddenly doesn't work. If it did it would be a great way to detect all sorts of things. "I'm going to cast magic missile on that evil guy there." Or, "I'm going to cast magic missile on that serial killer there." There's no divination involved.
So you would allow the MM to hit the Ogre cloaked by the image of the Kobold?
ThirdWizard
First Post
Dannyalcatraz said:
Yes. Just like it would hit a displaced ogre.
Note that it would not hit merely an illusion of an kobold.
Back to the other fork of this thread...the AoO on the MI images.
Personally, I would allow the AoOs (both normal and those from CR) to work because it:
1) Maintains Internal Consistency: If MM can target an MI based on the caster's perception, then the MI should trigger the same kind of perception on the part of the guy with Combat Reflexes. CR lets a character attack beings that leave or take actions within its threatened area- if a MI image moving into a threatened image doesn't make the CR PC think he's being "attacked," then he's obviously determinining the images are not real...even without making that MI random target roll.
Besides, where is the logic in treating an AoO differently from any other melee attack? Its not like the attacker has any special bonuses or hinderances to his perceptions when doing an AoO that don't exist with a normal attack.
2) It costs the character with CR his extra AoO's. Imagine a mage with MI and a touch spell. He and his images provoke AoOs from the guy with CR (he was already within the threatened area when he started casting)...the images take the hits (for sake of argument, the guy with CR was fooled), go poof, and the mage delivers his touch spell.
If the AoOs don't work against the MIs, then when the guy CR will get to take AoOs against the Mage only. But this ignores MI's extant mechanism within its description- the chance to miss the mage protected by MI. I mean, he only gets to AoO against the Mage (because he can't AoO an image) but has a chance to miss with his because he might erroneously attack the images he can't attack? That doesn't make sense.
Personally, I would allow the AoOs (both normal and those from CR) to work because it:
1) Maintains Internal Consistency: If MM can target an MI based on the caster's perception, then the MI should trigger the same kind of perception on the part of the guy with Combat Reflexes. CR lets a character attack beings that leave or take actions within its threatened area- if a MI image moving into a threatened image doesn't make the CR PC think he's being "attacked," then he's obviously determinining the images are not real...even without making that MI random target roll.
Besides, where is the logic in treating an AoO differently from any other melee attack? Its not like the attacker has any special bonuses or hinderances to his perceptions when doing an AoO that don't exist with a normal attack.
2) It costs the character with CR his extra AoO's. Imagine a mage with MI and a touch spell. He and his images provoke AoOs from the guy with CR (he was already within the threatened area when he started casting)...the images take the hits (for sake of argument, the guy with CR was fooled), go poof, and the mage delivers his touch spell.
If the AoOs don't work against the MIs, then when the guy CR will get to take AoOs against the Mage only. But this ignores MI's extant mechanism within its description- the chance to miss the mage protected by MI. I mean, he only gets to AoO against the Mage (because he can't AoO an image) but has a chance to miss with his because he might erroneously attack the images he can't attack? That doesn't make sense.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
June 16 2026 -
June 16 2026 -
September 16 2026 
Arcana Unleashed(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.
Replies (181) -
September 16 2026 -
October 1 2026 -
October 6 2026 -
January 1 2027
