Mirror Image vs. Cleave

[Nail]

There is no line in the rules that states that a mirror image specifically cannot be considered a "creature".

See text on Non-abilities, etc.

There is no line in the rules stating specifically that Cleave can ONLY be used against a "creature" and nothing else.

See text within the feat itself.

And finally there is no line anywhere in the rules which states that the images created by a mirror image spell specifically are prohibited from being targetted by ANY specific form of attack.

See text within the spell descriptions of interest. Magic Missile, for example.

 

[Hypersmurf]

There is no line in the rules stating specifically that Cleave can ONLY be used against a "creature" and nothing else.

He's quite right.

The benefit of the Cleave feat states that "If you deal a creature enough damage...", but it doesn't specifically say "These are the only benefits of the Cleave feat, and thus the feat does not allow a free melee attack when destroying an object."

From which we can only conclude that it's entirely possible that the feat does, in fact, allow a free melee attack when destroying an object.

Of course, the same can be said for the Run feat. After all, the Run feat doesn't specifically say that it doesn't allow a free melee attack when destroying an object, either, so by the same logic, if I have Run instead of Cleave, I can get my extra attacks from figments too...

-Hyp.

 

[Sigg]

It's not in the definition of creature; it's in the definition of 'Nonabilities' in the Monster Manual.

Quoted again:
Wisdom: Any creature that can perceive its environment in any fashion has at least 1 point of Wisdom. Anything with no Wisdom score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Wisdom score also has no Charisma score.

Charisma: Any creature capable of telling the difference between itself and things that are not itself has at least 1 point of Charisma. Anything with no Charisma score is an object, not a creature. Anything without a Charisma score also has no Wisdom score.

-Hyp.

I don't see anything in the figment description or mirror image spell description that either says they lack wis and cha, or that they are considered "objects". If they are "objects", and they are in contact with the caster, hence in his possession, can they be sundered? Now who's using tortured logic? The nonabilities bit has no stated connection to illusions in general, or the mirror image spell specifically. I also once again don't see anywhere in the Cleave feat description that explicitly prohibits it being used to target illusions of any kind, or even "objects" for that matter. Simply because "objects" are not mentioned in the feat description specifically, does not automatically imply they are prohibited targets. You are grasping at completely unrelated rules to imply a prohibition that is not specifically stated in the descriptions of the feat and spell. How is that any better than my relying on an official rules clarification by the publisher of the game to form my interpretation?

 

[Sigg]

See text on Non-abilities, etc.

See text within the feat itself.

See text within the spell descriptions of interest. Magic Missile, for example.

Non-abilities is unrelated and irrelevant. Non-abilities describes plants, not magic spells.

Text within the feat states no prohibitions.

How about you quote from me a line from the Magic Missile spell description that prohibits it's being used against illusions. Heck the spell desc proves it can be used against illusions even if you consider illusions to be "objects".

 

[Hypersmurf]

If they are "objects", and they are in contact with the caster, hence in his possession, can they be sundered?

So your question is - can I make an attack roll that deals damage against a figment in order to destroy it?

Sure, works for me...?

How about you quote from me a line from the Magic Missile spell description that prohibits it's being used against illusions. Heck the spell desc proves it can be used against illusions even if you consider illusions to be "objects".

How so? It targets "up to five creatures". If illusions are objects, they are not creatures, in which case a spell that can only target creatures is ineffective.

SPELL FAILURE
If you ever try to cast a spell in conditions where the characteristics of the spell cannot be made to conform, the casting fails and the spell is wasted.

-Hyp.

 

[Shadowdweller]

I'm away from my books... but doesn't it say somewhere that unless stated otherwise (like Exalted feats, for example), feats are Extraordinary abilities?

-Hyp.

It might. I can't confess to having looked particularly hard to back up my (silly) claims. The question, of course, is that IF such a statement occurs whether it's in the few acceptable passages that compose the "RAW" or not.

 

[KarinsDad]

Okay, quick question:

Excluding arguements based on semantics, why is it a bad thing to have Cleavable Mirror Images?

Nothing wrong with it.

It is not the rules, but it is a fine house rule.

And, this is not really semantics.

A figment is not a creature by definition. Cleave only affects creatures. No semantics, just rules.

 

[Storyteller01]

A figment is not a creature by definition. Cleave only affects creatures. No semantics, just rules.

As Hype mentioned, the description doesn't say that it does not effect non-creatures either.

Meh... Doesn't really matter. I'm out. Have fun everyone.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As Hype mentioned, the description doesn't say that it does not effect non-creatures either.

Er, right. And it doesn't say it doesn't grant a +6 enhancement bonus to all attacks.

Nor does it say it doesn't turn you into a giant chicken-man.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't see anything in the figment description or mirror image spell description that either says they lack wis and cha, or that they are considered "objects". If they are "objects", and they are in contact with the caster, hence in his possession, can they be sundered? Now who's using tortured logic? The nonabilities bit has no stated connection to illusions in general, or the mirror image spell specifically. I also once again don't see anywhere in the Cleave feat description that explicitly prohibits it being used to target illusions of any kind, or even "objects" for that matter. Simply because "objects" are not mentioned in the feat description specifically, does not automatically imply they are prohibited targets. You are grasping at completely unrelated rules to imply a prohibition that is not specifically stated in the descriptions of the feat and spell. How is that any better than my relying on an official rules clarification by the publisher of the game to form my interpretation?

You are totally incorrect here and just blowing smoke.

Simply because "objects" are not mentioned in the feat description specifically, does automatically indicate they are prohibited targets. You are giving the feat more power than what is written in it. Just because a normal melee attack can target an object does NOT give the melee attack from a Cleave feat the ability to target an object because the Cleave feat explicitly calls out what you can attack with it. Creatures. Period. It explicitly says so.

"If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach"

This also explicitly states that you get the extra melee attack against a creature within reach. This means that you cannot take a 5 foot step as part of a Cleave and arrange for a creature to be within reach.

Of course, the feat goes on to state: "You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack."

It did not really need to state this because the previous sentence already precluded it. They just added the sentence for clarity.

You also cannot target the same creature you just damaged.



PROVE that a figment is a creature and it has a minimum Wisdom score of 1 and a minimum Charisma score of 1.

Or PROVE that Cleave can target something other than a creature.

Or PROVE that Magic Missile can target something other than a creature.


Use RAW to do so.


Giving feats and spells and spell effects properties that they do not have written down in the game is merely wasting bandwidth here. It belongs in the House Rules forum.


"COMBAT CASTING [GENERAL]
Benefit: You get a +4 bonus on Concentration checks made to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability while on the defensive or while you are grappling or pinned."

You cannot use the +4 bonus to ANY other Concentration check. Just the ones it states.

Just like with Cleave. You only get a melee attack against a creature. No difference.


I suspect that you are a person who refuses to lose, no matter what. So, you will continue to ramble on without any rules to back up your position.

Pull out some rules that we all missed to prove that figments are creatures or that Cleave can be used on objects. Otherwise, you are just spitting in the wind and wasting everyone's time.