Mirror Images CAN'T all be in different 5' squares

[Grog]

I've seen posts here that say that each Mirror Image gets its own 5' square (I don't know if this is from the Sage or not, but I've seen several people say this). Well, if this is true, since the images re-arrange themselves every round, it would mean that the caster would move around every time the images re-shuffled.

Think about it. There's a row of six images + one caster. The caster is on one end of the row. Then, the images reshuffle, and the caster and the image on the far end switch places. The caster has just moved 30' without taking a step.

Even if the images were clustered together, the caster could still move 5 or 10 feet every round.

It seems pretty silly for this spell to confer the ability to blink upon the caster (even if it is only randomly). So wouldn't the images all have to be in the same square to avoid this problem?

(edit) I see that the caster has to move for the images to reshuffle, but even so, it still means that the caster could concievably move 30 feet by taking a 5 foot step.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The text of the spell states that each image must be within 5' of the caster or at least one other image... not within 5' of the caster and every other image.

What on earth makes you think the caster gets teleported? It says the images pass into and through and split off from each other and the caster.

When the caster's finished moving, there's been so much splitting and shuffling and passing through going on that nobody knows which one is real... but the caster only moves where he puts his feet.

-Hyp.

 

[Grog]

The text of the spell states that each image must be within 5' of the caster or at least one other image... not within 5' of the caster and every other image.

Right. Which means you could concievably have a horizontal row of images, each with its own 5' square.

What on earth makes you think the caster gets teleported? It says the images pass into and through and split off from each other and the caster.

When the caster's finished moving, there's been so much splitting and shuffling and passing through going on that nobody knows which one is real... but the caster only moves where he puts his feet.

Think about this example. A wizard is in a room that measures 10' north-south and 40' east-west. He casts Mirror Image and gets 6 images. The images array themselves in a horizontal row, each image with its own 5' square. So the row is 35' long, and the caster is at the far east end.

Next round, the caster moves 5' to the south. This makes the images reshuffle, and the new array is completely random. Let's say, by chance, the caster is now on the far west end of the row.

If he didn't get teleported, how did that happen? How else could he end up 35' to the west of his original position?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Next round, the caster moves 5' to the south. This makes the images reshuffle, and the new array is completely random. Let's say, by chance, the caster is now on the far west end of the row.

Yup. In which case, he is 5' south of where he was last turn, and all the images extend east of his position.

[color=white]
1.
------------
|..........|
|.ffff@....|
|..........|
|..........|
|..........|
|..........|
------------
2.
------------
|..........|
|..........|
|.....@ffff|
|..........|
|..........|
|..........|
------------
[/color]

The spell doesn't move the character, it moves the figments.

-Hyp.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I too intensely dislike the "mirror images get their own squares" approach to the spell. I think it creates a number of problems--and not just with movement:

1. Can Images provoke attacks of opportunity?

If images can't provoke attacks of opportunity because of their movement then either the caster gets a free pass should he move more than five feet and attack or cast a spell (if he provoked but none of the images provoke, after all, that would reveal where he was) or there's something about the caster that makes him provoke an AoO when he acts just like the images. Negating movement based AoOs for the caster seems like an unjustified increase of the spell's power based upon the text of the spell. However, if the images provoke AoOs through their movement, it seems like the spell isn't very useful.

2. Can Images threaten?/Do they all have to in order to be indisitinguishable from a wizard making a melee attack (touch, armed, or unarmed)?

A. In any of the examples above, all of the images couldn't possibly threaten any single square without a spiked chain.
B. A character who is attacked knows what direction he was attacked from.
C. Therefore, it would seem that an attacking wizard would reveal his true position. However, he could simply take a 5' step afterwards and remerge with the images.

This problem becomes more acute, however, if a PC moves through the threat range of an image. Now the image obviously can't take an AoO so it seems as if a PC could move around a group of images, seeing if any of them take an AoO before deciding which to attack. Most DMs seem to get annoyed when I try this though.

3. Do Images actually occupy squares?

It appears that people think they do. So, what happens if an opponent, knowing that there must be a number of false images decides to try and move into or through a square with an image in it? It does seem a bit unreasonable that a wizard with 5 images could take up a 10x15 block of space--he could conceivably prevent any enemies from even approaching his real location if images actually prevent enemies from occupying squares.

4. What happens if some images are in the area of effect of an area effect spell but others aren't?

The spell says that images react normally to area effect spells--acting as if they were burned or dead. Does that mean that if a fireball caught three of the wizard's five images, three of them would act dead although they wouldn't dissappear but the other three would act normally? Or would the three "dead" images get up on the wizard's initiative, merge with the other images and lose all their distinguishing burns?

On the whole, I prefer to avoid these difficulties by saying that all the images stay in the caster's square at all times. It's not the book's rules but it seems to avoid the problems caused by those.

 

[Hypersmurf]

On the whole, I prefer to avoid these difficulties by saying that all the images stay in the caster's square at all times. It's not the book's rules but it seems to avoid the problems caused by those.

So if a wizard has 8 images, all in the same square, and I take a swing at him with my sword, I have a 8 in 9 chance of missing him, even if my attack roll hits.

But if I close my eyes, treat him as an invisible opponent, choose the square that I know he's in (since all 9 of them were in the same square before I closed my eyes), I have a 1 in 2 chance of missing him, even if my attack roll hits.

11% chance of hitting the right one, bumped up to 50% by closing my eyes?

-Hyp.

 

[Maitre Du Donjon]

I too intensely dislike the "mirror images get their own squares" approach to the spell. I think it creates a number of problems--and not just with movement:

1. Can Images provoke attacks of opportunity?

The caster can move and provoke AoO's but the attackers still have to be lucky and hit the real caster.

2. Can Images threaten?/Do they all have to in order to be indisitinguishable from a wizard making a melee attack (touch, armed, or unarmed)?

The thing about Mirror Image, i think, is that if the caster doesn't move every round, it's going to be pretty easy figuring out which one is the real caster. It's certainly possible for an opponent to "outsmart" the spell if the caster stays still.

3. Do Images actually occupy squares?

Figments don't really occupy space. Don't they react independantly, tho? If you try to move through a square occupied by a figment, you could treat it as an automatic overrun (ie the figment let you through and stayed out of the way)

4. What happens if some images are in the area of effect of an area effect spell but others aren't?

uhhhhh i don't know. Like you said, some react, and others don't. When the caster moves, the images "update" and re-shuffle?

On the whole, I prefer to avoid these difficulties by saying that all the images stay in the caster's square at all times. It's not the book's rules but it seems to avoid the problems caused by those.

Apart from what Hypersmurf said, i don't think Mirror Image causes that much trouble as it is now...

Maitre D

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Exactly. Note that the last paragraph of the mirror image spell implies that that's an option as well. (It's not really an option if you put all the images in different squares).

It's also significant that, while it improves your chances to hit when there are 9 images, it doesn't do anything about improving your allies' chances to hit on their next blow. IME, it's often better to whittle down the images and have a 100% chance of hitting on the next round (if you hit) than to take a 50% miss chance on every swing. Doing that turns Mirror Image into displacement--a higher level and more powerful spell.

So if a wizard has 8 images, all in the same square, and I take a swing at him with my sword, I have a 8 in 9 chance of missing him, even if my attack roll hits.

But if I close my eyes, treat him as an invisible opponent, choose the square that I know he's in (since all 9 of them were in the same square before I closed my eyes), I have a 1 in 2 chance of missing him, even if my attack roll hits.

11% chance of hitting the right one, bumped up to 50% by closing my eyes?

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Exactly. Note that the last paragraph of the mirror image spell implies that that's an option as well. (It's not really an option if you put all the images in different squares).

It doesn't imply it, it flat-out says it... and it is an option. You still need to choose the square you attack into, so it's not a good option.

But the fact that the spell explicitly each image can be up to 5' away from the last means that having each in a separate square is possible.

They don't all have to be in separate squares - it says "cluster", and it says "up to 5'". But it's possible for them to be in separate squares.

It's also significant that, while it improves your chances to hit when there are 9 images, it doesn't do anything about improving your allies' chances to hit on their next blow.

That's why I like the not-all-in-the-same-square version. If you get lucky and hit the real caster, then all your allies know which one he is until his next action...

-Hyp.

 

[Maitre Du Donjon]

Exactly. Note that the last paragraph of the mirror image spell implies that that's an option as well. (It's not really an option if you put all the images in different squares).

Why wouldn't it be an option? I have 9 identical wizards in a square formation in front of me. I have no idea which one is the real caster. I close my eyes and try to make out where the sound comes from. Even if the caster is in the back row, i can still advance on him and strike him, no?