Need some spell effect clarifications

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

They should be blurred as per the Mirror Image spell emulating a blurred caster. They should not gain the concealment bonus of the Blur spell since they are not the target of the Blur spell.

Except that the concealment miss chance is a direct result of the image / caster being blurry.

As in, you can attempt to strike what appears to be him / it, except because of the way your eyes are playing tricks on you, you're attacking something that isn't there. You miss.

Likewise, you accidentally attack an image. Normally, as your weapon passes through the image, it would wink out of existence. Except, because of the blur effect, your sword never actually encounters the mirror image figment. Therefore, you miss, and it shouldn't blink out of existence.

Ruling that a manifestation gets some, but not all, of a spell's effects - especially when those effects are dependent upon one another - seems more than a little odd.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You are invisible. Your Mirror Images should be images of you, they should not be invisible.

Actually, they should be invisible, since they should look like you do. Currently, you look invisible. This makes them largely useless, at least until you attack. Unless, of course, you are proposing ...

They should be images of you as YOU appear. You stated so yourself "Mirror Image creates perfect duplicates of the caster (as far as appearance goes)".

So, if you look like the wall behind you, the images should look like the wall behind you (and if the wall behind you is polka dotted, you should see polka dotted images floating around because they are moving relative to the wall and you are not).

Yeah, it looks like you are.

What happens when a caster casts Mirror Image and then casts Polymorph or Alter Self to change his appearance? How about if the caster puts on a non-magical disguise? How about a magical disguise? Do his Mirror Images remain the same? Or do they change to reflect the new form?

What if the caster had cast the appearance altering spells, donned the diguise, etc., before casting Mirror Image?

What happens when the caster is hit with a Dispel Magic that strips the Alter Self / Polymorph effect, but not the Mirror Image?

In short, it seems like your ruling is unnecessarily complicated and weakens the spell more than its worth.

 

[KarinsDad]

Actually, they should be invisible, since they should look like you do. Currently, you look invisible. This makes them largely useless, at least until you attack. Unless, of course, you are proposing ...

What does "look invisible" mean?

It means you look like what is behind you, correct?

If what is behind the caster is purple, an image should be purple too. It should not be blue, just because what is behind the image is blue.

The image emulates the appearance of the caster, it does not emulate the appearance of what is behind the image.

Invisibility is not an appearance.

And if you rule that the caster does not have an appearance when invisible, well the total lack of appearance would be black.

Yeah, it looks like you are.

What happens when a caster casts Mirror Image and then casts Polymorph or Alter Self to change his appearance? How about if the caster puts on a non-magical disguise? How about a magical disguise? Do his Mirror Images remain the same? Or do they change to reflect the new form?

What if the caster had cast the appearance altering spells, donned the diguise, etc., before casting Mirror Image?

What happens when the caster is hit with a Dispel Magic that strips the Alter Self / Polymorph effect, but not the Mirror Image?

At all times, as per the Mirror Image spell, the image looks, acts, and sounds like the caster.

If the caster looks like polka dots because he is standing in front of a polka dot door, then the images should look that way too, regardless of whether they are in front of the door. Plus, since they are moving, their polka dots should move as well.

In short, it seems like your ruling is unnecessarily complicated and weakens the spell more than its worth.

Complicated?

To tell you the truth, I do not care which of the two ways it works. As long as the rules support that.

The rules (as written) really do not support the other interpretation.

The Blur, Displacement, and Invisibility spells target the caster and their effects work on the caster.

They do not target the Mirror Image images.

And, Mirror Image states that it gains the appearance of the caster. It does not state that it gains any special game mechanics of that appearance.

I would be ok with Mirror Image doing as the Sage stated in the FAQ as long as the Mirror Image spell itself (or the errata on it) said so.

From a purely game mechanics point of view, Mirror Image does not state that the images gain any benefits of other magic that the caster has on him, so they shouldn't gain benefits.

It's as simple as that.

Mage Armor spell targeted on caster. Mirror Image images do not get it.

Protection From Arrows spell targeted on caster. Mirror Image images do not get it.

Etc., etc., etc.


Here is a question for those who think that illusion spells should not conflict with each other.

What happens when a Wizard with Mirror Image up casts Mislead?

1) The images blink out because the actual caster goes invisible. This would indicate to a knowlegable person that Mislead was cast and the seen Wizard is not the real wizard. Hence, a conflict of illusions.

2) The images show what is behind the caster and move with him. This would indicate to a knowlegable person that Mislead was cast and the seen Wizard is not the real wizard and that the real Wizard is near those quasi-invisible images. Hence, a conflict of illusions.

3) The images blink out, but Mislead creates new images for the new illusion of the Wizard. This seems beyond the power of Mislead to create a single figment.


But in order to avoid the "conflict of illusions" issue, you have to give Mislead more power than the spell states it has. Just like you have to have Blur effectively target the Mirror Images, or have Mirror Images gain the benefits of some of the targets personal spells and not the benefits of other personal spells.

 

[-=Xar=-]

Thx for the help! I tend to agree with KarinsDad about the effects of Blur on Mirror Image, the figments would seem blurred, but they would gain no actual benefits. After all, the images wink out after a succesfull attack has been made, regardless of damage. You could pop the like balloons by prodding them with a finger. The blurry visual effect on the figments is actually part of the figment itself, therefore they would wink out when touched. The figments would perhaps look bigger or hazier, but this wouldn't protect them against being touched. And what is this thingy about images gaining the casters Dex bonus? I thought they were mindless illusions, who wouldn't even try to dodge a sword blow...

 

[KarinsDad]

And what is this thingy about images gaining the casters Dex bonus? I thought they were mindless illusions, who wouldn't even try to dodge a sword blow...

That is just the rule. The designers wanted to give them some way to have a higher AC, so they chose "moving around a lot" (i.e. Dex modifier), just like the caster they are protecting is theoretically "moving around a lot" in order for him to get his Dex modifier in combat.


I personally think Mirror Image is a poorly designed spell.

First, the AC should increase as the caster level increases in some manner. As one possibility, AC = 10 + 1/2 caster level + caster Dex modifier.

Second, an opponent should be able to make an opposed Spot check to notice flaws. For example, the Wizard is heavily injured and dripping a pool of blood. Either the images are not creating pools of blood, or their pools of blood are moving, hence, target the image with a non-moving pool of blood. So maybe something like DC = 15 + 1/2 caster level.

Third, once you know which image is the caster (by hitting it in melee for example), you should be able to ignore the other moving images to some limited extent. Again, maybe some sort of Spot check like DC = 10 + 1/2 caster level. Once you lose track of the Wizard (e.g. he walks behind the Fighter), you need a new DC 15 + 1/2 caster level to notice flaws again or something.


Mirror Image is very powerful at lower level and very weak at higher level. But, this is kind of dumb because it should be just as deceiving as an illusion at both low and high levels, and that's not exactly how it works out.

 

[Pickaxe]

What does "look invisible" mean?

It means you look like what is behind you, correct?

If what is behind the caster is purple, an image should be purple too. It should not be blue, just because what is behind the image is blue.

The image emulates the appearance of the caster, it does not emulate the appearance of what is behind the image.

Invisibility is not an appearance.

And if you rule that the caster does not have an appearance when invisible, well the total lack of appearance would be black.



At all times, as per the Mirror Image spell, the image looks, acts, and sounds like the caster.

If the caster looks like polka dots because he is standing in front of a polka dot door, then the images should look that way too, regardless of whether they are in front of the door. Plus, since they are moving, their polka dots should move as well.

Why can't the appearance of invisibility mean the (visual) appearance that you are not there? The whole "what's behind you" interpretation does not seem right. What's behind me is what's behind me, regardless of whether or not I'm invisible, and *I* do not look like what's behind me; I look like nothing, like something that doesn't block vision. I'm not covered by polka-dotted wallpaper that camouflages me against the wall behind; I cease to obstruct vision and allow the polka-dotted wall to be seen through me. But that does not make the wall part of my appearance. And I don't think that images, if they were invisible, should have this strange effect. Whether they should be invisible or not, I'm still pondering.

--Axe

 

[DreamChaser]

Invisiblity is a glamer which means it screws with the senses of the viewer. The viewer doesn't see the target but not because they are suddenly being shown an image of what is behind the target (this would require a spell to be constantly adapting to each viewers perception of where the invisible creature was, which is completely outside the realm of what any existing figment is capable of.

Mirror image is a figment. It creates "several illusory duplicates" of the caster. The final paragraph makes it clear how it interacts with invisibility.

An attacker must be able to see the images to be fooled. If you are invisible or an attacker shuts his or her eyes, the spell has no effect.

It is clear from this text that mirror images carry the effects of invisibility (a glamer) with them which in this case rendering the images useless.

Blur is another glamer. When the target creature is viewed, its outline looks blurred. This is a change in the sensory qualities of the creatures which would be translated into the mirror image because sensory qualities are duplicated by the figment (see above quote "duplicates" and the effects of invisibility).

A mirror images gain the benefits of blur because blur, like invisiblity, is a glamer which changes the qualities of the target and are thus duplicated along with every other quality of the target. Saying blur isn't duplicated is like saying that enlarge isn't duplicated because the caster isn't truly that size.

DC

 

[Pickaxe]

To tell you the truth, I do not care which of the two ways it works. As long as the rules support that.

The rules (as written) really do not support the other interpretation.

The Blur, Displacement, and Invisibility spells target the caster and their effects work on the caster.

They do not target the Mirror Image images.

And, Mirror Image states that it gains the appearance of the caster. It does not state that it gains any special game mechanics of that appearance.

I would be ok with Mirror Image doing as the Sage stated in the FAQ as long as the Mirror Image spell itself (or the errata on it) said so.

From a purely game mechanics point of view, Mirror Image does not state that the images gain any benefits of other magic that the caster has on him, so they shouldn't gain benefits.

It's as simple as that.

Mage Armor spell targeted on caster. Mirror Image images do not get it.

Protection From Arrows spell targeted on caster. Mirror Image images do not get it.

Etc., etc., etc.

Invisibility and Blur affect the appearance of the caster, therefore they affect the appearance of the images. If the effect of the spell is limited to altering appearance (e.g., Disguise Self), then the images should get the "benefit" of the magic. This would certainly be true of Invisibility, and would not be true of Blur only in the case that the appearance and the concealment effect are separate, which I would personally not rule, but which seems like a possible interpretation (not having the spell description right in front of me atm). Mage Armor and Protection from Arrows don't affect appearance, so why would they affect the images in the first place? To give another example, Alter Self would give the images the appearance of the selected form, but they would not confer natural armor or any other physical attributes.

The spell's targeting does not enter into the equation, as far as I see it; the images are not "targets", they are the effect of the caster's magic, and they in turn are affected by the caster's appearance, including magical alterations of it. I don't see how this view is any less supported by the RAW as your alternative view.

--Axe

 

[KarinsDad]

Invisiblity is a glamer which means it screws with the senses of the viewer.

No it doesn't. It does not affect the senses at all.

It affects the light (and sound) that is there which ALL viewers will then perceive. But the viewer is not directly affected in any way from a glamer.

It is clear from this text that mirror images carry the effects of invisibility (a glamer) with them which in this case rendering the images useless.

It is not clear at all. That is one possible interpretation, but not the only one.

Another interpretation of this is that the Mirror Image cannot create an image of an invisible target. Period. The spell cannot accomplish that.

Hence, the images are not invisible (and hence do not have a miss chance as stated earlier), instead they are just not there at all until the target becomes visible again.

There is a difference between being there invisible and protecting the caster and not being there at all.

The sentences:

"An attacker must be able to see the images to be fooled. If you are invisible or an attacker shuts his or her eyes, the spell has no effect."

implies that they do NOT protect you when you are invisible in any way shape or form because they have no effect then.

Hence, no miss chance on an invisible image.

Hence, no miss chance on a blurred image.

 

[Humanophile]

I'm tempted to agree with KarinsDad, albeit for different reasons. I can see both ends of the arguement, but to me the non-blurred images seem more balanced. YMMV.

To me, the visual effects are the images of the caster, not some ideal illusion that's really somewhere other than where it seems to be. If you make your own image blurry, your real body might not be where it looks to be, therefore meaning that sword swipe didn't really hit you. It strikes me as a little silly to say that the illusion isn't really where it looks like it is. So any strike that overlaps the image's area "pops" it, regardless if it only occupies that area due to the blur spell. (In strict game-world physics, the image is probably slightly larger and easier to hit than if the caster weren't blurred. The difference is far too fine for D20 game mechanics to notice, though.)

Kind of like if a size S caster used an illusion to appear M-sized. I'd say that some shots that only miss due to the size modifier don't harm the caster, but would pop the modified mirror images. (I actually wonder what sort of bonus I'd give a caster for trying a trick like that, or the inverse, but I'll probably just ignore the possibility for my own convenience.)