D&D 5E Reckless Attack / Mirror Image

[FormerlyHemlock]

The issue I see is that there are a lot of AoE attacks in 5E. What good is a defensive spell that can be totally dispelled and have zero net defensive effect because some hedge wizard has Thunderwave or some Shaman has Spike Growth? Casting a defensive spell in 5E is kind of like casting a Healing spell. The caster is already at a bit of a disadvantage because offense typically trumps defense in 5E (with some rare exceptions like Greater Invisibility).

Magic Missile or Scorching Ray is fine because the defensive spell actually does something defensive. Each image popped prevented the Mage from getting popped.

Without getting sidetracked into a discussion of the relative merits of offensive vs. defensive tactics in 5E, suffice to say that Paper disproves Spock and Spock vaporizes Rock: (Rewritten) Mirror Image doesn't have to be strong against everything to be a worthwhile spell. It's great against Iron Golems and Disintegrate and Counterspell--it will save you somewhere between 60 and 200 HP against Iron Golems and Disintegrate--and it is poor against Fireball and Hypnotic Pattern.

If it were great against Fireball and Hypnotic Pattern too, or even just ignored them, it would be (IMO) inappropriate as a 2nd level spell. It is better and more interesting if Thunderwave functions as a counter to Mirror Image. Besides--the hedge wizard is still wasting his action running up into melee range and casting Thunderwave, which invites its own counterplay (kill him).

But, I've acknowledged my bias--I'm probably being influenced by aesthetic concerns and old memories (and modern games like Dominions 4). And I'm not actually planning on houseruling Mirror Image any time soon anyway--no one ever casts it anyway, so fixing the spell's logic isn't a high priority for me right now. YMMV.

 

[CapnZapp]

It makes zero sense that

So?

Relinquish the scientist in you, and embrace that magic does not have to be rational.

In fact, I'd say that's the definition, that it isn't scientific.

I have zero problems with how mirror image works against some attacks, but not others.

That the distinction neatly follows a game mechanic (does it involve an attack roll?) is just gravy on top



Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

 

[S'mon]

I would certainly rule your Mirror Images are acting equally as Recklessly as you are! The RA & MI text
both say "targets you". I think the RA text & intent here is clear enough that I would be pretty annoyed with a player who raised this in-game.

 

[Arial Black]

Read the words you just wrote.

<<Rage "ends early if you are knocked unconscious or if your turn ends and you haven’t attacked a hostile creature since your last turn or taken damage since then".>>

Is your turn ending? Yes.

Have you attacked a hostile creature or taken damage since your last turn? No.

Therefore, Rage ends.

<<Therefore, if you use your action to cast mirror image and your bonus action to Rage, then you are not in danger of losing Rage early until the end of your next turn.>>

You just made that up out of whole cloth. That's not what the rule you just quoted says.

Rage ends early if you spend a round raging and during that round you neither attack nor take damage.

If the rage were to end as soon as you activated it then it would be an absurd interpretation. If you fail to keep up your obligations for a round then the raging stops. It can't stop the same instant it starts on the grounds that you didn't keep up those obligations for a round because you don't have any obligation to attack or take damage when you are not raging.

The obligations only begin when you start to Rage, and the 'since your last turn' only begins once the Rage begins. It is not backdated to before your Rage even existed!

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Rage ends early if you spend a round raging and during that round you neither attack nor take damage.

If the rage were to end as soon as you activated it then it would be an absurd interpretation. If you fail to keep up your obligations for a round then the raging stops. It can't stop the same instant it starts on the grounds that you didn't keep up those obligations for a round because you don't have any obligation to attack or take damage when you are not raging.

The obligations only begin when you start to Rage, and the 'since your last turn' only begins once the Rage begins. It is not backdated to before your Rage even existed!

The rules text says otherwise. If the obligation only began when you started to rage, it would be phrased differently, e.g. "...if your turn ends and you haven't attacked a hostile creature since your last turn spent Raging...". But in the absence of special text, there is no special rule: your last turn is just your last turn, and on the round you start Raging "your last turn" means "the turn before you started raging."

Normally it isn't an issue for a Barbarian, since they will Rage + Attack. The restriction is coming into play here because you're Raging on a turn when you want to do something else (cast Mirror Image or Blink).

This anti-synergy makes perfect sense from a fluff perspective too. There's no such thing as casting a spell in a "raging" way. ("Hulk Cast Mirror Image!"? No.) Raging is associated with frenzied attacks.

As an aside: this restriction on Rage is precisely why Rage is more of a pain to manage than Bladesong is. Since we're already talking about a wizard/barbarian, why not a bladesinger/Barbarian? Then you can (cast Blink or Mirror Image) + Bladesong on round one, and then Rage + Attack on round two.

 

[TwoSix]

Ick. That rage restriction is some fiddly BS. That's one for the scrap heap.

 

[S'mon]

If the rage were to end as soon as you activated it then it would be an absurd interpretation.

You always get an Action before it ends. I often see PCs Rage out of combat just to get Advantage on an Athletics check to break a door, bend bars etc. Of course it then ends. So what?

 

[discosoc]

A different player took over the DMing role, so I get to play a PC. I am planning on playing a multiclass Barbarian / Wizard.

I was wondering if I am reading Reckless Attack combined with Mirror Image correctly.

RA: "attack rolls against you have advantage until your next turn.".

MI: "Each time a creature targets you with an attack during the spell's duration, roll a d20 to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates.".


So, my interpretation of this is that foes who target my duplicate will not get advantage for my Reckless Attack because they are not targeting my PC. Correct? Thoughts?

This makes no sense. They think it's you -- that's all that matters. It's like, they still get advantage to hit if they end up targeting an illusion or something.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

This makes no sense. They think it's you -- that's all that matters. It's like, they still get advantage to hit if they end up targeting an illusion or something.

But note that they wind up targeting a different AC, which could be different (lower or higher) than your actual AC. E.g. if you are Dex 20 and wearing ring mail, you have AC 14, but your mirror images have AC 15. Clearly the mirror images aren't mirroring your every movement--they have their own defensive characteristics.

And now, as KarinsDad mentioned earlier, you are also setting a precedent that Blur should impose disadvantage on attacks against the mirror images. Is that really the precedent you want to set?

 

[KarinsDad]

This makes no sense. They think it's you -- that's all that matters. It's like, they still get advantage to hit if they end up targeting an illusion or something.

That's the cool thing about magic. It doesn't have to make sense. In fact to the PC or NPC not casting the spell, it often doesn't.