Stacking Blur and Mirror Image

[Nail]

Hey, I'm not the one claiming other people's opinions are invalid and wrong BECAUSE.

Errrr...???

Are you responding to me? I've given rules text, quotes, etc. You, OTOH, haven't. Who's claiming "just because", again?

 

[pawsplay]

I guess what I really am curious about is WHY you would run it the way you do. Do you think MI is underpowered? Do you think figments should be targetable? Do you have a relationship with the FAQ and if you don't say she's right you'll have to sleep on the couch? I'm not saying your opinion is without merit, far from it, I'm just trying to understand what that merit would be.

I am working from the spell description, from the RAW. I think neither that the spell is underpowered nor that figments are underpowered, but that the FAQ is correct and anyone who disagrees is arguing a weak position based on the RAW for the spells involved and for figments.

I have stated my reasons for believing so at length in this thread, so if you don't understand my viewpoint, you either haven't read the thread, don't know the rules, or disagree on what the rules say.

The spell states the duplicates appear to be you. You appear as someone with an image distorted enough to have a miss chance. Therefore, your duplicates are equally distorted.

If you disregard the FAQ answer, the figments fail to be displaced when attacked, and hence are distinguishable from your image, and hence disagree with the description of mirror image. As this results in a contradiction, the opposite answer, the FAQ answer, is therefore the remaining alternative.

The FAQ answer does not lead to a contradiction. It allows all the spells to function exactly as written in their description. It does not break any rules.

It's true, figments aren't a valid target for blur, but that is not a problem. Figments also can't wear full plate armor or have a Dex score, but mirror images can appear to do both.

Very simple. The only problem crops up when you insist blur is somehow being cast on the figment. Please refer me to where in the rules casting blur on yourself is casting blur on a figment. I was under the prehaps simplistic viewpoint that when you cast blur on yourself, that you are casting it on you, a living creature.

 

[werk]

Thanks for your response.

I am working from the spell description, from the RAW. I think neither that the spell is underpowered nor that figments are underpowered, but that the FAQ is correct and anyone who disagrees is arguing a weak position based on the RAW for the spells involved and for figments.

Blah blah, you aren't saying anything here, just throwing stones.

I have stated my reasons for believing so at length in this thread, so if you don't understand my viewpoint, you either haven't read the thread, don't know the rules, or disagree on what the rules say.

Blah.

The spell states the duplicates appear to be you. You appear as someone with an image distorted enough to have a miss chance. Therefore, your duplicates are equally distorted.

Here we go! The visual distortion is a fluff description of the mechanical miss chance spell effect. While the visual effect would be copied it doesn't provide the miss chance. If the figment apears to be blurry, and someone attacks the image and scores a high enough AC to hit the image, that's what has occured. Since the figment doesn't get the blur mechanic, just the appearance, the figment would be destroyed.

If you disregard the FAQ answer, the figments fail to be displaced when attacked, and hence are distinguishable from your image, and hence disagree with the description of mirror image. As this results in a contradiction, the opposite answer, the FAQ answer, is therefore the remaining alternative.

Whoa. You are going way out on a limb here. Isn't it possible for the images to appear displaced (or blurred, or bleeding, or splashed with paint) but remain indistiguishable from the caster? Our point is that they look blurred, but simply lack the mechanical advantage of the spell.

The FAQ answer does not lead to a contradiction. It allows all the spells to function exactly as written in their description. It does not break any rules.

It's true, figments aren't a valid target for blur, but that is not a problem. Figments also can't wear full plate armor or have a Dex score, but mirror images can appear to do both.

BUT they do not gain any mechanical benefit from the armor or Dex as they have a fixed AC in the spell description. This is a perfect analogy for my point! The figments appear to wear armor but do not gain a bonus to their AC the same way they would appear to be blurred but would not gain a miss chance.

Hope that helps.

 

[KarinsDad]

I am working from the spell description, from the RAW. I think neither that the spell is underpowered nor that figments are underpowered, but that the FAQ is correct and anyone who disagrees is arguing a weak position based on the RAW for the spells involved and for figments.

I have stated my reasons for believing so at length in this thread, so if you don't understand my viewpoint, you either haven't read the thread, don't know the rules, or disagree on what the rules say.

If you say so. Personally, I do not think you have quoted a single rule that supports your POV.

The spell states the duplicates appear to be you. You appear as someone with an image distorted enough to have a miss chance. Therefore, your duplicates are equally distorted.

There is no such thing as "appear as someone with an image distorted enough to have a miss chance" from a RAW perspective in the rules. There are game effects (miss chance) and whether that game effect is on a specific object, creature, or effect. Period.

If Mirror Image stated "Any visual spell effects on the caster are also duplicated on the images. For example: Blur ...".

But, Mirror Image has no such RAW text.

There is no "Blurred" Condition in the game which is a visual concealment effect that occurs under some specific conditions.

Blur is a spell. If the spell is on the target, it/he is blurred and gains the effect. If the spell is not on the target, it/he does not. It is not on the Mirror Image images and they are illegal targets for the spell, hence, by definition they do not gain the effects of the Blur spell.

If you disregard the FAQ answer, the figments fail to be displaced when attacked, and hence are distinguishable from your image, and hence disagree with the description of mirror image. As this results in a contradiction, the opposite answer, the FAQ answer, is therefore the remaining alternative.

There is no such contradiction. This is a total logical fallacy.

Your sentence here is the semantic equivalent of "If I hit the target, I can distinguish him from his images. Since Mirror Images states that I cannot distinguish him from his images, I cannot hit him."

This is semantical game playing with the words. There is no RAW text that states that if the caster is displaced, the images also must be displaced. Without such RAW text, you are not quoting rules. You are making them up such as in your statement quoted here.

 

[pawsplay]

I don't agree with your "hit the target" analogy. We are talking precisely about the appearance of the figment, and blur alters its appearance.

The absence of a "blurred" condition in the glossary does not mean someone cannot be in the condition of being blurred, merely that it is not generalized beyond the description of a particular spell. There is no "dead by lightning bolt" condition either, but lightning bolts do damage, and when your hit points get too low, you die. Blur causes a miss chance.

 

[werk]

I don't agree with your "hit the target" analogy. We are talking precisely about the appearance of the figment, and blur alters its appearance.

Right, but here's your disconnect... The figment appears blurred but it's ALL figment. If you hit a blurred section, it is therefore part of the figment, so it is a successful attack. When a caster is blurred you have real target, the caster, and illusion, the blur effect. you roll a % to see which one you hit, meat or illusion. With MI, all you have is the illusion, it's just the figment as produced by MI.

It is Hyp's blanket analogy, which you and others didn't get at all.

 

[irdeggman]

What's interesting here is that Mirror Image doesn't say the figments gain Invisibility. Rather, it says that Mirror Image "has no effect".

So not only does Mirror Image specify its valid target (creatures only), but it also gives precident that other spells don't give their benefits (the images are NOT invisible; they just aren't there at all!).

Stating it has no effect is not the same as saying they are not there at all.

"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."

So it is an extension of the first sentence that the attacker must be able to see the images to be fooled. If they can't see the images (like if they are say invisible) then the MI has no effect.

 

[blargney the second]

You know what beats blurred mirror images?

Rocks fall, everyone dies!
-blarg

 

[irdeggman]

Right, but here's your disconnect... The figment appears blurred but it's ALL figment. If you hit a blurred section, it is therefore part of the figment, so it is a successful attack. When a caster is blurred you have real target, the caster, and illusion, the blur effect. you roll a % to see which one you hit, meat or illusion. With MI, all you have is the illusion, it's just the figment as produced by MI.

It is Hyp's blanket analogy, which you and others didn't get at all.

But this is back to the miss chance being caused by hitting the blurred portion of the target - which is just not accurate at all.

Please show me where in the rules it states that this is how the concealment rules work. By extension if you swing at an invisible opponent you roll a % chance to see if you hit the target or thin air. Again - the rules do not say this at all.

 

[irdeggman]

Here we go! The visual distortion is a fluff description of the mechanical miss chance spell effect. While the visual effect would be copied it doesn't provide the miss chance. If the figment apears to be blurry, and someone attacks the image and scores a high enough AC to hit the image, that's what has occured. Since the figment doesn't get the blur mechanic, just the appearance, the figment would be destroyed.

Actually the description of blur states:

"The subject's outline appears blurred, shifting and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment."

So if the the MI appears blurred, shifting and wavering it should be that precise condition that grants concealment - which is pretty much what the FAQ is saying.

Would the MI benefit from darkness being cast on the caster?