Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Stacking Blur and Mirror Image
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 3507041" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>Interesting analysis. Flawed, but interesting. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>The point you dropped on the floor is that with my interpretation, Mirror Image gives 5-6 images and Displacement merely protects the caster.</p><p></p><p>Cost: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell.</p><p>Gain: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell.</p><p></p><p></p><p>With the opposing interpretation, Displacement changes the Mirror Image into the equivalent of an Empowered Mirror Image.</p><p></p><p>Cost: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell.</p><p>Gain: 1 4th level spell + 1 3rd level spell.</p><p></p><p></p><p>With regard to the rest of what you wrote, the caster is not better off with two Mirror Image spells (as you claimed) since they are totally ablative whereas a Mirror Image combined with Displacement is only partially ablative. The gain is not about as effective (or better off, you claimed both) as 2 2nd level spells as you claimed, rather it is a gain of a 3rd level spell (Displacement) and the equivalent of a 4th level spell (Empowered Mirror Image or a Mirror Image with 7 to 9 images) with this interpretation.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Having the Displacement and MI up is a larger protection versus the back to back Mirror Images that you proposed. The chances to get targeted (let alone hit) as images get popped drops by:</p><p></p><p>MI (6 images followed by casting 6 images again when down to 1 image) = 16.7% / 20% / 25% / 33.3% / 50% / 16.7% / 20% / 25% / 33.3% / 50% / 100% / 100%, etc. (average 40.8% of getting targeted after 12 successful attacks)</p><p></p><p>versus</p><p></p><p>Disp followed by casting MI (6 images) = 50% / 8.3% / 10% / 12.5% / 16.7% / 25% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50%, etc. (average 35.2% of getting targeted after 12 successful attacks)</p><p></p><p>Most of the time (except for a few successful attacks after casting a second MI), it is better to have up a MI and a Displacement (using my interpretation) than it is casting a second MI. At higher level with opponents having more attacks per round, the dual MI spells come down fast whereas the Displacement lasts much longer (shy of a Dispel).</p><p></p><p></p><p>The other interpretation yields (assuming alternating attacks miss the images due to the combined displacement with the images of that interpretation):</p><p></p><p>Disp followed by casting MI (6 images) = 50% / 8.3% / 10% / 10% / 12.5% / 12.5% / 16.7% / 16.7% / 25% / 25% / 50% / 50%, etc. (average 23.9% of getting targeted after 12 would have been successful if it did not run into displacement attacks)</p><p></p><p>As can be seen, this is much stronger than my interpretation where Displacement does not affect Mirror Image (as I originally claimed and you claimed it was not much stronger).</p><p></p><p>If an opponent Fighter type averages 20 points of damage (combining both to hit and damage), your two MI solution would have the caster taking 98 points of damage, my interpretation with Displacement and MI would have the caster taking 84.5 points of damage, and the alternative interpretation with Displacement and MI would have the caster taking 57.4 points of damage.</p><p></p><p>So yes, that interpretation of Displacement combining with Mirror Image would be 1.7 times as effective at stopping damage than using two Mirror Image spells. You claimed using Mirror Image would be more effective (or about as effective, you claimed both of these). It's actually much worse off in the long run, espeically at higher levels where opponents get more attacks per round.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 3507041, member: 2011"] Interesting analysis. Flawed, but interesting. ;) The point you dropped on the floor is that with my interpretation, Mirror Image gives 5-6 images and Displacement merely protects the caster. Cost: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell. Gain: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell. With the opposing interpretation, Displacement changes the Mirror Image into the equivalent of an Empowered Mirror Image. Cost: 1 2nd level spell + 1 3rd level spell. Gain: 1 4th level spell + 1 3rd level spell. With regard to the rest of what you wrote, the caster is not better off with two Mirror Image spells (as you claimed) since they are totally ablative whereas a Mirror Image combined with Displacement is only partially ablative. The gain is not about as effective (or better off, you claimed both) as 2 2nd level spells as you claimed, rather it is a gain of a 3rd level spell (Displacement) and the equivalent of a 4th level spell (Empowered Mirror Image or a Mirror Image with 7 to 9 images) with this interpretation. Having the Displacement and MI up is a larger protection versus the back to back Mirror Images that you proposed. The chances to get targeted (let alone hit) as images get popped drops by: MI (6 images followed by casting 6 images again when down to 1 image) = 16.7% / 20% / 25% / 33.3% / 50% / 16.7% / 20% / 25% / 33.3% / 50% / 100% / 100%, etc. (average 40.8% of getting targeted after 12 successful attacks) versus Disp followed by casting MI (6 images) = 50% / 8.3% / 10% / 12.5% / 16.7% / 25% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50% / 50%, etc. (average 35.2% of getting targeted after 12 successful attacks) Most of the time (except for a few successful attacks after casting a second MI), it is better to have up a MI and a Displacement (using my interpretation) than it is casting a second MI. At higher level with opponents having more attacks per round, the dual MI spells come down fast whereas the Displacement lasts much longer (shy of a Dispel). The other interpretation yields (assuming alternating attacks miss the images due to the combined displacement with the images of that interpretation): Disp followed by casting MI (6 images) = 50% / 8.3% / 10% / 10% / 12.5% / 12.5% / 16.7% / 16.7% / 25% / 25% / 50% / 50%, etc. (average 23.9% of getting targeted after 12 would have been successful if it did not run into displacement attacks) As can be seen, this is much stronger than my interpretation where Displacement does not affect Mirror Image (as I originally claimed and you claimed it was not much stronger). If an opponent Fighter type averages 20 points of damage (combining both to hit and damage), your two MI solution would have the caster taking 98 points of damage, my interpretation with Displacement and MI would have the caster taking 84.5 points of damage, and the alternative interpretation with Displacement and MI would have the caster taking 57.4 points of damage. So yes, that interpretation of Displacement combining with Mirror Image would be 1.7 times as effective at stopping damage than using two Mirror Image spells. You claimed using Mirror Image would be more effective (or about as effective, you claimed both of these). It's actually much worse off in the long run, espeically at higher levels where opponents get more attacks per round. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Stacking Blur and Mirror Image
Top