Wizard Spells 10-16 Two Page Spread

[Ultimatecalibur]

I'm just going to point out something I just noticed.

We're comparing a PC defense ability verses a PC offensive abilities, correct? Why are we doing that? Shouldn't we be looking at Monster abilities verses Mirror Image? Does any known monster have an ability like the Rouge's Deft Strike? Will any monsters be getting abilities like that?

 

[Graf]

And I think you're too fixated on fireball, since that's the spell that constantly comes up during this argument, despite us having no idea what the 4e version actually does.

We know there are spells that affect lots of opponents at once and they require attack individualized attack rolls.

You're dodging, I think, because I've got a very good point.
Some spells will require "attack rolls" but obviously aren't guided by the precise angle of the wizard pointing a finger. Some will obviously perform this behavior (hitting lots of foes) and go even further such as hitting lots of foes some of whom aren't visible to the wizard at all (i.e. dropping a fireball at the corner of a hallway; or on a group of foes some of which are invisible).

I think it's reasonable to assume these AOE's will affect invisible creatures, creatures down the hall, etc.
I think one of these AoE's will be called fireball, but maybe they'll decide to call it blast-of-fire.

Either way it's a problem with your logic. Insisting that the emperor's wizard doesn't know fireball because we haven't seen his spell book yet isn't much of a logical defense.



Your explanations and interpretations are all reasonable. They're one very specific extrapolation targeted at insisting that MI -has- to work differently.
You can attempt to avoid alternative possibilities that allow this, but it's doesn't make your argument any stronger (or weaker). It remains one (strict, game limiting) possibility.

You're dogged insistence that this is the only possible way that it could work has defeated me. I shall post no more on the subject.

 

[The Little Raven]

You're dodging, I think, because I've got a very good point.

Not really.

I'm saying "Single-target spells require the same type of aim as ranged attacks, especially Magic Missile, since it's a basic ranged attack. It doesn't make sense that an illusion which masks your true location would only affect attacks that are required to penetrate armor. It'd be like Invisibility granting you a bonus to Armor Class, but not to Reflex, so it's just as easy to hit you with something, unless I'm trying to penetrate the armor you're wearing."

Some spells will require "attack rolls" but obviously aren't guided by the precise angle of the wizard pointing a finger.

And some are... like Magic Missile, Acid Arrow, and Sonic Orb. Even 3e's low-level Mirror Image stymied casters trying to target you with spells (it explicitly calls it out), by making them have to pick which one to attack (there was no real system for how it actually helped you or anything like that). It seems strange to me to up it in level, and then give it an effect which makes it

Either way it's a problem with your logic. Insisting that the emperor's wizard doesn't know fireball because we haven't seen his spell book yet isn't much of a logical defense.

Now you're just trying to put words in my mouth. My argument is that single-target attacks should be subject to the Defense bonus granted by Mirror Image, and you keep saying "Well, that's not how Reflex interacts with fireball."

I'm talking about a single-person pewpew attack, and you're saying that it doesn't need to be consistent, since that's how AoE works.

The description of MI is "Three duplicate images of you appear, imitating your actions perfectly and confusing your enemies," but it should more accurately be "Three duplicate images of you appear, imitating your actions perfectly and confusing your enemies when they try to penetrate your armor."

 

[Stalker0]

I'm just going to point out something I just noticed.

We're comparing a PC defense ability verses a PC offensive abilities, correct? Why are we doing that? Shouldn't we be looking at Monster abilities verses Mirror Image? Does any known monster have an ability like the Rouge's Deft Strike? Will any monsters be getting abilities like that?

There are lots of monsters that have been posted, and I'm sure I've seen a few of them that target reflex saves instead of AC.

Regardless, a dm is going to throw npcs at his party, not just monsters all the time. MI should stand up mechanically to both.

I agree its a real easy fix, just use the +2 to AC and reflex defense (lose an image each attack that misses AC or reflex defense) that people have mentioned. Quick, clean, and easy...and it fixes all the problems.

 

[hong]

There are lots of monsters that have been posted, and I'm sure I've seen a few of them that target reflex saves instead of AC.

Regardless, a dm is going to throw npcs at his party, not just monsters all the time. MI should stand up mechanically to both.

I agree its a real easy fix, just use the +2 to AC and reflex defense (lose an image each attack that misses AC or reflex defense) that people have mentioned. Quick, clean, and easy...and it fixes all the problems.

I suspect NPCs will be expected to be statted up in the same vein as monsters. It's the culmination of the villain class approach.

That said, this doesn't actually rule out said NPCs using spells like fireball either.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Mirror Image should apply to Reflex defense as well as AC. Too many things attack Reflex and ignore AC, like grabbing and magic missiles.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I agreed with you completely until I got to this point in my post, and realized something... since poison attacks are usually against Fortitude, this wouldn't defend from poison stinger attacks and stuff like that. The power probably needs a bit more tweaking.

Don't forget that poisonous stingers and such seem to be pretty much always the poison as a secondary affect targeting fortitude once the delivery mechanism has made its hit.

So that isn't relevant.

Cheers

 

[Hypersmurf]

MM was also never affected by Mirror Image.

Better reread Mirror Image in 3E and 3.5. When someone casts Magic MIssile at you, they are required to select their target(s) from among you and the images. If they don't pick the real you, you don't get hit by a Magic Missile...

-Hyp.

 

[Falling Icicle]

The more I've been thinking about the new Mirror Image, the less I like it. I like the simple, easy way they did it, but the benefits are far too small. Heck, even level 1 clerics can throw around +1 AC bonuses like their nothing. I think they should greatly increase the bonus or allow it to avoid more attacks, or both. A +10 starting bonus sounds good to me.

 

[The Little Raven]

Don't forget that poisonous stingers and such seem to be pretty much always the poison as a secondary affect targeting fortitude once the delivery mechanism has made its hit.

So that isn't relevant.

I phrased that totally wrong. What I meant to say was that all Fortitude-based attacks aren't just secondary effects from other attacks, so making the extra images disappear only on Ref/AC attacks might not cover everything.

The Hobgoblin Warcaster has Force Lance, an ability that is a single-target ranged attack against Fortitude, which deals 2d8+4 force damage and slides the target 3 squares. Although it doesn't target Reflex or Fortitude, it sure sounds like something that MI would make harder to target.