Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6258849" data-attributes="member: 6681948">Given the spell indicates a targeting is generally achieved by a random roll, it seems like a GM who rules a structure where that is not the case is functionally weakening the spell.  So is that GM also a jerk?Because that was the only way to spread out eight images into their own separate squares, considering the 5’ requirement, the terrain, and the location of the wizard, his allies and the opponents?  Because the attacker cleverly worked out that, if they are arranged in a grid of 3x3, the wizard would logically wish to be in the back and advancedThat means he passed through two images, which the spell allows, and is now sharing a space with one of them, now that I consider it. This seems to contradict the “no sharing squares” rule.  If the attacker can’t pass through a figment’s square, the wizard should arrange the images to force the enemy to carve through them first, augmenting the spell.It seems pretty likely the attacker would seldom have the ability to move within striking range of every image, especially if our wizard keeps backpedaling.The terrain in my example forces that. However, it does beg the question who decides how they “cluster”.  Does the caster make that choice? The GM? Most spells give the caster the ability to place his spell, and most spells with mobile effects indicate how that movement is determined.  Funny how this one doesn’t – almost as if the designer perceives no need to address which squares the images are in.Good point - I had not considered the potential for the caster to separate from the cluster.  The description does technically say they remain in a cluster, not that the wizard does.  Can the wizard control them to move one way while he slips away another?  Perhaps he casts Invisibility, all images vanish with him, he slips away and then dismisses the invisibility.  Can he make the images go the other way so they reappear in line of sight and he does not?  Oh wait, “the figments stay near you”. So how near is that?  Seems quite ill defined if the intent is that they fan out within a large area rather than the “Personal” range of the spell.Then once any action identifies him, it should become pretty tough to become indistinguishable from all the images in many cases.That frames it nicely.  You are quite correct that the spell does not indicate who controls placement of the images.  So why would we presume it is not the caster?  Can the GM decide they all fan out in a manner that makes it easier for the opponents to reach the caster?  Does the caster get to decide, and choose to his advantage? SOMEONE has to place them, and there is no rule stating how that is to be done.  Again, almost as if the designer sees no need for such a rule.While moving, I can merge and split off. That’s even a 5’ step.  It’s hard to believe this confounds the viewer if I’m the only one with limited movement.Yet no other rule is provided, nor any guidance for when the general rule does not apply.  Again, like the designer perceives no need to identify the exceptions.Here’s a thought – what does the FAQ say (duh!)  I’ve provided the whole FAQ on the spell for completeness.So the recommended assumption, repeated more than once, is that the caster and images share one location. When the caster moves, the images move along with him, so their reshuffling is not moving several squares, but shuffling within a smaller space.  That will be a disadvantage if the opponent has Great Cleave or WWA –as the FAQ makes clear!Much easier to envision the images passing through one another, and the caster, repeatedly, as the spell indicates.The same way he hits only one target under any other scenario.  An attack hits a single target.Well, it IS magic, isn’t it? We also abstract a lot of attack mechanics, and that’s part of the explanation as well.I don’t. I read “the images separate and continue to move around and through you always staying within 5’”.  I then read that consistent with the view that the person is not a 5’x5’ mass, but stands within the square, generally moving around, possibly reaching into any of the eight adjacent squares, on an ongoing basis, rather than standing stock still between actions.A  lot of your other points are irrelevant if we follow the FAQ. You then scientifically analyze spell issues, followed by suggesting we not do so.  And at the end, we agree that we shouldTo me, the FAQ indicates the way the spell is supposed to work. Done? So how does the spell know whether the images should touch the ground, float above it or be buried halfway or all the way in it? Seems like all the images are supposed to look like they could be the caster, which not standing on the ground may screw up.</blockquote>

Verification