Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Radijs 02-20-08, 06:14 AM	My DM is very fond of using mirror image as a defense against beatsticks. Nearly every opponent we come across uses it and so I am looking for good ways to get rid of the spell quickly. Dispelling isn't a great option (yet) because my caster level isn't that great. The only other option I know of is true seeing or blindsight. But we can't afford those options yet either. What would be a good way to get rid of the benefits provided by this spell? Grappling comes to mind, Pin the sucker down and let the rest of the beatsticks whale on it, or if there are a lot of images closing your eyes (A chance of 1 in 2 to hit your target instead of 1 in 6 to 8)
runestar 02-20-08, 07:32 AM	Great cleave can get rid of all the images in a heartbeat. Magic missile can work as well, just aim each missile at a different image. Or just use area affect spells. It won't matter when you can blast them all, both real and imaginary...:D
Windspear 02-20-08, 07:42 AM	Fireball. End of story.
Radijs 02-20-08, 09:54 AM	Fireball does not break mirror image. But the cleave suggestion is good. I'll pass that along to our own beatsticks.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-20-08, 10:06 AM	Fireball might not remove an image, but it bypasses that defense. What level? Who's in the party?
Silencher 02-20-08, 10:13 AM	Being a caster who uses mirror image.. I just want to ask, that closing his eyes suggestion shouldn't work, right? The first roll of percentage should be if you're attacking the right image(Like 20% if you have five images), the second roll (the 50% one when blinded/eyes closed) is to see if you hit. Am I understanding this wrong?
Axiomatic_vampire 02-20-08, 10:30 AM	It depends. I think there's still some debate over how mirror image works. If all those images are in the same 5 ft square, then closing one's eyes does work, because there are rules for attacking a square while blind. Since sight is removed from the situation, the illusions cannot aid you, hence it's the 50% miss chance of being blind. Other people claim that the mirror images occupy other squares, closing one's eyes is no good in that scenario.
Old_Troll 02-20-08, 10:30 AM	Couple the "Closed-eyes" technique with Listen checks if your a meleer trying to hit. If your another spell-slinger, Magic Missles, AoE, or a neat little trick with a Summon II or higher (for longer duration). Summon a group of bats and have them attack. There vision is bad enough that they tend to always use their sonic radar which will ignore the images, and even if you GM rules otherwise, watch the bats with a waiting action. When one of them bounces off or lands on an image, blast away!
wonlee76 02-20-08, 10:31 AM	Whirlwind Attack I believe could destroy all the mirror images too if I recall correctly. I think the mirror images are always within a short distance of the caster so the images should all be within reach of a whirlwind attack.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-20-08, 11:12 AM	I think the text is "each image is within 5 feet of the caster or another image", but you can generally get at least two or three. How would glitterdust react with the illusions? I think there might be a solution there.
Oswald Krato 02-20-08, 11:35 AM	Summon I or II is always a good move. Spring traps. Carry treasure. Defeat illusions. The list goes on and on.
Kursk 02-20-08, 11:38 AM	It depends. I think there's still some debate over how mirror image works. If all those images are in the same 5 ft square, then closing one's eyes does work, because there are rules for attacking a square while blind. Since sight is removed from the situation, the illusions cannot aid you, hence it's the 50% miss chance of being blind. Other people claim that the mirror images occupy other squares, closing one's eyes is no good in that scenario. "These figments separate from you and remain in a cluster, each within 5 feet of at least one other figment or you." Each can have its own square. It's right in the spell description.
Vegepygmy 02-20-08, 12:41 PM	Being a caster who uses mirror image.. I just want to ask, that closing his eyes suggestion shouldn't work, right? The first roll of percentage should be if you're attacking the right image(Like 20% if you have five images), the second roll (the 50% one when blinded/eyes closed) is to see if you hit. Am I understanding this wrong?Yes, you are reading it wrong. The spell description makes it absolutely clear: 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. (Being unable to see carries the same penalties as being blinded.) It depends. I think there's still some debate over how mirror image works. If all those images are in the same 5 ft square, then closing one's eyes does work, because there are rules for attacking a square while blind. Since sight is removed from the situation, the illusions cannot aid you, hence it's the 50% miss chance of being blind. Other people claim that the mirror images occupy other squares, closing one's eyes is no good in that scenario.Which is how we know that interpretation is wrong: because the spell description itself makes it clear that closing one's eyes is a useful tactic. Each can have its own square. It's right in the spell description.Nowhere in the spell description does it say an image can have its own square. Nowhere does it say they can occupy a square at all. They're just images. They have no substance. It's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of "each within 5 feet" that it simply means they never, at any time, move beyond that distance, but that they are normally much closer (say, within 1 foot of you). Interpreting the spell as allowing each image to have its own square raises many more questions than it answers.
Damned slayer 02-20-08, 12:50 PM	Yes, you are reading it wrong. The spell description makes it absolutely clear: 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. (Being unable to see carries the same penalties as being blinded.) Which is how we know that interpretation is wrong: because the spell description itself makes it clear that closing one's eyes is a useful tactic. Nowhere in the spell description does it say an image can have its own square. Nowhere does it say they can occupy a square at all. They're just images. They have no substance. It's a perfectly reasonable interpretation of "each within 5 feet" that it simply means they never, at any time, move beyond that distance, but that they are normally much closer (say, within 1 foot of you). Interpreting the spell as allowing each image to have its own square raises many more questions than it answers. than please tell me what the use of that spell would be?? Drasticly nerf invisibility (same lvl) and you get what your talking about the spell says it must be WITHIN 5ft of you or other figment THAT MEANS ITS MORE THAN 1 square they use they can have 1 each
Kursk 02-20-08, 12:50 PM	Nowhere in the spell description does it say an image can have its own square. Nowhere does it say they can occupy a square at all. Interpreting the spell as allowing each image to have its own square raises many more questions than it answers. Umm, yeah. "each within 5 feet of at least one other figment or you." Draw out the all possibilities of this on a grid and then get back to me. :rolleyes:
Tordak 02-20-08, 12:59 PM	Also, if anyone is willing to invest a few feats, mage slayer, blind fighting and pierce magical concealement will also work well. Pierce magical concealement allows you to pick the real caster out of the images. It as other use also, which mean it's not a waste. Greater cleave also works very well (I've personnaly used that before). Like it's been said already, area effect spells will damage the caster without regards for images.
narack 02-20-08, 12:59 PM	a nice Spot check
jaelis 02-20-08, 01:28 PM	than please tell me what the use of that spell would be?? It is still quite powerful. If someone tries to defeat it by closing their eyes, then they are effectively making all their opponents invisible. You can also attack the effectively blind person without popping the effect. The spell works fine either way you play it, but I find the "all in one square" to be simpler.
mtbOgre 02-20-08, 02:08 PM	It is still quite powerful. If someone tries to defeat it by closing their eyes, then they are effectively making all their opponents invisible. You can also attack the effectively blind person without popping the effect. The spell works fine either way you play it, but I find the "all in one square" to be simpler. The problem with attacking it with your eyes closed is you are blind and take any penalties for being blind. -2 AC, don't threaten any squares, no dex to AC... than please tell me what the use of that spell would be?? Drasticly nerf invisibility (same lvl) and you get what your talking about Invisibility goes away after a single attack, this allows you to continue to attack and cast whatever spells you would like. It's more comparable to Blur than invis. As for the original question about how to fight it, the best bet is any sort of multi attack form. Bows w/ rapid shot, fighters with TWF or even single weapon with shield bash. Haste makes short work of it also. Glitterdust would not work to reveal the spell because the images would reflect the changes to the original (But could still blind the creature). As mentioned the best low level spell fix is magic missile.
Vegepygmy 02-20-08, 03:07 PM	Draw out the all possibilities of this on a grid and then get back to me.I can certainly do so, but it won't make your interpretation any less problematic.
CryoSilver 02-20-08, 03:11 PM	For 9000 gp, you can get a Blindfold of True Darkness, which grants you 30 ft Blindsight.
Kursk 02-20-08, 03:24 PM	I can certainly do so, but it won't make your interpretation any less problematic. Waiting... :whatsthis
Vegepygmy 02-20-08, 03:40 PM	Waiting... :whatsthisI have no idea what you think is going to happen now, but please enjoy yourself. :bored:
Goof 02-20-08, 03:44 PM	I would think glitterdust would work as it wouldn't iluminate the illlusions.
Kursk 02-20-08, 03:50 PM	I have no idea what you think is going to happen now, but please enjoy yourself. :bored: I'm sure nothing will happen...
VulcanStormwrath 02-20-08, 03:55 PM	I would think glitterdust would work as it wouldn't iluminate the illlusions. They's shift through each other and add the illusion of Glittering, just like bleeding, being on fire etc. Bet choices are as mentioned, Magic Missile, Great Cleave, Whirlwind Attack, Hasted Archer with high fire rate. The point is to force the whole party to waste it's actions for at least one round. Having one party member utilize their action to negate all images negates this in gives the party a net gain in actions per round versus the Bad Guy.
Loren Pechtel 02-20-08, 04:06 PM	I don't see the point of closing your eyes. If you know what square has the real target then you can hit it anyway, if you don't then it doesn't protect you from targeting a square with an image anyway.
Slimgauge 02-20-08, 04:17 PM	One of the tactical maneuvers granted by the feat "Awesome Smite" is "Seeking Smite". Your smite is uncannily guided to its target, ignoring any miss chance your foe might have. Is Mirror Image a miss chance based on how many images remain ? (i.e. 1 image and the real mage = 50% miss chance, 2 images and the real mage = 66% miss chance, etc.) The downside is you only get so many smites/day and it doesn't help your allies figure out wich one to hit.
Damned slayer 02-20-08, 04:33 PM	One of the tactical maneuvers granted by the feat "Awesome Smite" is "Seeking Smite". Your smite is uncannily guided to its target, ignoring any miss chance your foe might have. Is Mirror Image a miss chance based on how many images remain ? (i.e. 1 image and the real mage = 50% miss chance, 2 images and the real mage = 66% miss chance, etc.) The downside is you only get so many smites/day and it doesn't help your allies figure out wich one to hit. won't help they're in different squares I'd maybe let it go if you could reach them all from where you start the attack tho I think it's boosting the maneuver
toucanbuzz 02-20-08, 04:35 PM	I would think a good Listen or Spot check would discern which one is real. As you read the spell, it seems to suggest this: When you and the mirror image separate, observers can’t use vision or hearing to tell which one is you and which the image. You could make a Listen/Spot check after spell is cast to learn which image is genuine. Though I don't see a DC, Listen is generally opposed by Move Silently. Spot would be akin to detecting invisible creatures. To the benefit of the caster, though: While moving, you can merge with and split off from figments so that enemies who have learned which image is real are again confounded. Again, anything that hits an area will be great, including Burning Hands, a Web spell set aflame, a Summon Swarm spell, etc.
Nephlite 02-20-08, 04:47 PM	My DM is very fond of using mirror image as a defense against beatsticks. Nearly every opponent we come across uses it and so I am looking for good ways to get rid of the spell quickly. Dispelling isn't a great option (yet) because my caster level isn't that great. The only other option I know of is true seeing or blindsight. But we can't afford those options yet either. What would be a good way to get rid of the benefits provided by this spell? Grappling comes to mind, Pin the sucker down and let the rest of the beatsticks whale on it, or if there are a lot of images closing your eyes (A chance of 1 in 2 to hit your target instead of 1 in 6 to 8) Summon Swarm auto hits: so every image in the 10 foot area (same area as a ogre fits in) is hit. That should hit alot of images and it avoids the miss chance.
Radijs 02-20-08, 05:11 PM	I was thinking for a moment. How well would grappling work? Once in a pin the npc is held mostly immobile. Any images going in or out of him would be rather useless then.
mtbOgre 02-20-08, 06:48 PM	won't help they're in different squares I'd maybe let it go if you could reach them all from where you start the attack tho I think it's boosting the maneuver The view that the other images occupy different squares is a minority one and not consistent with the rules. For example if you don't know which square the caster is in how could closing your eyes negate the effect? You would then be blind and still have no idea where the caster is. Also, do you now take 8 squares on the battlefield? Makes for a messy melee, all your images would suddenly be prone to AoO all over the place.
Istaran 02-20-08, 07:06 PM	Summon Swarm auto hits: so every image in the 10 foot area (same area as a ogre fits in) is hit. That should hit alot of images and it avoids the miss chance. That will harm the target (and likely the party; uncontrollable swarms are notoriously uncooperative, and last a few rounds after you stop concentrating, so it can come back and bite the party as well), but will do nothing to negate the images. Swarm attack is an AOE, so it will make the images look like they are being hurt, not actually hurt them. A summoned creature or whatever else you can get with blindsight works well, as you have the beatsticks ready an action to attack the target the blindsighted creature targets before the images/original can merge/seperate again. Maybe ready an action to grapple the target? I don't know if that would negate the use of the images, but it would certainly let the grappler do his damage without needing to worry about images. Chain Missiles seems like it would be a good one too, especially if you have a non-imaged foe close to the imaged one. Pound the non-imaged foe with up to 10 force missiles, and bounce each one off to hit an image.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-21-08, 12:03 AM	Mirror image. Every time it comes up, it's a huge debate. Seriously, no one knows for sure how it's supposed to work. Rule 0. Check with your DM, that's how mirror image works. For example: the images are "up to 5ft from you or other image". "up to" implies that the distance is a variable, as if the caster can choose it. It's a mess. Badly designed spell, huge amount of argument. For real, everyone, just ask your DM. They'll tell you how they want to run it. Argument over.
mtbOgre 02-21-08, 12:11 AM	Mirror image. Every time it comes up, it's a huge debate. Seriously, no one knows for sure how it's supposed to work. Rule 0. Check with your DM, that's how mirror image works. There it is. I guess the first question to the OP should have been "How does your DM use mirror image?" Then tactics for getting rid of it stem from there. How we think it should be handled is really irrelevant to the OP. Thanks AV.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-21-08, 12:54 AM	You can always hit it with a fireball though, and I'm really getting interested in my glitterdust idea. Mirror image is supposed to mimic fighting, casting, and bleeding...but glowing? The dust can't stick to an illusion, right? I'm loving glitterdust, temporarily, until someone points out why it doesn't work.
mtbOgre 02-21-08, 01:26 AM	You can always hit it with a fireball though, and I'm really getting interested in my glitterdust idea. Mirror image is supposed to mimic fighting, casting, and bleeding...but glowing? The dust can't stick to an illusion, right? I'm loving glitterdust, temporarily, until someone points out why it doesn't work. Well the part in Mirror Image that says "Enemies attempting to attack you or cast spells at you must select from among indistinguishable targets." Gives me the impression that they are indistinguishable for the duration of the spell and that marking one marks them all. The illusion is a mirror image of the caster that is continuously reflecting him. This is why when you cast fireball they all look scorched. Your DM might be more generous though.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-21-08, 01:31 AM	An illusion can pretend to look scorched. Can an illusion pretend to be physically solid enough to have bright shiny dust accumulate on it? Does the illusion take on the attribute of glowing? Is mirror image essentially a large group of programmed images that have the script of "emulate the caster in all ways"? Isn't that a bit much for a 2nd level spell? Honestly, I don't know. That spell is a son of a female greyhound.
mtbOgre 02-21-08, 01:52 AM	An illusion can pretend to look scorched. Can an illusion pretend to be physically solid enough to have bright shiny dust accumulate on it? Does the illusion take on the attribute of glowing? Is mirror image essentially a large group of programmed images that have the script of "emulate the caster in all ways"? Isn't that a bit much for a 2nd level spell? Honestly, I don't know. That spell is a son of a female greyhound. Well since is says specifically "Figments seem to react normally to area spells (such as looking like they’re burned or dead after being hit by a fireball). " Since GD is an area spell I can't see any reason it would be exempt from this. Emulating GD is no more complex than emulating fire damage from a fireball. Anything that happens to the original caster gets mirrored by the spell. It is considered the best 2nd level defensive spell in the book for a reason.
Axiomatic_vampire 02-21-08, 02:04 AM	Well since is says specifically "Figments seem to react normally to area spells (such as looking like they’re burned or dead after being hit by a fireball). " Since GD is an area spell I can't see any reason it would be exempt from this. Emulating GD is no more complex than emulating fire damage from a fireball. Anything that happens to the original caster gets mirrored by the spell. It is considered the best 2nd level defensive spell in the book for a reason. Because it's a conjuration that makes actual glowing glitter? An illusion can hop around and pretend to be injured all it wants, can it be substantial enough to accumulate actual glowing glitter? A conjuration should fall right through an illusion, while accumulating on the body of the physical caster, no? Ah, maybe you're right. Maybe the illusion constantly changes it's nature to do the best job possible of copying the caster. But maybe not. All the spell really implies is that it copies the movements of the caster, including casting spells, drinking a potion, or reacting to damage. If the mirror imaged mage was in a river, would you argue that all the illusions part the water? If a conjuration is physically substantial, isn't it similar to that?
tuberov 02-21-08, 02:56 AM	I would be interested in what would happen if a mage that has cast mirror image is suddenly caught in a web/entangle/briar web type of spell. The figments would emulate the caster, making them all, "stuck," as well (provided the mage failed his save). If anything, it frees up time to start taking free shots to determine the real mage.
Knightblde 02-21-08, 03:23 PM	HUH, Your own statement says you can't use vision or hearing. You know Spot requires vision and Listen requires hearing, right?
Silencher 02-21-08, 05:34 PM	my thought about all of this is that it does just what the name suggests, it mirrors the caster. So if the caster has glitterdust all over him, suddenly so do the images, the dust still goes through the images and lands on the floor, but it appears like all would have the dust on them because they're mirroring the image of the caster. Just my 2 cents. and no, I don't think it would look like it parts the water, unless you think of it as an aura around the caster that is reflected, then maybe it does.
Loren Pechtel 02-21-08, 07:18 PM	I would be interested in what would happen if a mage that has cast mirror image is suddenly caught in a web/entangle/briar web type of spell. The figments would emulate the caster, making them all, "stuck," as well (provided the mage failed his save). If anything, it frees up time to start taking free shots to determine the real mage. And precludes the real mage moving around once he has been discovered. How about another approach: Flour. Do mirror images leave footprints???
Radijs 02-21-08, 07:30 PM	I don't think they do. But checking footprints during combat would be pretty hard.
Nephlite 02-21-08, 08:19 PM	That will harm the target (and likely the party; uncontrollable swarms are notoriously uncooperative, and last a few rounds after you stop concentrating, so it can come back and bite the party as well), but will do nothing to negate the images. Swarm attack is an AOE, so it will make the images look like they are being hurt, not actually hurt them. Prove that Swarm's attack is a area effect. Not listed as such.
runestar 02-22-08, 12:03 AM	I don't see the point of closing your eyes. If you know what square has the real target then you can hit it anyway, if you don't then it doesn't protect you from targeting a square with an image anyway. The images work by distracting people who can see, because they now see multiple copies of their target. Obviously, if you close your eyes, or are otherwise somehow blind, there is no way the images can fool you. :)
Radijs 02-22-08, 06:49 AM	Its not literally stated as it being an AOE for swarms. But as far as I can see its not unlogical to see it as such.
Jay_Ibero_911 02-22-08, 10:32 AM	On the glitterdust issue, look at it this way. If a caster with active mirror images has a bucket of water dumped on him, he and all his images will look wet. Replace water with glitter and you see why glitterdust would be of no use in negating the mirror images. Faerie Fire might be of use, because it only outlines creatures and objects in the area, and an illusion is neither. Since the light only surrounds the subject and isn't actually ON them, the images wouldn't copy the effect.