Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 TheCriticalFail Jun 01, 2015 7:49:40	Just noticed an absolutely INCREDIBLE combo whilst making an arcane trickster for an upcoming game. Now, as we all know, the dream for a rogue is to proc sneak attack on a reaction as well. Unfortunately this is normally annoying and requires multiclassing to fighter for riposte or relying on the enemy attacking someone else when you have the sentinel feat (not likely when they have the squishy rogue in front of them).   NO MORE.   Sentinel states: "When a creature within 5 feet makes an attack against a target other than you (and that target doesn't have this feat), you can use your reaction to make a melee weapon attack against the attacking creature.   MIRROR IMAGE STATES: "Each time a creature targets you with an attack during the spells duration, roll a D20 to determine whether the attack instead targets one of your duplicates." Thus, the attack getting redirected onto a duplicate by mirror image counts as the enemy making an attack against a "target" (as the duplicate is referred to in spell desc. and as logically makes sense) other than you, causing sentinel to activate and thus allowing you to attack and land a second sneak attack (providing the conditions for sneak attack are also met). To me this makes logical sense, is completely rule legal and is also completely epic in every single way. What's more, it simply requires one spell and a feat, meaning you can avoid the finicky multiclassing issues etc of trying to achieve the same effect normally.   Downside is spell slot consumption and the fact that they're not guranteed to hit a duplicate... but on the other hand it fits with the idea of arcane trickster so well and is still pretty awesome.   Haven't seen this combo mentioned anywhere else yet so thought I'd post it. If it's already known, I apologise and kudos to whoever noticed it first. BUT I AM IN LOVE WITH IT. Yay.
#2 mellored Jun 01, 2015 8:08:44	Well...   i could see someone arguing that your duiplicate has the sentinal feat....
#3 HermanTheWize Jun 01, 2015 8:14:26	I like it. I think I would allow this as a DM.
#4 TheCriticalFail Jun 01, 2015 8:19:01	@Mellored ... I'd be interested in that, since they're not actually copies of you. Just illusions that mimic you to confuse opponents. What's more if you argued that they had the sentinel feat (which would make little sense since they can't even attack), they'd have to be affected by your other feats as well. For example, they would gain +1 ac for dual wielder if you had that feat as well, which makes little sense. So yes, while I can see someone arguing that (and in fact the thought had occurred to me while I was writing the original post) I don't think such an argument would really have much basis.
(Reply to #2) HermanTheWize	mellored wrote:
#6 mellored Jun 01, 2015 8:33:47	Yea, i wouldn't argue that either.  Just pointing it out.   Seems like a reasonable combo to me.  Your investing enough for the pay-off.
#7 arnwolf666 Jun 01, 2015 8:46:59	I would so allow it.
#8 Nevvur Jun 01, 2015 9:08:26	Interesting, and looks RAW valid. I'm not sure I would allow it, though I'm having difficulty justifying why not. That is, I'm highly convincible on this one.   From a narrative sense, I feel like Sentinel is supposed to punish an attacker for not giving you his full attention. When your duplicate gets attacked instead of you, the attacker is still attacking into your space (first line of the spell), and this is my biggest hang up on preferring to deny this combo.
(Reply to #8) TheCriticalFail	Nevvur wrote:
#10 mellored Jun 01, 2015 9:30:21	It doesn't require enemies attacking you.  If just requires you to be in the front lines. If an enemy sees your mirror images, and attacks an ally, you still get to use sential to stab them.   That said, mirror image is a high level spell for a trickster.  And if your MC wizard, then you lose out on your sneak attack. Plus there are plenty of other ways to provoke OA's for a rogue, creatures with reach, ranged attacks, ect...
#11 Miladoon Jun 01, 2015 9:29:14	If I justified a duplicate having a feat I could also justify it having a feature.  Like Sneak Attack.  It is just an illusion that is also a target.  I would allow it...good combo.
#12 SterlingRat Jun 01, 2015 11:34:55	I would also allow.   Investing a feat and a spell (considering your limited spell slots to begin with) makes this "Just right" rather than OP. I don't know if it's RAW, RAI or RAIWTTB, but if you invest that many resources into a combo like this, you better believe I'm letting that happen.    I would probably set up some cinematic duels for a character like that - a one-on-one duel to the death with the BBEG's trusted side kick or something. Yuen Woo-ping is already choreographing the fight in my head.
(Reply to #12) Nevvur	SterlingRat wrote:
#14 BRJN Jun 01, 2015 16:50:20	mellored wrote:
#15 guachi Jun 01, 2015 19:21:48	I had a ranger/rogue in AL play that had sentinel and mirror image (not concentration!) And I wish I'd thought of this.
#16 OnionDruid Jun 01, 2015 20:56:24	I feel as if you may as well go Fighter 3 (Battle Master)/Rogue (Arcane Trickater) 17. Pick up the maneuver that let's you attack on a miss against you and call it a day. Saves you a feat slot and you could theoretically do it more times per day and plus do it at an earlier level.
#17 FunkySpunk Jun 01, 2015 21:02:49	I like it!
#18 BestNorthernDope Jun 01, 2015 22:50:41	I'm currently playing an Arcane Trickster, and cleared with my DM before the game that this combo would work. We are only level 3 at the moment, so quite a lot of time before the combo can get online (level 7 for 2nd level spell, level 8 for Sentinel feat). I don't consider it too good, since you lose your attack the turn you cast Mirror Image, and it only works in melee.   Besides that, having Sentinel on the rogue in the fights where you don't or can't cast Mirror Image can be a very bad thing. I'd make sure to pick up the 'Shield' spell, and make good friends with your local 'Healing Word' caster.
#19 FrogReaver Jun 01, 2015 23:58:30	I love the combo.  Nice find friend.
(Reply to #16) TheCriticalFail	OnionDruid wrote:
#21 intently Jun 02, 2015 6:22:38	mellored wrote:
#22 danyc Jun 02, 2015 6:55:58	The combo isn't new, although I'm struggling to remember where I saw it posted 5e wise. Technically it probably goes back to various ideas in 4e with Combat Challenge.   Regardless, I don't see much problem with it, although people suggesting counting the duplicates as allies of yourself are... reaching a bit - they're not even creatures, let alone allies. It's like asking if a wall spell counts as an ally.
(Reply to #21) TheCriticalFail	intently wrote:
#24 reddaemon Jun 02, 2015 12:46:33	jaden_stormtracker wrote:
#25 guachi Jun 02, 2015 13:34:50	Unless you're my DM in AL who said once per turn really meant once per round. And then you quit because the DM won't admit he's wrong. I asked on multiple forums and the result was (initially) 50-4 that I could do it. Two of the "nos" changed their mind. One never responded after his initial "no" and the fourth had a non standard definition of "turn".
#26 intently Jun 02, 2015 13:51:32	There shouldn't be any disagreement that sneak attack can be used on a character's turn and again as a reaction on an enemy turn.   Nevvur wrote:
#27 Mommy_was_an_Orc Jun 02, 2015 14:18:43	I think it seems legit. On the other hand... How often do your DMs let you cast a 1 action, one minute verbal spell before a combat?
#28 Treantmonklvl20 Jun 02, 2015 14:30:20	I'm not sure that I would rule that an attack on you that Mirror Image protects you from is an attack on a target other than you.  The mirror image duplicates are you.
#29 TheCriticalFail Jun 02, 2015 15:40:52	intently wrote:
#30 Treantmonklvl20 Jun 02, 2015 15:58:38	TheCriticalFail wrote:
#31 Psikerlord Jun 03, 2015 4:53:54	limited resource tactic. I'd allow it.
#32 FallingIcicle Jun 03, 2015 12:06:55	I would allow it. The rogue is spending an action to cast mirror image, so he's effectively giving up one sneak attack so that he can maybe get 2 more later, but only if an enemy attacks him. He also needs the sentinel feat and is spending a 2nd level spell slot, which is a limited resource. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
#33 dbsquirl Jun 06, 2015 23:18:00	This (like many other things) could potentially benefit from a Warlock dip. 3 levels of Warlock would get you 2 short-rest second level spell slots for this trick, as well as useful invocations (Devil's Sight and Mask of Many Faces come to mind for an AT) and an expanded spell list. You can go Pact of the Chain for a useful scouting assistant or Pact of the Tome for even more spells. You could take it further and go Pact of the Blade until level 5 and pick up Thirsting Blade, netting you an extra attack that a pure rogue never gets. Warlock 6 can get you Misty Escape, so if the enemy manages to hit the real you, you can poof away from them or behind them in response. AT and Warlock use different casting stats, but you could tailor your spell selection for either of them in such a way for it to not matter terribly much.
#34 Mistwell Jun 07, 2015 11:24:23	3 levels of something isn't practical.  That's a feat as well....you're missing out on a feat because you only get the feat at 4th level.  You might as well do 4 levels of something at that point.
#35 Ilse Jun 08, 2015 21:41:16	Let's decorrelate things a bit here. There is the sentinel feat and its applicability to the rogue, and then there is mirror image.   The sentinel feat is, in any case, not a bad choice for the rogue. It is a feat, and therefore expensive, but there are lots of benefits because (and I know about the controversy), the RAW says "once per turn" for sneak attack, without any further precision, which means that it's not specifically the rogue's turn. It therefore applies during the rogue's reaction (on someone else's turn), whether it;s an opportunity attack or an attack started by the sentinel feat. And this is what the sentinel feat does, give another source for "attacks of opportunity" Note that this is still limited anyway, because you only get one reaction per round anyway.   Now, does the mirror image trigger sentinel ? For me it seems it does, because although initially the adversary targets the rogue, mirror image actually changes the target. So it should trigger sentinel. I don;t see any reason to consider that the images have any feat of the rogue, in particular sentinel, they certainly don't have any of the others (for example any increasing AC or defenses).   But then, to do a sneak attack, the other conditions of Sneak attack must be present, and for me the images do not count. They are targets, yes (once the spell potentially reassigns the target), but they are not enemies of the adversary.   I am in particular aligned with what Nevvur wrote, that Sentinel and Mirror Image are both very valid choices in their own right for a melee rogue, so the "cost" of the combo does not seem that high to me, but it has sufficient limitations (limited use as it's a lvl 2 spell, pre-casting before engaging, attacking the rogue, not hitting an image, having sneak attack conditions on that attacker, limited number of images, etc.) that I would allow it. Still a good combo though, and visually interesting (compared to some that are visually ugly as they are only technical optimisations).
#36 awaken_D_M_golem Jun 09, 2015 16:27:12	BRJN wrote:
#37 Clutchbone Jun 10, 2015 12:54:12	Kneejerk reaction was "no".   Thought about scenario where monster targets separate illusion of Arcane Trickster, adjacent to real Arcane Trickster, would probably allow it.   Thought about wording of Sentinel ("makes an attack against a target other than you) and mirror image ("the attack instead targets one of your duplicates").   Thought about monster's POV where it sees 5 arcane tricksters and picks a specific one to target. It might target a duplicate, which is "a target other than you".   Grudgingly changed my opinion to "yes".
#38 Ilse Jun 10, 2015 15:04:20	Clutchbone wrote: