Does it Stack?

[quiet1mi]

If I cast Mirror image upon myself, and then Displacement... Does my opponent have to roll a D8 (if there were 7 illusions and myself) to see if he hits the real me, then rolls the 50% miss chance, then rolls to see if he can hit me?

If this is right, then my beguiler now has a lot less to fear in close combat and will be more aggressive when it comes to stabilizing his allies with a wand of Cure light wounds.

[Tyndmyr]

If I cast Mirror image upon myself, and then Displacement... Does my opponent have to roll a D8 (if there were 7 illusions and myself) to see if he hits the real me, then rolls the 50% miss chance, then rolls to see if he can hit me?

If this is right, then my beguiler now has a lot less to fear in close combat and will be more aggressive when it comes to stabilizing his allies with a wand of Cure light wounds.

Can't recall displacement offhand, but if it works like blur, blink or other concealment offering spells, then yes.

All visual effects are replicated visually to the images and the images follow you acting the same as you.

Now mind you, this does rather little against someone who say, closes their eyes. Or has true seeing. But for mooks, its awesome.

[Tavar]

If they close their eyes, then they're blinded. That's one of the best combat conditions you can inflict on someone.

[Xyk]

You know what works even better than this? Invisibility. It's like a second level spell, and I'm pretty sure you can heal allies without dispelling it. If not, ignore this post.

[elonin]

Invisibility is a 2nd level effect instead of 2 3rd level spells but drops once you take an offensive action. It is also easily countered by glitterdust. Course you could make yourself invisible, displaced, and mirror imaged. Very nice.

[quiet1mi]

Except see invisibility kinda rains on your parade...

When you Dm for a Beguiler with a high hide and move silently check along with darkstalker, you have a habit of including one monster that can find the beguiler....

At least with this, it does not matter if they can see me...

[jmbrown]

This is a hotly debated subject because of two descriptions in RAW.

Figments cannot make something seem to be something else.

and

A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.

By RAW a figment (mirror image) cannot duplicate a glamer (blur/displacement). However, mirror image duplicates the caster and mimics what he does.

Does this mean that if the caster is blurred, his duplicates aren't? Does it mean that his duplicates appear to be blurred but don't take the positive effects? That falls in your DMs hands so talk to your DM about how he thinks mirror image + blur/displacement should work because it differs from DM to DM.

[elonin]

The dm's that I've talked to have come to the conclusion that you can't use blurring/ nonblurring on mirror images to defeat the spell. I guess that some dm could rule the other way which would make this a dumb combination.

From a logic (not rule wise perspective) it's stupid that see invisibility would make the mirror images appear. But then again it doesn't make sense that invisibility would work and not simultaneously blind he target.

[jmbrown]

The dm's that I've talked to have come to the conclusion that you can't use blurring/ nonblurring on mirror images to defeat the spell. I guess that some dm could rule the other way which would make this a dumb combination.

From a logic (not rule wise perspective) it's stupid that see invisibility would make the mirror images appear. But then again it doesn't make sense that invisibility would work and not simultaneously blind he target.

It's not stupid at all. Figments and glamer aren't real, they just make things appear to be real. See invisibility allows you to pick out things that aren't real.

What really doesn't make sense is how people are invisible (and perceive themselves as invisible) but are constantly aware of their current position. An invisible person (by RAW) never stumbles over objects or has trouble with depth perception despite the fact that they cannot perceive their own body.

[Douglas]

What really doesn't make sense is how people are invisible (and perceive themselves as invisible) but are constantly aware of their current position. An invisible person (by RAW) never stumbles over objects or has trouble with depth perception despite the fact that they cannot perceive their own body.

I disagree. I do not need to see my own body to know where it is. Other senses can take care of that just fine.

[jmbrown]

I disagree. I do not need to see my own body to know where it is. Other senses can take care of that just fine.

There's really no way I can simulate this IRL but the way I see it is that an invisible person should effectively be blind for purposes of complex tasks like skill checks. While you may think your other senses take over, your peripheral vision is powerful enough to give you an edge. You walk without "seeing" the ground, but your peripheral vision locates objects way before you ever reach them and the human eye can catch movement in an 8th of a second (if my useless knowledge is correct).

Best way I can think of it is like this: how long does it take your fingers to find the home keys on your keyboard? How long does it take when you're actually looking at the keyboard in relation to that? How fast can you clip your toenails with your eyes closed? How fast can you clip them when you can actually see them?

It's a difficult concept to imagine but if I couldn't see my body I probably wouldn't be able to tell where my foot was in relation to the ground or where my hands are. I imagine an invisible character does plenty of groping because there's absolutely no visual connection between his body and the world around him.

Edit: Shoot, just imagine trying to pick a lock or disarm a snare when you can't see your probes or tools. Imagine trying to avoid tripping over a wire when you're tiptoeing and can't see your actual feet. This is something complex that D&D doesn't simulate but real life invisibility has got to be the most disorienting effect in the world if it were real.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Who says you're invisible to yourself? Maybe you disbelieve the illusory invisbility even when others don't get a save. True invisibility would be, as observed, a massive headache - and I can't imagine that people wouldn't have worked furiously to try to remove the disadvantages.

[jmbrown]

Who says you're invisible to yourself? Maybe you disbelieve the illusory invisbility even when others don't get a save. True invisibility would be, as observed, a massive headache - and I can't imagine that people wouldn't have worked furiously to try to remove the disadvantages.

True. Illusions are based on the perception of the individual so an invisible person could disbelieve his illusion but that leads to the interesting situation where the caster doesn't know how long his invisibility lasts.

Another question that I think is more important than blur/mirror image is disbelieving mirror image itself. A person who has reason to disbelieve an illusion can make a will save against it. In the case of figments, false images appear as thin outlines.

Since multiple images of a creature is plenty of excuse to disbelieve an illusion, can a creature subject themselves to a will save to disbelieve the mirror image? RAW says they must "study it carefully" which I would think equals a full-round action. Is that fair?

Edit: Well, mirror image moves with you and mimics your actions so it's pretty difficult to "study it carefully".

[Signmaker]

Best way I can think of it is like this: how long does it take your fingers to find the home keys on your keyboard? How long does it take when you're actually looking at the keyboard in relation to that? How fast can you clip your toenails with your eyes closed? How fast can you clip them when you can actually see them?

Not that much of a difference for me, because I'm used to those motions. Same with, say, tying my shoelaces (people have this habit of raising their chin up when doing so, interestingly). So I feel as if only certain skill checks would truly take a hit due to lack of visual 'grounding'. Something like Open Lock would hardly be affected, due to the minimal need to see (you're listening and feeling for tumblers in a tumbling lock, for example), whereas you can't Craft(Basketweave) well if you and your weave is invisible.

[quiet1mi]

can we please get back on the original topic...

Blur+Mirror Image does it stack?

You are spending 2 level 3 spells after all on what amounts to a single combat.

[Curmudgeon]

If I cast Mirror image upon myself, and then Displacement... Does my opponent have to roll a D8 (if there were 7 illusions and myself) to see if he hits the real me, then rolls the 50% miss chance, then rolls to see if he can hit me?

Yes.

However, there's no stacking involved here. Stacking would also give a 50% miss chance of hitting each Mirror Image, and that doesn't happen. If you swing at an Image and hit its AC, it goes poof.

[nekomata2]

Page 84 of the D&D 3.5 FAQ

The images also look just
like the caster, and they share purely visual effects such as the
blur or displacement spell. If the mirror image user is also
using either of these effects, an attack aimed at an image has
the same miss chance an attack aimed at the caster has.

From here, if you need it: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a

[Curmudgeon]

FAQ author screwed up again. Blur and Displacement only give a miss chance to a creature, not a figment. The Mirror Images seem to react in the same way as the spellcaster with Blur or Displacement, but Mirror Image can't actually give them an additional miss chance. You've got to follow the rules, and that includes paying attention to the target specification of these spells.

[jmbrown]

FAQ isn't RAW. Figments (which is what mirror images are) can't make something appear like something else. Glamer (which is what invisibility, blur, and displacement are) specifically make something appear like something else.

Your mirror images appear blurred or displaced but they have the normal AC of a figment.

[Debihuman]

Well, it says very clearly that "the images have the same miss chance as the caster". You may not agree with the FAQ and wish to argue the point, but the FAQ is clear on this.

Debby

[AstralFire]

Well, it says very clearly that "the images have the same miss chance as the caster". You may not agree with the FAQ and wish to argue the point, but the FAQ is clear on this.

Debby

That... is exactly what they just did.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Well, it says very clearly that "the images have the same miss chance as the caster". You may not agree with the FAQ and wish to argue the point, but the FAQ is clear on this.

So?

No, really, what is the purpose of this post? The FAQ is clear. Yeah, we could have looked at the FAQ and seen that. People can argue the point - so they are.

[jmbrown]

Well, it says very clearly that "the images have the same miss chance as the caster". You may not agree with the FAQ and wish to argue the point, but the FAQ is clear on this.

Debby

Yes, the FAQ says this, but the FAQ isn't RAW. You can follow the FAQ if you wish but the point of the argument is that RAW says one thing and FAQ says another. Pick one that you prefer and use it for your game.

[Tyndmyr]

Things like blur add a miss chance BECAUSE of the visual effect. Mirror image explicitly passes the visual effect on to the images.

[Curmudgeon]

Things like blur add a miss chance BECAUSE of the visual effect. Mirror image explicitly passes the visual effect on to the images.

While I might argue your first statement here, let's posit that it's true. However, passing the visual effect on does not pass the miss chance on unless the spell description specifically includes that provision, because of (at least) two other rules:

• The target for Blur and Displacement is a creature, not a figment. Mirror Images are not valid targets for those spells.
• Figments have limitations in what effects they can produce. An extra miss chance because of some visual effect is not one of those things.

  Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. ... Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can.

Absent a specific exception to these rules in the description of Mirror Image, those more general rules about the behavior of spells remain in effect.

[jmbrown]

Things like blur add a miss chance BECAUSE of the visual effect. Mirror image explicitly passes the visual effect on to the images.

And mirror image is a figment; figments explicitly cannot make something appear to be something else and figments explicitly cannot produce real effects.

The duplicates are indistinguishable from the caster in appearance. That doesn't mean spell effects are applied to them. A blurred caster with duplicates has blurry duplicates who are just as easy to hit as if the caster wasn't blurred.

[Tyndmyr]

Said figments levitate when you levitate. It's explicitly an example of how effects on the caster are replicated to the figments. Clearly, thats an example of the figments being affected by a spell.

Note that there's no legal normal way for levitate to target the caster and all figments, either, but it does.

Since this is one of the examples of how all visual effects are replicated to the image, blur is obviously also replicated.

Blur:

The subject’s outline appears blurred, shifting and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).

[Curmudgeon]

Since this is one of the examples of how all visual effects are replicated to the image, blur is obviously also replicated.

Blur:

Target: Creature touched

The subject’s outline appears blurred, shifting and wavering. This distortion grants the subject concealment (20% miss chance).

The subject gets 20% miss chance. The figments look blurred (i.e., the visual effect is replicated), but do not get 20% miss chance because only the subject is granted that.

[Seatbelt]

The human mind has this thing called proprioception. Essentially it is the body's ability to locate itself in space without the use of your eyes. It allows your body to perform tasks without having to look at your limbs to do it. Its how you can walk, or scratch your arm while playing rock band or even dress yourself.

A blind person would develop a strong proprioception to do things like clip his toe nails. If invisibility renders you invisible to yourself, you may not be able to clip your toe nails, because you can't see them and they have no nerve endings. But you should have a sufficiently clear map of your body and the space it occupies to reach your spell component pouch. Or swing your sword. Or do a ton of other things.

It is possible to loose this sense though. People who loose it have to relearn how to walk. They can't do a lot of things without looking at their hands. For example, you couldn't type. Sure you may have a strong sense of where the keys are and a good muscle memory. But you have no idea where your hands are in space without looking at them.

A blind person without his sense of proprioception would be royally and utterly screwed. He'd have no sense of himself in space and no ability to locate himself visually.

[Tyndmyr]

The subject gets 20% miss chance. The figments look blurred (i.e., the visual effect is replicated), but do not get 20% miss chance because only the subject is granted that.

What granted the distortion? The visual effect.

What else is subject to the visual effect? The images.