Multiple Image Spell save

[Dinne]

There is someone who has multiple image in their signature and they have like 8000+ posts... It was literally impossible to look anything up on this spell. I apologize for my failure.

The multiple image spell has a save to see through the images and the wizard gets bonuses. What confuses me is what to do if someone fails the save against the multiple image. The description does not specify. Do you have them roll a '3-sided dice' (6 sided) every time they have to attack? Can they not attack that target? Is it a blind shot? Maybe... a wild shot? I'm kinda confused on this because the only benefit (aside from bonuses) is the ability to 'confuse, scare, and distract'.

Any help will be much appreciated. Sorry for any TLDR's because I typed so much.

[Dinne]

I think I'm just going to do the 3 sided dice thing if something fails against it. Seems like the most sane way to deal with it. I'd still like some thoughts on it! I always appreciate the help provided!

[Nekira Sudacne]

Multiple Images does nothing but give you some bonuses to parry and dodge if the opponent fails the saving throw. that is all. there is no rolling to see if you hit the fake image, you just have to roll to strike over the boosted dodge and you automatically hit the real one.

[ShadowLogan]

The multiple image spell has a save to see through the images and the wizard gets bonuses. What confuses me is what to do if someone fails the save against the multiple image. The description does not specify. Do you have them roll a '3-sided dice' (6 sided) every time they have to attack? Can they not attack that target? Is it a blind shot? Maybe... a wild shot? I'm kinda confused on this because the only benefit (aside from bonuses) is the ability to 'confuse, scare, and distract'.

If the target(s) make the Save vs Magic "see through the illusion an identify the true person", if target(s) fail to Save vs Magic they can not see through the illusion. Generally if you fail your save the result is as per the description, if you make your save effects are weakened/avoided.

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion. Remember to that attacks made with iron WILL dispel the image if they strike it (so if using an Iron sword and you swing at a caster under MI, and you hit one of the fakes you would dispel it).

[Nekira Sudacne]

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion.

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

[42dragon]

I am not sure there is a specific source for that process of determining which image got hit. But I have ruled it that way in the past (provided the attacker failed their save).

[Nekira Sudacne]

I am not sure there is a specific source for that process of determining which image got hit. But I have ruled it that way in the past (provided the attacker failed their save).

Then you houseruled the spell to be far more powerful than it is, and people should note their houserules as such before answering a question with them

[Prysus]

Greetings and Salutations. I've been following this thread since it started and been giving the matter some thought. Before this thread ...

I had always thought it would make three separate images of the caster. The classic movie image of some illusion (or hologram) and the hero doesn't know which one is the real one. However, the fact that each of the copies "mimics his every movement exactly" always kind of made that not quite mesh in my mind. The other mages can't wave and yell "I'm the real one," "No, I'm the real one!," etc. Nor can they circle around an opponent and make him wonder which one is real, and the hero then has to try and defend against all four blades. What if the mage turns around and runs and two of the images run into a freaking wall? Also, once you hit the real one (or even a false one), you could probably remember unless you lost visuals on them. To me, the concept in my mind never quite meshed with the spell description, but I couldn't think of any other way it would work either. Now ...

As I've been reading these posts, I've come to the idea: What if the images are more of a trail? For visuals, thinking of someone on drunk or on drugs seeing multiple images, or how they sometimes visualize super fast characters with a trail of little images behind the speedster. The images make it harder to focus and hit the character, but still possible and may not even require the extra (D4) roll. This would better represent the bonuses in my opinion, and why even if you get a clean hit once you might miss the next time. Just an idea. Not sure how others have always visualized it. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[ShadowLogan]

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion.

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

I think it is implied by the text for the spell description when using "common sense". They state what happens when you strike an image with iron, but they give no way to determine if it was the fake or the real deal. We know there is only a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the real vs 3 in 4 chance of the fake. Someone also has to pick a number the real one represents on the die.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion.

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

I think it is implied by the text for the spell description when using "common sense". They state what happens when you strike an image with iron, but they give no way to determine if it was the fake or the real deal. We know there is only a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the real vs 3 in 4 chance of the fake. Someone also has to pick a number the real one represents on the die.

Yup.
Rolling d4 (or other dice) to determine whether the an attack hits a fake image or the real mage isn't specifically canon, but it makes the most sense, assuming that the attacker fails his/her/its save.

[Nekira Sudacne]

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion.

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

I think it is implied by the text for the spell description when using "common sense". They state what happens when you strike an image with iron, but they give no way to determine if it was the fake or the real deal. We know there is only a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the real vs 3 in 4 chance of the fake. Someone also has to pick a number the real one represents on the die.

Yup.
Rolling d4 (or other dice) to determine whether the an attack hits a fake image or the real mage isn't specifically canon, but it makes the most sense, assuming that the attacker fails his/her/its save.

Not really. Common sense says you need to make an attack targeting the seperate imaged with iron in order to dispell them, which would then remove the bonuses once they are gone. Nothing implies the normal rules for targeting are different.

The spell is mostly useless as written, but that does not make a houseruled better version canon. It just means some spells were poorly thought out when written.

[Killer Cyborg]

If you are asking how to determine if they hit the caster or the illusion. Roll 1d4 (3 images PLUS caster), with the caster being one of those values (if a PC I suggest letting them pick a number on the die), roll that and the attack hit the caster otherwise the illusion.

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

I think it is implied by the text for the spell description when using "common sense". They state what happens when you strike an image with iron, but they give no way to determine if it was the fake or the real deal. We know there is only a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the real vs 3 in 4 chance of the fake. Someone also has to pick a number the real one represents on the die.

Yup.
Rolling d4 (or other dice) to determine whether the an attack hits a fake image or the real mage isn't specifically canon, but it makes the most sense, assuming that the attacker fails his/her/its save.

Not really. Common sense says you need to make an attack targeting the seperate imaged with iron in order to dispell them, which would then remove the bonuses once they are gone. Nothing implies the normal rules for targeting are different.

The normal rules for targeting aren't different. As in, you don't roll d4 to strike instead of a d20 or anything.

The issue is that you have 4 different targets that look identical, and you cannot decide to "target an image" or to "target the real mage," because you cannot tell which is the real mage and which is the image.
All you can do is to pick one of the identical images, and to attack it... not knowing if it's an illusion or a real person.
The d4 is to determine if the 1 in 4 chance you have of hitting the real person occurs.

[eliakon]

That 'chance of hitting the wrong one' is the penalties that the spell gives though.
If you get a 75% chance of missing every time you attack then the spell becomes one of the most powerful combat buffs out there and that is BEFORE the additional penalties get stacked on top...

[ShadowLogan]

Not really. Common sense says you need to make an attack targeting the seperate imaged with iron in order to dispell them, which would then remove the bonuses once they are gone. Nothing implies the normal rules for targeting are different.

The spell is mostly useless as written, but that does not make a houseruled better version canon. It just means some spells were poorly thought out when w

Yes common sense says you have to target one of the mage/fakes, the question though is how to determine if what you strike is the real mage or one of the three fake mages. That is the crux of the issue here. We know iron disspells the image, but we have no method of determining if you strike the real or fake image, we don't even know how much control the mage has over placement of the fakes (can they control the outcome of the 3 total images in relation to themself, or is it randomized by the spell).

There are probably a few ways to use the D4 (could roll for each attack when it changes targets, could roll once in secret for the #1-4 placement and when an image is attacked the attacker determines which # illusion they are going after, etc), but the use of D4 seems implied via common sense.

That 'chance of hitting the wrong one' is the penalties that the spell gives though.
If you get a 75% chance of missing every time you attack then the spell becomes one of the most powerful combat buffs out there and that is BEFORE the additional penalties get stacked on top...

No it doesn't.

Presumably if you know which one is the real one you don't need to keep rerolling, because the mage can't swap places with the images (unlike with Multi-Phase, DB2 Phasepower). You can also arrive at the correct one by the process of elimination (well I'm pretty sure A, B, and C are fakes because when I struck them nothing changed, and I don't have iron, so that means D is the correct answer).

[42dragon]

That 'chance of hitting the wrong one' is the penalties that the spell gives though.
If you get a 75% chance of missing every time you attack then the spell becomes one of the most powerful combat buffs out there and that is BEFORE the additional penalties get stacked on top...

But there are no penalties to hit the caster in the spell at all. A +2 to dodge that is the only thing that could reasonably be construed as a penalty to hit. But that +2 to dodge still requires you to give up actions to dodge. Considering that the are 4 identical mages now, even if you failed your save you can still automatically target the correct one. How?

Say I cast multiple image, now there are 4 identical copies of me standing (where? next to me, behind me, do I have control? lack of details) lets say next to me that are mimicking my every move. I say I (the real one) am the first one on the left. I can see my opponent aiming at the one on the far right. Why should I have to spend an attack and try to dodge with a +2 to avoid being hit when I can see they aren't aiming at me anyway? How would this shot possibly hit me when they are aiming at an illusion maybe 10-15 feet to my right?

If the spell came with a -4 to strike the caster or similar built in. Then I could agree with your position. But with no penalties to strike and you are always targeting the correct one, that only if the caster chooses to use up an attack gets a minor +2 to dodge. That makes the spell almost useless.

Yes, there is nothing in the RAW telling you how to determine which target you are targeting the mage or the illusions. But as I said before my ruling (you can call it a house rule, I call it filling in the lack of details provided in the spell) is that either the mage chooses which # the image is and then the attacker (who failed their save) must determine the real caster by luck (roll 1d4) or process of elimination.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Source please.

As I read the spell, there is no roll to hit the fakes instead of the real one. There is only the parry/dodge bonus due to the distration the spell provides if they fail to save vs. magic.

I think it is implied by the text for the spell description when using "common sense". They state what happens when you strike an image with iron, but they give no way to determine if it was the fake or the real deal. We know there is only a 1 in 4 chance of selecting the real vs 3 in 4 chance of the fake. Someone also has to pick a number the real one represents on the die.

Yup.
Rolling d4 (or other dice) to determine whether the an attack hits a fake image or the real mage isn't specifically canon, but it makes the most sense, assuming that the attacker fails his/her/its save.

Not really. Common sense says you need to make an attack targeting the seperate imaged with iron in order to dispell them, which would then remove the bonuses once they are gone. Nothing implies the normal rules for targeting are different.

The normal rules for targeting aren't different. As in, you don't roll d4 to strike instead of a d20 or anything.

The issue is that you have 4 different targets that look identical, and you cannot decide to "target an image" or to "target the real mage," because you cannot tell which is the real mage and which is the image.
All you can do is to pick one of the identical images, and to attack it... not knowing if it's an illusion or a real person.
The d4 is to determine if the 1 in 4 chance you have of hitting the real person occurs.

Not really, the images cannot move independantly. The spell even says they are a perfect mirror of every action. This makes shuffling them impossible because it does not teleport you either.

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

[Killer Cyborg]

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

And if you weren't looking directly at the mage when he cast the spell?

[eliakon]

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

And if you weren't looking directly at the mage when he cast the spell?

It might provide some, situational, bonuses on a case by case basis...
....but since, for instance if you hit the mage in melee... then only the image in melee range is the valid one...not 1d4 of them.
If the mage casts a spell at you... then the fireball that hurts was real...
A GM might allow a specific case by case use...
...but there should be no flat boost simply because the spell doesn't seem to function that way.

[Nekira Sudacne]

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

And if you weren't looking directly at the mage when he cast the spell?

i've never seen anyone cast it NOT already in combat. not saying it couldn't happen, but it hasn't come up.

I might houserule that they have to guess which is the real one, but only untl they find the real one. but it is nothing but a houserule to do so, which is my point.

a 75% miss chance is simply too powerful to assume the game just left it out of the text. the only clear effect we have is

1: 3 fakes appear, which perfectly mirror your actions and cannot move independantly of your own movements, and
2: You get minor bonuses to dodge, parry, and init from this

both a natural reading and 'common sense" indicate that 2 is the result of 1, making giving a logical effect that is consistant with the spells discribed mechanics and a low cost commiserate to the limited effect, as well as a relatively low spell level. There is no need and in fact an argument to be made against assuming another more powerful feature was completely left out of the text. especially as we DO have another power which does allow shuffling for shell games with attacks, which also costs a lot more preportionally to use. which given the explicit impossibility of playing shell games when one cannot shuffle the shells, it is rather dubious to assume it was ment to have the same effect for less cost.

[Killer Cyborg]

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

And if you weren't looking directly at the mage when he cast the spell?

i've never seen anyone cast it NOT already in combat. not saying it couldn't happen, but it hasn't come up.

Odd.

I might houserule that they have to guess which is the real one, but only untl they find the real one. but it is nothing but a houserule to do so, which is my point.

Nobody here said that rolling a d4 to determine if the guessing was accurate is anything other than a house rule.

a 75% miss chance is simply too powerful to assume the game just left it out of the text. the only clear effect we have is

Not really, no.
Because this spell is based on a D&D spell, from back when PFRPG is was based on D&D. The spell description likely includes some level of assumption that the readers were already familiar with the D&D spell.
Even if not that specifically, a LOT of spells are written very vaguely, as if they were just reminding the players of something that they already knew.

You can argue that the ONLY effect is the bonuses, but I think it's odd to assume that a spell that makes exact duplicates of you isn't intended to confuse people about which one is the real you.

[Killer Cyborg]

You are standing on a checkerboard floor, d4 to use a chess example. You cast multiple image, you are /still/ on d4, you just now have copies on c4, e4, and f4 too. You move up to d5, they all move up one too. You slide to the left or right they all slide with you. Because shuffling the relative position is impossible there is in fact no need to roll, because you were on D4 before you cast, you were on D4 after, and there is no need to roll. Just keep attacking the second one on the left and'll always be the mage. Hence it gives only minor bonuses and not a 75% miss. Same applies if the all spread out to your left or right- the mage will always be the one on the far right or left respectively. Just keep attacking the same one and it'll always work.

And if you weren't looking directly at the mage when he cast the spell?

It might provide some, situational, bonuses on a case by case basis...
....but since, for instance if you hit the mage in melee... then only the image in melee range is the valid one...not 1d4 of them.

What makes you assume that they're not ALL in melee?

If the mage casts a spell at you... then the fireball that hurts was real...

You'd have 4 mages simultaneously casting fireballs at you, all of which hit at the same time.

[Prysus]

It might provide some, situational, bonuses on a case by case basis...
....but since, for instance if you hit the mage in melee... then only the image in melee range is the valid one...not 1d4 of them.

What makes you assume that they're not ALL in melee?

Greetings and Salutations. Because the way the spell is written, it wouldn't really work out. So let's start with the assumption that you didn't see the mage cast the spell (as that would make a lot of this pointless otherwise).

So okay, we have the mage and his three illusions walk around the side of the building into view now. Which one is the real one? Don't know. If the mage moves into melee range, this is a really stupid move because we'll know which one is real almost immediately. Not sure why?

Imagine 4 people standing side by side. They're all making the exact same movements and facing the exact same direction (as the spell tells us the images have to do). Now imagine all of them are attacking straight ahead, or exactly in a right 45 degree angle, how many are actually attacking you? Only one. The others are either attacking air or someone else beside you. Remember, the images need to mirror the mage exactly, they can't even turn without the mage also turning. For a different visual, think of the classic dojo training scene where you have a bunch of students all practicing the same moves at the exact same stance. Punch forward, block, kick forward. If that was an attack on you, would you be worried about the ones attacking air or just the one directly in front of you?

Now, in theory, the mage could set it up so one of the illusions attacks you, but that will be of little benefit. The moment you parry (or are hit) you'll know it's an illusion. For one, it's an illusion and not solid (at least not evidence of it being solid) so your parry (or the hit) will pass right through you. Also, you can't push the arm (for instance) aside because the illusion can only mimic the mage, so unless the mage's arm is moved to the side it would still act like normal. Basically, having an illusion attack would only waste an attack on the mage's part, and let the opponent know where at least one of the illusions are.

If the mage casts a spell at you... then the fireball that hurts was real...

You'd have 4 mages simultaneously casting fireballs at you, all of which hit at the same time.

No, all 4 mages simultaneously cast fireballs in the same direction, only one of which will hit you (unless you're really wide, and then you'd probably at least know if it hit your left or right side). Think of a shooting range and 4 people all aiming at the target straight in front of them. If you're a target, how many threaten you? Only one. The spell isn't really designed to work well in combat, otherwise the images would be able to have some variation to them. The fact each image must mirror the movements of the caster exactly makes the spell rather limited.

Honestly, the best usage for this spell (as best as I can figure at this point) is for either retreating (something as simple as dashing behind a tree and when you come out the other side there are four of you, making it difficult for ranged attacks) or for stalling (let's say you walk into the enemy camp to negotiate, and you need enough time to say whatever you're going to say, so you hope that the illusion stops them from attacking right away and if one does attack, hopefully just hits air).

Note: From a game mechanics standpoint, I can say the spell is extremely limited. From an in-world perspective, unless I know the spell and its limitations, the usage can increase. I swing and hit air. Is my first thought: "An illusion, if I just keep attacking the others until I find the real one" or "What just happened?!?!?" In-character, there may be a moment to get our wits about us. Then, we may still not know that the mage can't just swap between his illusions, so you can't eliminate any of them so easily.

If someone has a different idea how this can be more effective, but each movement of the images still being exactly the same as the caster, I'm open. However, I've tried to figure a few other methods and they almost always fall apart rather quickly once the exact movement rule is applied. Anyways, that's all for now. Farewell and safe journeys.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think you're taking the spell far too literally.
The way I describe it, it functions and is useful.
The way you do... well, yeah, it seems pretty pointless.

Which do you think the authors intended?

[Prysus]

I think you're taking the spell far too literally.

Greetings and Salutations. I'm referring to what's clearly written. I can't simply ignore the line: "Each image mimics his every movement exactly." I don't see ambiguity there, which is often rare in Palladium. Without that line, the spell would be much more open.

The way I describe it, it functions and is useful.

I think I know how you do it, and if so that's how I thought it was intended for a long time, but that would be a house rule on the matter. With that said, I've been second guessing the intent a lot while reading this thread. Note: This has never come up in any of my campaigns, as a player or a G.M., so it's never been addressed personally.

The way you do... well, yeah, it seems pretty pointless.

Agreed. That's kind of the point most people are making in this thread.

Which do you think the authors intended?

At this point, I can honestly say I'm not sure. With Palladium it can be near impossible. If it's the way you suggest (and the way I previously figured was intended), then it's written in about the worst possible way. There's the line I quoted above which states mimics exactly. That doesn't mesh with what you're describing. The combat bonuses don't really support this theory either. Then the spell description never mentions possibly hitting the wrong target. Other than trying to give the spell some practical application, the spell doesn't really suggest that's the case. Honestly, read the spell and see if you find any implication that the illusions should be able to help encircle an opponent and keep the enemy guessing.

There's also the possibility that it was meant to distract and confuse (exactly what the spell says it does), but not really meant for combat. So applying combat applications as you're trying could very well be against the intent. Then there's the idea I mentioned earlier ...

As I've been reading these posts, I've come to the idea: What if the images are more of a trail? For visuals, think of someone drunk or on drugs seeing multiple images, or how they sometimes visualize super fast characters with a trail of little images behind the speedster. The images make it harder to focus and hit the character, but still possible and may not even require the extra (D4) roll. This would better represent the bonuses in my opinion, and why even if you get a clean hit once you might miss the next time. Just an idea.

So I could also see it being multiple images, but creating more of a blur than entirely separate figures. Kind of like how someone gets hit on the head and another asks how many fingers they're holding up. If they say four when the person is only holding up two fingers, is it because they're seeing a separate hand somewhere else? But it is another image, a blur of the person's hand. I could see that being the intent of this spell as well.

In the end, I can say I genuinely don't know. What I can say is that the wording of the spell actually prohibits one of this interpretations. Whether that was intentional or not is only a guess. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I think you're taking the spell far too literally.
The way I describe it, it functions and is useful.
The way you do... well, yeah, it seems pretty pointless.

Which do you think the authors intended?

How is +2 initiative, +2 dodge, and +1 strike pointless?

For 7 PPE and -6 to the victim to save, it feels like it's utility right in line with it's cheep cost.

Just because it does not have the point you want it to have does not mean it does not have the point the authors intended, and given it's very low level and low PPE cost, it's utility is is in line with it's apparent place in the power hierachy, minor cost for minor benifits and a decent duration. that is not pointless, at level 4 it has just enough bang for it's buck without needing it to be houseruled to be much better.

And on the other hand, 7 PPE for victiems to have a flat 75% chance to miss every time they attack that strike bonuses do nothing to help is far too little cost for such a good benefit.

which do YOU think is more likely, the authors took a powerful spell, made it low level, low cost and worded it in such a way it never actually stated it had that powerful effect

Or, they made a minor spell low level, low cost, and gave it wording that discribes exactly the kind of mild effect the price and level implies it would have?

[Killer Cyborg]

I think you're taking the spell far too literally.

Greetings and Salutations. I'm referring to what's clearly written. I can't simply ignore the line: "Each image mimics his every movement exactly." I don't see ambiguity there, which is often rare in Palladium. Without that line, the spell would be much more open.

You don't have to ignore that part. There IS ambiguity.
Yes, a line of figures all pointing the exactly the same direction, and all performing the same motion ARE mimicking every movement exactly.
But so are four figures surrounding a person, facing inward.
So are four figures in a semi-circle, all facing a central opponent.

A mirror image mimics your movements exactly, even if it's not facing the same direction as you.

The way I describe it, it functions and is useful.

I think I know how you do it, and if so that's how I thought it was intended for a long time, but that would be a house rule on the matter.

No more than the "every image is in a straight line" interpretation.

And no, it's not necessarily a house rule either way--it might be a house rule, or it might simply be Rules As Intended.

Which do you think the authors intended?

At this point, I can honestly say I'm not sure. With Palladium it can be near impossible.

Sometimes, sure.
But in this case, we're dealing with a game that originated as D&D, with a spell that's essentially the same as a D&D spell:
Mirror Image (Illusion/Phantasm)
Level: 2 Components: V, S Range: 0 Casting Time: 2 segments Duration: 2 rounds/level Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: 6' radius of spell caster
Explanation/Description: When a Mirror Image spell is invoked, the spell caster causes from 1 to 4 exact duplicates of himself or herself to come into being around his or her person. These images do exactly what the magic-user does, and as the spell causes a blurring and slight distortion when it is effected, it is impossible for opponents to be certain which are the phantasms and which is the actual magic-user. When an image is struck by a weapon, magical or otherwise, it disappears. but any other existing images remain intact until struck. The images seem to shift from round to round, so that if the actual magic-user is struck during one round, he or she cannot be picked out from amongst his or her images the next. To determine the number of images which appear, roll percentile dice, and add 1 to the resulting score for each level of experience of the magic-user: 25 or less = 1 mirror image, 26-50 = 2, 51-75 = 3, 75 or more = 4. At the expiration of the spell duration all images wink out.[/i]

I don't find it plausible to believe that Multiple Image is just coincidentally similar to Mirror Image.
I likewise don't find it plausible to believe that KS was inspired by Mirror Image, but wanted his version to be infinitely less useful, and to deliberately alter the function of the spell by omitting a key part like the underlined

Is it possible? Sure, I guess.
But is it plausible?

I'm not seeing it.

If it's the way you suggest (and the way I previously figured was intended), then it's written in about the worst possible way.

Welcome to Palladium!

Try reading Time Slip, if you want a headache.

The combat bonuses don't really support this theory either.

Bonuses to initiative, dodge, and strike don't work with the idea that you're not sure which of the images the next attack is coming from...?

Then the spell description never mentions possibly hitting the wrong target.

Why else would there be multiple images of the caster, if not to confuse people about which one was real?
It mentions hitting an image with iron to destroy it. That right there indicates that the images might be attacked.
Why bother attacking the false images, if not because you're unsure which is the real guy?
Just to spend 3 attacks to eliminate a minor combat bonus?

Other than trying to give the spell some practical application, the spell doesn't really suggest that's the case. Honestly, read the spell and see if you find any implication that the illusions should be able to help encircle an opponent and keep the enemy guessing.

There's nothing describing the placement of the images at all.
Nothing saying that they're NOT positioned usefully.
Either assumption is equally canon. Why not go with the assumption that makes the spell useful?

So I could also see it being multiple images, but creating more of a blur than entirely separate figures. Kind of like how someone gets hit on the head and another asks how many fingers they're holding up. If they say four when the person is only holding up two fingers, is it because they're seeing a separate hand somewhere else? But it is another image, a blur of the person's hand. I could see that being the intent of this spell as well.

If not for the fact that this spell is based off of a D&D spell that is more clearly described, I might agree.
Although I'd be hard-pressed to hit a drunken blur with a piece of iron without also hitting the real person.

[Killer Cyborg]

I think you're taking the spell far too literally.
The way I describe it, it functions and is useful.
The way you do... well, yeah, it seems pretty pointless.

Which do you think the authors intended?

How is +2 initiative, +2 dodge, and +1 strike pointless?

It's not pointless.
It's pretty pointless.
We're talking about a 4th level spell here. Same level you get Carpet of Adhesion, Magic Net, Fire Bolt, Shadow Meld, Magic Net, Astral Projection, you also get... a spell that gives you minor combat bonuses by making duplicate images of you that nobody is likely to mistake for actually being you?

Heck, Thunderclap is a level 1 spell, and it gives +5 to init, and +1 to strike, parry, and dodge, for only 4 PPE as opposed to the 7 PPE for Mirror Image.
Chameleon is a 2nd level spell that renders you 90% undetectable, for 6 PPE. Still cheaper, and easier to learn.

And, as I've pointed out, this spell is very clearly the Palladium version of a 2nd level D&D spell.
Why would KS gimp the spell into minor bonuses, while bumping the spell level up by two?

And on the other hand, 7 PPE for victiems to have a flat 75% chance to miss every time they attack that strike bonuses do nothing to help is far too little cost for such a good benefit.

Seems more in line with the power level of CoA and Magic Net to me.
And it's not a flat 75% miss chance. You can use an Area attack, and nail all the images at once, for example.

which do YOU think is more likely, the authors took a very powerful spell, made it low level, low cost and worded it in such a way it never actually stated it had that very powerful effect

Definitely.
Again, they were assuming that we already knew what the spell did. Palladium does that pretty often.
Although I don't consider 4th level to be particularly low, and as I've said there are powerful spells at that level.

Or, they made a minor spell low level, low cost, and gave it wording that discribes exactly the kind of mild effect the price and level implies it would have?

"Common Sense" and occams razor suggests the latter to me.

Already addressed in my response to Prysus.
You believe that KS took a D&D spell, made it weaker, made it 2 levels higher, and differentiated between the new version by omitting part of the description?
That seems a lot less plausible than him omitting a key part out of sloppiness.

And, again, there's nothing stating the location of the images, or which direction they're facing.
That's a house rule/interpretation with your version as much as with mine.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I didn't houserule anything about location of images, I just used an arbitrary example. I even said it won't matter how the images are arranged or how close or distant because regardless of how they appear, their relative positions can never change due to the text.

Also: what if you are a player who's never even played D&D, or never played a D&D wizard, and has no idea of the D&D version of the spell? "Because D&D did it this way" Is not an argument I find convincing. yes, a lot of thing are altered ripoffs of D&D in eairly palladium. the point they ARE different.

D&D Multiple Images has a miss chance. palladium's does not.

I also didn't say that other fourth level spells are not stronger, I'm just saying this isn't as good as them.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I will also note that this spell is a wonderful candiate to use with Illusion Manipulation, as it's a piggyback spell that will allow you to play shell games with the illusions to your hearts content.

[Killer Cyborg]

I didn't houserule anything about location of images, I just used an arbitrary example. I even said it won't matter how the images are arranged or how close or distant because regardless of how they appear, their relative positions can never change due to the text.

Only if you take the text too literally.

Also: what if you are a player who's never even played D&D, or never played a D&D wizard, and has no idea of the D&D version of the spell?

Then KS' description of the spell won't do a lot of good, if looked at literally.
If you think about any number of super-heroes/villains and/or movie scenes with this kind of thing, you might get the gist anyway.

"Because D&D did it this way" Is not an argument I find convincing. yes, a lot of thing are altered ripoffs of D&D in eairly palladium. the point they ARE different.

This spell, for example, only lets the illusions be disrupted by iron. That's spelled out.
And there are combat bonuses as well. That's a change.

But since THE FRIGGIN' POINT of the original spell was to make attackers play The Shell Game with identical copies of you, why would KS change that part of it, and keep the rest of the spell?
Wouldn't make sense to me.
And if he DID, then--knowing that most of his players were likely D&D fans--he'd have highlighted the change in some way, not just neglected to mention that the spell is designed to keep people from guessing which is the real you.


And with your version, where do the combat bonuses come from?
You know which of the images is the real mage (assuming you saw him/her cast the spell), so why does the mage get bonuses?

With my interpretation (and the D&D version), the mage gets those bonuses precisely because you're not sure which one is the real guy. So you have four guys stabbing you at once, or four guys all chucking a fireball at you simultaneously, and that puts you off your game a bit.

I also didn't say that other fourth level spells are not stronger, I'm just saying this isn't as good as them.

Uh... I thought you said that your version of the spell was on par with other spells of the same level.
So I'm not sure what you're saying here.

[Killer Cyborg]

Here's the Mirror Image spell description from the D&D Red Box set:

With this spell the magic user creates 1d4 additional images which look and act exactly the same as the magic user. The images appear and remain next to the magic user, moving if the magic user moves, talking if the magic user talks, and so forth. The magic user need not concentrate; the images will remain until the duration ends, or until hit. The images are not real, and cannot actually do anything. Any successful attack on the magic user will strike an image instead, which will merely cause that image to disappear (regardless of the actual damage).

As with the Multiple Image spell, this description does NOT mention anything that would indicate that anybody would have any difficulty knowing which of the images is real... until the last line.
For me, the writers were describing how the spell works, and expected people to understand from that description that enemies were supposed to be confused about which one was the real mage.
That last line only describes the mechanical result of that confusion; the intended function was already described.

That kind of thing is how spells were often described in early RPGs (i.e., back when Palladium wrote this particular spell). They often didn't go into exact literal detail, and you can see this not just in Palladium's "Multiple Image" spell, but also in many of their other spells.
How many argumens have there been over Carpet of Adhesion, for example?

[Nekira Sudacne]

I didn't houserule anything about location of images, I just used an arbitrary example. I even said it won't matter how the images are arranged or how close or distant because regardless of how they appear, their relative positions can never change due to the text.

Only if you take the text too literally.

Also: what if you are a player who's never even played D&D, or never played a D&D wizard, and has no idea of the D&D version of the spell?

Then KS' description of the spell won't do a lot of good, if looked at literally.
If you think about any number of super-heroes/villains and/or movie scenes with this kind of thing, you might get the gist anyway.

"Because D&D did it this way" Is not an argument I find convincing. yes, a lot of thing are altered ripoffs of D&D in eairly palladium. the point they ARE different.

This spell, for example, only lets the illusions be disrupted by iron. That's spelled out.
And there are combat bonuses as well. That's a change.

But since THE FRIGGIN' POINT of the original spell was to make attackers play The Shell Game with identical copies of you, why would KS change that part of it, and keep the rest of the spell?
Wouldn't make sense to me.

Prehaps he thought the origional spell was too powerful and decided to give it a nerf. Personally, I'd have kept the spell the same but put it around level 7 and bumped the cost up to 20 PPE. But i'm not kevin, all I know is he decided to give it a good nerf. I don't presume to know why he thought it was in need of such a harsh one, but that appears to be what occured.

And if he DID, then--knowing that most of his players were likely D&D fans--he'd have highlighted the change in some way, not just neglected to mention that the spell is designed to keep people from guessing which is the real you.

I would say completely ommitting the major part of the spells effect to be a pretty potent highlight. it sure stuck out like a sore thumb to me. I find occams razor leads me to the direction of this ommission being deliberate.

And with your version, where do the combat bonuses come from?
You know which of the images is the real mage (assuming you saw him/her cast the spell), so why does the mage get bonuses?

because even if you know intellectually they are the same, you still see four of them that look completely real to you. when they swing, or make threatening gestures or spells, it looks real. this instills a natural hesitation as your own reflexes are demanding you respond to the preceived threat and not ignore them. this throws you off a little bit, and gives the other guy an edge.

With my interpretation (and the D&D version), the mage gets those bonuses precisely because you're not sure which one is the real guy. So you have four guys stabbing you at once, or four guys all chucking a fireball at you simultaneously, and that puts you off your game a bit.

Same, you are just not off your game to the tune of missing 75% of the time.

I also didn't say that other fourth level spells are not stronger, I'm just saying this isn't as good as them.

Uh... I thought you said that your version of the spell was on par with other spells of the same level.
So I'm not sure what you're saying here.

On par with is not the same as identical to.

Levels of spells are rough levels of power. not all spells of the same level are of identical power or utility. some are more useful or more powerful than others of that level (and thus tend to get picked a lot--invisibility superior, call lightning, carpet of adhesion and magic net are very popular choices for your one free spell of your current level than others of that same level for a reason).

It falls within the range of expected power for 4th level magic. this does not mean other spells are not higher in the same range.

[Nekira Sudacne]

Here's the Mirror Image spell description from the D&D Red Box set:

With this spell the magic user creates 1d4 additional images which look and act exactly the same as the magic user. The images appear and remain next to the magic user, moving if the magic user moves, talking if the magic user talks, and so forth. The magic user need not concentrate; the images will remain until the duration ends, or until hit. The images are not real, and cannot actually do anything. Any successful attack on the magic user will strike an image instead, which will merely cause that image to disappear (regardless of the actual damage).

As with the Multiple Image spell, this description does NOT mention anything that would indicate that anybody would have any difficulty knowing which of the images is real... until the last line.
For me, the writers were describing how the spell works, and expected people to understand from that description that enemies were supposed to be confused about which one was the real mage.
That last line only describes the mechanical result of that confusion; the intended function was already described.

That kind of thing is how spells were often described in early RPGs (i.e., back when Palladium wrote this particular spell). They often didn't go into exact literal detail, and you can see this not just in Palladium's "Multiple Image" spell, but also in many of their other spells.
How many argumens have there been over Carpet of Adhesion, for example?

It's still a big assumption to make that they just ommitted a massive potential power.

if they had not put in anything that could convincingly replace that effect from the D&D origional, i'd agree with you likely.

However, they didn't just omit the odds of hitting the fake image--they brought in a substitue for that effect--specifically the bonus to dodge.

Ergo, if the person who is attackign misses due to the +2 dodge bonus, then they hit an image instead of the real thing, due to giving in to instinct and reflexes dispite their knowing better. people do stuff like that in a fight for their lives.

in other words, the spell functions exactly as discribed with the mechanics already presented. there is no need to assume other, larger mechanics are involved that are not mentioned. As a rule, if a spell is internally consistant and functions as discribed without using any house rules or assuming text is missing, then that spell is complete as it is and should not be assumed to have to have even more added in.

The spell works as discribed. the discription matches the given mechanics. there is no more that needs to be read into the spell to make it work, and thus, nothing more should be read into it. Doing so can not be anything but a house rule, because the actual written rules we have certainly do not either state that such an additional mechanic exists, nor is an additional mechanic not written required to make the spell make sense given it's own context.

[Killer Cyborg]

Here's the Mirror Image spell description from the D&D Red Box set:

With this spell the magic user creates 1d4 additional images which look and act exactly the same as the magic user. The images appear and remain next to the magic user, moving if the magic user moves, talking if the magic user talks, and so forth. The magic user need not concentrate; the images will remain until the duration ends, or until hit. The images are not real, and cannot actually do anything. Any successful attack on the magic user will strike an image instead, which will merely cause that image to disappear (regardless of the actual damage).

As with the Multiple Image spell, this description does NOT mention anything that would indicate that anybody would have any difficulty knowing which of the images is real... until the last line.
For me, the writers were describing how the spell works, and expected people to understand from that description that enemies were supposed to be confused about which one was the real mage.
That last line only describes the mechanical result of that confusion; the intended function was already described.

That kind of thing is how spells were often described in early RPGs (i.e., back when Palladium wrote this particular spell). They often didn't go into exact literal detail, and you can see this not just in Palladium's "Multiple Image" spell, but also in many of their other spells.
How many argumens have there been over Carpet of Adhesion, for example?

It's still a big assumption to make that they just ommitted a massive potential power.

They didn't omit a power. They omitted a clarifying part of the text.
The power is to make four identical copies of yourself.
The obvious benefit of that would be that the enemy won't know which one is you.

The only thing omitted is some specifying text that wasn't in the original D&D version either.
That version had a 100% miss chance, until all the illusions were destroyed.

However, they didn't just omit the odds of hitting the fake image--they brought in a substitue for that effect--specifically the bonus to dodge.

A +2 to dodge is not the same as a 75-100% miss chance.
The combat bonuses aren't a substitute for the main function of the spell--they're a result of it.
KS--I would wager some money--looked at the D&D spell, and thought, "Well, not only would it make it unlikely for you to hit the real mage, they'd get some combat bonuses on top of any miss chance."

Ergo, if the person who is attackign misses due to the +2 dodge bonus, then they hit an image instead of the real thing, due to giving in to instinct and reflexes dispite their knowing better. people do stuff like that in a fight for their lives.

NOW who's adding stuff that isn't there?

[Killer Cyborg]

Prehaps he thought the origional spell was too powerful and decided to give it a nerf. Personally, I'd have kept the spell the same but put it around level 7 and bumped the cost up to 20 PPE. But i'm not kevin, all I know is he decided to give it a good nerf. I don't presume to know why he thought it was in need of such a harsh one, but that appears to be what occured.

At 1st level, you can blind opponents (Blinding Flash 1 PPE, Cloud of Smoke 2 PPE).
At 2nd level, you can become 90% undetectable (Chameleon 6 PPE)
At 3rd level, you can turn flat-out undetectable to the eye (Invisibility Simple 6 PPE), while maintaining your ability to attack.
At 4th level, you can...
a) make illusory images of yourself that don't fool anybody, but give you minor combat bonuses for 7 PPE
b) make illusory images of yourself that can fool people into a 75% (or whatever) miss chance, and provide minor combat bonuses for 7 PPE.

B seems more in line to me.

[Prysus]

You don't have to ignore that part. There IS ambiguity.
Yes, a line of figures all pointing the exactly the same direction, and all performing the same motion ARE mimicking every movement exactly.
But so are four figures surrounding a person, facing inward.
So are four figures in a semi-circle, all facing a central opponent.

A mirror image mimics your movements exactly, even if it's not facing the same direction as you.

Greetings and Salutations. Agreed, they wouldn't all have to face the same direction necessarily, but it breaks down in other ways. First, it still won't work very well. Second, that version also causes more questions.

1: Let's take the example of them all being able to surround a person. This means coming in from 4 different directions. I'm fine with this image at first thought. Now, we are still having to go by the assumption that we didn't see the mage use the spell otherwise we'd already know which one was real. This more or less prevents the magic user from just cast standing in front of you and then casting it so you're surrounded. So let's say the mage steps from around a corner 10 feet away. There's an image north, south, west, and east of you. Perfect for surrounding. One problem. As long as you take a few steps in any direction, the four images will never surround you. They can't! In fact, to engage you, the mage will have to turn, and when s/he does, all the other images will be turning a direction away from you. The spell was just nullified by taking a few steps. I've considered this option before, and as written the separate entity version just doesn't work just about ever. If you win initiative, you might be able to do something like cast a Fireball first, if you're using the new RUE casting times instead of the older half a melee round casting times (though this is not the rules in most other settings, so this would only benefit casters in Rifts). Note: Though, due to some experience in D&D, and this discussion, probably one of the problems is we keep trying to apply this spell to things like melee combat. Perhaps the best usage for the magic user is to use it to buy time while casting. Mages can be easily interrupted, but if you can't hit the mage, then you can't interrupt him/her. Screw direct attacks, indirect magic (such as Call Lightning or Carpet of Adhesion) would be much better usage by the caster. Then the spell caster doesn't have to worry about targeting and giving him/herself away.

2: We don't really know the range of the images either. Is there one? The range is limited to self, yes. But let's say those four surrounding mages turn and run away in four different directions. How far apart can they get from each other? Can they just get further and further away until the spell elapses? Or do they have to stay within some type of proximity to the original mage? Also, now that they're so far separated, do they still get the bonuses? The others aren't around to confuse anyone (you either have an illusion or you don't at that point). so does this actually remove the bonuses?

Sometimes, sure.
But in this case, we're dealing with a game that originated as D&D, with a spell that's essentially the same as a D&D spell:
Mirror Image (Illusion/Phantasm)
Level: 2 Components: V, S Range: 0 Casting Time: 2 segments Duration: 2 rounds/level Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: 6' radius of spell caster
Explanation/Description: When a Mirror Image spell is invoked, the spell caster causes from 1 to 4 exact duplicates of himself or herself to come into being around his or her person. These images do exactly what the magic-user does, and as the spell causes a blurring and slight distortion when it is effected, it is impossible for opponents to be certain which are the phantasms and which is the actual magic-user. When an image is struck by a weapon, magical or otherwise, it disappears. but any other existing images remain intact until struck. The images seem to shift from round to round, so that if the actual magic-user is struck during one round, he or she cannot be picked out from amongst his or her images the next. To determine the number of images which appear, roll percentile dice, and add 1 to the resulting score for each level of experience of the magic-user: 25 or less = 1 mirror image, 26-50 = 2, 51-75 = 3, 75 or more = 4. At the expiration of the spell duration all images wink out.[/i]

I don't find it plausible to believe that Multiple Image is just coincidentally similar to Mirror Image.
I likewise don't find it plausible to believe that KS was inspired by Mirror Image, but wanted his version to be infinitely less useful, and to deliberately alter the function of the spell by omitting a key part like the underlined

Is it possible? Sure, I guess.
But is it plausible?

I'm not seeing it.

I'm not sure I find it plausible that KS wanted you to ignore his spells and just replace them with D&D spells either, or that KS doesn't want fans playing his games unless they've mastered D&D first. Yes, I know Palladium is basically a house ruled D&D game. However, it is house ruled and modified. I'm not sure I agree with ignoring the changes in favor of D&D rules take priority. Though, since we're discussing the changes, I felt I would go to PF1 just to see if this spell was there and how it may have differed.

Multiple Image level three
Range: self or 30 feet
Duration: 5 melees per level of the spell caster
saving throw: special
Another illusionary spell, it creates 1-6 identical images which mimic the spell casters every movement exactly. If the false image is touched, pierced, or struck that particular one will disappear.
This spell can also be cast upon another person within a 30 feet radius and the spell caster's line of sight.
Saving throw: Viewers may be able to see through the illusions and identify the true person but such rolls vs magic are at minus six.

I will note that melees were a full minute long back at the time. I did my best to keep their odd use of capitals as well (such as that lower case "s" in the first saving throw heading which is driving me crazy to repeat!). Not sure it provides much new insights. Though it does make me question: If we're using the logic that Palladium wouldn't raise a level of a spell and reduce usefulness simply by omission, does that mean that the 2nd Edition version of the spell (Rifts included) still can be cast on others up to 30 feet away? After all, the Palladium version went from level three to level four. Of course, I'm not a huge fan of omission equals inclusion that's being argued for this spell in general.

Bonuses to initiative, dodge, and strike don't work with the idea that you're not sure which of the images the next attack is coming from...?

If the four separate images have to mimic the caster's every movement, moving a little bit makes it extremely easy to figure out which one is real (if using any type of direct attack). Of course, it's quite possible I've given the implications of the wording more thought than those who actually wrote it.

If not for the fact that this spell is based off of a D&D spell that is more clearly described, I might agree.
Although I'd be hard-pressed to hit a drunken blur with a piece of iron without also hitting the real person.

You have to pierce it, not simply hit it. With that said, I view that very much as the +2 to dodge. Try to hit a drunken blur and what might've been a glancing blow just turned into a miss. Though, I will admit, I'm not sure how you'd determine if you hit the illusion or not (with the rules as presented).

Of course, I'll also admit I don't think the spell as written works very well. I'm personally not a huge fan of it. I'd rather see it rewritten. However, in a discussion such as this, I don't want to simply ignore what's written because it's inconvenient either. Farewell and safe journeys.

[Killer Cyborg]

[justify]

You don't have to ignore that part. There IS ambiguity.
Yes, a line of figures all pointing the exactly the same direction, and all performing the same motion ARE mimicking every movement exactly.
But so are four figures surrounding a person, facing inward.
So are four figures in a semi-circle, all facing a central opponent.

A mirror image mimics your movements exactly, even if it's not facing the same direction as you.

Greetings and Salutations. Agreed, they wouldn't all have to face the same direction necessarily, but it breaks down in other ways. First, it still won't work very well. Second, that version also causes more questions.

1: Let's take the example of them all being able to surround a person. This means coming in from 4 different directions. I'm fine with this image at first thought. Now, we are still having to go by the assumption that we didn't see the mage use the spell otherwise we'd already know which one was real. This more or less prevents the magic user from just cast standing in front of you and then casting it so you're surrounded. So let's say the mage steps from around a corner 10 feet away. There's an image north, south, west, and east of you. Perfect for surrounding. One problem. As long as you take a few steps in any direction, the four images will never surround you. They can't! In fact, to engage you, the mage will have to turn, and when s/he does, all the other images will be turning a direction away from you.

Hold on a sec.
The images "mimic the spell casters every movement exactly."
You're thinking strictly in terms of "The mage turns north, so all the images turn north," or "the caster turns 80 degrees to the left, so all the images turn 80 degrees to their left."
But I don't agree with that assumption.
If the mage turns to face the opponent's new position, and all the images turn to face the opponent's new position, that ALSO "mimics the spell casters every movement exactly." They're all doing the same thing: turning to face the opponent's new position.

Likewise, if the mage moves to attack/threaten the opponent, then the images likewise "moving to attack/threaten the opponent" would in fact be mimicking the mage's actions.

2: We don't really know the range of the images either. Is there one? The range is limited to self, yes. But let's say those four surrounding mages turn and run away in four different directions.

I don't think that would be possible, as the images mimic the mage's movements, and the mage himself/herself cannot "run in different directions."

Sometimes, sure.
But in this case, we're dealing with a game that originated as D&D, with a spell that's essentially the same as a D&D spell:
Mirror Image (Illusion/Phantasm)
Level: 2 Components: V, S Range: 0 Casting Time: 2 segments Duration: 2 rounds/level Saving Throw: None Area of Effect: 6' radius of spell caster
Explanation/Description: When a Mirror Image spell is invoked, the spell caster causes from 1 to 4 exact duplicates of himself or herself to come into being around his or her person. These images do exactly what the magic-user does, and as the spell causes a blurring and slight distortion when it is effected, it is impossible for opponents to be certain which are the phantasms and which is the actual magic-user. When an image is struck by a weapon, magical or otherwise, it disappears. but any other existing images remain intact until struck. The images seem to shift from round to round, so that if the actual magic-user is struck during one round, he or she cannot be picked out from amongst his or her images the next. To determine the number of images which appear, roll percentile dice, and add 1 to the resulting score for each level of experience of the magic-user: 25 or less = 1 mirror image, 26-50 = 2, 51-75 = 3, 75 or more = 4. At the expiration of the spell duration all images wink out.[/i]

I don't find it plausible to believe that Multiple Image is just coincidentally similar to Mirror Image.
I likewise don't find it plausible to believe that KS was inspired by Mirror Image, but wanted his version to be infinitely less useful, and to deliberately alter the function of the spell by omitting a key part like the underlined

Is it possible? Sure, I guess.
But is it plausible?

I'm not seeing it.

I'm not sure I find it plausible that KS wanted you to ignore his spells and just replace them with D&D spells either

Good thing that I'm not suggesting that.
All I'm suggesting is that he intends his spell to work the same way, and that if you scrutinized the D&D spell the same way that you scrutinize the Palladium version, that you'd run into essentially the same problems.
It's not a matter of replacing Palladium's spell with the D&D version--it's a matter of understanding from context how the spell is intended to work.

quote] or that KS doesn't want fans playing his games unless they've mastered D&D first.[/quote]

I haven't suggested that either, and it's a pretty disingenuous description.
First, knowing how a 2nd level spell that's described in the Basic D&D Player's Handbook is nowhere near "mastering" D&D.
Second, I don't think that KS expects people to necessarily be familiar with the spell. I think he just described the spell a bit loosely when translating it into his own system.

Yes, I know Palladium is basically a house ruled D&D game. However, it is house ruled and modified. I'm not sure I agree with ignoring the changes in favor of D&D rules take priority. Though, since we're discussing the changes, I felt I would go to PF1 just to see if this spell was there and how it may have differed.

Multiple Image level three
Range: self or 30 feet
Duration: 5 melees per level of the spell caster
saving throw: special
Another illusionary spell, it creates 1-6 identical images which mimic the spell casters every movement exactly. If the false image is touched, pierced, or struck that particular one will disappear.
This spell can also be cast upon another person within a 30 feet radius and the spell caster's line of sight.
Saving throw: Viewers may be able to see through the illusions and identify the true person but such rolls vs magic are at minus six.

I will note that melees were a full minute long back at the time. I did my best to keep their odd use of capitals as well (such as that lower case "s" in the first saving throw heading which is driving me crazy to repeat!). Not sure it provides much new insights. Though it does make me question: If we're using the logic that Palladium wouldn't raise a level of a spell and reduce usefulness simply by omission, does that mean that the 2nd Edition version of the spell (Rifts included) still can be cast on others up to 30 feet away? After all, the Palladium version went from level three to level four. Of course, I'm not a huge fan of omission equals inclusion that's being argued for this spell in general.

It's a tricky subject. I'd say that there are matter of degrees. Something like casting it on another person? The omission of that might be indicative of a change, or a correction, or it might be an error.
In the case of Mirror Image, the entire point of the spell was to confuse people into attacking the false images of you.
It's hard for me to believe that KS omitting some specific language removes that entire point, and replaces it with minor combat bonuses.

[Glistam]

So far you've all done a great job convincing me I should've had this spell in my repertoire instead of ignoring it all these years. I also really like the idea of using Illusion Manipulation with it for even more wacky hijinks.

[ShadowLogan]

I will also note that this spell is a wonderful candiate to use with Illusion Manipulation, as it's a piggyback spell that will allow you to play shell games with the illusions to your hearts content.

Yes and No. While Illusion Manipulation might help in confusing which image is fake vs real, the location of the real one doesn't change because one uses IM. There is a Phasepower (Multi-Phase, in DB2) that allows the user to literally move the ball under the shell of their choice, not just alter the shell like IM would do.

i've never seen anyone cast it NOT already in combat. not saying it couldn't happen, but it hasn't come up.

Ludicruous Magic in Rifter 9-1/2 (April Fool's) is basically the spell under a different name and lists a non-combat purpose. Now 9-1/2 may not be cannon material, but it illustrates that a mage looking to make some money as an entertainer might use the spell outside of combat as part of an act.

I will note that melees were a full minute long back at the time. I did my best to keep their odd use of capitals as well (such as that lower case "s" in the first saving throw heading which is driving me crazy to repeat!). Not sure it provides much new insights. Though it does make me question: If we're using the logic that Palladium wouldn't raise a level of a spell and reduce usefulness simply by omission, does that mean that the 2nd Edition version of the spell (Rifts included) still can be cast on others up to 30 feet away? After all, the Palladium version went from level three to level four. Of course, I'm not a huge fan of omission equals inclusion that's being argued for this spell in general.

Okay this answers my question on if that is 1E/1R because the text doesn't match up with the version I am familiar with in 2E/Rifts.

Re: changes, if the range doesn't allow for it I would not allow it to be cast on others, terminology is pretty well defined on what the range statistic is supposed to mean by the time of Rifts/PF2E. It should also be noted that 2E/Rifts only creates "three identical images" not the "1-6 identical images" as the previous one, can only be disrupted by piercing it with iron, and gives bonuses. So there does appear to be more extensive changes than just level and range aspect when compared to PF1E/R.

EDIT: corrected description of Ludicrous Magic's version of Multiple Image (Imaginary Quartet pg92 Rifter 9-1/2), I thought it said identical (memory), but is says "Basically the same as" the spell.

[Killer Cyborg]

As an aside, what happens if an invisible mage casts Multiple Image?

[ShadowLogan]

RE: Invisibility and Multiple Image combo.

It really depends on how one sees the respective version of invisibility working and what Multiple Image uses as the basis for the image. I do not think there is an easy answer.

I want to say both results are possible, you create 3 invisible illusions, but you also create 3 visible illusions and remain invisible or not. It really depends on what actually is going on method wise for various "invisiblities" working with the method Multiple Image uses to create the illusion.

For example, if both use hypnotic suggestion to achieve their results, how does the target handle the contradictory suggestions (I'm not here really, but really there are 4 of me).

Then again the more recently activated power could cancel out the previous power, making casting order important.

[Prysus]

Hold on a sec.
The images "mimic the spell casters every movement exactly."
You're thinking strictly in terms of "The mage turns north, so all the images turn north,"

Greetings and Salutations. No, actually. This one wouldn't work, unless they all started off side by side and facing the same direction.

or "the caster turns 80 degrees to the left, so all the images turn 80 degrees to their left."

Yes. In my opinion, "every movement exactly" requires exactly the same movement. So one steps left, they all step left. If they're facing a different direction, that's a serious problem. Stepping left and stepping right is not the exact same move. They'll take you to the same location, but it's not the same movement.

But I don't agree with that assumption.
If the mage turns to face the opponent's new position, and all the images turn to face the opponent's new position, that ALSO "mimics the spell casters every movement exactly." They're all doing the same thing: turning to face the opponent's new position.

Likewise, if the mage moves to attack/threaten the opponent, then the images likewise "moving to attack/threaten the opponent" would in fact be mimicking the mage's actions.

Mimicking the same action, yes, but not exactly the movement. It's similar or equivalent, but not exactly. If the word "exactly" wasn't in there we probably wouldn't be having this debate. This is actually an issue that's bugged me about this spell since I first read it. As a G.M. I would house rule this spell more than likely, but as a reader discussing the spell objectively I can't ignore that word, because it has a meaning.

I'm not sure I find it plausible that KS wanted you to ignore his spells and just replace them with D&D spells either

Good thing that I'm not suggesting that.
All I'm suggesting is that he intends his spell to work the same way, and that if you scrutinized the D&D spell the same way that you scrutinize the Palladium version, that you'd run into essentially the same problems.
It's not a matter of replacing Palladium's spell with the D&D version--it's a matter of understanding from context how the spell is intended to work.

I suppose that's true. Your stance has been more that if something is more useful in D&D, we include those D&D aspects into the Palladium versions as intent.

I likewise don't find it plausible to believe that KS was inspired by Mirror Image, but wanted his version to be infinitely less useful, and to deliberately alter the function of the spell by omitting a key part like the underlined

Is it possible? Sure, I guess.
But is it plausible?

I'm not seeing it.

You believe that KS took a D&D spell, made it weaker, made it 2 levels higher, and differentiated between the new version by omitting part of the description?
That seems a lot less plausible than him omitting a key part out of sloppiness.

I'll continue this one a little lower down ...

or that KS doesn't want fans playing his games unless they've mastered D&D first.

I haven't suggested that either, and it's a pretty disingenuous description.
First, knowing how a 2nd level spell that's described in the Basic D&D Player's Handbook is nowhere near "mastering" D&D.
Second, I don't think that KS expects people to necessarily be familiar with the spell. I think he just described the spell a bit loosely when translating it into his own system.

True, you didn't say mastery. That was an exaggeration on my part. As for the second part ...

Because this spell is based on a D&D spell, from back when PFRPG is was based on D&D. The spell description likely includes some level of assumption that the readers were already familiar with the D&D spell.

So he doesn't expect them to be familiar with the spell, or he assumes they are familiar with the spell, which is it? If you don't think it, it was pretty disingenuous of you to say it.

So earlier you claimed that KS assumes we're familiar with the D&D spell, and that because the D&D spell is more useful we should apply those useful aspects as intent. You're using D&D to try and take precedence.

Though, addressing a line from above, about scrutinizing the D&D spell and running into the same problem ... I did. Since we're comparing D&D and Palladium though, I figure we should discuss more of the changes as well. I didn't play early D&D (and only in the last year and a half have I ever even read a single page in a D&D book, and that's 3.5), but a lot of these points will come from things I've heard you discuss before in other threads. As a result, I might get something wrong (if so, I apologize and it's not intentional), but I think I should have it on target.

You've said one of the things that attracted you to Rifts is that mages didn't have super low hit points, and that they could learn to fight just like any warrior. Meanwhile, in D&D, they had (I believe) the lowest Hit Points, limited (or no) armour, and they couldn't really fight, that they had to hide in back and cast spells while others protected them. Sound about right? So let's actually consider the implications of a D&D mage to a Palladium mage.

In D&D, a mage can't stand up in a direct fight. A spell like Mirror Image is invaluable for survival. This gives the mage time to do things like cast spells and ripped to shreds by a Fighter or Barbarian. However, I don't see any indications (either by D&D mechanics as a whole or the spell description) that this spell was designed to allow the mage to become a melee fighter. This spell is basically a defensive measure only. On the other hand, D&D works with minis, so you don't have to roll a D4 to determine which one you hit, you just pick one of the targets on the map. This spell provides no bonuses to AC, To Hit, or Initiative, only the shell game advantage.

In Palladium, a mage can fight as well as some warriors and wear armour. Mages take time to cast and can be interrupted. This spell could be useful for having time to cast spells (indirect or buffs would be best), if not moving (hand symbols maybe, but that's not necessarily directed at an individual to give the real mage away either). So if we're going with the same intent, I'd be fine with the same concept as D&D with picking on of the targets on the map (roll a D4 if not using maps or indicators of any sort) and still call it within the intent. On the other hand, trying to argue this spell is designed to turn into the mage into a combat monster seems against the D&D intent, and it's not really written into the Palladium description either. You do get combat bonuses (Initiative and Dodge are probably the most useful, and the Strike bonus is the lowest of all the combat bonuses) which replace the shell game.

So if we're claiming intent, I don't think I agree with your version of that either. I've found this interesting. On the other hand, I think it's convinced me what you claim as intent (at least into the context of the images being able to make different movements as long as their end action is the same) is wrong.

In the case of Mirror Image, the entire point of the spell was to confuse people into attacking the false images of you.
It's hard for me to believe that KS omitting some specific language removes that entire point, and replaces it with minor combat bonuses.

For the record, I'm not inherently opposed to the D4 option. I'm opposed to the concept of direct actions not giving you away, because as written neither the D&D spell nor the Palladium version seem to be designed for that.

On the other hand, this conversation has helped me consider it in a different way than before. Too often everyone discusses the combat applications as an offensive option (such as trying to surround opponents). That's where this spell has always broken down for me. However, having it more as a defensive measure to give time for casting makes much more sense to me. Images (along with the mage) could move forward, backwards, left, or right in unison to move further from an approaching enemy or closer to be within casting range, as long as there wasn't direct interaction with anything nothing would really give away the true image. Casting times and interruptions can be very much an issue, and using a spell like this to aid that seems more like a mage-y thing to do than running into melee combat anyways. Farewell and safe journeys for now.

[Prysus]

As an aside, what happens if an invisible mage casts Multiple Image?

Greetings and Salutations. I've actually been wondering that myself. Though since someone else asked (and I'm not wondering out of mild curiosity) ...

If the images look identical to the spell caster ... they would also be invisible. This has both its pros and cons. If someone is using See the Invisible, they'll see the copies and still won't know which one is real. On the downside, it might force opponents to do things like rely on other senses (such as scent) and methods (such as looking for footprints), and the illusions wouldn't be of any benefit. Note: Scent can give away the real mage anyways, but people (in my experience) are less likely to rely on other senses when sight is an option.

Of course, the counterpoint to that would be that according to Invisibility: Simple, anything you pick up or drop after becomes visible, as the magic doesn't seem to extend or take affect after. This could also be used to apply to the Multiple Images. This will probably work better as a general distraction, but anyone who can See the Invisible will probably instantly know which one is the real one.

If I were to G.M. the situation, I'd probably let the player pick ... and just make sure they realize that it'll be that way from now on (no take backs). Farewell and safe journeys.[/justify]

[Prysus]

Okay this answers my question on if that is 1E/1R because the text doesn't match up with the version I am familiar with in 2E/Rifts.

Re: changes, if the range doesn't allow for it I would not allow it to be cast on others, terminology is pretty well defined on what the range statistic is supposed to mean by the time of Rifts/PF2E. It should also be noted that 2E/Rifts only creates "three identical images" not the "1-6 identical images" as the previous one, can only be disrupted by piercing it with iron, and gives bonuses. So there does appear to be more extensive changes than just level and range aspect when compared to PF1E/R.

Greetings and Salutations. I personally agree. The number of images and disrupting them are clear changes. This was primarily directed at the stance of Killer Cyborg who said he finds it unlikely they'd have taken a spell, make it higher level, and then make it weaker (in regards to the D&D version), the omission of an ability does not mean it was intentionally removed. Since PF1 is the closest to the D&D roots, I decided to look there to see if it would provide any clues (it really didn't in my opinion, but included the description anyways in case someone would find something I missed). I noticed the range thing as I typed it out, and wanted to hear his opinion if the raise in level indicated that omission was also accidental. If he felt that the omission was accidental, he has a cool new edge to Multiple Image in his games. If he felt omission meant an actual change, I was curious if it would give him any second thoughts regarding the omission of lines from the D&D spell.

Now, on the other hand, the omission of jumping rules from RUE I don't think means that characters can no longer jump, or that the omission of the random monster table from RUE means that you're not allowed to make random monsters any more. So a stance doesn't necessarily have to be a rock solid rule. I can't understand the details of someone else's stance unless I ask though. Farewell and safe journeys.