A Question About Images

[Bill_in_IN]

I know that a wizard can create an image of a Fencer with two swords and armor and that it can engage a foe.

My question is about how this Image engages the foe as a fencer.

The options for the Image would not include attack because a successful roll would make it disappear. So, it can defend one of two ways.

1. It can defend requiring a 5/DX roll to be hit by the foe. Of course, success would make it disappear.

2. It can go into Double-Parry mode which would require a 4/DX roll. This is a powerful mode for a real fencer because they would also stop 4 more hits if the DX roll is successful. But, that would cause the image to disappear.

So, the fate of option 2 above is obvious. A successful 4/DX roll against it would cause it to disappear.

Option 1 isn't quite so obvious. A 5/DX roll to be hit does make such an image useful for engaging a foe and delaying their ability to attack your PCs. Can a GM assume that when in such a mode, that there is no contact at all while defending unless there is a successful 5/DX roll. I think that it is fair to interpret it that way per the description given of Images. However, one could argue that some contact could occur on the Image as a general part of defending against attacks.

What do you folks think?

[hcobb]

Unless it's an image clone of a fighter that's in this fight it will not have any advanced combat talents (ITL 139) and an Image can't Defend (ITL 117).

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by Bill_in_IN

I know that a wizard can create an image of a Fencer with two swords and armor and that it can engage a foe.

My question is about how this Image engages the foe as a fencer.

The options for the Image would not include attack because a successful roll would make it disappear. So, it can defend one of two ways.

1. It can defend requiring a 5/DX roll to be hit by the foe. Of course, success would make it disappear.

2. It can go into Double-Parry mode which would require a 4/DX roll. This is a powerful mode for a real fencer because they would also stop 4 more hits if the DX roll is successful. But, that would cause the image to disappear.

So, the fate of option 2 above is obvious. A successful 4/DX roll against it would cause it to disappear.

Option 1 isn't quite so obvious. A 5/DX roll to be hit does make such an image useful for engaging a foe and delaying their ability to attack your PCs. Can a GM assume that when in such a mode, that there is no contact at all while defending unless there is a successful 5/DX roll. I think that it is fair to interpret it that way per the description given of Images. However, one could argue that some contact could occur on the Image as a general part of defending against attacks.

What do you folks think?

I think Images can't defend. There's a lot of confusion when it comes to Defend and the Two-Weapon Parry options, but I think Defend involves blocking blows with one's weapon (I think there's a name for that...). You can't defend barehanded for this reason.

So, if the 4- or 5-die to-hit is because the figure is blocking blows with his weapon, then an Image can't gain this benefit. It's not just that he makes contact if the opponent successfully rolls his to-hit. It's that if the opponent misses because of the extra dice, then the opponent also made contact.

So, what I'd allow is that the Image acts as if he's defending, but regardless of the skills used, it's only 3/adjDX to hit and dispel him. The appearance of defending is only a ruse, unlikely to work for long, but if the opponent misses his to-hit, then he may think it's a real figure or an illusion rather than an image.

The problem with this ruse, of course, is that players usually roll their own to-hit dice and they'll know whether they rolled three or four or five dice. You could avoid this by having them roll four or five dice, as appropriate, but then secretly roll one or two dice and deduct it from their roll.

[phiwum]

Originally Posted by hcobb

Unless it's an image clone of a fighter that's in this fight it will not have any advanced combat talents (ITL 139) and an Image can't Defend (ITL 117).

That's an easier answer than mine.

[Bill_in_IN]

Thanks Guys.

Your responses make sense and are much appreciated. I've been play testing a new wizard and the thought of doing this with an image as opposed to an illusion seemed like an interesting scenario. I knew that there would be limitations and the use of an image for such things is pushing against such limitations in the rules.

So, for now, I will look over the rules referenced and see if it does allow for the ruse factor. Meaning, that it really isn't happening and the GM has to intervene per phiwum's response for it to be allowed as a ruse.

[hcobb]

Make an image duplicate of your snaked staff, which has (most of) Blur built in.