4
\$\begingroup\$

This is very similar to Do the Armor of Agathys and Mirror Image spells stack, so that hitting an illusory duplicate still causes you to take cold damage?, but I believe this reasoning no longer applies to the 2024 edition of the rules.

The Mirror Image spell description (2024) states (PHB, p. 299; emphasis mine):

Each time a creature hits you with an attack roll during the spell's duration, roll a d6 for each of your remaining duplicates. If any of the d6s rolls a 3 or higher, one of the duplicates is hit instead of you.

(Note the change from the 2014 version, which starts with "Each time a creature targets you with an attack".)

The Armor of Agathys spell description states (PHB, p. 243; emphasis mine):

If a creature hits you with a melee attack roll before the spell ends, the creature takes 5 Cold damage.

This is very similar to the Abjurer's Arcane Ward feature which is also providing damage redirection and is believed to "stack" with Armor of Agathys:

Whenever you take damage, the ward takes the damage instead

So: is it possible to redirect a melee attack to an illusory duplicate in such a way that caster takes no damage but the attacker is punished with the cold damage?

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ A note on Arcane Ward: The big difference there is that the timing is when you take damage, and not when you are hit. Arcane Ward also wouldn't be triggered if the attacker hit one of the illusions from Mirror Image. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday

1 Answer 1

19
\$\begingroup\$

They don't synergize

Mirror Image states (emphasis mine):

Each time a creature hits you with an attack roll during the spell’s duration, roll a d6 for each of your remaining duplicates. If any of the d6s rolls a 3 or higher, one of the duplicates is hit instead of you, and the duplicate is destroyed. The duplicates otherwise ignore all other damage and effects.

So you roll after an attack hits to determine if a duplicate is hit instead of you. If that happens, you are not hit — the hit is retroactively removed — and Armor of Agathys does not trigger.

\$\endgroup\$
7
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Rather than use "redirected" (which the spell does not include), you might better reference the word "instead" and explain what it does here (retroactively removes the hit to you). \$\endgroup\$
    – Kirt
    Commented yesterday
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ As a further "logical" argument: If the attacking creature takes damage from AoA AND they destroy a mirror image instead of dealing damage to the caster, that would mean that both the caster and the mirror image was hit by the attack. And you can't hit two targets with the same attack. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree that the "instead" word plays a crucial role here. If we view it from the Magic: the Gathering perspective, the AoA is "triggered ability" but MI is a "replacement effect" that causes the initial situation (an attack hitting you) to not happen at all. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @VictorBulatov Id be careful with that sort of thinking, MtG has a much more rigid structure for rules interpretation than D&D, and applying that approach to D&D can yield incorrect and even nonsensical outcomes, like concluding that certain spells only work if you get naked first. \$\endgroup\$ Commented yesterday
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Good edit, now upvoted. \$\endgroup\$
    – Kirt
    Commented yesterday

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.