RAW, Official and Core are three different concepts.
RAW applies to anything written as a rule, hence Rules As Written. The concept of RAW applies to official products, third party produces and homebrew. It simply means reading things literally as they are written without inferring or assuming anything about the intent of the rules (contrast with Rules As Intended).
Official is anything WotC publishes that they declare as official. Xanathar's Guide to Everything is an official product.
The core rulebooks are the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual.
You are right, per the quoted text, that Xanathar's Guide to Everything isn't a Core rulebook. However, RAW still applies to it, in that you can read the rules presented as written, and it's still an official book.
RAW does not mean 'official' or 'core', it just means to read things as they are written.
True true, my mistake. My point was just that the options in XgtE don't really apply to this discussion, which is covering things in the DMG and PHB. XgtE may offer solutions to questionable things in the Core Books, but since it's only optional it's still good to try to get to the bottom of things without it; not everyone owns and uses it.
I would disagree, XGTE provides official insights into the rules that clarify a lot of situations. Disregarding XGTE because it's not part of the core three would be like disregarding the Sage Advice Compendium or the various errata.
You don't have to use the rules presented in XGTE, but you can't disregard the insights they provide into the game.
I don't mean to say it should be disregarded; I certainly use it. But not everyone has it, and it doesn't answer every question. It doesn't answer this question, and even if it did, that doesn't mean the core rule shouldn't be discussed, because even if Xanathars had an answer it would still just be an option.
The reason I posted the Xanathars was that the only thing in my mind that would tell me that the damage shouldn't apply twice is that it occurs at the same time, and the Xanathars rule says that simultaneous events do occur separately, in order, which eliminates that reasoning in my mind.
I still say that saying the spells overlapping causes the damage from one to be omitted doesn't answer other scenarios, per below:
1) If you start in AoE #1, and make the save for damage, then move into AoE #2 while still in AoE#1, do you avoid the damage from AoE #2? what if AoE #2 was more recently cast or created by a higher level version of the spell?
I will continue to rule at my table that the only effects that don't stack are continuous effects, like buffs and debuffs to stats and abilities. Damage is never a continuous effect, it is a point effect that might get repeated, but it isn't continuous. It might not be RAW exactly, but it avoids these weird scenarios like the one above and is a consistent rule I can enforce at the table.
1) If you start in AoE #1, and make the save for damage, then move into AoE #2 while still in AoE#1, do you avoid the damage from AoE #2? what if AoE #2 was more recently cast or created by a higher level version of the spell?
If #1 is either more potent or more recently cast, then the target would have to move out of #1’s AoE before they would be effected by #2 because where they overlap, #1 suppresses #2.
If #2 is either more potent or more recently cast, then where they overlap #2 suppresses #1, so the creature would have to roll another save as soon as it enters#2’s AoE.
1) If you start in AoE #1, and make the save for damage, then move into AoE #2 while still in AoE#1, do you avoid the damage from AoE #2? what if AoE #2 was more recently cast or created by a higher level version of the spell?
If #1 is either more potent or more recently cast, then the target would have to move out of #1’s AoE before they would be effected by #2 because where they overlap, #1 suppresses #2.
If #2 is either more potent or more recently cast, then where they overlap #2 suppresses #1, so the creature would have to roll another save as soon as it enters#2’s AoE.
in the second case though, the only difference then is the timing of when the effect happens on a turn. in the above case, an individual starting in one, saving for damage, then moving into two, and saving for damage, is no different to me than starting in both, which per xanathars still occurs "separately"
I won't be changing how I run my table because, again, my interpretation can be more consistently applied, IMO. (you are free to disagree and rule differently at yours)
Huh. Not to put to fine a point on it, but the DMG version of this rule indicates that it is only the ongoing effects that do not stack. It also uses the example of fire elemental's fire form. This ability has several parts, two of which are relevant: initial damage from entering or starting a turn in the elemental's space and ongoing damage from being on fire. The DMG version of the rule only indicates that the ongoing damage fails to stack.
From my reading of that rule, if you start your turn in the space of two fire elementals, you'd take the initial damage twice. Then, if you move out of that space and start your turn on fire, you'd only take the ongoing damage once.
Ongoing effects have ways that they end. For example, the fire form trait's "on fire" damage says that someone can douse you. The initial damage is instantaneous, because it has no duration. For spirit guardians, of course the spell has a duration, but that does not mean that all of its effects also have that same duration. The damage effect from the spell is instantaneous, since it provides no duration (you are not "on spirit fire" for the duration) or way of ending its continued effect.
I will not pretend that I have sifted through 8 pages of this topic, so forgive me if this particular argument has been hashed out. I also realize that the obvious flaw to this is that the rule in the PHB mentions only "durations of those spells," implying that the duration of an effect has no bearing -- though again, the DMG rule has different wording stating that it is the duration of the effect that matters.
Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again. Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items. See the related rule in the “Combining Magical Effects” section of chapter 10 in the Player’s Handbook.
Spirit Guardians has both an intitial (per turn) damage and an ongoing effect, just like the quoted ability, so I think it’s viable to say only the ongoing effect is not stacked based on this similar rule in the DMG
Right, and you are perfectly correct to point out that the DMG is not only more specific in how it describes the rule, but more specific in naming that it applies to spells as well as other game features.
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
Right, and you are perfectly correct to point out that the DMG is not only more specific in how it describes the rule, but more specific in naming that it applies to spells as well as other game features.
Nowhere in that rule you quoted does it say anything about being affected by two different Fire Elementals both using Fire Form on the same target on the same turn. It says that if a target is affected by Fire Form multiple times that it doesn’t suffer more ongoing damage. That’s just saying that if the same elemental uses the same ability on the same target more than 1ce (like 2 turns in a row), that the ongoing effects are not additive.
The PHB is more specific in precluding multiple castings of the same spell from overlapping effects.
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
Nowhere in that rule you quoted does it say anything about being affected by two different Fire Elementals both using Fire Form on the same target on the same turn. It says that if a target is affected by Fire Form multiple times that it doesn’t suffer more ongoing damage. That’s just saying that if the same elemental uses the same ability on the same target more than 1ce (like 2 turns in a row), that the ongoing effects are not additive.
The PHB is more specific in precluding multiple castings of the same spell from overlapping effects.
I completely agree. Ongoing effects do not stack. What it does show is that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.
It's like you didn't think about the post because you already know what answer you want.
I completely agree. Ongoing effects do not stack. What it does show is that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.
It's like you didn't think about the post because you already know what answer you want.
No, I thought about it.
I just don’t think that it shows “that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.”
What I think it shows is that if the same Fire Elemental uses the same ability on the same target 2 or more times in a combat that it cannot make that target “more on fire” than it did the first time.
And the damage dealt by Spirit Guardians is instantaneous. That doesn’t matter, because it is being caused by an ongoing effect, the ongoing effect is the presence of those spirits that are in that AoE. The ongoing effect that gets canceled by the second casting is those spirits existing in that area at that time. If there is only one set of spirits in that area (because the ongoing effect of two castings of the same spell don’t stack), then they aren’t there to do the damage.
I completely agree. Ongoing effects do not stack. What it does show is that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.
It's like you didn't think about the post because you already know what answer you want.
No, I thought about it.
I just don’t think that it shows “that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.”
I'm not sure what to disagree with here. As far as the text of the rule, that's literally what it says("while the durations of the effects overlap"), so...
What I think it shows is that if the same Fire Elemental uses the same ability on the same target 2 or more times in a combat that it cannot make that target “more on fire” than it did the first time.
Again. the fire form trait has several parts, including two sources of damage. you are beholden to the initial damage each time it is applied to you because it is instantaneous. Only the ongoing damage fails to stack.
And the damage dealt by Spirit Guardians is instantaneous. That doesn’t matter, because it is being caused by an ongoing effect, the ongoing effect is the presence of those spirits that are in that AoE. The ongoing effect that gets canceled by the second casting is those spirits existing in that area at that time. If there is only one set of spirits in that area (because the ongoing effect of two castings of the same spell don’t stack), then they aren’t there to do the damage.
And this is where you are reading into the rule something that is not written. The rule doesn't say that the newer one overwrites the older one. Just that the effects do not stack while the durations of the effects overlap.
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
Nowhere in that rule you quoted does it say anything about being affected by two different Fire Elementals both using Fire Form on the same target on the same turn. It says that if a target is affected by Fire Form multiple times that it doesn’t suffer more ongoing damage. That’s just saying that if the same elemental uses the same ability on the same target more than 1ce (like 2 turns in a row), that the ongoing effects are not additive.
The PHB is more specific in precluding multiple castings of the same spell from overlapping effects.
But the PHB example is not simultaneous either...it references Bless, which cannot be cast simultaneously (per Xanathar's). In both cases you have examples applied one after the other, whether on different turns, the same turn or in the same (near) instant is irrelevant. The only common thread between both is that the ongoing effects are not duplicated. (Bless only produces an ongoing effect (advantage on rolls during the duration), and Fire Form produces both an ongoing effect (you are ignited and on fire) and an instant effect (you take damage when you start turns next to the creature or when you move next to the creature)). The DMG ruling illustrates that the instant damage is not subjected to the rule on combined effects because it isn't mentioned, and by the wording is actually intentionally excluded because the excluded damage indicated is specific to the "ignited" section of the rule
I think where the issue here is is that there are two "effects" of spirit guardians; the aura of spirits, and the slowing effect on others. The aura causes damage to others, but the effect is focused on the caster (as the target of the spell is "Self"). The secondary slowing effect is focused on others due to the spells wording. the combining magical effects rule says that a target subjected to identical spell effects at the same time is not subjected to amplified (or stacked) effects, but the example rulings in both the PHB and the DMG indicate that the ruling applies only to effects 1) focused on the target and 2) that are ongoing so as to overlap. in the Fire Form example, the Fire Form aura is focused on the elemental (but causes damage to others) but the wording of the ability makes the secondary effect "the target is on fire" and its subsequent damage, focused on the other creature. similarly, the Spirit guardians aura is ongoing and causes damage to others, but is focused on the caster not those others. The slowing effect is specifically focused on the others per the spells wording (creatures in the aura have their speed reduced by half).
So, the appropriate ruling is that a caster could not cast spirit guardians on himself twice and expect two saving throws or rolls from creatures in the aura, but two creatures casting the effect once on themselves and whose AoEs overlap could expect that for a creature in both areas, as the effect is targeting themselves once each. The slowing effect, as it is focused on the other creature, would not stack in either case.
I completely agree. Ongoing effects do not stack. What it does show is that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.
It's like you didn't think about the post because you already know what answer you want.
No, I thought about it.
I just don’t think that it shows “that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.”
I'm not sure what to disagree with here. As far as the text of the rule, that's literally what it says("while the durations of the effects overlap"), so...
What I think it shows is that if the same Fire Elemental uses the same ability on the same target 2 or more times in a combat that it cannot make that target “more on fire” than it did the first time.
Again. the fire form trait has several parts, including two sources of damage. you are beholden to the initial damage each time it is applied to you because it is instantaneous. Only the ongoing damage fails to stack.
And the damage dealt by Spirit Guardians is instantaneous. That doesn’t matter, because it is being caused by an ongoing effect, the ongoing effect is the presence of those spirits that are in that AoE. The ongoing effect that gets canceled by the second casting is those spirits existing in that area at that time. If there is only one set of spirits in that area (because the ongoing effect of two castings of the same spell don’t stack), then they aren’t there to do the damage.
And this is where you are reading into the rule something that is not written. The rule doesn't say that the newer one overwrites the older one. Just that the effects do not stack while the durations of the effects overlap.
The effect in question is not the damage itself, but the existence of the spirits that could potentially deal the damage. The duration of their existence is not instantaneous, but Concentration. As long as the caster maintains concentration on the spell, the effect of those spirits existing in that space is what is at question. Since two separate batches of spirits cannot stack, therefore one group of spirits is not there to deal any damage. No second batch of spirits, no second batch of damage.
Not “including two sources of damage” as you state. Nowhere does that rule mention the presence of two separate elementals. It is a ruling about two instances of damage from the same source, not specifically two separate sources. That’s where you’re reading into the rules.
on my post above, I am aware that spirit guardians is a concentration spell, but the rule is still relevant. a spell like mirror image is not, and the effect is targeted towards self, and the effect affects others (by potentially changing their attack targets), but the same rules apply.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
RAW, Official and Core are three different concepts.
You are right, per the quoted text, that Xanathar's Guide to Everything isn't a Core rulebook. However, RAW still applies to it, in that you can read the rules presented as written, and it's still an official book.
RAW does not mean 'official' or 'core', it just means to read things as they are written.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
True true, my mistake. My point was just that the options in XgtE don't really apply to this discussion, which is covering things in the DMG and PHB. XgtE may offer solutions to questionable things in the Core Books, but since it's only optional it's still good to try to get to the bottom of things without it; not everyone owns and uses it.
I would disagree, XGTE provides official insights into the rules that clarify a lot of situations. Disregarding XGTE because it's not part of the core three would be like disregarding the Sage Advice Compendium or the various errata.
You don't have to use the rules presented in XGTE, but you can't disregard the insights they provide into the game.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I don't mean to say it should be disregarded; I certainly use it. But not everyone has it, and it doesn't answer every question. It doesn't answer this question, and even if it did, that doesn't mean the core rule shouldn't be discussed, because even if Xanathars had an answer it would still just be an option.
The reason I posted the Xanathars was that the only thing in my mind that would tell me that the damage shouldn't apply twice is that it occurs at the same time, and the Xanathars rule says that simultaneous events do occur separately, in order, which eliminates that reasoning in my mind.
I still say that saying the spells overlapping causes the damage from one to be omitted doesn't answer other scenarios, per below:
1) If you start in AoE #1, and make the save for damage, then move into AoE #2 while still in AoE#1, do you avoid the damage from AoE #2? what if AoE #2 was more recently cast or created by a higher level version of the spell?
I will continue to rule at my table that the only effects that don't stack are continuous effects, like buffs and debuffs to stats and abilities. Damage is never a continuous effect, it is a point effect that might get repeated, but it isn't continuous. It might not be RAW exactly, but it avoids these weird scenarios like the one above and is a consistent rule I can enforce at the table.
If #1 is either more potent or more recently cast, then the target would have to move out of #1’s AoE before they would be effected by #2 because where they overlap, #1 suppresses #2.
If #2 is either more potent or more recently cast, then where they overlap #2 suppresses #1, so the creature would have to roll another save as soon as it enters#2’s AoE.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
in the second case though, the only difference then is the timing of when the effect happens on a turn. in the above case, an individual starting in one, saving for damage, then moving into two, and saving for damage, is no different to me than starting in both, which per xanathars still occurs "separately"
I won't be changing how I run my table because, again, my interpretation can be more consistently applied, IMO. (you are free to disagree and rule differently at yours)
Huh. Not to put to fine a point on it, but the DMG version of this rule indicates that it is only the ongoing effects that do not stack. It also uses the example of fire elemental's fire form. This ability has several parts, two of which are relevant: initial damage from entering or starting a turn in the elemental's space and ongoing damage from being on fire. The DMG version of the rule only indicates that the ongoing damage fails to stack.
From my reading of that rule, if you start your turn in the space of two fire elementals, you'd take the initial damage twice. Then, if you move out of that space and start your turn on fire, you'd only take the ongoing damage once.
Ongoing effects have ways that they end. For example, the fire form trait's "on fire" damage says that someone can douse you. The initial damage is instantaneous, because it has no duration. For spirit guardians, of course the spell has a duration, but that does not mean that all of its effects also have that same duration. The damage effect from the spell is instantaneous, since it provides no duration (you are not "on spirit fire" for the duration) or way of ending its continued effect.
I will not pretend that I have sifted through 8 pages of this topic, so forgive me if this particular argument has been hashed out. I also realize that the obvious flaw to this is that the rule in the PHB mentions only "durations of those spells," implying that the duration of an effect has no bearing -- though again, the DMG rule has different wording stating that it is the duration of the effect that matters.
Quoting Wolfs reference:
Combining Game Effects
Different game features can affect a target at the same time. But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap. For example, if a target is ignited by a fire elemental’s Fire Form trait, the ongoing fire damage doesn’t increase if the burning target is subjected to that trait again. Game features include spells, class features, feats, racial traits, monster abilities, and magic items. See the related rule in the “Combining Magical Effects” section of chapter 10 in the Player’s Handbook.
Spirit Guardians has both an intitial (per turn) damage and an ongoing effect, just like the quoted ability, so I think it’s viable to say only the ongoing effect is not stacked based on this similar rule in the DMG
Specific over general. That covers general “game effects,” but the PHB covers specific “spell effects.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Right, and you are perfectly correct to point out that the DMG is not only more specific in how it describes the rule, but more specific in naming that it applies to spells as well as other game features.
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
Nowhere in that rule you quoted does it say anything about being affected by two different Fire Elementals both using Fire Form on the same target on the same turn. It says that if a target is affected by Fire Form multiple times that it doesn’t suffer more ongoing damage. That’s just saying that if the same elemental uses the same ability on the same target more than 1ce (like 2 turns in a row), that the ongoing effects are not additive.
The PHB is more specific in precluding multiple castings of the same spell from overlapping effects.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
More seriously though, the sentence in the PHB does revolve around effects as well, but it uses pronouns that you can only guess at the meaning of. Is "their durations" in the relevant sentence referring to effect or spell durations? That is a question we have some specific guidance on from the DMG. It says that it is the effect's duration that matters.
Nowhere in that rule you quoted does it say anything about being affected by two different Fire Elementals both using Fire Form on the same target on the same turn. It says that if a target is affected by Fire Form multiple times that it doesn’t suffer more ongoing damage. That’s just saying that if the same elemental uses the same ability on the same target more than 1ce (like 2 turns in a row), that the ongoing effects are not additive.
The PHB is more specific in precluding multiple castings of the same spell from overlapping effects.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I completely agree. Ongoing effects do not stack. What it does show is that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.
It's like you didn't think about the post because you already know what answer you want.
No, I thought about it.
I just don’t think that it shows “that it is the duration of the effect that matters. Spirit guardians damage is not dealt from an ongoing effect. It is instantaneous.”
What I think it shows is that if the same Fire Elemental uses the same ability on the same target 2 or more times in a combat that it cannot make that target “more on fire” than it did the first time.
And the damage dealt by Spirit Guardians is instantaneous. That doesn’t matter, because it is being caused by an ongoing effect, the ongoing effect is the presence of those spirits that are in that AoE. The ongoing effect that gets canceled by the second casting is those spirits existing in that area at that time. If there is only one set of spirits in that area (because the ongoing effect of two castings of the same spell don’t stack), then they aren’t there to do the damage.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
If the spirit
I'm not sure what to disagree with here. As far as the text of the rule, that's literally what it says("while the durations of the effects overlap"), so...
Again. the fire form trait has several parts, including two sources of damage. you are beholden to the initial damage each time it is applied to you because it is instantaneous. Only the ongoing damage fails to stack.
And this is where you are reading into the rule something that is not written. The rule doesn't say that the newer one overwrites the older one. Just that the effects do not stack while the durations of the effects overlap.
But the PHB example is not simultaneous either...it references Bless, which cannot be cast simultaneously (per Xanathar's). In both cases you have examples applied one after the other, whether on different turns, the same turn or in the same (near) instant is irrelevant. The only common thread between both is that the ongoing effects are not duplicated. (Bless only produces an ongoing effect (advantage on rolls during the duration), and Fire Form produces both an ongoing effect (you are ignited and on fire) and an instant effect (you take damage when you start turns next to the creature or when you move next to the creature)). The DMG ruling illustrates that the instant damage is not subjected to the rule on combined effects because it isn't mentioned, and by the wording is actually intentionally excluded because the excluded damage indicated is specific to the "ignited" section of the rule
I think where the issue here is is that there are two "effects" of spirit guardians; the aura of spirits, and the slowing effect on others. The aura causes damage to others, but the effect is focused on the caster (as the target of the spell is "Self"). The secondary slowing effect is focused on others due to the spells wording. the combining magical effects rule says that a target subjected to identical spell effects at the same time is not subjected to amplified (or stacked) effects, but the example rulings in both the PHB and the DMG indicate that the ruling applies only to effects 1) focused on the target and 2) that are ongoing so as to overlap. in the Fire Form example, the Fire Form aura is focused on the elemental (but causes damage to others) but the wording of the ability makes the secondary effect "the target is on fire" and its subsequent damage, focused on the other creature. similarly, the Spirit guardians aura is ongoing and causes damage to others, but is focused on the caster not those others. The slowing effect is specifically focused on the others per the spells wording (creatures in the aura have their speed reduced by half).
So, the appropriate ruling is that a caster could not cast spirit guardians on himself twice and expect two saving throws or rolls from creatures in the aura, but two creatures casting the effect once on themselves and whose AoEs overlap could expect that for a creature in both areas, as the effect is targeting themselves once each. The slowing effect, as it is focused on the other creature, would not stack in either case.
The effect in question is not the damage itself, but the existence of the spirits that could potentially deal the damage. The duration of their existence is not instantaneous, but Concentration. As long as the caster maintains concentration on the spell, the effect of those spirits existing in that space is what is at question. Since two separate batches of spirits cannot stack, therefore one group of spirits is not there to deal any damage. No second batch of spirits, no second batch of damage.
Not “including two sources of damage” as you state. Nowhere does that rule mention the presence of two separate elementals. It is a ruling about two instances of damage from the same source, not specifically two separate sources. That’s where you’re reading into the rules.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
on my post above, I am aware that spirit guardians is a concentration spell, but the rule is still relevant. a spell like mirror image is not, and the effect is targeted towards self, and the effect affects others (by potentially changing their attack targets), but the same rules apply.