Can you twin spell hex

[Sir cryosin]

As the title say can you. And can you move them around also. I know you wouldn't be able to with one bonus action. Or can you?

[Naanomi]

Don't see why not, but as you said it would take two bonus actions to move them both, and they wouldn't stack on one target

[DracoKnight]

As the title say can you. And can you move them around also. I know you wouldn't be able to with one bonus action. Or can you?

This is an interesting question...I'm AFB, but I don't think you can by RAW...however, as a DM, I'd probably let you...

[MaxWilson]

After reviewing the text of both Hex and Twin spell, it appears to me that you can. And I'd let you move both Hexes as well, one bonus action per move.

But you can't usefully stack them both on the same target.

[Pex]

How coincidental. My sorcerer has Magic Initiate, I took Hex precisely to twin it, and I just discussed this with the DM. Yes, you can do it. You can move both with one bonus action if both targets are at 0 hit points because it's one spell that just happens to have two targets. However, you can't stack them against the same opponent as the rules clarify you can't combine the effects of the same spell.

[Foxhound438]

you super can. Hex is a spell that has one target.

If either die, you have the option for the duration to select a new target. This works with both. However, you can't re-target both with one bonus action, as the spell's ability is that once an afflicted creature dies, you can select a new creature during any subsequent turn, meaning not more than one, as a bonus action.

That said I'm not sure how useful that would be outside of your plan specifically being to twincast spells every turn, but your resources would dry up pretty fast; maybe instead of hex twin a hunter's mark as a Ranger 11/ sorc x, and make use of volley or whirlwind attacks.

However, both hex effects are probably better off being used to focus down a single target. Kill the one thing faster, save your SP to quicken eldritch blasts seems a lot better.

[RickAllison]

you super can. Hex is a spell that has one target.

If either die, you have the option for the duration to select a new target. This works with both. However, you can't re-target both with one bonus action, as the spell's ability is that once an afflicted creature dies, you can select a new creature during any subsequent turn, meaning not more than one, as a bonus action.

That said I'm not sure how useful that would be outside of your plan specifically being to twincast spells every turn, but your resources would dry up pretty fast; maybe instead of hex twin a hunter's mark as a Ranger 11/ sorc x, and make use of volley or whirlwind attacks.

However, both hex effects are probably better off being used to focus down a single target. Kill the one thing faster, save your SP to quicken eldritch blasts seems a lot better.

Note that you can't double up on one target with the same spell. To my consternation. It would be so much more entertaining to combine my Enlarge spell with a Potion of Growth to get to Huge size...

The greatest use I see for this is the ability to switch targets. Every bonus action that doesn't have to be spent switching targets between attacks is one more being used in another fashion.

[RSP]

As stated, you can twin Hex but can't double up Hex on one target which makes it much less useful to twin. Since Hex only works with attacks, using AoE spells are out as saving throws aren't attacks. So you'd have to split up your attacks on seperate targets which, as stated previous, is generally less effective than Hexing one target, hitting it until dead, and switching to a new target via bonus action.

[Sir cryosin]

A lot of people for get it second effect. Which in right situations is very nice. As initiative is a dex check not throw so that two people with disadvantage on initiative.
Edited: your grappling buddy would love if you were giveing as many people disadvantage on str as well.

[Giant2005]

You can't twin Hex. The errata changed Twin to require that the spell "must be incapable of targeting more than one creature". A single casting of Hex can target plenty of creatures before its duration expires.

[Pex]

As stated, you can twin Hex but can't double up Hex on one target which makes it much less useful to twin. Since Hex only works with attacks, using AoE spells are out as saving throws aren't attacks. So you'd have to split up your attacks on seperate targets which, as stated previous, is generally less effective than Hexing one target, hitting it until dead, and switching to a new target via bonus action.

As part of Magic Initiate Feat I also took Eldritch Blast so targeting two opponents will not be an issue. It will not always be the best option since sometimes I need to focus fire, but it doesn't have be the best all the time. It's enough I have the option for when it would be a good thing to do. Since Hex is a Warlock spell it would be unusual for a Sorcerer who somehow gets Hex also does not get Eldritch Blast. Twin Hex also helps with Scorching Ray, and I think Magic Missile.

Ooh! I wasn't even considering having Magic Missile for my Sorcerer as a matter of personal preference, but if each Missile gets its own d6 Hex damage, regardless of twin, I just may change out a 1st level spell for it as I'm leveling up now for when I really need to nova on someone. Have I just discovered for myself an Awesome Combo?! Is Magic Missile + Hex as juicy as it sounds? :smallbiggrin:

[Arial Black]

As part of Magic Initiate Feat I also took Eldritch Blast so targeting two opponents will not be an issue. It will not always be the best option since sometimes I need to focus fire, but it doesn't have be the best all the time. It's enough I have the option for when it would be a good thing to do. Since Hex is a Warlock spell it would be unusual for a Sorcerer who somehow gets Hex also does not get Eldritch Blast. Twin Hex also helps with Scorching Ray, and I think Magic Missile.

Ooh! I wasn't even considering having Magic Missile for my Sorcerer as a matter of personal preference, but if each Missile gets its own d6 Hex damage, regardless of twin, I just may change out a 1st level spell for it as I'm leveling up now for when I really need to nova on someone. Have I just discovered for myself an Awesome Combo?! Is Magic Missile + Hex as juicy as it sounds? :smallbiggrin:

Hex won't work with magic missile because hex only adds to damage of 'attacks', i.e. 'attack rolls'.

[Naanomi]

You can't twin Hex. The errata changed Twin to require that the spell "must be incapable of targeting more than one creature". A single casting of Hex can target plenty of creatures before its duration expires.
Hex can't target more than one creature... it can happen to move later to another creature, but it only ever targets the one.

[RSP]

Giant2005, interesting point about the multiple targets. I'd lean towards allowing it because it never targets more than a single target but a good point to keep in mind that it's up for table, table-to-table.

Cryosin, I wasn't thinking about the second effect, and yes it could be very useful in that regard.

[the secret fire]

Hex can't target more than one creature... it can happen to move later to another creature, but it only ever targets the one.

Yeah, I think this is the "correct" reading of the rules. I would rule that Hex can be twinned, though I honestly can't fathom why one would want to outside of some very specific situations where you're trying to nova down two equally strong targets at the same time with multiple rounds of follow up twinned scorching rays, or what have you.

[RSP]

Pex, not to ruin your fun, but I'm not sure you can twin a Magic Initiate spell, per RAW.

Technically, Magic Initiate gives you a 1/day casting of a 1st level spell, it does not give you a spell slot. Per my understanding, and I could be missing a ruling, MI learned spells can only be used with other spell slots if the spell chosen is something that's on one of your classes spell list.

As Hex is not on the Sorcerer's list, it can not be cast using spell slots, barring a 1 level dip into Warlock. And since it's not being cast using a spell slot, I don't think it can be twinned.

Obviously, this involves a few different rulings and is a little convoluted, and I'm sure many DMs would still allow it as it's still using up a limited resource and isn't in anyway broken or overpowered (or even optimal), but I believe that would be the RAW of it.

[Pex]

Hex won't work with magic missile because hex only adds to damage of 'attacks', i.e. 'attack rolls'.

Yeah, I read up on the spells when I got home. It did sound too good to be true.

Darn. :smallsmile:


Pex, not to ruin your fun, but I'm not sure you can twin a Magic Initiate spell, per RAW.

Technically, Magic Initiate gives you a 1/day casting of a 1st level spell, it does not give you a spell slot. Per my understanding, and I could be missing a ruling, MI learned spells can only be used with other spell slots if the spell chosen is something that's on one of your classes spell list.

As Hex is not on the Sorcerer's list, it can not be cast using spell slots, barring a 1 level dip into Warlock. And since it's not being cast using a spell slot, I don't think it can be twinned.

Obviously, this involves a few different rulings and is a little convoluted, and I'm sure many DMs would still allow it as it's still using up a limited resource and isn't in anyway broken or overpowered (or even optimal), but I believe that would be the RAW of it.

You learn the spell. The feat gives you one "free" casting per long rest. You can cast the spell using spell slots if you have them.

[Cybren]

Yeah, I read up on the spells when I got home. It did sound too good to be true.

Darn. :smallsmile:



You learn the spell. The feat gives you one "free" casting per long rest. You can cast the spell using spell slots if you have them.

If you have them and the spell was acquired by choosing your own class.

[Pex]

If you have them and the spell was acquired by choosing your own class.

The feat specifically tells you you learn the spell.

[Cybren]

The feat specifically tells you you learn the spell.
You're certainly free to rule it that way, and I don't actually think it particularly unbalances anything to play it that way either, however

If you have spell slots, can you use them to cast the 1st-level spell you learn with the Magic Initiate feat?
Yes, but only if the class you pick for the feat is one of your classes. For example, if you pick sorcerer and you are a sorcerer, the Spellcasting feature for that class tells you that you can use your spell slots to cast the sorcerer spells you know, so you can use your spell slots to cast the 1st-level sorcerer spell you learn from Magic Initiate. Similarly, if you are a wizard and pick that class for the feat, you learn a 1st-level wizard spell, which you could add to your spellbook and subsequently prepare.

In short, you must follow your character’s normal spellcasting rules, which determine whether you can expend spell slots on the 1st-level spell you learn from Magic Initiate.

[RickAllison]

You're certainly free to rule it that way, and I don't actually think it particularly unbalances anything to play it that way either, however

Disclaimer: What follows is my fluff, drawn from the mechanics and some fluff of the books. It has no backing other than the mechanics already there.

Casting through Magic Initiate is a different beast than casting other leveled spells. Rather than casting through an extraordinary natural reserve (like sorcerers) or a developed reserve (wizards, clerics, etc.), it is actually drawing magic from the source of those, that base connection to the arcane and divine. This is raw magic, present in every living thing, but it requires training to tap and is very limited. The training to tap into this can also be used to tap into other reserves if similar methods are in place (a Warlock who learns to tap into Armor of Agathys through MI can easily adapt that to his pact magic), but it is far more difficult to create that connection when one doesn't have the appropriate training to access other parts of magic.

A good comparison could be coding, with spells being sequences and languages being the different casting methods. One could certainly learn to create certain sequences in a language they don't know through sheer training, but they can't apply it within a larger code because they do not know the language to make the transitions. Now someone can learn the transitions (taking class levels to become a certain caster/caster derivative) and now they can use what they already know of that sequence in a larger body of code.

[Dalebert]

If either die, you have the option for the duration to select a new target. This works with both. However, you can't re-target both with one bonus action, as the spell's ability is that once an afflicted creature dies, you can select a new creature during any subsequent turn, meaning not more than one, as a bonus action.

That's what the spell says because it normally only targets one creature. Twinning gives it two targets so by the same reasoning that it now has the ability to target two instead of just one, you could argue that you can move both with a bonus action, because the effect has been twinned.

That said, there is room for interpretation and I would not argue with a DM who wanted me to move them one at a time. It's not unreasonable. I personally don't see it as a big deal because it seems so very rare that you'd have the opportunity to move them both at once anyway.


That said I'm not sure how useful that would be outside of your plan specifically being to twincast spells every turn, but your resources would dry up pretty fast;

Consider this. A sorlock with draconic origin is adding their charisma bonus to certain cantrips. If you twin hex, you can then twin a cantrip for just 1 point a round and hit twice as many targets getting both hex dmg and cha bonus damage twice. It's actually fairly efficient and a lot of damage for just 1 sorcery point. Even without hex, my twinned Firebolt is competitive with Scorching Ray now that I'm tier 2 and each does 2d10+4. It's two bolts instead of three, but with cha bonus, and for only 1 sorcery point instead of a level 2 spell. With hex, that 2d10+1d6+4 on two targets for a total of 4d10+2d6+8. At tier 3 it will be clearly superior except I can't focus on one target. It has to be split between two. It's also extra opportunities to get the killing blow on something and get my fiend lock temp hp.


The feat specifically tells you you learn the spell.

Crawford disagrees. He only lets you cast it with slots if it's also on a spell list for one of your classes. I would rule this way though because I feel like the feat is a bit weak and it should allow you to know the spell and cast it with slots.

[MeeposFire]

You're certainly free to rule it that way, and I don't actually think it particularly unbalances anything to play it that way either, however

I have always loved how that ruling just makes up rules as he went along. Nothing else in the game works like that so I am not sure how you were supposed to come up with that by the rules. Of course that is why before that ruling no one was advocating that when coming from a RAW standing (they all had either you 1-you knew the spell so you could use it with your spell slots, 2- you can only cast it once period due to the wording regardless of whether it is normally on your list or not to cast it multiple times you would need to choose it as one of your normal choices, or 3- more rarely some said that while prepared casters could only cast it once since they could not prepare the spell but classes like sorcerers could cast it using their slots since they "knew" the spell and they can cast any spell they know using their slots).

[Pex]

Crawford disagrees. He only lets you cast it with slots if it's also on a spell list for one of your classes . . .


Which is stupid because there's no reason to take the feat just to get a spell on your spell list since you can already know it anyway if you wanted it that much. A warrior wants the feat for the cantrips and maybe one first level he really really wants and doesn't mind it's once per long rest. A spellcaster wants the feat to get the first level spell he really wants without having to multiclass. Sorcerers like Hex. Life clerics like Goodberry and Shillelagh is a nice bonus. Wizards maybe don't get much use out of it, but Bless is nice if only for the saving throw bonus and Sacred Flame for when the monster is resistance or immune to their goto attack cantrip or is undead.

[RSP]

I wouldn't charact use it as stupid just because you want it to work different for optimization purposes.

There's plenty of fluff items in D&D that probably seem "stupid" and unoptimized, like Druids not wearing metal armor.

It doesn't mean your table has to rule this way, but they are build into the design of the system.

Take the fluff explanation posted above; that's a great way to look at.

Or, if a wizard is using the feat to take Cleric spells, the name "magic initiate" makes me feel like the new spell isn't like his prepared spells in his spell book, but rather comes from his spiritual side and his participation in a religion; he's s not a full Cleric (that would require multiclassing) but is an initiate in the faith.

Obviously, if at your table you don't like the fluff, change it, but I don't think doing so requires you to think those who abide by it as stupid.

[Pex]

I'm not talking about fluff at all. It is dumb to take the feat for a spell of your own class you could have had anyway if you wanted it that much.

[RSP]

I agree that it doesn't make sense to become an "initiate" in a class you already are beyond that point in, training wise; that is, a 4th level Wizard is already, in my opinion, past just being an initiate in wizardry.

However, if that same Wizard, having strong convictions in a religion, gains a small taste of that religion's power (i.e. the Wizard takes Magic Initiate and chooses the Cleric's spell list), he may later decide to dedicate himself more fully to that religion at a later time (i.e. Multiclass into Cleric), and, in doing so, has greater access to the small taste of power his believe previously granted him.

The MI feat fully follows the rules of classes and multiclassing. For instance, if you're a Wizard and choose MI with the Cleric spell list, you use your Wisdom as your casting stat.

I don't believe MI was ever intended to be a feat for just picking up spells outside of a casters normal spell list, and the rules, and Crawford's ruling reflect that.

[RickAllison]

I agree that it doesn't make sense to become an "initiate" in a class you already are beyond that point in, training wise; that is, a 4th level Wizard is already, in my opinion, past just being an initiate in wizardry.

However, if that same Wizard, having strong convictions in a religion, gains a small taste of that religion's power (i.e. the Wizard takes Magic Initiate and chooses the Cleric's spell list), he may later decide to dedicate himself more fully to that religion at a later time (i.e. Multiclass into Cleric), and, in doing so, has greater access to the small taste of power his believe previously granted him.

The MI feat fully follows the rules of classes and multiclassing. For instance, if you're a Wizard and choose MI with the Cleric spell list, you use your Wisdom as your casting stat.

I don't believe MI was ever intended to be a feat for just picking up spells outside of a casters normal spell list, and the rules, and Crawford's ruling reflect that.

Well said. However, how would it impact balance if we allowed appropriate partial casters to reap similar benefits? Like EKs and ATs can use it to learn new wizard spells, Paladins can use it for cleric, and rangers can do it with Druid spells.

[RSP]

I don't think it impacts balance at all and believe per RAW, that's how it already works (EK and AT use the Wizard's list as is, so it's already covered). Basically this makes MI very similar to how Martial Adept works if you already have maneuvers.

[RickAllison]

I don't think it impacts balance at all and believe per RAW, that's how it already works (EK and AT use the Wizard's list as is, so it's already covered). Basically this makes MI very similar to how Martial Adept works if you already have maneuvers.

Oh good. Paladins didn't seem to get that much (damage spells and Sanctusry, mostly). Rangers seem to get quite the variety of useful spells, but I don't exactly feel bad about giving them a nice boost for Spellcasting.