Magic Missile damage rolls, vs previous editions

[Ellisthion]

Preface:

As you may know, people have been making the argument that Magic Missile is rolled as a single d4, which is then re-used for each dart. This reading is particularly pushed as a way of loopholing the errata on Empowered Evocation, and when pushed on it, Crawford acknowledged it does read that way.

Personally, I find it pretty weird to use the damage-dice-reuse rule on this, as it's really intended for AoE stuff, and the loopholing annoys me, but that's not the point.

The question:

In previous editions, people unambiguously rolled handfuls of d4s without question, and it was really important for metamagic and so on.

Is there some quirk in the 5E rules that is making this single-roll reading plausible, when in previous editions it wasn't? Glancing over the spell descriptions, I don't see how anything has really changed. What am I missing? Why is this argument happening now after multiple editions of consistent behaviour?

I'm not asking what the "correct" 5E reading is. I'm asking, why is this even being discussed, when earlier editions were apparently clear?

EDIT:

For reference, the arguments are based around this:


If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them.

And Crawford thing is here:

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/17/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/

[Millface]

Where is the damage dice reuse rule? Is that in the PhB or DMG? Are we supposed to be allowed to roll 1d6 and multiply the number shown by 8 for a fireball instead of rolling all 8 dice? I've never seen that. If it's in the cannon somewhere I'll read it and give my two cents on the RAW or RAI involved.

[Ellisthion]

Where is the damage dice reuse rule?

Sorry, you're right, should have cited that. I believe the line people refer to is this, phb196:

"
If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them.
"

And Crawford thing is here:

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/17/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/

[nickl_2000]

Sorry, you're right, should have cited that. I believe the line people refer to is this, phb196:

"
If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them.
"

And Crawford thing is here:

https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/17/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/

You are misinterpreting this quote. This doesn't mean that you roll 1d4 and multiply it. It means that when you throw down an AoE spell you only roll the damage once and apply it to all those effected.

Example: I toss out a level 3 fireball and hit 4 targets. I roll 8d6 and get a total of 30 damage. Each person that was effected by the fireball takes 30 damage and can reduce that 30 damage by making a save.
As Example: I'm 11th level and I hit someone with chill touch. I roll a total of 3d8, so I actually roll all 3 dice to get my total.

[Blacky the Blackball]

Where is the damage dice reuse rule? Is that in the PhB or DMG? Are we supposed to be allowed to roll 1d6 and multiply the number shown by 8 for a fireball instead of rolling all 8 dice? I've never seen that. If it's in the cannon somewhere I'll read it and give my two cents on the RAW or RAI involved.

It's not about rolling 1d6 and multiplying by eight for a fireball. It's about whether you roll 8d6 once and apply it to everyone in the fireball or whether you roll 8d6 separately for each person in the fireball.

The PHB says (p196):

If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them.

For some things - like fireball (which is actually used as the example) - this is clear. But for others it's less clear. Here are some scenarios:

1) Three people are in the area of a Cone of Cold spell. The spell hits them all together, so you roll once and they all take the same damage.

2) Two people are hit by the two beams of an Eldritch Blast. Since you roll the attacks for each beam separately, each beam counts as a separate effect and has its damage rolled separately.

3) You have cast a Wall of Fire, and two people each pass through it on their respective turns. Although it's the same wall, the targets aren't being damaged by it at the same time, so they each roll damage separately.

4) You have cast Spirit Guardians, and two goblins and a hobgoblin are in the area at the start of their respective turns. Since the goblins share an initiative and go at the same time (PHB p189) they are being damaged by the same spell at the same time and you will roll once and they both take the same damage. The hobgoblin has a separate initiative to the goblins, and therefore isn't being damaged at the same time and you roll separately for its damage at the start of its turn.

5) You cast Magic Missile and target two missiles at a bugbear and one at his pet wolf. This is the one that people disagree about. Each missile does 1d4 damage, but since you don't need to resolve attack rolls for each one does each missile count as a separate effect or are they all the same effect affecting multiple creatures? I (and the majority) favour the former interpretation and roll each one separately. The latter interpretation is favoured by some people because it allows things that boost damage on an effect to work on all the missiles together rather than just one of them.

[Ellisthion]

You are misinterpreting this quote. This doesn't mean that you roll 1d4 and multiply it.

Which is my interpretation also. But people ARE applying this to Magic Missile and I'm trying to understand why, and what if anything about 5E is causing people to read it this way.

[Blacky the Blackball]

Which is my interpretation also. But people ARE applying this to Magic Missile and I'm trying to understand why, and what if anything about 5E is causing people to read it this way.

I think it's the lack of attack rolls and the fact that the spell description specifically says that the missiles strike simultaneously.

If someone were rolling for each missile to see if it hits, then psychologically it would feel like each missile was a separate effect. But because there's no attack rolls - you simply apply the damage to the multiple targets simultaneously - it feels like it's a single effect targetting multiple creatures, so p196 should apply.

Either that or they're just powergaming.

[Pelle]

Which is my interpretation also. But people ARE applying this to Magic Missile and I'm trying to understand why, and what if anything about 5E is causing people to read it this way.

Are people doing that? That's your claim.

Each dart of magic missile only hits one target, so there's no reason to consider this.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Are people doing that? That's your claim.

Each dart of magic missile only hits one target, so there's no reason to consider this.

But the contention is that magic missile (the spell as a whole) affects multiple targets.

From my point of view

Rolling multiple dice
* Rolling more dice is fun.
* Keeping track of who gets what dice is slower (not by much, but it's slower).

Rolling one die
* quick and easy
* Less dice = less fun.

Pick one, whatever's more important for your table.

[Ellisthion]

Are people doing that? That's your claim

Yes. I wouldn't be making this post if people weren't arguing about it. Just... just let it go, okay? I CAN prove it but srsly that's not the point right now. :-(

My question again is: in previous editions nobody argued for rolling one d4 for magic missile. Can anyone see anything in 5E which explains this argument appearing? The wording all seems the same to me. As far as I can tell, people are only caring because of the implications for Empowered Evocation.

[MaxWilson]

Except that even people who like rolling dice don't enjoy rolling lots of d4s. :-P


Which is my interpretation also. But people ARE applying this to Magic Missile and I'm trying to understand why, and what if anything about 5E is causing people to read it this way.

It's because of the "simultaneous" clause in Magic Missile, as well as thinking through corner cases like "what if you allocate one missile each to three creatures and two missiles to a fourth creature?" Because 5E makes it canonical that simultaneous AoE damage must be rolled only once and applied equally to all creatures (modified by saving throws), Crawford's reading that there is only one Magic Missile roll, period, is weird but plausible.

It really shouldn't matter how you roll damage, but 5E has so many features that interact with "one roll per turn" that it winds up mattering more than it should (from a game design standpoint).

[Tanarii]

4) You have cast Spirit Guardians, and two goblins and a hobgoblin are in the area at the start of their respective turns. Since the goblins share an initiative and go at the same time (PHB p189) they are being damaged by the same spell at the same time and you will roll once and they both take the same damage. The hobgoblin has a separate initiative to the goblins, and therefore isn't being damaged at the same time and you roll separately for its damage at the start of its turn.
Individual goblins acting on the same initiative still have individual turns, in any order, that they must complete before the next goblin acts. So they are not at the same time.

[Ellisthion]

Because 5E makes it canonical that simultaneous AoE damage must be rolled only once and applied equally to all creatures

Hmmm. So in 3.5 (for example), rolling only a single damage roll for Fireball wasn't canonically RAW? And that's why we're seeing this now? Wait, no, that can't be right, surely the interacting with metamagic in 3.5 necessitated a single roll? Or not?

[Thrudd]

I would think that because the spell specifies that there are separate missiles, you are clearly meant to roll a die for each missile. It says each missile hits a creature, and a missile does 1d4+1. If it was meant to be one damage roll applied to multiple targets, that would have been worded differently- like "3 targets take 1d4+1 damage from force missiles. Casting with higher level slot lets you add 1 additional target per level over 1st."

[Tanarii]

Hmmm. So in 3.5 (for example), rolling only a single damage roll for Fireball wasn't canonically RAW? And that's why we're seeing this now? Wait, no, that can't be right, surely the interacting with metamagic in 3.5 necessitated a single roll? Or not?
It's the interaction of the MM specifically saying "simlultaneous"" with the rule for hitting multiple targets that is the basis for the argument.

Personally I don't buy into it. It seems like a stretch reading of the MM spell.

[Garfunion]

“You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several.”

How are players confused with this? Each dart deals 1d4+1 force damage. So each d4 represents a dart.

I target two creatures, my 2 blue d4s target creature A and my red d4 target creature B. I roll all dice at once.

Unless my table(s) and I have been interpreting it wrong all along.

[Ellisthion]

It's the interaction of the MM specifically saying "simlultaneous"" with the rule for hitting multiple targets that is the basis for the argument.

Personally I don't buy into it. It seems like a stretch reading of the MM spell.

Ah, I see it now. The technicality of the wording around the damage rule (which is for any 'simultaneous' damage whereas previous editions discussed more in context of AoE spells), combined with the 'simultaneous' wording on Magic Missile, which itself was only worded that way to prevent weird consequences from multiple hits.

I very much agree that it's a stretch.


How are players confused with this? Each dart deals 1d4+1 force damage. So each d4 represents a dart.

Yeah, it seems like solid consensus here on GitP that you roll a d4 per dart, and the alternate ruling is pretty weird.

I originally posted this because there was a discussion on reddit where the consensus was quite the reverse, which is rather interesting. I'm wondering what this says about the demographics.

[Garfunion]

Yeah, it seems like solid consensus here on GitP that you roll a d4 per dart, and the alternate ruling is pretty weird.

I originally posted this because there was a discussion on reddit where the consensus was quite the reverse, which is rather interesting. I'm wondering what this says about the demographics.
Thinking about it more. I could allow the caster to roll all the d4 dice first. Then allow the caster to choose which creature(s) gets hit by which d4 dart. This gives the caster more control of the damage hitting a creature(s).
But still each dart will only deal d4+1 damage.

[Erys]

As has been mentioned: technically since Magic Missile can strike multiple opponents (instantly and at the same time, like a Fireball) you are supposed to just roll 1d4+1 (plus mods, if any) and then adjudicate the damage per bolt in accordance to what was hit.

But, its more fun to roll a fist full of d4's so I usually don't follow that rule.

Edit to add- I think in all my years of playing/running D&D (which is a lot), I have seen someone use Magic Missile to strike more then one opponent less than five times. lol

I am a little curious if anyone actually uses it routinely as a multi-target spell.

[opticalshadow]

The way i rule it, which is the way i have always understood it, AOE spells unless otherwise stated, is one damage roll for everything hit, and you roll the amount of dice equal to the x value xdy+z

For magic missile you roll for each missile created, so a d4 for each missile fired.

I get the argument, i think its a dumb one. I saw crawfords sage advice, which honestly to me doesnt sound right. He refers to pg 196 about damage rolls which state you roll once for a multiple target roll, but if magic missile is effect one target, it doesnt matter if they hit at the exact same time or separately, its still the same single target, so you should roll however many dice you need, not multiply the first roll (which i think is even the only time we have a spell that is even worded like magic missile where it says add a d4 instead of specifically roll a xd4)

In anycase, both RAW and RAI as far as i am concerned follow my logic, but its weird, and poorly worded in this specific case.

[qube]

pfft.
Screw RAW. Magic missles is 3 darts for me.

fixes that 'int to 1 damage roll' hick-up.
And meh, on lvl 2 you get other spells that do 3 rays, so it's not like a lvl 1 spell with 3 attacks* isn't that OP per see

*in the english-sense, not the d&d attack roll sense.

[The Aboleth]

Maybe a stupid question, but...doesn't Magic Missile automatically hit? The spell description doesn't say to make a ranged spell attack, so my understanding was you just rolled damage for each missile.

[Erys]

Maybe a stupid question, but...doesn't Magic Missile automatically hit? The spell description doesn't say to make a ranged spell attack, so my understanding was you just rolled damage for each missile.

It does auto-hit.

[qube]

Maybe a stupid question, but...doesn't Magic Missile automatically hit? The spell description doesn't say to make a ranged spell attack, so my understanding was you just rolled damage for each missile.Yes it automatically hits but technically, it works like a fireball that only affects a fixed number of targets (instead of everyone) and that creatures can be target multiple times.

like a fireball, you roll the damage only once, and then instead of saying "20 damage for all", you go "I rolled 5 damage, so everyone I targetted once get 5, those I targeteed twice get 10, ..."

...

Basically (IMHO) utterly counterintuitive & nonsensical to think of magic missle as an effect like that.

[MaxWilson]

Hmmm. So in 3.5 (for example), rolling only a single damage roll for Fireball wasn't canonically RAW? And that's why we're seeing this now? Wait, no, that can't be right, surely the interacting with metamagic in 3.5 necessitated a single roll? Or not?

I've no idea. I've played AD&D and 5E but nothing in between.

[qube]

Hmmm. So in 3.5 (for example), rolling only a single damage roll for Fireball wasn't canonically RAW? And that's why we're seeing this now? Wait, no, that can't be right, surely the interacting with metamagic in 3.5 necessitated a single roll? Or not?doublechecked. area effects in 3.5 were also 1 roll.

PHB 3.5, p169 (start of chapter 10 magic), has an example of Mialee casting burning hands on 3 centipedes.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

Not sure if anything in 5e is causing people to read it that way or not. Either way I'd argue that they're wrong and it doesn't make sense.

Fireball: One fireball is affecting 13 targets. You don't roll 8d6 13 times because the single fireball is affecting all targets. That's what the rule is for.

Magic Missile: One dart is affecting only one target (3 or more times). You role each separately because each dart is a separate bit of magic.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I originally posted this because there was a discussion on reddit where the consensus was quite the reverse, which is rather interesting. I'm wondering what this says about the demographics.

It says we dem real boys. :smallcool:

Seriously though, come at me reddit...

[MaxWilson]

Not sure if anything in 5e is causing people to read it that way or not. Either way I'd argue that they're wrong and it doesn't make sense.

Fireball: One fireball is affecting 13 targets. You don't roll 8d6 13 times because the single fireball is affecting all targets. That's what the rule is for.

Magic Missile: One dart is affecting only one target (3 or more times). You role each separately because each dart is a separate bit of magic.

What if there are five darts affecting four targets? Roll 1d4+1 and apply to four targets, then roll an extra 1d4+1 and apply to the last target?

I agree that it doesn't make sense. 5E should never have been written in such a way that the way you roll damage is mechanically important.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

What if there are five darts affecting four targets? Roll 1d4+1 and apply to four targets, then roll an extra 1d4+1 and apply to the last target?

I agree that it doesn't make sense. 5E should never have been written in such a way that the way you roll damage is mechanically important.

What's your question? Based on my explanation you would choose your target and how many darts then xd4+x damage. It doesn't matter how many targets you have.

[Erys]

What if there are five darts affecting four targets? Roll 1d4+1 and apply to four targets, then roll an extra 1d4+1 and apply to the last target?

I agree that it doesn't make sense. 5E should never have been written in such a way that the way you roll damage is mechanically important.

By RAW, roll 1d4+1, apply the result once to the four targets who are struck with one bolt, and twice for the enemy hit by two.

In usual practice, roll 1d4+1 for each missile- so goblin A-D get 1d4+1 damage rolled individually and goblin E takes 2d4+2 (also rolled independently).

[Sigreid]

Which is my interpretation also. But people ARE applying this to Magic Missile and I'm trying to understand why, and what if anything about 5E is causing people to read it this way.

My understanding is that it tends to be interpreted this way because the designers wrote the evoker's way of adding Int to spell damage in such a way that you only apply it once per roll. To cover for this and make MM something fun to use with that ability they then came out and said you roll 1d4+1+(intmod) once and apply it to each missile individually.

[Eragon123]

Well, let's say that it's only roll one die.

The Wild Bombardment feature of the Wild Sorcerer would be interesting

Beginning at 18th level, the harmful energy of your spells intensifies. When you roll damage for a spell and roll the highest number possible on any of the dice, choose one of those dice, roll it again and add that roll to the damage. You can use the feature only once per turn.

You could effectively double the damage of the spell. :D

[Kane0]

Players generally like rolling lots of dice. Its part of the appeal.

[Sigreid]

Players generally like rolling lots of dice. Its part of the appeal.

Yep. And it really sucks when you roll a 1 and have to apply it to all missiles.

[BurgerBeast]

The rule is almost certainly supposed to apply only to AoEs such as fireball, as explained by others, because those effects are single effects that strike multiple targets.

I would argue that each missile is a separate magical effect, which would mean that no individual missile targets more than one creature, and therefore you roll for each missile.

I don’t care. I make players roll for each missile. I think the other way is stupid. It’s not relevant to me whether this is a houserule or RAI or RAW. My players can call it whatever they think it is. They still must roll for each missile at my table.

[The Aboleth]

The spell description explicitly says it is 1d4+1 per missile. As such, I have my players roll 1 die per missile. I get the AoE stuff, but Magic Missile never struck me as an AoE spell so I'm confused as to why people are treating it as such?

[guachi]

My understanding is that it tends to be interpreted this way because the designers wrote the evoker's way of adding Int to spell damage in such a way that you only apply it once per roll. To cover for this and make MM something fun to use with that ability they then came out and said you roll 1d4+1+(intmod) once and apply it to each missile individually.

Yes. The ruling, despite being strange, makes a subclass feature more powerful, not less powerful.

[BurgerBeast]

Yes. The ruling, despite being strange, makes a subclass feature more powerful, not less powerful.

What am I missing? I see no mathematical difference.

If you roll 1d4+1+mod once and apply it, or roll 1d4+1+mod per missile, the damage averages out to be the same in the long run.

[qube]

What am I missing? I see no mathematical difference.

If you roll 1d4+1+mod once and apply it, or roll 1d4+1+mod per missile, the damage averages out to be the same in the long run.you get your mod on "1 roll".

if you roll once, and use that result for everyone, everyone gets extra damage
if you roll seperately, and add your mod to 1 of those rolls, only 1 missle does extra damage

ex. Scorching ray is 3 rays, and 3 different rolls - meaning you only get your damage boost to only one of those rolls.

[Ellisthion]

The ruling, despite being strange, makes a subclass feature more powerful, not less powerful.

Which I reckon is the only reason anyone is advocating this strange reading. If there was no benefit, nobody would bother even trying to rules lawyer it.

[Occasional Sage]

I originally posted this because there was a discussion on reddit where the consensus was quite the reverse, which is rather interesting. I'm wondering what this says about the demographics.

If you have a way of teasing out those data, I would be very interested.


As has been mentioned: technically since Magic Missile can strike multiple opponents (instantly and at the same time, like a Fireball) you are supposed to just roll 1d4+1 (plus mods, if any) and then adjudicate the damage per bolt in accordance to what was hit.

But, its more fun to roll a fist full of d4's so I usually don't follow that rule.

Edit to add- I think in all my years of playing/running D&D (which is a lot), I have seen someone use Magic Missile to strike more then one opponent less than five times. lol

I am a little curious if anyone actually uses it routinely as a multi-target spell.

When I played 3.P I did. Pathfinder had a metamagic called Toppling Spell (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/metamagic-feats/toppling-spell-metamagic/); Toppling Magic Missile used a 2nd level slot to make a trip attempt against every target. That was money in the bank with my melee-heavy group.

[Erys]

When I played 3.P I did. Pathfinder had a metamagic called Toppling Spell (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/metamagic-feats/toppling-spell-metamagic/); Toppling Magic Missile used a 2nd level slot to make a trip attempt against every target. That was money in the bank with my melee-heavy group.

Nice!

Hadn't heard of that feat, makes multi-targeting Magic Missile so worth it though.

[MrStabby]

I have had some experience of magic missile vs multiple targets. It was against a temple full of clerics, all heavily armoured and all with concentration spells up.

As for the rules question- I have always treated it as multiple rolls. It never occurred to me to do otherwise. Looking at the text quoted though I am shifting to the idea of it being a single roll.

[The Aboleth]

I have had some experience of magic missile vs multiple targets. It was against a temple full of clerics, all heavily armoured and all with concentration spells up.

My players often split up magic missiles, too, usually when there are multiple enemies who have low HP remaining.


As for the rules question- I have always treated it as multiple rolls. It never occurred to me to do otherwise. Looking at the text quoted though I am shifting to the idea of it being a single roll.

What specifically about the wording is making you change your mind? The spell description says "per missile" so I don't understand how it could be anything but multiple rolls.

[MrStabby]

What specifically about the wording is making you change your mind? The spell description says "per missile" so I don't understand how it could be anything but multiple rolls.

The fact that it is one spell that does damage to multiple enemies. I had assumed that the rule was only for area of effect spells, but seeing it quoted here has made me realise that it doesn't exclude multi missiles or other simultaneous sources of damage. The fact that is says "per missile" doesn't seem particularly relevant to me - determine damage per missile as a single roll then add up missiles.

[EggKookoo]

The fact that it is one spell that does damage to multiple enemies. I had assumed that the rule was only for area of effect spells, but seeing it quoted here has made me realise that it doesn't exclude multi missiles or other simultaneous sources of damage. The fact that is says "per missile" doesn't seem particularly relevant to me - determine damage per missile as a single roll then add up missiles.

I was going to argue this, but you know... I'm not entirely sure you're wrong. I've been having my players roll per missile forever but I'm wondering if I should change that.

Also: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/17/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/

RAW indeed is one die, multiplied.

This has some interesting implications. It makes MM more swingy -- a lot more, especially at higher levels. It de-averages the damage and now it's more all-or-nothing.

I may experiment with this and see how it goes. I have a 3rd level Sorc going through Pandelver right now.

[The Aboleth]

I don't know. I still feel like the "spirit" of the AoE description is to account for things like the "splash damage" of a fireball, but spells with explicitly separate effects (like multiple darts for Magic Missile) should be rolled separately. That being said, I don't think it's outright ridiculous to go with the AoE interpretation. I'll still have my players roll one die per dart using Magic Missile, though...it just feels "right" to me, personally.

[Sigreid]

I was going to argue this, but you know... I'm not entirely sure you're wrong. I've been having my players roll per missile forever but I'm wondering if I should change that.

Also: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/17/magic-missile-do-you-roll-the-same-d4-for-all-darts/

RAW indeed is one die, multiplied.

This has some interesting implications. It makes MM more swingy -- a lot more, especially at higher levels. It de-averages the damage and now it's more all-or-nothing.

I may experiment with this and see how it goes. I have a 3rd level Sorc going through Pandelver right now.

I would say that if you permit any damage modifiers that apply to apply to each die, there is not reason not to just roll each die independently. Over time it should work out the same either way. If you don't allow the damage modifiers to each die, then most of the time, starting at about level 5, it will be out damaged by a cantrip. That doesn't seem right, even with the auto hit.

[EggKookoo]

I would say that if you permit any damage modifiers that apply to apply to each die, there is not reason not to just roll each die independently. Over time it should work out the same either way. If you don't allow the damage modifiers to each die, then most of the time, starting at about level 5, it will be out damaged by a cantrip. That doesn't seem right, even with the auto hit.

But the damage modifier is the same per dart, so why does that make a difference? Maybe I'm just not getting what you mean.

[Sigreid]

But the damage modifier is the same per dart, so why does that make a difference? Maybe I'm just not getting what you mean.

The way the rules are written, unless there's multiple attack rolls, spell modifier damage is per target and not per beam, projectile, etc.

[MrStabby]

Well the downside of this is that it kind of screws my plan for a hexblade arcana cleric. Hexblade curse with magic missile had seemed pretty fun.

[EggKookoo]

The way the rules are written, unless there's multiple attack rolls, spell modifier damage is per target and not per beam, projectile, etc.

You're saying if I cast MM and shoot 3 darts at a target, I roll 1d4, multiply the result by 3 (for the 3 darts), then add 1? As opposed to rolling 1d4+1 and multiplying that by 3?

[MrStabby]

You're saying if I cast MM and shoot 3 darts at a target, I roll 1d4, multiply the result by 3 (for the 3 darts), then add 1? As opposed to rolling 1d4+1 and multiplying that by 3?

I think it is d4, multiply by three then add 3.

[EggKookoo]

I think it is d4, multiply by three then add 3.

Ok, so help clarify? If I shoot three darts, two at one target and one at another target, what do I roll? Using the (apparently RAW) method of roll-then-multiply, it seems like I would roll 1d4+1, double it, apply that to the first target, then roll 1d4+1 and apply that to the second target. Is that right?

[MrStabby]

That's my (new) reading.

[Danielqueue1]

I personally feel the intent of the whole Simultaneous hitting for magic missile is so that a player couldn't proc multiple affects off of hitting a creature with multiple hits from magic missile. so a creature with bestow curse on it (+1d8) would take 3d4+3+1d8 instead of 3d4+3d8+3 from a magic missile. and because the damage is simultaneous, a creature would only have to make a single concentration save vs the damage. and a player couldn't target a creature with a missile, find out if it killed it, then decided whether to target it with another. these are IMHO reasonable things to restrict.

I understand the interpretation of it targeting multiple creatures therefore counts for the single roll rule, but using that interpretation, you would roll a different number of dice depending on whether you targeted more than 1 creature. a fifth level magic missile against 1 target would thus deal 7d4+7 force damage but a fifth level magic missile where all but one of the darts struck one creature and one struck someone else would thus target multiple creatures and thus be handled with a single die roll. (dealing) (1d4+1)*6 to the main target.

I understand how people can choose to rule it that way, especially when they can take advantage of a certain UA subclass that would make 2 castings of magic missile a day absurdly powerful because of it. But that is not how I would rule it at my table.

regardless of Sage Advice. I do not feel like changing the way a spell fundamentally operates based on whether it targets more than one creature at the time of casting is reasonable.

[qube]

Ok, so help clarify? If I shoot three darts, two at one target and one at another target, what do I roll? Using the (apparently RAW) method of roll-then-multiply, it seems like I would roll 1d4+1, double it, apply that to the first target, then roll 1d4+1 and apply that to the second target. Is that right?nope.


> Magic Missile: Do you roll the same d4 for all darts, or one d4 per dart?

Magic missile. RAW: You roll 1 damage die (see "Damage Rolls," PH, 196). RAI: It doesn't matter; you choose.
-- Sage Advice, Jeremy Crawford Sept 9 2016

If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the sam e time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell’s damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.
-- PHB 196

This means - according to RAW (which IMHO I find stupid and refuse to follow, but my oppinion =/= RAW), that if you have a lvl 10 evocation wizard, that has


you can add your Intelligence modifier (minimum of +1) to the damage roll of any wizard evocation spell that you cast. The damage bonus applies to one damage roll of a spell, not multiple rolls.

and have Int 18. You attack 2 force-resistant monsters with magic missle (splitting the three missles 2 / 1 ), you
roll a d4.
(suppose it results in a '4')
you add 1 (as magic missle does 1d4+1) and add 4 (as per damage bonus to one damage roll)
(resulting in 9)
the darts get divided under the monsters
(one monster gets 2 darts of 9 force damage, the other 1 dart of 9 force damage)
as normal, resistances apply
(one monster loses 2 times 4 hp, while the other loses 4 hp once)


-----

an interestign appendum ... I'm wondering if a magic missle constitutes as a hit. While I'm well aware the the combat chapter defines hit as a successful attack roll, Magic missle says "Each dart hits a creature you can see.". Under specific beats general, one could certainly make the argument that magic missle is a specific exception to the genral rule of when you 'hit' something. The spell is screwed up enough as it is, it's hard for me to phantom what RAI would be.

[EggKookoo]

I the issue is about simultaneous hitting, that's easily handled as a special rule on MM. I suspect my players will balk at rolling once and multiplying.

[Sigreid]

You're saying if I cast MM and shoot 3 darts at a target, I roll 1d4, multiply the result by 3 (for the 3 darts), then add 1? As opposed to rolling 1d4+1 and multiplying that by 3?

Ok, it's gets confusing. The way the rules are written if you only do one roll and multiply it by the number of missiles, damage would be (1d4+1 (+int Mod))x3. If you roll each die individually it's 3d4+3+(int mod) if they're all aimed at the same target. Which is very weird.

[Kane0]

Man, Magic Missile has been causing some controversy lately.

[Ellisthion]

It's worth noting/reminding, in the context of referencing Sage Advice: it's not RAW. It's not the rules. It's not errata. Sage Advice is explicitly an opinion piece, and is not considered to have any official special meaning. AL DMs are not required follow Sage Advice.


I personally feel the intent of the whole Simultaneous hitting for magic missile is so that a player couldn't proc multiple affects off of hitting a creature with multiple hits from magic missile.

Exactly my thoughts. Causing multiple hits is definitely a bigger problem, they were just trying to prevent this succinctly.

[EggKookoo]

It's worth noting/reminding, in the context of referencing Sage Advice: it's not RAW. It's not the rules. It's not errata. Sage Advice is explicitly an opinion piece, and is not considered to have any official special meaning. AL DMs are not required follow Sage Advice.

The main purpose of SA is to get RAI. RAW is easy -- just crack open one of the books.

[MrStabby]

The main purpose of SA is to get RAI. RAW is easy -- just crack open one of the books.

It almost works for that. Only the whole thing is so muddled and self contradictory that they purport to have intended two mutually exclusive things at once on many occasions.



I would prefer to come here and get some advice from other DMs on how to rule something than resort to sage advice. At least here you will get different views with reasoning provided. Much more useful for making a decision than SA.

[EggKookoo]

I would prefer to come here and get some advice from other DMs on how to rule something than resort to sage advice. At least here you will get different views with reasoning provided. Much more useful for making a decision than SA.

And that's called RAF. :-)

[Magzimum]

But the contention is that magic missile (the spell as a whole) affects multiple targets.

From my point of view

Rolling multiple dice
* Rolling more dice is fun.
* Keeping track of who gets what dice is slower (not by much, but it's slower).

Rolling one die
* quick and easy
* Less dice = less fun.

Pick one, whatever's more important for your table.

Rolling 1d4, multiply by 3 has a 25% chance of a 3, 6, 9 or 12. It's a very extreme outcome.
Rolling 3d4 statistically averages out. It just doesn't occur so often that you roll 3 ones or 4 fours, so you typically do about 7-8 damage, and well over 60% of the rolls end p between 6-9 damage.

It's just what you call boring, but I think that rolling less dice is far more exciting from a gambling and therefore from a dice-rolling perspective.

[edit] Having said that, I always allow players to roll 3 dice for the Magic Missiles, and I think that is what is meant to happen in the PHB too, as these are in my opinion 3 spell effects which each hit 1 target.

[Tanarii]

And that's called RAF. :-)
RASGOTIRI
Rule As Some Guy On The Internet Rules It

[qube]

I would prefer to come here and get some advice from other DMs on how to rule something than resort to sage advice. At least here you will get different views with reasoning provided. Much more useful for making a decision than SA.But to what end?

We have RAW

and we have RAI

As a DM, if you still don't like it - change the parts you don't. Obviously you won't be using it as it was intended to be used ... but that would be obvious as you're not following RAI. All side effects are already pointed out. (namely, it's statistically the same, other then abilities which add a bonus to one damage die). At the one hand you can take the view that you don't like how it makes magic missle significantly better then other simelar spells; on the other you could presume it was done this way to make "the magic missler" a viable build (an evoker specialized in magic missle)
With a lvl 3 spellslot, an evoker can chose to blast a ~42.5 magic missle on a single target, or (a fireball) ~33 (16.5 on save) multi target, with a common element)

But that's as DM. More incisidious however, is if you come to these forums as player. And, not liking RAW or RAI, try to get an excuse to go cry to the DM and use us as leverage why he should rule, not RAW or RAI (which you don't like or you won't be here) - but option 3 instead.


[edit] Having said that, I always allow players to roll 3 dice for the Magic Missiles, and I think that is what is meant to happen in the PHB too, as these are in my opinion 3 spell effects which each hit 1 target.nope.

As explained in post #58 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23388290&postcount=58)

[MrStabby]

"To what end?" You ask.

To decide how to run my games.

Players have a reasonable expectation that I will follow the articulated rules. I.e. the phb and any published errata to it.

Players should not expect my rulings to reflect what some guy on the internet said but couldn't get into an errata. Or they can but only so far as it is good for the game.

Here on GITP I can get different opinions from a greater variety of DMs with collectively much more experience than that one guy. Experience of different groups and different playstyles. More importantly people, in an effort to convince others, add reasoning here. This means if I am deciding how to rule something I can get a lot more value from coming here than from reading some dudes Twitter feed.

[EggKookoo]

Here on GITP I can get different opinions from a greater variety of DMs with collectively much more experience than that one guy. Experience of different groups and different playstyles. More importantly people, in an effort to convince others, add reasoning here. This means if I am deciding how to rule something I can get a lot more value from coming here than from reading some dudes Twitter feed.

Plus you can get into endless meaningless pedantic fights! It's "GitP," btw...