Arcane Firearm and Twinned Spell

[Silpharon]

Hey guys,

If I use the Artillerist's Arcane Firearm to cast firebolt with twinned spell metamagic (through feat or multiclassing), would I get to add an extra d8 to both damage rolls or just one? Or... Is it the same damage roll for both targets?

Cheers!

[Pandamonium]

"You can use your arcane firearm as a spellcasting focus for your artificer spells. When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm, roll a d8, and you gain a bonus to one of the spell's damage rolls equal to the number rolled."

Well it is the one spell but with two targets so I'd say it is the same damage roll for both targets.

[stoutstien]

Hmmm tough one. My gut says each target would each target would get arcane firearm applied but on second reading the extra damage is added to a single roll regardless of targets.
Does twin spell make the user roll once and apply to each target or is there two individual rolls happing?

[Sigreid]

Doesn't seem like it. But, the official interpretation would make magic missile nearly 3x more powerful as the damage role would be 1d4+1+1d8 x number of bolts. Good for crits too.

[Gignere]

Doesn't seem like it. But, the official interpretation would make magic missile nearly 3x more powerful as the damage role would be 1d4+1+1d8 x number of bolts. Good for crits too.

Doesn’t work because its not a artificer spell.

[CrazyCop]

I thought twinned spell only works with spells that can target one creature?

edit: i thought it said fireball, my b

[Sigreid]

Doesn’t work because its not a artificer spell.

It is for armorers. but that doesn't apply to artillerists

[Valmark]

You apply it to one target, because Firebolt wouldn't be using the same damage roll for two targets being two different attacks.

If you were to twin Dissonant Whispers it'd work (nevermind that it isn't an artificer spell, I needed an example of a twinnable save spell).

[stoutstien]

You apply it to one target, because Firebolt wouldn't be using the same damage roll for two targets being two different attacks.

If you were to twin Dissonant Whispers it'd work (nevermind that it isn't an artificer spell, I needed an example of a twinnable save spell).

Acid splash works without twin with a range caveat.

[Silpharon]

Thanks folks for the responses! Let me summarize what I'm hearing:

Twinned metamagic says "you can spend a number of sorcery points ... to target a second creature in range with the same spell". The "same spell" part suggests that it's only one cast, just modified to allow two targets. Since arcane firearm works per cast, I'd only have one extra d8 to apply to a single damage roll. As Valmark mentions, for firebolt that would mean only one target would get the extra damage, as attacks use separate rolls. However, Frostbite, Poison Spray, and Lightning Lure target a single creature with a saving throw, and a twinned second target would share the same damage dice (which can be rolled first and applied to all targets depending on the save).

[Tanarii]

Thanks folks for the responses! Let me summarize what I'm hearing:

Twinned metamagic says "you can spend a number of sorcery points ... to target a second creature in range with the same spell". The "same spell" part suggests that it's only one cast, just modified to allow two targets. Since arcane firearm works per cast, I'd only have one extra d8 to apply to a single damage roll. As Valmark mentions, for firebolt that would mean only one target would get the extra damage, as attacks use separate rolls. However, Frostbite, Poison Spray, and Lightning Lure target a single creature with a saving throw, and a twinned second target would share the same damage dice (which can be rolled first and applied to all targets depending on the save).

The rule isn't attack roll different damage, save same damage.

The rule is damage at the same time, one roll.

[Valmark]

The rule isn't attack roll different damage, save same damage.

The rule is damage at the same time, one roll.

Yes, but it's not at the same time for attacks.

[Tanarii]

Yes, but it's not at the same time for attacks.

Yup, generally not for attack rolls. (To distinguish that from some attacks that aren't attack rolls.)

But my point was that it doesn't follow that saves are automatically the same time.

If A then C, since B = not-A, therefore not-C ... isn't correct.

(I think that's the correct logical equivalent.)

[Valmark]

Yup, generally not for attack rolls. (To distinguish that from some attacks that aren't attack rolls.)

But my point was that it doesn't follow that saves are automatically the same time.

If A then C, since B = not-A, therefore not-C ... isn't correct.

(I think that's the correct logical equivalent.)

Should be correct, yes. And yeah, it's not automatically true but in general a spell targeting multiple creatures with a save is at the same time (for example Fireball).

The example cantrips seem like they should work with it, at least.

[Silpharon]

Guys I think I got a sick combo here...

So the problem with Arcane Firearm is that it requires a staff, wand, or rod. As far as I can tell, there are none of those items that provides +X to spell save DC, which is what you'd want if you're trying to maximize this capability. But enter alchemist...

1) Alchemist's Alchemical Savant can be used as long as alchemist tools are used as the focus. +Int mod damage/healing for acid, fire, necrotic, poison, and healing spells.
2) All-Purpose Tool can turn into a set of alchemist tools. It can also learn a cantrip from any school for 8 hours. It also provides +1/2/3 to spell save DC.

If we have an alchemist with twinned metamagic and 20 int, we can learn Toll the Dead from All-Purpose Tool, and when we cast it, we do (1-4)d(8 or 12)+5 to two targets using one sorcery point with a +1/2/3 increase in DC depending on the version of All-Purpose Tool.

That's 62 average damage over two targets at max level by only spending 1 sorcery point. Not bad! This can be improved even further with a TCE shard (elemental water, fire, or outer shard evil come to mind).

[Keravath]

"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."

"When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell's level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip)."

"You can use your arcane firearm as a spellcasting focus for your artificer spells. When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm, roll a d8, and you gain a bonus to one of the spell's damage rolls equal to the number rolled"

1) I can't find anything in the rules stating that spells which require attack rolls are NOT resolved simultaneously. Magic missile states that the darts hit simultaneously. However, just because Scorching Ray doesn't include similar text doesn't mean that each of the targets aren't designated when the spell is cast and resolved simultaneously.

2) Twinning a spell states that you target a creature with the "same spell". This could be interpreted as either casting the spell twice OR having the exact SAME spell affect two targets. Either interpretation is possible and the decision is up to the DM.

3) IF it is the exact same spell affecting two targets simultaneously - which is completely possible in this case depending on how the DM wants to decide things - then the cantrip would be cast once. One to hit die roll and one damage roll including the artillerist extra damage would be rolled and those numbers applied to the two targets of the twinned spell. Depending on target ACs and other conditions, one or both might hit or miss.

Twin states "the same spell" ... if this would work with Dissonant whispers then it would work with firebolt. The fact that one is a save spell and one a to hit spell is not relevant (at least there is no indication I can find in the rules that all save spells are resolved simultaneously while all to hit spells are sequential).

P.S.

"INSTANTANEOUS
Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant."

Firebolt, Dissonant Whispers and many others are all Instantaneous spells. Scorching Ray and Magic Missile are also Instantaneous. This means that all of the bolts from Scorching Ray are to hit rolls that happens simultaneously because the magic only exists for an instant. Players may resolve these consecutively if they only have one set of dice but the target designation and resolution of to hit spells with more than one possible target are simultaneous because the spells are instantaneous.

So if Twin just allows an additional target for exactly the same spell then it is instantaneous and the situation is the same as one spell with a second or multiple targets.

[Valmark]

"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."

"When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell's level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip)."

"You can use your arcane firearm as a spellcasting focus for your artificer spells. When you cast an artificer spell through the firearm, roll a d8, and you gain a bonus to one of the spell's damage rolls equal to the number rolled"

1) I can't find anything in the rules stating that spells which require attack rolls are NOT resolved simultaneously. Magic missile states that the darts hit simultaneously. However, just because Scorching Ray doesn't include similar text doesn't mean that each of the targets aren't designated when the spell is cast and resolved simultaneously.

3) IF it is the exact same spell affecting two targets simultaneously - which is completely possible in this case depending on how the DM wants to decide things - then the cantrip would be cast once. One to hit die roll and one damage roll including the artillerist extra damage would be rolled and those numbers applied to the two targets of the twinned spell. Depending on target ACs and other conditions, one or both might hit or miss.

Twin states "the same spell" ... if this would work with Dissonant whispers then it would work with firebolt. The fact that one is a save spell and one a to hit spell is not relevant (at least there is no indication I can find in the rules that all save spells are resolved simultaneously while all to hit spells are sequential).

P.S.

"INSTANTANEOUS
Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant."

Firebolt, Dissonant Whispers and many others are all Instantaneous spells. Scorching Ray and Magic Missile are also Instantaneous. This means that all of the bolts from Scorching Ray are to hit rolls that happens simultaneously because the magic only exists for an instant. Players may resolve these consecutively if they only have one set of dice but the target designation and resolution of to hit spells with more than one possible target are simultaneous because the spells are instantaneous.

So if Twin just allows an additional target for exactly the same spell then it is instantaneous and the situation is the same as one spell with a second or multiple targets.

It's because for each attack you are asked for an attack roll and a damage roll. Not only that, but you can move between attacks (at least weapon attacks)- they can't be at the same time if you can move between them.

[Keravath]

It's because for each attack you are asked for an attack roll and a damage roll. Not only that, but you can move between attacks (at least weapon attacks)- they can't be at the same time if you can move between them.

Yes. However, spell attacks are specifically stated as "Instantaneous" and in this case we aren't discussing sequential weapon attacks but rather simultaneous spell attacks. Just because each resolution of a portion of a spell requires separate to hit and damage rolls does not mean that those rolls are not in game being resolved simultaneously (at least I haven't found anything in the rules that would indicate instantaneous spell effects requiring to hit and damage rolls must be sequential).

[Gignere]

Yes. However, spell attacks are specifically stated as "Instantaneous" and in this case we aren't discussing sequential weapon attacks but rather simultaneous spell attacks. Just because each resolution of a portion of a spell requires separate to hit and damage rolls does not mean that those rolls are not in game being resolved simultaneously (at least I haven't found anything in the rules that would indicate instantaneous spell effects requiring to hit and damage rolls must be sequential).

For spells with multiple attack rolls you can attack move, attack move, like scorching ray and Eldritch blast.

Edit: presumably you can do the same for twin spell, if used on an attack roll spell.

[Valmark]

Yes. However, spell attacks are specifically stated as "Instantaneous" and in this case we aren't discussing sequential weapon attacks but rather simultaneous spell attacks. Just because each resolution of a portion of a spell requires separate to hit and damage rolls does not mean that those rolls are not in game being resolved simultaneously (at least I haven't found anything in the rules that would indicate instantaneous spell effects requiring to hit and damage rolls must be sequential).

I'm not sure what you're arguing about- if you're rolling multiple damage rolls you aren't adding the arcane firearms' damage multiple times.

[Avonar]

Do you use multiple damage rolls for Eldritch Blast beams?

Do you use multiple damage rolls for something like Scorching Ray?

Then use multiple damage rolls for a twinned spell fireblast too.

[Keravath]

For spells with multiple attack rolls you can attack move, attack move, like scorching ray and Eldritch blast.

Edit: presumably you can do the same for twin spell, if used on an attack roll spell.

As far as I know you can't attack and move when casting spells with multiple attack rolls. Spells are instantaneous and all attacks have to be designated and rolled at the same time. I've never either played with or run a game in which characters could move between the attacks from either eldritch blast or scorching ray.

The rules specifically allow this for creatures that take the attack action and have the extra attack feature allowing for movement between attacks but that is not the case when spells are cast (at least raw).

[Keravath]

I'm not sure what you're arguing about- if you're rolling multiple damage rolls you aren't adding the arcane firearms' damage multiple times.

Honestly, we're talking about RAW here ... not necessarily how folks actually play.

All I'm saying is that RAW, spell effects that affect more than one creature at the same time only roll the damage once. (Personally, I don't use this for targeted spells but only for AoE - so spells like Magic Missile or Eldritch blast roll the damage for each hit - but this is not what RAW says to do when multiple creatures are affected).

"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."

This rule does not specify only saving throw spells or only to hit spells. It simply says that if you cast a spell that affects more than one creature only roll the damage once.

Eldritch blast specifies a separate attack roll for each bolt - it does not actually specify a separate damage roll for each bolt.

Scorching Ray also specifies a separate to hit roll for each ray but other than stating the target takes 2d6 damage - it doesn't state whether this is rolled once for all three rays or is rolled for each ray separately. The general rule above indicates that when a spell does damage to more than one target - you only roll the damage once.

Finally - the relevance to the artillerist ability. Twinned spell follows the same rules - if you damage more than one target there is only one damage roll. So you add the artillerist d8 and apply the same damage to each target if a hit is achieved.

So, yes, I can see this being exactly Rules As Written but as I said above, I house rule it to play otherwise since I use separate damage rolls for every creature affected by a creature targeted spell - but use one damage roll for AoE spells.

[Valmark]

As far as I know you can't attack and move when casting spells with multiple attack rolls. Spells are instantaneous and all attacks have to be designated and rolled at the same time. I've never either played with or run a game in which characters could move between the attacks from either eldritch blast or scorching ray.

The rules specifically allow this for creatures that take the attack action and have the extra attack feature allowing for movement between attacks but that is not the case when spells are cast (at least raw).

Nothing says that you have to designate all attacks at the same time- only MM (which doesn't use attacks) says that the darts strike simultaneously.

Honestly, we're talking about RAW here ... not necessarily how folks actually play.

All I'm saying is that RAW, spell effects that affect more than one creature at the same time only roll the damage once. (Personally, I don't use this for targeted spells but only for AoE - so spells like Magic Missile or Eldritch blast roll the damage for each hit - but this is not what RAW says to do when multiple creatures are affected).

"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."

This rule does not specify only saving throw spells or only to hit spells. It simply says that if you cast a spell that affects more than one creature only roll the damage once.

Eldritch blast specifies a separate attack roll for each bolt - it does not actually specify a separate damage roll for each bolt.

Scorching Ray also specifies a separate to hit roll for each ray but other than stating the target takes 2d6 damage - it doesn't state whether this is rolled once for all three rays or is rolled for each ray separately. The general rule above indicates that when a spell does damage to more than one target - you only roll the damage once.

Finally - the relevance to the artillerist ability. Twinned spell follows the same rules - if you damage more than one target there is only one damage roll. So you add the artillerist d8 and apply the same damage to each target if a hit is achieved.

So, yes, I can see this being exactly Rules As Written but as I said above, I house rule it to play otherwise since I use separate damage rolls for every creature affected by a creature targeted spell - but use one damage roll for AoE spells.

Alright, again, nobody said that the rule is that only save spells roll for damage simultaneously.

The examples you mentioned don't ask for separate attack rolls- they ask for separate attacks. It's the attacks that ask for their own damage rolls.

[Tanarii]

RAW, spells that use multiple attack rolls roll damage separately for each attack roll.

The rule is under making an attack p194, steps 1-3, and step 3 includes the damage roll. Then repeat for the next attack. Even if step 3 is done once for each attack roll, it's still done separately with separate damage rolls for each attack roll.

There's no real question about this rule. The question is when a non-attack roll spell is simultaneously vs not.

[Keravath]

RAW, spells that use multiple attack rolls roll damage separately for each attack roll.

The rule is under making an attack p194, steps 1-3, and step 3 includes the damage roll. Then repeat for the next attack. Even if step 3 is done once for each attack roll, it's still done separately with separate damage rolls for each attack roll.

There's no real question about this rule. The question is when a non-attack roll spell is simultaneously vs not.

All I am saying is that RAW can be read in different ways.

p194 says

"Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise."

However, the rules for ALL damage rolls do specify otherwise.

p196 Damage Rolls
"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."

So if you cast a spell that makes attack rolls that damage more than one creature at the same time you roll the damage die ONCE. This is what it says RAW.

Do spells that have multiple attack rolls happen at the same time?

phb p203
"DURATION
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.

INSTANTANEOUS
Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant."

Most attack roll spells are instantaneous. No time passes between each attack roll that does damage. These attacks are resolved simultaneously using separate to hit rolls.

However, by RAW, in the damage roll rules, if these attacks are against more than one creature then the damage die are rolled only once. I don't think I am misreading or intentionally misinterpreting - it isn't how I play since I played previous editions of the game where this was certainly not the case, but rules as written the damage roll rules say that if a spell or other effect damages more than one creature at a time, then the damage is rolled once. Does it make a lot of sense for attack roll spells with multiple targets - maybe not - but that is what the rules say.

So if you cast eldritch blast at one target - roll each to hit die and then each damage die - if you cast eldritch blast at multiple targets - roll the damage die once and apply it to each hit.

Spell attacks are instantaneous so there is no time between each bolt and its resolution so they are simultaneous.

That is what it seems to say RAW - please don't shoot the messenger :)

[Tanarii]

All I am saying is that RAW can be read in different ways.

Of course. Always. The RAW is just the words, and words can often be read many ways. :)

But this has been discussed since the start of 5e, and the consensus on how to interpret the RAW on attacks and damage, as well as developer RAI, is pretty well established.

Edit: I'm reacting to seeing come up again. Totally not my place to shut you down, which looking at my posts is what I was trying to do. My bad. Communicating that its been a common discussion previously should have been my point and left at that.

[Valmark]

All I am saying is that RAW can be read in different ways.

p194 says

"Resolve the attack. You make the attack roll. On a hit, you roll damage, unless the particular attack has rules that specify otherwise."

However, the rules for ALL damage rolls do specify otherwise.

p196 Damage Rolls
"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."

So if you cast a spell that makes attack rolls that damage more than one creature at the same time you roll the damage die ONCE. This is what it says RAW.

Do spells that have multiple attack rolls happen at the same time?

phb p203
"DURATION
A spell's duration is the length of time the spell persists. A duration can be expressed in rounds, minutes, hours, or even years. Some spells specify that their effects last until the spells are dispelled or destroyed.

INSTANTANEOUS
Many spells are instantaneous. The spell harms, heals, creates, or alters a creature or an object in a way that can't be dispelled, because its magic exists only for an instant."

Most attack roll spells are instantaneous. No time passes between each attack roll that does damage. These attacks are resolved simultaneously using separate to hit rolls.

However, by RAW, in the damage roll rules, if these attacks are against more than one creature then the damage die are rolled only once. I don't think I am misreading or intentionally misinterpreting - it isn't how I play since I played previous editions of the game where this was certainly not the case, but rules as written the damage roll rules say that if a spell or other effect damages more than one creature at a time, then the damage is rolled once. Does it make a lot of sense for attack roll spells with multiple targets - maybe not - but that is what the rules say.

So if you cast eldritch blast at one target - roll each to hit die and then each damage die - if you cast eldritch blast at multiple targets - roll the damage die once and apply it to each hit.

Spell attacks are instantaneous so there is no time between each bolt and its resolution so they are simultaneous.

That is what it seems to say RAW - please don't shoot the messenger :)

The assumption here is that an istantaneous spell deals damage simultaneously with all of its attacks, which isn't stated anywhere. If anything we know that Magic Missile (which is Istantaneous) strikes with its darts simultaneously, which isn't specified anywhere else.

[Keravath]

The assumption here is that an istantaneous spell deals damage simultaneously with all of its attacks, which isn't stated anywhere. If anything we know that Magic Missile (which is Istantaneous) strikes with its darts simultaneously, which isn't specified anywhere else.

Agreed. However, the commonly accepted definition of Instantaneous is that the event happens without a perceptible passage of time. Instantaneous spells specifically state "its magic exists only for an instant." This includes the multiple to hit rolls of any spell that requires them. The dictionary defintion of instant is "a moment", "an extremely short period of time", "immediate". There is no time to do anything between the attack rolls of an instantaneous spell - the spell is over "instantly".

I think it is very reasonable to equate "instantaneous" with "happening at the same time" in terms of damage resolution but obviously other DMs can say that a mircosecond passes between each bolt being rolled so the damage die are rolled separately.

It is just another area where a DM can make a call.

Personally, I don't allow a caster of a spell like Scorching Ray or Eldritch blast to assess the effect of an attack before designating the target of the rest since it really isn't compatible with the statement that the spell is instantaneous and the magic is over in an instant.

Anyway, from the point of view of the "English" language nature of the rules and just reading them as they are written, I do not see why "instantaneous" would not be treated as "happening at the same time" from the point of view of the damage resolution rules.

[Valmark]

Agreed. However, the commonly accepted definition of Instantaneous is that the event happens without a perceptible passage of time. Instantaneous spells specifically state "its magic exists only for an instant." This includes the multiple to hit rolls of any spell that requires them. The dictionary defintion of instant is "a moment", "an extremely short period of time", "immediate". There is no time to do anything between the attack rolls of an instantaneous spell - the spell is over "instantly".

I think it is very reasonable to equate "instantaneous" with "happening at the same time" in terms of damage resolution but obviously other DMs can say that a mircosecond passes between each bolt being rolled so the damage die are rolled separately.

It is just another area where a DM can make a call.

Personally, I don't allow a caster of a spell like Scorching Ray or Eldritch blast to assess the effect of an attack before designating the target of the rest since it really isn't compatible with the statement that the spell is instantaneous and the magic is over in an instant.

Anyway, from the point of view of the "English" language nature of the rules and just reading them as they are written, I do not see why "instantaneous" would not be treated as "happening at the same time" from the point of view of the damage resolution rules.

Imo it shouldn't be treated equally because like said before we have a spell that specifies that- logically a similar spell that doesn't do it shouldn't be treated equally.

Add to that the fact that attacks call for their own damage rolls and that the SAC rules that way and I'd say the more widely accepted opinion is for multiple attacks caused by the same spell to not use the same damage roll.