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...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...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...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.

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.