Twinned RAW and improvements wrt Hex

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 16:25

Dragon's breath has two sets of targets: the creature you give the breath weapon to and the creatures in the area of effect created by the spell. #DnD https://twitter.com/zoozeki/status/944278238905352192

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on December 22, 2017 at 6:51 PM

Dragon's breath can affect more than one creature with the exhalation. It therefore can't be twinned. #DnD https://twitter.com/TheSandwichPira/status/944271465708322816

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on December 22, 2017 at 6:26 PM

And I actually think he would rule that Hex cannot be twinned

Maximillian

Twin crawford and ask both the same question. Make the one that answers incorrectly disappear.

Rubiksmoose

Telekinesis can affect multiple creatures over the course of its duration. It's not eligible for Twinned Spell. #DnD https://twitter.com/HeathDawson/status/915697666193010688

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on October 4, 2017 at 10:00 PM

Maximillian

alternatively, create an Evil_Crawford account the issues errata on Crawford.

Sir Cinnamon

Dang, what CAN you twin

Rubiksmoose

@Maximillian OMG this is an incredible idea lol

Maximillian

Oct 3, 2018 16:32

"You can twin Dragon Breath, but in doing so an innocent in your game world dies."

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I think I might agree with that

GreySage

@Maximillian I wonder if this is illegal in any way...

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Well I'm posting a question about it right now so think on it!

Maximillian

Parody accounts exist, most of them get to stay if they're clearly labeled a parody account.

Rubiksmoose

@GreySage In the US at least parody accounts don't seem to be illegal in general.

Xirema

Oct 3, 2018 16:34

@Carcer Crawford is pretty regularly consistent. The problem is that he rarely answers a question directly. He'll usually defer back to some regurgitation of the rules in the handbook/etc. Which wouldn't be so bad, except that often, if someone's going to ask for a rule's clarification, it's specifically because the rules-as-written were ambiguous/unclear.

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema I mean also to be fair he gets asked a lot of questions whose answers are plain readings of the rules as well.

Just like here.

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose You're not wrong.

I think I got into a fight with someone here over whether Empowered Spell could affect all damage dice for Eldritch Blast or not. Crawford issued a ruling for Chaos Bolt that says "all damage dice of a spell are eligible", which technically answers the question, but doesn't address the specific concern (namely the damage being split across multiple attack rolls) so when someone tries to address a different spell, the ruling becomes difficult to apply.

NautArch

@Xirema I'm still kinda miffed about his GWF ruling on divine smites. I think it's silly especially when a big part of his 'logic' was too many dice rerolls isn't fun because it slows down the table.

Xirema

@NautArch Does he play at tables where they all have to share the same set of exactly 1 die of each type d4 d6 d8 d10 d12 d20 d%?

NautArch

@Xirema ha!

Maximillian

Oct 3, 2018 16:42

That was a concern with 5E. Remove rolls here and there. Remove numbers bigger than 5. Dunno how I feel about that.

Xirema

@Maximillian I like the bounded accuracy aspect of 5e overall, including lowering the numbers (makes small changes more meaningful) but reducing the number of rolls misses the point, I think.

Especially since "more rolls" is easily fixed with "roll more of your dice at once".

Maximillian

Evil Crawford: Roll all of the dice you have. Take the average. Good enough.

Round up if it's Thursday otherwise round down.

(Thursdays are empowered)

Xirema

My Paladin keeps Bless up pretty regularly, so whenever I attack, I roll 6 dice at once, 3 of each color: (1d4 (Bless) + 1d20 (attack roll) + 1d8 (Longsword weapon damage)) * 2.

I just match the colors together, and I know A) if I hit, and B) how much damage I did with that attack.

NautArch

@Xirema I used to have bless as a standard, but less so more recently (mostly due to my +3 glaive)

Xirema

@NautArch We're still only level 6, + we don't get Haste (or really any other Concentration Spell worth maintaining).

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 16:46

but when i run a concentration spell, that's usually it. I also have a ring of earth elemental and that gives me stoneskin which I often use.

@Xirema Protection from evil and good is surprisingly useful

Xirema

@NautArch Yeah, but we fight a lot of humanoids in our campaign. I'd definitely be running it if we were fighting a lot of undead/demons/whatever.

Rubiksmoose

There we go. Question posted. Now we can fight about this on mainsite lol cc @DavidCoffron

NautArch

@Xirema aberrations, celestials, elementals, fey, fiends, and undead

that's a lot of creature types :)

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I think Crawford's logic is dumb but there's the answer. I don't like how Crawford uses the word "affect" but hex does target multiple creatures over the duratiom

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Yeah so much of the time in this issues he uses affect and target interchangeably, which is really bad.

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 16:53

@Rubiksmoose especially here:

Twinned Spell test: can the spell affect only one creature at the spell's current level, and is its range not self? If yes, TS works. #DnD https://twitter.com/mrprotoman/status/852657423089324032

Tweeted by JeremyECrawford on April 14, 2017 at 1:39 AM

Rubiksmoose

Ugh yeah that one is really blatant. Especially since he is trying to set up a rule.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose it causes the dragon's breath problem.

Dragon's breath can "affect" multiple creatures, but doent "target" them

@Maximillian VtC: Duplicate

@NautArch come to think of it, why is this not a fighter subclass. There is precedent for subclasses focused on one weapon (Arcane Archer). It would make way more sense and be very easy to balance around Arcane Archer

NautArch

@DavidCoffron THat's a really good way of looking at it. The Darts and their special properties are equivalent to the arcane archer choices.

David Coffron

@NautArch why are darts melee weapons In his homebrew. That is very weird...

NautArch

Shearing @nitsua60: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/132924/…

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 17:04

@NautArch (I've been told it's better to flag than to ping in chat). Not sure what your calling him for anyway lol. Seems like a fine question

NautArch

@DavidCoffron I think they come up with good ideas, but then develop slapdash homebrew.

@DavidCoffron because sheep :)

David Coffron

@NautArch oh. I'm dumb

Whoops

NautArch

it's actually a pretty interesting question

GreySage

@NautArch Interesting, and it is very similar to Arcane Archer. I don't know why the OP is using materials from a kit instead of charges or uses, and having so many recover on a short rest is pretty broken.

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch I could have sworn we had something similar, but I looked through and didn't find anything.

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 17:11

@GreySage Making things more difficult than they need to be? Standard human operating procedure.

Rubiksmoose

18

Q: Do removed parts of a Druid's Wild Shape form persist after said Druid exits Wild Shape?

A player wanted to use Wild Shape as an unlimited supply of feathers for our ranger to make his own arrows with and it sparked a discussion on whether or not parts of a Druid that are removed from said Druid's Wild Shape persist after the Druid is no longer in Wild Shape. I have been unable to f...

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose enkryptor found it (I looked too)

Rubiksmoose

That is the one I was thinking of. Not a dupe though.

I was only looking through polymorph ones though. I didn't even consider WS. Makes sense.

KorvinStarmast

@Rubiksmoose This opens the idea of the poop disappearing after the druid / bear goes in the woods ... that was a part of the answer that I don't think gets enough credit.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose still bothers me that they didn't take the time to balance the CR options of polymorph as an offensive spell

KorvinStarmast

Oct 3, 2018 17:23

@DavidCoffron You only get a few spell slots. They balanced versus the resource exhaustion of the 6-8 encounters ... not a 5 minute adventure day. Plus polymorph is an iconic D&D spell, sorta like fireball and lightning bolt.

David Coffron

Just means my intelligent NPCs try to focus the caster which means the fun of being a massive beast is short lived. If the massive beast had the same threat level of the PCs it's be more reasonable for them to actually fight the beast

KorvinStarmast

If it's a little cooler than other spells, fine. It fits the genre well. And who doesn't want to be able to be turned into King Kong or a TRex

David Coffron

I'm glad it's cool but it could've been toned down a bit. I always feel guilty trying to break the casters concentration

KorvinStarmast

It burns a level 4 spell slot. That needs to have a good payoff.

(I saw a thing recently about most D&D games never getting out of tier 2).

David Coffron

@KorvinStarmast it's just a bit too good. Compare it to conjure minor elemental for example

@KorvinStarmast not surprised. Very few people like to start games past tier 1 and it's hard to get a group to stick together long term

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:28

@DavidCoffron Do you mean it needs to be more powerful or less?

KorvinStarmast

@DavidCoffron Somedays, I just want to turn our bard into a TRex and let him attack that Frost Giant. Why? Because it's cool! I only get to do it once at 7th level ...

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast My bard has turned into a t-rex a few times :)

KorvinStarmast

Did he trample the enemies while bellowing/singing "Give It To me!"

NautArch

@KorvinStarmast C'mon man! You know T-rex's can't sing!

...but they can bang a gong.

KorvinStarmast

@NautArch Whoops, I was remembering a J Geils band song.

Xirema

Oct 3, 2018 17:43

On the subject of spells that can or cannot be Twinned, is Shield of Faith ineligible to be twinned, because the AC increase affects more than one target?

(specifically, it affects the attack rolls of more than one creature)

((Yes, I'm being a smart-butt. That's a rhetorical question))

Rubiksmoose

@NautArch Mine too! so fun!

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose Be careful - don't do it when in darkness. Speaking from experience :(

Xirema

I move that Protection from Good and Evil also be ineligible, on the grounds that it causes more than one creature, potentially, to receive disadvantage on their attacks.

NautArch

@Xirema how?

KorvinStarmast

@Xirema Now that's crazy talk. Uh, sorta like Crawford talk. He seems to be aiming to kill the Twinned metamagic ... not sure why.

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 17:46

@Rubiksmoose less. A CR 7 (from polymorph) is far more powerful than a CR 2 elemental and a level 7 party member (from conjure minor elementals)

GreySage

@Xirema That is actually pretty comparable to Dragon's Breath

It's an effect of the spell that affects multiple creatures, opposed to just altering the stats of 1 creature.

KorvinStarmast

I have a new shadow sorcerer; what meta magic should I use when I get that feature? Twinned seems to be dying on the vine ...

NautArch

oh - gotcha. The target and effects are for the recipient. They have disadvantage on attcaks against you. not in general. It's all about you, man.

Xirema

@KorvinStarmast Twinned can still be used with Booming Blade.... for now.

GreySage

@Xirema He does seem to like that one combo

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:47

@KorvinStarmast Only if you care what Crawford says.

David Coffron

@KorvinStarmast that would be perfectly balanced at around level 14

Rubiksmoose

That being said, all this is begging the question if Crawford's way is dumb is there a better way?

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose I think the Postmodernist's take in my answer to that question is the best take.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose use target as an actual term and not "affect" and all is fine in my eyes

Xirema

> Does anything actually exist?

Delioth

Oct 3, 2018 17:48

@KorvinStarmast You kindly ask your GM to ignore Crawford's interpretations on Twinned

NautArch

but having said that, i don't understand how dragon's breath is a problem.

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron But then begins the endless questions about what actually targets what which is even more confusing.

GreySage

"I target the universe"
"So, you target all the creatures and things? It's an AoE spell then."
"No, it's single target, the universe is a single thing."

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema hahaha yeah if a player started saying things like that I would simply sigh get a tall glass of whiskey on the rocks then ask them calmly if they really want to go down that road lol

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose true. Idk

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:51

Because I am legit confused as to what the rules are even trying to get us to call a target even ignoring all of JC's stuff.

Well, I guess I do think they paint a somewhat clear picture I guess, but it goes counter to what most people think (as I pointed out here)

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I think it is any creature affected by the immediate spell effect. All targets hit by an aoe are targets. The creature from hex is a target. All attacked creatures are targets. A creature attacked by spiritual weapon is not a target

It's different from Trading Card Games like Magic the gathering and Yugioh

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron This is my reading as well. I wouldn't consider creatures attacked from Haste targets.

Jason_c_o

I don't think target is solely aggressive

NautArch

I keep wanting to provide an explanation/reasoning and I keep changing my mind. It just doesn't make sense.

Jason_c_o

I do think haste targets

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:54

@Jason_c_o haste does target for sure. But only the creature that haste is put on IMO.

Jason_c_o

but I don't think Dragon's Breath and Hex are comparable; the second creature mentioned in Haste isn't a target until declared as one (ie the first one dies)

well yeah

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose But would you consider creatures attacked from Dragon's Breath?

Rubiksmoose

Creatures that they then attack should not be considered targets of the spell.

Jason_c_o

not haste, hex***

mentioned in hex*

Xirema

@NautArch I very specifically do NOT consider those, because you, the person casting the spell, didn't get to choose those targets. You didn't "target" them when casting the spell.

The effect of Dragon's Breath is "give one creature the ability to breathe fire".

Full stop, IMO.

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 17:56

When you throw a grenade, you have targets. When you use Dragon's Breath, you know whom you want to hit

NautArch

@Xirema I think I agree :)

Sir Cinnamon

@Jason_c_o When you cast the spell dragons breath or when you consume the ability granted by the spell though?

Jason_c_o

hmm that makes sense

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o Not true actually DB gives you the ability to breathe fire, but it does not make an attack.

NautArch

but then what about Hex? You are targeting a creature, and only one creature. But you can then move that target to another creature.

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 17:56

I think Hex should be twinned. It only has one target

Delioth

@Jason_c_o But you don't know who you want to hit. You know who you want to give the ability to breathe a cone to, but for all you know, that person could be a traitor and you might be on the receiving end

Rubiksmoose

I would say Hex has multiple targets strctly.

GreySage

@SirCinnamon Beathing doesn't consume the ability granted by the spell, you have the option to use the action it gives you for the entire spell duration (1min concentration)

Xirema

@NautArch My gut instinct is that, in that case, you're "choosing a new target" as part of the effect of the spell, therefore it isn't eligible. But TBH if a DM said otherwise, I wouldn't feel strongly enough to contest it.

Jason_c_o

It has the potential to shift targets. Dragon's Breath falls closer to AoE

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:57

@Xirema In fact, I would probably allow it straight out.

Sir Cinnamon

@GreySage Right, I learned that recently, bad choice of words there

Rubiksmoose

I'm just trying to find a way to not be overrestrictive and be consistent.

Jason_c_o

I think Hex and Dragon's Breath are apples and oranges

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose @Xirema I think I'd disallow. The whole purpose of hex/hunter's mark is multiple ongoing targeting.

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose It all depends on whether that second creature is "targeted" or not by the spell.

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 17:59

@Xirema I think it pretty clearly is.

Jason_c_o

It is, but not at the same time as the first

so it's still only targeting one

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o Sure, but nothing says that the restrcition has a time limit.

Jason_c_o

That's the easiest reading

occam's razor

when you cast it, it has one target

Delioth

Just like when you cast Dragon's Breath, it has one target

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o but it is capable of targeting more than one during the spell. I actually don't think reading it that way helps but I'd have to think about it.

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:01

But it doesn't ever target more than one. It just changes target

Xirema

> Twinned Spell. When you cast a spell, you may spend sorcery points equal to the spell's level (or 1 point for a Cantrip) to duplicate its effects. You may choose a new target for the duplicated effect. No creature may be affected more than once by this spell at the same time.

Would anyone object to that revision? It makes the metamagic more powerful, but for being a metamagic that, theoretically, costs more than any other, it seems reasonable.

Rubiksmoose

Target A and Target B are more than one target.

Jason_c_o

It's not target A and target B

it's a new target A

You can cast Hex and never have it change targets

Delioth

@Xirema That'd be exactly what I'd run Twinned Spell as at all times if I actually played 5e

Regardless of silliness from Crawford and targeting and jazz. This revision just makes it easier and we don't have to define "target"

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema "duplicate its effects" is not really clear to me actually.

And I do object to opening up twinned to AOEs in general which that would do.

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:04

@Jason_c_o I think changing targets is equivalent to more than one target.

Jason_c_o

I don't at all

it's still only ever focused on one creature

Rubiksmoose

(at a time)

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose Hence the "no creature may be affected more than once". Makes it worse than Heightened Spell if you could already fit all the creatures inside the AOE range.

Rubiksmoose

Bob and Jerry are different creatures. Different creatures different targets.

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o you can also have magic missle hit only one target. It is specifically disallowed by the errata. It's whether it is capable of targeting more than one which hex is

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:05

It's focused Creature X (Target A). THen Creature X is killed and you shift to creature Y (Target A). You have targeted two creatures.

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema But I object to allowing AOEs even with that clause.

NautArch

Which makes me think about how Protection would work...in that those attacking you with disadvantage aren't targets. You are the target and you being you is generating disadvantage for certain creature types.

Jason_c_o

@DavidCoffron I still think those are different instances. Magic Missile is capable of targeting more than one at a a time

Hex isn't

David Coffron

@Xirema but some AOEs have smaller effects for balance reasons. If you twin it for double the AOE it becomes very strong (drag someone through two squares of cloud of daggers every turn for example)

Jason_c_o

now we have apples, oranges, and pears

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 18:07

@Jason_c_o that "at a time" language is absent from the text. It doesn't care when you target those creatures, just that you do

GreySage

@Jason_c_o Can we combine them into delicious franken-fruit?

NautArch

@Jason_c_o and now i'm hungry.

Xirema

@DavidCoffron I would refer you to "no creature may be affected more than once". Maybe revised to "in one turn/round"?

Jason_c_o

To me the wording is implied. There's a lot in 5e that isn't explicit

and me too, I haven't had breakfast yet XD

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema How would you stop an enemy from trying to pas through a Twinned wall of flame then? would the second just not count?

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 18:08

@Jason_c_o I don't see that implication at all.

Jason_c_o

Then we'd rule it differently haha

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose If it's in the same turn, then yes, the second would not count.

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema Even if they chose to go through it?

GreySage

I think twinned spell still needs a target. Something like a twinned Flaming Sphere would be pretty baller.

Yuuki

@GreySage Ballers.

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:10

@GreySage or twinned spiritual weapons

Rubiksmoose

And then they would be able to pass freely back and forth through both walls for the rest of the turn with no ill effects?

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose They can already do that as-is with a single wall, I think? Since the effect still reads "starts their turn there, or enters the area for the first time in a turn"

Jason_c_o

I think that's a straw man. Wall of Flame can't be twinned in the first place

GreySage

Stuff that specifically limit areas/numbers would be a little unbalanced. Like Giant Insects, or Glyph of Warding

Xirema

@Jason_c_o (We're considering the revision I submitted a few pages up)

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:12

my bad

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o It would under the new ruling proposed. Also a straw man wouldn't last long in a wall of fire.

:)

Jason_c_o

haha

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o how can you add a temporal clause to the text implicitly. Would you also rule that you could cast wish again after losing the 33% because it's not "in the same day"?

Jason_c_o

@DavidCoffron Wish is one of those instances where it is explicit. "ever again"

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema huh. I think you are right. That is surprising.

nitsua60

Oct 3, 2018 18:15

@NautArch GASP!!!

Xirema

IMO, I don't think increasing the AOE of a spell is that powerful. It's powerful enough to justify the expenditure of some Sorcery Points, but it's pretty rare to have an AOE nuke spell that doesn't also have the AOE of a... well, nuke. And if you invoke "well, what about Meteor Swarm"/whatever, I generally consider "balance" a non-factor when 9th level spellcasting is involved.

nitsua60

I didn't know we were running some sort of nudists' colony here....

NautArch

@nitsua60 Be careful of your 'friends' :)

Xirema

I mean, you can wipe out entire civilizations with a well-timed use of the Wish spell.

NautArch

and i think you mean: BLLLEEEEAAAATTT

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 18:17

@Xirema I guess my issue is that it deviates too far from the obvious and intended use of the ability for my comfort. I think we are throwing the baby out with the bath water here. Sure it makes it easier (maybe I still think the AOE thing would lead to weirdness I can't think of exampels right now though) but we end up with essentially a new ability.

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o okay. Bad example, but there have to be cases where reading clauses into the text is just absurd. I don't see the logic of adding the clause to Twinned Spell as a RAW or RAI interpretation

Jason_c_o

It's just now how I read it. "Capable of targeting more than one creature..." Hex isn't capable of targeting more than one. It just changes targets

that's not more than one

that's one, and then maybe another

I can see the other way, but that's not the path my brain takes haha

NautArch

I really think it's more about how many targets can the spell affect. Hex/HM is more than one. Dragon's Breath is a single target (but they can use it on more than on person), Haste is a single target (but they can use it on more than one creature), Protection is a single target (but it can have an impact on more than one creature's interaction with that target.)

KorvinStarmast

@Xirema That is right. What Crawford is saying makes no sense.

Rubiksmoose

I think perhaps a modification that fits my idea better would be to change it to saying "incapable of affecting more than one creature on the turn it is cast". What do people think of that?

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:23

@Rubiksmoose that would make hex/HM possible?

Jason_c_o

That's kinda how I read it. I'd twin Dragon's Breath. I don't think it makes sense to include whom the character actually breaths on

Rubiksmoose

Remove the target argument completely and make it say affect since it is pretty clear what that means. Then the turn limit is to prevent confusion about hex and other spells who can expand later.

@NautArch HM?

Xirema

@Rubiksmoose That would certainly clear up a lot of ambiguities, though it does shut down Dragon's Breath, as cast on yourself would enable you to Quicken it out and then use the action to deal damage.

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose hunter's mark

Rubiksmoose

@Xirema You can still do that though but only on yourself. I guess if you want to Twin you have to accept extra restrictions.

@NautArch ah ok. Yeah it would allow both of those.

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 18:25

@Xirema by that logic it also keeps the hex confusion since you could kill the target during the same turn

NautArch

@Rubiksmoose I don't think I'd want that allowed - but that's just me.

Rubiksmoose

@Rubiksmoose I think it takes a more pro-player logic to the ruling and also makes it easy for the DM to adjudicate as there is nothing I can think of that would be unclear with the new parameters.

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose HM still is

It has the ability to affect multiple targets in one turn but not at the same time

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Then it would not be allowed.

Jason_c_o

I'm still not confused by Hex.. "A creature you can see" is one. It can hop targets, but only if the other dies, so it's still one.

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:27

@DavidCoffron Thta's a good point. If you have extra attack you could attack/kill, bonus action change target, attack.

And then you've got multiple targets in a single turn.

Jason_c_o

where does Hex mention it's limited to a turn?

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o Consider this: if a spell said "select two targets" would you allow a player to pick the same creature for both?

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose Jason has been arguing that it is still only one target

Jason_c_o

@Rubiksmoose that's a different beast. If you can pick two, it's no longer elegible. But you aren't picking two

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o I was discussing whether Rubiksmoose's supposed revision solves the problem

Rubiksmoose

Oct 3, 2018 18:28

@Jason_c_o No I mean ignore Twinned for the moment.

Jason_c_o

@Rubiksmoose it wouldn't matter. It's still capable, just like Magic Missile

you can pick one target, but it's capable of more

Hex isn't

NautArch

@Jason_c_o why isn't hex?

KorvinStarmast

I would suggest we not discuss Twin and Hex in the same breath, since they said they did not balance all t his for Multiclassing?

NautArch

i thought both hex and Hunters Mark worked the same

Jason_c_o

Can Hex hex both creatures at once? @NautArch

No

KorvinStarmast

Oct 3, 2018 18:31

@NautArch yes, that is how I understand it.

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o Here's what I was trying to get at. Targets in this game are differentiated by creature. Regardless of when you choose the target or how a different creature is a different target. Saying that chosing creature A on turn 1 and then moving it to creature B on round 2 and counting them as one target would be the same as allowing both creatures to be considered the same target if chosen at the same time as well. It doesn't make sense.

David Coffron

@KorvinStarmast did they balance it for feats? You can get hex from magic initiate.

Jason_c_o

They are different targets, but it's not targeting more than one creature. Ever

it's never targeting more than one target, iow

Delioth

@Jason_c_o Concurrent Targets !== Targets. Just because Hex only targets one creature at a time, doesn't mean it only targets one creature

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron I guess I kind of missed your feedback, what did you think of the modification?

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:32

I think it does. I'll accept you don't agree

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose I could see it being used but it does change how it works fundamentally.

Delioth

It only targets one creature at a time, but over the lifetime of the spell it has 1+ targets

Jason_c_o

Hex is different from Magic Missile, and I would twin Dragon's Breath as well

NautArch

@Jason_c_o And neither can Hunter's Mark, right?

Rubiksmoose

@DavidCoffron Does it? It makes it more permissable sure, but the underlying concepts are the same about it I think. And it is much easier to use potentially.

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:33

@Jason_c_o It could target more than one in a single turn.

Jason_c_o

I don't see it mentioning turn anywhere

I think tha'ts a detail you're caught in that doesn't matter

it never targets more than one

it's not capable of targeting more than one

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o They are talking about my revision I think

David Coffron

@Rubiksmoose yeah. I would certainly not protest to it as a house rule. Can't think of any examples that it changes other than removing some ambiguity on DB. I'd say it's a good revision

Jason_c_o

maybe? I've lost track XD I'm talking vanilla, if it matters

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o The only way this statement can be true is if you accept your thesis that "at a time" is implied. If you disagree with that then that statement is false.

But there is almost no way to prove that it isn't implied so it is not really fruitful to keep arguing about that point with you.

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:36

I've already said I think it's implied. It's the way that makes sense to me, and it's the reading that causes less confusion.

NautArch

@Jason_c_o If we're talking vanilla, i really don't think it works. The difference is in your reading of it as "one creature at a time" and i'm reading it as "more than one creature targeted for the duration of the spell"

Jason_c_o

but then you're assuming the "duration of the spell" is implied

you're guilty of the same thing

NautArch

Neither are explicit or implicit (or right or wrong)

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o take Channel Divinity. "Beginning at 6th level, you can use your Channel Divinity twice between rests." Is there an implicit "[at the same time]" after "twice"

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o You did, but I think if we are going to continue this discussion we are going ot have to buy into one or another's reading. Arguing abou the same base point will get us nowhere. You read it one way, the rest of us read it the other.

KorvinStarmast

Oct 3, 2018 18:38

@DavidCoffron I don't think so, feats are an optional rule/variant.

Jason_c_o

I think the other way causes the confusion haha. I'll accept I'm the odd one out, but we're both adding something. Either "at a time" or "for the duration"

NautArch

but the intent based on tweets is not wanting more than creature targeted.

Delioth

"At a time" is a pretty large assertion to add to something as implicit. If you came across a spell that read "make an attack against one creature. If it hits, deal 1d8 psychic damage, and then you may make another attack against another creature in range, dealing the same damage. You may repeat these attacks until you miss or run out of targets".

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o I'm not adding "for the duration". It says if "the spell targets more than one creature". Hex targets more thsn one creature

Jason_c_o

no it doesn't

Delioth

Oct 3, 2018 18:39

It's pretty evident that this spell has multiple targets, but if you go by your reading of adding an implicit "at a time", then the spell only has one target

Jason_c_o

it targets one creature and that creature can change if one dies

you don't even need "at a time"

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o that makes 2 creatures.

2 distinct targets

Jason_c_o

oy vey

I don't want to go in circles too much here

KorvinStarmast

@DavidCoffron Not as far as I can tell from the text in front of me. Channel Divinity takes an action to do, for a cleric, right?

Rubiksmoose

Ok can we not keep doing this please. I think there are other interesting aspects to talk about. @Jason_c_o is reading it their own way and there's no way to convince them otherwise. We are reading it another. If we continue to talk about this we have to agree to one or the other.

David Coffron

Oct 3, 2018 18:41

If I fired a fun at a range and then fired the gun again down a different lane, did I hit "one target"?

Jason_c_o

You fired twice

Rubiksmoose

If we keep cutting in and disagreeing on the same unresolvable point we cannot have a discussion.

Xirema

@DavidCoffron Yes, because your accuracy isn't that good.

Jason_c_o

that's not comparable to Hex

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o ok. The bullet ricocheted and hit another target

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:42

Different beasts

Delioth

@DavidCoffron 2 targets by our reading, 1 target "at a time"

Jason_c_o

1 target at time of casting

Colin Gross

@Delioth chain lightning is one target at a time.

Rubiksmoose

@Delioth exactly.

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o I don't see how it's different. I fired one bullet (the casting). It hit the one target

Then it ricocheted (the target died) and hit another target (creature B)

Colin Gross

Oct 3, 2018 18:43

@DavidCoffron Was the bullet made of ice? I think that's relevant here.

Jason_c_o

Hex doesn't work like a bullet

ceding one one isn't ceding on the other

Delioth

So if I fling a fireball at one guy who (from my perspective) is standing in an open field, is that only 1 target?

David Coffron

@ColinGross ice knife is another good counterexample actually. The initial casting targets one creature but then does an AOE

Colin Gross

@Jason_c_o But six shooters have a HEXagonal arrangement of bullets. Soooo...

@DavidCoffron AIR?

Jason_c_o

good luck getting a bullet to ricochet off one person into another. I'd hardly call that practically capable

Colin Gross

Oct 3, 2018 18:44

Oh

Jason_c_o

You go out and consistently hit two targets with one bullet

and I'll consider your analogy

Colin Gross

@Jason_c_o What about just go through and into the person behind?

What if the "bullet" was made of lightning and did it really fast?

Delioth

@Jason_c_o Needing to bring actual physics into a debate about magic is kind of a bad sign

Jason_c_o

that depends on a lot, and usually bullets don't go straight through

Xirema

@Jason_c_o I have an image suddenly of someone putting an unshot bullet between their knuckles and punching people with it.

Colin Gross

Oct 3, 2018 18:45

@Jason_c_o Depends on how hard they try

David Coffron

@Jason_c_o it's an analogy. I can hit two targets with a frisbee. Now will you consider it?

Xirema

That's gotta be an Anime character, yeah?

Jason_c_o

@Delioth That's what I'm saying. You can't compare Hex to abullet

Delioth

It could just as easily be me throwing a ball, bouncing if off the barbarian's head, and hitting the wizard

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron The analogy needs to be taken out back and shot. Then we can play frisbee

NautArch

Oct 3, 2018 18:45

This poor horse.

I think it's time to move on.

Jason_c_o

Yeah the analogy sucks, is what I'm saying

Colin Gross

@Delioth Off the barbarian, into the wizard, over the rogue... nothing but net.

Xirema

@ColinGross But we can't shoot two analogies with the same bullet.

Jason_c_o

too bad

Colin Gross

@Xirema We can, but they can't be twins.

Jason_c_o

Oct 3, 2018 18:46

but if we can't, then we can twin it

Rubiksmoose

@Jason_c_o It doesn't suck, but it also doesn't help the discussion at all since it doesn address the assumption that we can't disprove.

Jason_c_o

then it sucks for it's intended purpose

Xirema

My takeaway from this conversation is that we should all go out and start shooting twins. Everyone in agreement?

Okay, excellent.

David Coffron

@NautArch I agree. Lets do a reducto ad comedium like usual

Colin Gross

@Rubiksmoose Undisprovable assumption.... "undisuption"

KorvinStarmast

Oct 3, 2018 18:47

I will be soon suggesting a new metamagic: Tripled Spell. It will be much easier to implement.

David Coffron

@KorvinStarmast Can I twin and triple a spell?

Colin Gross

@DavidCoffron That only affects small to large analogies. Small, tiny, huge, and gargantuan analogies are unaffected.

Xirema

> Tripled Spell. Spend 3 Sorcery Points. Your DM immediately convulses over in an uncontrollable fit of sobbing and wailing. You instantly win D&D 5e.

Rubiksmoose

> When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self [...] To be eligible, a spell must be incapable of incapable of affecting more than one creature on the same turn on which it is cast, at the spell's current level.

So that is my proposed rewording.

And it also happens to bypass this entire debate.

TRPG General Chat

Participants