D&D General 0 HP Magic Missile = Death?

[Reynard]

Okay but the threshold to make the difference is 21+ damage which feels like a very high bar to match for any spell of low level.

Compare it to the 2nd level scorching Ray - maybe 3 hits if you’re lucky doing 7 damage average. So DC 10 concentrate.

Even the 3rd level fireball is gonna do an average of 28 damage but if they save 14 so still DC 10 concentrate.

Basically, concentration is too difficult to break when characters are low level, and too hard when they are high level.

 

[TheSword]

Basically, concentration is too difficult to break when characters are low level, and too hard when they are high level.

Well you only get one concentration spell regardless of level, so probably about right.

I don’t quite agree though as damage increases much faster than proficiency/ability score bonuses much more than the 4-6 points your concentration proficiency is likely to go up over the full course of an adventuring career

 

[Reynard]

Well you only get one concentration spell regardless of level, so probably about right.

I don’t quite agree though as damage increases much faster than proficiency/ability score bonuses.

It also occurs to me that casters are better concentration breakers than warriors, since cantrips add dice where warriors add attacks. I wonder if it would be reasonable to give warriors an option to conver theri extra attacks into extra damage dice. it is a lower total amount of damage (since they are losing some number of attribute and other damage bonuses) but for things where the total number matters is it important.

It also suggests that rogues are good concentration breakers. Which is typical, since they are good at everything else, too.

 

[the Jester]

So if you're reduced to 0 hp and get magic missiled before someone can healing word you thats 3 sources of damage= death?

That would be my ruling.

 

[jgsugden]

This is definitely one of those areas where we can talk about RAW, but you should absolutely ask the DM. It is a very strong effect for a first level spell as either a concentration breaker or 'down killer' (if allowed), which can be horrible as a player to see used against you. A few low level spellcasters pelthing a high level wizard with magic missiles (if they do not have shield) can be an absolute concentration killer.

 

[the Jester]

However, it is probably unbalanced for MM to do discrete damages because that means a single casting can not only kill a downed creature easily, but it also plays havoc with concentration, forcing multiple checks (trivial checks, but the die has many sides...).

This is a feature, not a bug. (See also mirror image in previous editions).

 

[cbwjm]

It also occurs to me that casters are better concentration breakers than warriors, since cantrips add dice where warriors add attacks. I wonder if it would be reasonable to give warriors an option to conver theri extra attacks into extra damage dice. it is a lower total amount of damage (since they are losing some number of attribute and other damage bonuses) but for things where the total number matters is it important.

It also suggests that rogues are good concentration breakers. Which is typical, since they are good at everything else, too.

Considering most NPC stock casters have a constitution save of +0 to +2, I think I'd rather have multiple attacks to force multiple saves since you need at least 22 damage for the save to be higher than DC 10.

 

[the Jester]

Well, I wasn't cherry picking as you seem to think, I was only pointing out that, even though each dart deals damage, it all hits at the same time. That was my point. Like my falling example. If you fall you will very likely suffer multiple injuries, even if minor, which would all be damage. But the game groups it all into one total.

Yes, but the game doesn't group magic missile damage- each missile does its own damage. When you fall, you take one damage expression (say, 6d6 for a 60' fall). When you are struck by a magic missile, each missile does a separate amount of damage. Same thing applies to (for instance) scorching ray or eldritch blast.

Do you tell a player hit by multiple magic missiles the damage they take from each separate missile, or just tell them the total?

Each one, if it is relevant; total, if it isn't. For instance, if a pc has force resistance, I'll give them each missile's damage separately, because rounding matters.

For example: a PC has 8 hp left and is hit by all three missiles (which we know strike simulatenously). You roll damage and get 3, 5, 2 total. If you say the 3 and 5 are applied first, reducing the PC to 0 hp, the last 2 would be an auto fail death save. But what if you told them the damage was 3, 2, and then 5? Well, now they are still at 0 hp, but no auto fail death save.

If you roll the damage "in order" and tell them each individual damage, you are then forcing a random order on something that happens simultaneously. After all, with those damage rolls, only saying the 3 and 5 (or 5 and 3) would result in a failed death save. Starting with the 3,2 or 2,3 or the 5,2 or 2,5 combinations would NOT result in a failed death save.

So, random chance of how you told them the damage results in just a 1/3 chance of a failed death save in this case.

As long as you are consistent in how you do it, you're being fair. For instance, if the order matters, I read damage dice from right to left and top to bottom.

No, you take damage ONCE because it all happens at the same time. (See my above point.)

If you move and provoke three opportunity attacks and all three hit, they all damage you at once.

 

[Stormonu]

Personally, I think that it should Death saving throws should be a one per round thing, maybe done at init 0. If the target has taken any damage that round (no matter the number of sources or the amount), the save is automatically failed. If any of the damage comes from a critical (such as a cu de grad-type attack meant to purposely kill the victim), it counts as two failures.

There will always be some gaminess to the procedure, but as long as no one’s really trying to exploit the rules (and the magic missile example does sort of seem an attempt at that), I don’t see much wrong with the normal method, as is. I’d only advocate for a change if I got the impression someone was trying to game the system, not the story.

 

[Krachek]

TheSword said:
Would you make a wizard affected by it take 3 concentration checks?

Yes.

The fun is that the Wizard is more likely to have Shield to protect himself, but the BBEG won’t have Shield! So net advantage for the players!

Overall those nasty tricks from DM work a few sessions, after that players adjust their play and eventually screw the DM with his own tricks.