Magic Missile. How have you and how do you roll the damage.

[Tim Freerksen]

I always roll for each missile damage. They auto-hit, always have and always will for me.

 

[S'mon]

Per missile of course. Sounds like a Twitter brainfart from the "Sage" (LOL).

I wouldn't be happy at any player who started pointing to tweets as a rules source.

 

[Satyrn]

I'm not sure I've ever rolled damage for a magic missile.

I know I haven't in 5e. Nor 4e. Probably not in 3e. Maybe 2e, since I actually played a wizard way back then

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Have you ever rolled one die and applied the result to each missile before 5e? For me, I'm always going to roll damage for each missile instead of once for the whole spell.

It makes more sense if you treat magic missile as an AoE spell, just one with interesting targeting. When you cast fireball, you roll damage once and apply the same number to every target. Apply the same reasoning to magic missile, with the only difference that a creature in a fireball only gets hit once but a creature in a magic missile can be hit more than once.

On the other hand, I always roll seperately. I do, however, demand from my players that they allocate all targets before rolling any dice (the opposite to the various blast and ray spells).

 

[Caliban]

Per missile of course. Sounds like a Twitter brainfart from the "Sage" (LOL).

I wouldn't be happy at any player who started pointing to tweets as a rules source.

How about those who point to actual rules printed in the PHB which support the Sage's statement, or are you too busy laughing at your own "wit" to care about such things?

 

[AmerginLiath]

Surreptitiously pick up the proper number of dice and hurl them at the DM while shouting “Magic Missile!” Right as it becomes your turn.

Count the number of dice s/he fails to dodge and let the table vote on an inverse scale of one to four on avoidance technique.

 

[5ekyu]

How about those who point to actual rules printed in the PHB which support the Sage's statement, or are you too busy laughing at your own "wit" to care about such things?

I support the Sage normally and even I say his selective reasoning here is dubious - albeit official.

The mm spell says each dart does d4+1 to "its target" which is a lot different than the wording of actual AoE spells like fireball.

He ignores or supplants that difference to declare them as "like AoE spells" (or was it sort of like) because of the simultaneous ruling which he then decides is what "at the same time" require under doing damage section - although one could just as easily ruled a spell like scorching ray counts as well for the "one roll hurts all targets" because it is an instantaneous spell.

Basically there is a "pair of rules" you can take from the same sections and the same spells to make it treat scorching ray the same as mm or to make it different in regards to roll for each or roll once.

But the difference is, what about say Acid Spray which does not have a to-hit roll but also does not have an AoE and does not have the words simultaneous anywhere?

No AoE - pick one or two targets - not three even if in ssme hex.

Not simultaneous- or does instantaneous here for this spell count for the "at the same time"

Definitely no to-hit roll so not sequenced.

That is my problem with the ruling he chose, it created a odd dividing line for this one or many rolls question that leaves a lot of gaps, instead of the other pair of rules which would have made it more distinct.

Either of these seems clearer in the big "how this rule can work in practice...

Instant dmg vs multiple targets triggers one roll

Or

If you select targets (as opposed to everyone in an area) its individual rolls

Moreover, the oddest thing is the less clear most obscure pairing he chose actually served to boost on of the already traditionally overturned spells for its level. He admits balance is one of the last considerations but here he seemed to go out of his way to find the counter to balance solution.

It's not a ruling I find myself able to endorse, frankly.

 

[S'mon]

How about those who point to actual rules printed in the PHB which support the Sage's statement, or are you too busy laughing at your own "wit" to care about such things?

It does not support the tweet* at all, it says "A dart does d4+ 1 damage to its target" and that the spell creates three. Nothing about them all doing the same damage.

So yes I would be annoyed at a player being a dick and wanting to roll once for all, and if they persisted in being a dick (or quoted Twitter at me) they can get lost.

*Edit: I wrote 'The Sage', but this is stupid. Sage Advice was an advice column in Dragon magazine - a printed column means time to consider and potential editorial review. The person writing it was 'The Sage' only when writing in that capacity, not as some kind of Professorial chair. Sometimes he or she got it wrong, but it was considered advice. Random tweets are not comparable IMO.

 

[delericho]

Roll per missile.

Sage Advice has a long and glorious history of getting things wrong.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I don't see anything wrong or dubious about the ruling.

In fact I'm pretty sure one roll is what's been intended all along. I think it was intentionally changed like this in 5e due to balance, because there are several abilities that read "when you roll damage" and those are intended to only apply once per spell and not once per spell target.

So if you house rule that magic missile is a separate damage roll per dart, you should at the same time house rule that all dart damage rolls together still only count as one damage roll for other abilities.