D&D 5E (2014) Twinning Dragons Breath Spells?

[Zardnaar]

This spell.

Dragon's Breath - DND 5th Edition

dnd5e.wikidot.com

Well RAW it seems to be fine Jeremy Crawford seems to say no according to Google.

I may also be inclined to allow it in a smaller group or if someone picked an acid dragon sorcerer.
It doesn't seem to fit the spirit of twin spell as it allows the attacks over multiple rounds. But so does haste.

Your thoughts?

 

[cbwjm]

I allow dragon's breath to be twinned.

 

[ichabod]

I would also allow dragon's breath to be twinned. But, hey, maybe if they clearly stated what each spell's target was, we wouldn't have these problems.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I would also allow dragon's breath to be twinned. But, hey, maybe if they clearly stated what each spell's target was, we wouldn't have these problems.

Yet again, natural language fails to save the day.

 

[Seramus]

I allow it. It hurts basically nothing. Go on with your bad huff'n'puff self.

 

[kigmatzomat]

I think this is a more of a gut-reaction to the balance problem, rather than rules-as-written analysis.

E.g. "can these be twinned":

• a spell that does AoE slashing damage - NO
• A spell that gives the caster-only claws - NO
• A spell that gives any one creature touched claws that do damage - YES
• A spell that turns any one creature into a lion - YES
• A spell that gives any one creature touched a breath weapon/gaze attack/AoE - (meltdown)

Claws obviously can affect multiple creatures over time, especially if cast on a fighter. Are they the "target"? Well, no, the person who gets the claws is the target.

I personally think the meltdown is "But with Dragon's Breath there are Saves! The creatures that make Saves from a spell must be the target....right?"

And that's silly. Polymorph can get a form with a knockdown attack which has saves and yet Polymorph is clearly in the "ok to twin" category

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I think this is a more of a gut-reaction to the balance problem, rather than rules-as-written analysis.

E.g. "can these be twinned":

• a spell that does AoE slashing damage - NO
• A spell that gives the caster-only claws - NO
• A spell that gives any one creature touched claws that do damage - YES
• A spell that turns any one creature into a lion - YES
• A spell that gives any one creature touched a breath weapon/gaze attack/AoE - (meltdown)

Claws obviously can affect multiple creatures over time, especially if cast on a fighter. Are they the "target"? Well, no, the person who gets the claws is the target.

I personally think the meltdown is "But with Dragon's Breath there are Saves! The creatures that make Saves from a spell must be the target....right?"

And that's silly. Polymorph can get a form with a knockdown attack which has saves and yet Polymorph is clearly in the "ok to twin" category

Which is why it is nice to have a distinction between effect and secondary attacks. The dragon's breath spell effect has a single target. This effect enables a secondary attack, which happens to induce a save, with its own effects. Twinning, based on all acceptable examples, only cares about the initial/primary target, not all potential secondary/tertiary/etc. targets.

But because being specific and consistent is "jargon"....

 

[Zardnaar]

First time it got used the other day.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Which is why it is nice to have a distinction between effect and secondary attacks. .......

But because being specific and consistent is "jargon"....

Oh, I agree totally. I liked the clearly defined terms used in 3e. I was positing my theory that Saves are somehow triggering to the devs.

 

[DeviousQuail]

I allow it. The game doesn't feel broken if you do and that was how I interpreted the rules as written.

For the future a simpler Twinned metamagic would be allowing it for any spell that can target an additional creature when upcasting. That way it effectively becomes a free upcast and the effect is already accounted for in the spell design. I don't love it since that means no self or AoE, but at least it becomes consistent.