• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D General 0 HP Magic Missile = Death?

TheSword

Legend
Auto damage? Single source as far as I’m concerned. Two reasons…

Would you make a wizard affected by it take 3 concentration checks? I don’t think so.

Otherwise it’s just a spell designed to pee off players and make them feel really hard done by.
 

log in or register to remove this ad





Reynard

Legend
Supporter
Well no, not the same, because eldritch blast requires attack rolls and the magic missile volumes increase dramatically faster than attacks.
One impact of the "one damage vs many smaller damages" decision is the difficulty of that concentration check. It is much easier to break concentration by forcing many checks when even the collected damage is relatively low. Total magic missile damage just doesn't get high enough to make the DC hard. I don't know ifbthis is intentional, but Crawford seems to think so.
 

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
No, it is a spell that makes no attacks. It just deals damage.

Makes no attack rolls. That’s not the same thing as no attacks.
And if you target one creature, they all hit at the same time.
You can, as DM, rule it that way, but it’s not in the spell description.

And you could also rule that a main hand and off-hand attack hit at the same time.
Allowing MM to count as separate sources of damage would be like ruling a creature that falls takes more than one source of damage. Afterall, first its arm hits, then its head, then back, then legs. Obviously it is very likely that creature will suffer multiple sources of injury. But for the game, it is treated as one source of damage.

No, it wouldn’t, because that’s not how the rules work. There is no head vs arm vs leg damage; it’s one roll.

It seems to me you don’t like the idea of magic missile working the way the OP describes. Which is fine! You’re the DM; rule however you want.

But your attempts to show how your preference is technically correct are…lacking.
 

Bill Zebub

“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
On the other hand, the spell's scaling isn't great, such that it seems pretty pointless in medium to higher levels.

Now, the thing becomes quite a menace, and a counter to the whack-a-mole of magical healing. When a teammate goes down, you darned well ought to put pressure on the enemy wizard, or...

Yeah this is exactly where I come out.
 

ezo

Where is that Singe?
Makes no attack rolls. That’s not the same thing as no attacks.

You can, as DM, rule it that way, but it’s not in the spell description.

And you could also rule that a main hand and off-hand attack hit at the same time.


No, it wouldn’t, because that’s not how the rules work. There is no head vs arm vs leg damage; it’s one roll.

It seems to me you don’t like the idea of magic missile working the way the OP describes. Which is fine! You’re the DM; rule however you want.

But your attempts to show how your preference is technically correct are…lacking.
There is no gap. See my Zen moment above. ;)
 

TheSword

Legend
One impact of the "one damage vs many smaller damages" decision is the difficulty of that concentration check. It is much easier to break concentration by forcing many checks when even the collected damage is relatively low. Total magic missile damage just doesn't get high enough to make the DC hard. I don't know ifbthis is intentional, but Crawford seems to think so.
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.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top