Attacks against multiple targets

[Nikosandros]

Then all that "maximized dice" talk would be useless, since you're not maximizing your damage if you're rolling it.

No, because if you have to roll damage separately against each target, scoring a crit will save you plenty of dice rolls.

I think JohnSnow's interpretation is probably closest to accurate.

Yes, it's certainly possible... if it so, I'm still unclear about the second part of the quote.... how is this really saving all those die rolls?

 

[Deverash]

No, because if you have to roll damage separately against each target, scoring a crit will save you plenty of dice rolls.

Yes, it's certainly possible... if it so, I'm still unclear about the second part of the quote.... how is this really saving all those die rolls?

The speed from having the aggressor roll attacks against a static defense is that he's already in the mind set of rolling dice, and particularily comes into play when the NPC wizard is rolling against the players. I know in our game, when we all have to make saves(or spot checks or anything else) it takes more time to get everyone to roll the dice, add in their modifiers, then relay them to the DM so he can check it against the DC, than it would be if he made all the die rolls and just told us what happened...like in melee combat. It's even better if he's got our defenses already written down somewhere, so he doesn't have to ask, "Does a 16 hit?"

 

[Warbringer]

Think he may be simply referring to when you crit you do max... no need to confirm, no need to roll that d8 4 times to calculate damage for your scythe attack.... yes, some of us don't have four d8s


Also, I hope to hell you don' t roll damage separate for each target when hit... that would be a true pitha in general, and especiallyfor area of effect

I think 1 roll to hit, 1 roll for damage

 

[JohnSnow]

I don't think so. double attack and what-not aren't multi-target attacks. They're individual attacks, against individual targets.

A grenade or auto-fire attack is the closest to the Saga version of a multi-target attack.

I utterly recant my earlier guess. I'm not saying those abilities won't exist, but that's not what this is addressing, as you point out.

Saying that "you make an attack roll against each target" is NOT the same as saying "you make a separate attack roll against each target." It could, and I think probably does, mean "the same attack roll affects each and every target."

So this is, in my mind, precisely referencing the fireball situation. When you crit, you know how much damage your fireball does to every target.

EDIT: I dunno...now I'm waffling...need...more...information.

 

[Abstraction]

You'll roll an attack roll against each target, so maximized dice ...

They don't always say exactly what they mean. This could mean "You roll an attack roll, which is applied to each target..." or it could mean "You roll attack rolls for every target..."

 

[Novem5er]

I'm voting for 1 attack role for a fireball.

To quote the article:

"You'll roll an attack roll against each target".

Two key words here "an" (attack roll) and "each" (target). I take it as meaning you roll a single attack roll (thus the singular "an") and the result is applied "against" each target.

This takes into account that different targets in the same blast might have different Defense scores. Also, it implies that you aren't "attacking" the ground.

So 1 attack roll that is applied against each target's Defense.

 

[Voss]

Standard english usage is the opposite. 'an attack roll' goes with 'each' not 'against'
Now, the author's English skills may be poor, but as written, it really is saying you roll a separate d20 for each and every target.

The context of the rest of the paragraph reinforces that (even though, overall, it isn't actually saving much in the way of die rolls).

 

[Abstraction]

All that the context of the rest of the paragraph really says is that you should write down your max damage for each weapon/spell/power.

 

[Novem5er]

Standard english usage is the opposite. 'an attack roll' goes with 'each' not 'against'
Now, the author's English skills may be poor, but as written, it really is saying you roll a separate d20 for each and every target.

The context of the rest of the paragraph reinforces that (even though, overall, it isn't actually saving much in the way of die rolls).

I agree, simply written, it states that we'll be rolling a separate attack for each target. However, given the informal nature of these previews, I take the language as more "spoken" which means clarity is not always paramount. If the author were to speak that same sentence, his meaning would depend on what word he emphasized.

"You'll roll an attack roll AGAINST each target" would imply that the single roll is being applied against different targets.

"You'll roll an attack roll against EACH target" implies a different roll for each target.

I think it makes sense that we would make a single roll. A single roll sets a bar that is measured against different Defense values. If you hit target A, but missed target B, it's because B was a more slippery opponent.

Otherwise, if you rolled separately, you could miss the guy with a low Defense and hit the guy with the HIGH defense, all with the same action?

I still vote for a single attack roll

 

[Voss]

No, no, oh please no. Please don't start second guessing the preview posts and saying that they don't actually mean what they say. That way lies madness.

Madness!