Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lumenbeing" data-source="post: 7908653" data-attributes="member: 6779684">There is a particular reason and I've said it before. Here it is again. If the requirement (implicit in the word "must") was a price in gold rather than "make an attack with a melee weapon" no one would be arguing that twinning the spell puts the needed gold in the casters pocket. Yes the spell creates an exception, but not in that it grants a melee attack, but rather in that it imposes an additional requirement (like a component) as a threshold limit on the spell. You aren't "able to" make an attack with a melee weapon, you HAVE TO. You "must". Otherwise the spell fails. And as you say, there is "no particular reason" to say that Twinning doesn't extend that requirement.Maybe you have a point about invoking common sense being dubious. I don't agree, but let me state it another way. The degree to which the notion of Twinning Booming blade would necessarily grant an otherwise physically incapable caster of making 2 melee weapon attacks, possibly on opposite sides of him, offends my sense of verisimilitude, and in my reading of the spell description is not at all supported, so rather than inventing ways the twinning of the spell "might" work to further strain my suspension of disbelief, I prefer my argument that Twinning this particular spell is simply not possible unless the caster can fulfill the twinning requirements. And I'm perfectly fine with the characterization of this as a "house rule."On the other hand, the reason I even bother arguing is this. For whatever reason, arguments are given more weight when they appear on the internet. Some player will surely come along as say, "oooh look, these 5 randoms on EnWorld agree you CAN twin booming blade. And JC tweeted that it grants a second weapon attack. My DM is soooo wrong" So now, officially, not everyone agrees with the "community consensus." You're welcome.</blockquote>

Verification