MerakSpielman
First Post
yes, caliban, but how did you react to this:
seems like you conveniently ignored it.
TrizzlWizzl said:
seems like you conveniently ignored it.
Magic Missile on Constructs
- Thread starter douga
- Start date
MerakSpielman said:
Are you honestly saying that if I fired 5 magic missiles at 5 different targets, each with a hardness of 5, that I would add all my damage together, and then subtract 5 hardness, before applying damage to any of the targets?
I ignored it because it's idiotic.
IceBear
Explorer
MerakSpielman said:
No, I think he said something to the effect that the multiple missles are from ONE spell, not two. However, the passage doesn't say spells, it says effects.
I think I'll side with Caliban on this one (it's not strong agreement at this point, but it's agreement
) but given that each individual missle doesn't hit the EXACT same spot (at least that's how I see it) I don't think they should be added together for purposes of DR or hardness.IceBear
Last edited:
drnuncheon
Explorer
MerakSpielman said:
That rule is taken out of context - it's from a section discussing how two or more spells interact, not how one spell interacts with itself. Therefore, it doesn't apply in this situation.
Shuriken do count separately vs. damage reduction. Their damage is '1', not '1 per shuriken thrown'. Even though they are all sent at the same target they do not all hit in the same place.
The way that SR functions is not evidence for the way DR functions. SR and DR function in completely different ways - SR is more akin to armor than it is DR. In addition, the SRD has specific instructions on how to handle SR in these cases: "Check spell resistance only once for any particular casting of a spell or use of a spell-like ability. If spell resistance fails the first time, it fails each time the creature encounters that same casting of the spell. Likewise, if the spell resistance succeeds the first time, it always succeeds. "
In short: Caliban's got the preponderance of the evidence on his side. In the extremely rare case that magic missiles impact something with hardness (which only occurs in the case of animated objects as far as I can tell, since creatures are the only legal targets for MM and creatures generally do not have hardness), the hardness is assessed against each missile separately.
J
I have to agree with Caliban here.
Hardness works per instance of damage. If the object gets hit simultaneously with two arrows, or two swords, or two copies of that duplicating weapon from ELH, hardness applies to each of the hits separately.
The spell generates multiple missiles, doing 1d4+1 damage each. Since there's more than one missile, hardness applies more than once. It's perfectly straightforward.
If the spell were worded like Fire Seeds or something, where there's a single pool of damage dice that can be divided among multiple targets, then hardness would only apply once for a given target. That isn't how the spell works, though.
The PHB passage quoted, referring to multiple instantaneous effects, is in the context of spell duration. It's talking about what happens if I apply a spell with a lasting instantaneous effect (like Flesh to Stone), followed by another such spell; the effects stack instead of overlapping. It really has nothing to do with Magic Missile, object hardness, or this discussion in general.
Hardness works per instance of damage. If the object gets hit simultaneously with two arrows, or two swords, or two copies of that duplicating weapon from ELH, hardness applies to each of the hits separately.
The spell generates multiple missiles, doing 1d4+1 damage each. Since there's more than one missile, hardness applies more than once. It's perfectly straightforward.
If the spell were worded like Fire Seeds or something, where there's a single pool of damage dice that can be divided among multiple targets, then hardness would only apply once for a given target. That isn't how the spell works, though.
The PHB passage quoted, referring to multiple instantaneous effects, is in the context of spell duration. It's talking about what happens if I apply a spell with a lasting instantaneous effect (like Flesh to Stone), followed by another such spell; the effects stack instead of overlapping. It really has nothing to do with Magic Missile, object hardness, or this discussion in general.
TrizzlWizzl
First Post
If you think my calling you "homie" constitutes "name calling" then we simply don't share the same cultural background, heritage, language nuances or marketing demographic. Ease back there, um... chum? Buddy? Compadre?
Anyways, whatever. I couldn't find the answer to our particular quandry in the FAQ. The letter to the Sage has been sent. What we have here is a rules question that I can't believe hasn't been addressed before, so until someone comes along with a link to the Answer or I get a letter from the Sage I'm gonna assume I'm right. 'Cause why not?
MerakSpielman
First Post
So would you also rule that Ice Storm would not deal bludgening damage to such creatures, because it has multiple hailstones?
Last edited:
drnuncheon
Explorer
MerakSpielman said:
If the spell said 'ice storm generates 5 hailstones doing 1d6 damage each', then yes.
Since it doesn't, it's not really the same thing.
J
No. Ice storm is an area effect, exactly like fireball. It is a single instance of damage, applied to each creature in the area, once.MerakSpielman said:
If it specified a certain number of hailstones, and the caster could aim those stones at one or more targets in the area, then it would be equivalent. But it doesn't say that, so it's irrelevant.
Last edited:
Similar Threads
