D&D 5E Warlock and Repelling Blast

[Arial Black]

Magic.

Bullsh*t is mundane, not magic.

 

[Zorku]

Bullsh*t is mundane, not magic.

And Eldritch Blast is magic, not . Moreover it's often far realm magic so it makes even less sense than usual.

 

[Noctem]

The rules text we have certainly does not say that the beams are not simultaneous, nor does it say they are consecutive.

The only relevant 5E text is the instantaneous duration, and the fact that the magic of instantaneous spells last for only an instant. This does not suggest 'thinking time between beams', and does suggest 'practically simultaneous'.

The Making an Attack rules which includes all attacks made via weapon and/or spells specifically say that each attack follows 3 steps in a specific order (outside of specifically called out exceptions), for every attack made. By your logic (and you ignoring the Making an attack rules) weapon attacks would also be simultaneous since similarly nothing in the PHB says that they can't or aren't. Btw, your usual reply here is that you can follow the steps but change the rule to pick all targets for all attacks, figure all the modifiers for all the attacks, resolve all the attacks at the same time giving the simultaneous attacks bs once again. But as you and I both know, that's you changing the rules to suit your claim.

 

[Arial Black]

And Eldritch Blast is magic, not . Moreover it's often far realm magic so it makes even less sense than usual.

Nevertheless, spells do exactly what they say they do. Unless a spell says that it dilates time for some while not for others, then it's bullsh*t to suggest that it has that effect.

There is a spell which does this: time stop, a 9th level spell. It does because it says it does. It's wrong to claim that a cantrip can do this when it says no such thing, on the bogus grounds that "it's magic!"

 

[Arial Black]

The Making an Attack rules which includes all attacks made via weapon and/or spells specifically say that each attack follows 3 steps in a specific order (outside of specifically called out exceptions), for every attack made. By your logic (and you ignoring the Making an attack rules) weapon attacks would also be simultaneous since similarly nothing in the PHB says that they can't or aren't. Btw, your usual reply here is that you can follow the steps but change the rule to pick all targets for all attacks, figure all the modifiers for all the attacks, resolve all the attacks at the same time giving the simultaneous attacks bs once again. But as you and I both know, that's you changing the rules to suit your claim.

That's not my usual reply. My reply is that, although the Making An Attack rules certainly apply to eldritch blast, those rules certainly do not have anything to say about attacks being either simultaneous OR consecutive, because they aren't trying to; they simply tell us how ONE attack is resolved, not how to arrange multiple attacks.

Therefore, I don't need to change the Making An Attack rules in order to resolve simultaneous attacks, because the Making An Attack rules don't forbid simultaneous attacks.

The part of the combat rules that does address multiple attacks only applies to weapon attacks, not to spell attacks like eldritch blast or scorching ray.

 

[evincarzed]

This warlock features says it allows you to push a foe 10 feet away from you in a straight line when you hit with Eldritch blast. If I'm 12th level and I have 3 blasts, does this mean I push them 10 feet for every hit for a total of 30 feet?

The seminal point is:
Does the invocation in question can push targets once or multiple times?
Does it say push per cast or push per hit?
If its per hit, then per hit it is.

Thats my point of view on this matter of secondary arguments:

"Duration: Instantaneous" doesn't mean zero or no measureable time interval between cast-effect. It just means it doesnt last enough to be dispelled, but enough to be countered. The duration of the spell is small enough to be irrelevant in the round its being cast.
You can react, after all.
So, there IS some amount of time. The rules cover how much? No.
They need to cover it? Nope.
Magic missile is set apart of other spells by saying its hits are simultaneous.
The other spells say they are simultaneous?
No? Then they are not.

Consider a reaction, or ready action.
If X happens, then Y.
"If the warlock attacks me, i run around the corner, disappearing from view."

A) if the target allocation is defined on cast, then any change on this allocation is not possible. The target is chosen and be done with it.
B) If the target allocation is defined on each attack, then any subsequent changes can affect the choosing.

Then:
A) The warlock then (cast his spell, choose his target and only then...) attacks for the first time, and the target dives away from his vision, as the rightfull interruption of this ready action allows him to get full cover. But the target was already chosen for all attacks of his blasts, and all the blasts do... what? turn the corner on his tail? Follow him supernaturally tracking him behind the corner and hitting the wall?

B) The warlock cast his spell, choose his first target, make his first attack, only to see the rascal target disappear from view. He then chooses other targets for his remaining blasts, each one at his own time.

EDIT: the way i see it, B makes sense, A does not.
EDIT 2: Some musings:
Looks like there is foreign (meaning d&D game as "home") definitions of instantaneous involved. Magic the gathering (WoTC game too) uses those "target on cast" definitions, and ignore the "attack steps routine". Maybe there is some influence on this confusion?

 

[CapnZapp]

If 826 replies haven't sorted this out, I don't think an 827th will either.

 

[Zorku]

But an 827th reply after more than 2 years of inactivity, not THAT is something that will resolve the issue.

 

[evincarzed]

hey, no one can blame me of omission

 

[evincarzed]

oops