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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="seebs" data-source="post: 6773087" data-attributes="member: 61529">No, in an effort to communicate to you why it is that being smug and rude about how you don't think other people have read the rules is completely non-productive.Yes, but you haven't shown any signs of listening. You gleefully declare that how things worked in prior editions isn't relevant, but you don't stop to consider why I might think an example from that was relevant to the discussion. You aren't making any effort to think about what I am communicating, just to look for things in it you can use to declare it wrong so you can declare victory.I didn't say you weren't reading my posts. I said that I have evidence that you have a history of telling other people to read the rules when you clearly haven't, and that you weren't listening to other people's posts. Reading and listening-to are not the same thing; "listening to" implies an effort to comprehend the intent of the communication, not just looking for the first thing you can find to attack.Hooray.I still think the magic missile question is at best tangentially or indirectly relevant. More useful would be to identify specific points of dispute about the structure or intent of the rules, and ask those questions -- and there's more than one. The most obvious point appears to be the assertion by AB that "instantaneous" spells must occur all-at-once, and thus prohibit a target-resolve-target-resolve cycle. That's a claim which I don't think is supported by the rules. But the question about magic missile is only sort of related to that; after all, it could well be that many spells have a target-resolve-target-resolve cycle, and many don't. There's lots of spells which are clearly intended to pick all targets, then resolve effects against all targets, rather than doing the cycle. There's also at least some which I think are clearnly intended to have a cycle. But if I were going to guess, I'd guess first that the rule is that a spell which requires attacks will let you cycle through the attack sequence normally, and a spell which hits automatically (whether or not it is subject to saving throws) will generally require you to pick all targets before resolving any spell effects. I don't think the magic missile question helps us much on that; if the answer really is "yes", then everyone I know has played most of the spells wrong in 5e, and probably in previous editions too. If it's "no", then we're back to having no idea at all what the rule would be, or whether there's any general pattern, and we haven't actually resolved much of anything, because we still have most of the problem space open, and asking about magic missile told us almost nothing. (The "yes" answer would at least indirectly tell us that eldritch blast, not being magic missile, does not require simultaneous resolution. The "no" answer does not tell us whether or not eldritch blast is intended to require separate resolution.)</blockquote>

Verification