quick question, can you twin spell eldritch blast at 17th level and attack two different people with twin spell?
if so you can do **** tons of damage with it and then action surge and do it again
You cannot use twin spell on spells that are capable of targeting more than one creature, even if intended to choose to target only one creature.
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
slumgum wrote:
slumgum wrote:
What is the difference between "When you cast a spell that targets only one creature" and "When you cast a spell that is only targeting one creature"? You've changed tense and location of the word "only", but the meaning is the same. If you choose to make all the Eldritch Blast beams target a single creature that is both a spell that is only targeting one creature AND a spell that targets only one creature.
Technically, 5e spells aren't formatted as rigidly as 4e powers, which had a target line.
Important bits of EB:
"A beam of crackling energy streaks toward a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target."
and
"You can direct the beams at the same target or at different ones."
The spell, by default, states that it targets "a creature", singular, thus meeting the requirement for Twinned Spell. At levels 5, 11, and 17 is where things getting muddied. The latter clause allows for modification to the basic form of the spell, allowing the additional option to target different creatures. Though it's an exception, it is not a replacement of the default mode of the spell. And unlike 4e, where a target line is literally a replacement for any previoius target line, e.g. psionic powers that used power points, no such construct exists in 5e. The spell simply states what it does and to this end it can always be used to "target only one creature" as Twinned Spell requires.
slumgum wrote:
slumgum wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Ashrym wrote:
Since it was so demanded, here is where a tweet confirming my interpretation as the correctly intended one can be found - make sure you read Jeremy Crawford's response, not just Mike Mearls'.
Thank you.
TopCheese wrote:
TopCheese wrote:
DIY.
DM may I?
That's really what this issue boils down to. Semantic arguements over all the vague rules (especially some casting, combat, and synergy rules) can be had for days.
House rule it if it's an issue at your table. Have fun. I did read the tweet links above. When I DM or play, our group's opinion outweighs Dev tweets. Not published rules of course; we still like playing a game that professionals have made up and have written succinctly, but...'Meh' to tweets. We didn't even follow all the errata from 4e, and we love 4e. 
If it's causing a table conflict that friends/co-workers/aquaintences/whatever cannot or will not resolve themselves...I'm sorry. 
PS: The Crawford seems to be saying it is meant to work with any spell that only has a single target when cast normally. So...No magic missile, no eldrich blast, no fireball, etc. Again, though. Are you playing D&D with the WotC team? In organized play? If not, who cares?
(Just my 2 cp.)
I think we had this before
There was the concentration issue
But some people insisted the most 'simple' reading of the spell was that it created a whole new spell where you could get the effect of that concentration spell twice with it only taking one concentration.
Others said you could cast two, but then only maintain one.
No, it's the same casting of the original spell, just expanded to include another target. So there's no issue with concentration. The issue would be with a spell like Hex or Witch Bolt.
Actually, I guess Hex is ok with this. Witch Bolt is the weird one.
On subsequent turns, you must spend your action dealing the automatic damage to the target or the spell ends. If you deal it to one but no the other, does that mean the whole spell ends?
For some reason I confused witch bolt with the subject of this thread. My mistake.
slumgum wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
wow what monster did i create
You didn't start the fire, it just spread here.
well anyway it has created an interesting discussion,does eldritch blast and other spells like it. count as multi-target spells or spells that get multiple chances to attack, like the Attack Action.Me personally i dont thinks that overpowered, its not like wishing something dead. If the rules dont directly say no why not give it a shot right.
AcesEight wrote:
well with the build i was going with is 2 warlock level 2 fighter level the 16 draconic sorcerer.So you can fly, attack with eldritch blast at 1200 feet with a combantion of distant spell,spell sniper, and eldritch spear.While twinned spelling it aswell.
that is more damage but nowhere near the 1200ft range of the eldritch blast and EB is cheaper to meta magic than scorching ray
well that is the question on how spells like that work.One way is they become multi-target spells and the other is its a spell that gets multiple chance to attack like the attack action,
My own view on it is this. Why would you be unable to fire 4 bolts at 4 targets, and then do it again with a burst of sorcerous energy (metamagic), but suddenly when those 4 bolts target one thing, you can? Or you shoot a fireball, and if there happens to be an extra creature in range, somehow you can't muster the energy to cast another spell, but if there's only one target there, you can? You're expending the same energy and effort either way.
A spell that can only only target one creature would presumably take less effort, or concentration, or coordination, or whatever, than one that splashes over a huge area or involves several independent projectiles. That's why you can twin it. It's just totally nonsensical to me that the same fireball is twin-able or not depending on who's inside it. That's why I interpret Twinned Spell as applying to "spells that have the property of only targeting one creature," rather than "spells which are currently only targeting one creature."
Macv12 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
ConsumedReality wrote:
I mean, it's up to the specific DM, but I'd go with the intent of the ability and not the exact wording. Doesn't seem like you're "twinning" when you're shooting an extra 2+ bolts, just because they're at different targets.
Clarification isn't needed, it was already made and people are not accepting it.
The context of Crawford saying "The Twinned Spell feature is intended to work on spells that can normally target only one creature." is such that he is saying it doesn't work with magic missile because it doesn't fit the intent - which means eldritch blast doesn't either once you hit a particular level.
Its a case of people wanting there to be some kind of sense being made by the rule other than just working as it does for gameplay reasons, and the only kind of sense that the rules even try for is that of "for gameplay reasons."
but you cannot use SR at 1200ft while EB you can
AcesEight wrote:
I'm not certain what he means. You can use the Eldritch Spear invocation to increase the range of eldritch blast to 300 feet and the Distant Spell metamagic feature to double the range to 600 feet. That's still not 1200 feet, though. But if you did that you couldn't use Twinned Spell as it's one metamagic feat per spell.
Good to know I'm not the only one not able to figure out where that 1,200 feet figure is coming from.
No idea...
Also, if you're using Distant Spell, then you're not using Twinned Spell.
EDIT: Spell Sniper also doubles distance.
durntaur wrote:
240 feet from Spell Sniper is plenty of range for almost all applications. Eldritch Spear is a waste of an invocation and Distant Spell...well, we're talking about Twinning Spell, so it's out.
I can see a Warlock/Sorcerer with an invisible chain familiar that they can sense through (via invocation), doing some long-range sniping. Outside of that (and considering that's pretty party-unfriendly)...