The noted change in the errata seems to be at odds with some of the existing rulings Re: twinned spells. Namely, according to the rules as written, it would discount any spell that could ever be used to target multiple creatures, even if it is only targeting a single creature, including magic missile and scorching ray. There is conflicting information on this regard: https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/521538368698462208
We could use a clarification and FAST. Better yet, an official list of spells that can be twinned. This is really messing up a lot of Adventures League groups in my area tonight.
It's how Jeremy clarified via Twitter a while ago. In general, Crawford trumps Mearls there.
Basically, when you decide to cast the spell, and what level it will be, look at it. Can you pick more than one target with it? If the answer is yes, then you cannot Twin it, assuming the other restrictions apply.
From the Adventures League Local Coordinator's discussion: http://prntscr.com/7fk83i
That's the most authoritative answer we have so far, an AL Regional Coordinator. The clarification so far is that for example: if I knock down something with magic missile with darts left, the other darts cannot target another creature if I wish to twin, they are "wasted".
It would still be nice to get an official list of spells that can be twinned. Obviously anything with concentration has been out for a long time.
No, you can't twin magic missile. It can target multiple creatures, so it can't be twinned at all.
The way the Regional Coordinator explained it to me is:
There are 2 conditions, 1 of which must be no:
1) Can it potentially target multiple creatures? Yes/No
2) If 1 is Yes, does it target multiple creatures? Yes/No
1 or 2 must be no. Acid Splash is another example. It can target 1 or 2 creatures. So the answer to 1 would be yes, but 2 can be either yes or no. If 2 is no, then acid splash can be twinned.
JefferyKnight wrote:
JefferyKnight wrote:
I suspect it is best to ignore the twin changes.
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
Magic Missile, acid splash and Scorching ray were NEVER twinnable, this got explain quickly. The ambiguity for the nit pickers was with spell like invisibility whichi if cast as a 2nd level spell it target 1 person. If cast as a 3rd level spell it target 2 person. now the errate clarified this:
If cast at it's current level cannot target more then 1 creature (so invisibility level 2 cannot target 2 or more creature) then you can twin it. But if you cast invisibility as a spell level 3 (now it can potentially target 2 person) then you cannot twin it.
Magic missile at any level got the potential to target multiple target
Acid splash at any level can potentially target multiple target
Eldritch blast casted with a character under 5th level cannot potentially target multiple target so you can twin it, but as soon that you reach level 5 and gain a second ray then you can potentially target multiple target. so no longer twinnable.
Yeah, Sorcerers could open up a can of hurt using EA and sorcery points once or twice per long rest. That cost us our ability to regain spell slots and use some subclass features. It was a tradeoff. Now it is very unbalanced. Sorcery points are worthless now except for spell slots, and even then, we don't get that many compared to the short rest method wizards and warlocks can regain spell slots. Sorcery points take a long rest to recover. That was the tradeoff. We could either have our extra spell slots, or we could use them on metamagic to knock something on its rear in a tight squeeze.
The bottom line is we're going to need a list of spells that can be twinned. Just heard that by the definition of the new errata that you can twin fireball since it targets 1 point/creature it just has an effect over a 20-ft radius - in other words, my DM is telling me it only targets 1 creature, just causes trouble for the others around him. Now that they've defined "incapable/capable" they're going to need to define "targeting." Honestly, the wording in the PHB was more clear than the errata:
"When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn't have a range of self"
Pretty clear to me...
You want a list of spells that can be Twinned? Here it is.
Note: This is only looking at the basic Sorcerer list. It does not include the expanded spell list options from the Storm or Favored Soul sorcerers, since your complaining strongly implies you're an Adventurer's League player, nor does it include spells available from multiclassing. However, it does include the Elemental Evil spells.
Chill Touch
Friends
Frostbite
Gust (creature-targeted version)
Message
Poison spray
Ray of Frost
Shocking Grasp
Ice Knife
Jump
Mage Armor
Ray of Sickness
Witch Bolt
Blindness/Deafness*
Crown of Madness
Darkvision
Earthbind
Enhance Ability*
Enlarge/Reduce
Hold Person*
Invisibility*
Levitate
Maximilian's Earthen Grasp
Phantasmal Force
Spider Climb
Suggestion
Dispel Magic (as a targeted effect)
Fly*
Gaseous Form
Haste
Protection from Energy
Tongues
Banishment*
Blight
Confusion
Dominate Beast
Greater Invisibility
Polymorph
Stoneskin
Dominate Person
Hold Monster*
Immolation
Telekinesis
Disintegrate
True Seeing
Etherealness*
Finger of Death
Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting
Dominate Monster
Power Word Stun
Power Word Kill
*Denotes a spell that can only be twinned if cast at its lowest spell level.
EDIT: I forgot cantrips. They're there now.
See something in common on all of these spells? They target only one person, cannot possibly target more than one person, and do not have a range of Self.
I would indeed argue with Dimension Door 
I'd say the option to carry another creature with you means it can target two creatures.
I like that this errata answers a ruling I was considering on Chain Lightning. I was looking at the fact that it has one target initially and then makes additional targets from there to possibly allow twining. This ruling pretty much clarifies that to a no. Little sad for my Tempest Cleric/Dragon Sorcerer (Lighting (copper?)), but happy as far as a clarity/balance issue.
I forgot cantrips in the earlier list; they're there now.
For the record, the list of sorcerer spells that the errata "affected" (scare quotes because it's still consistent with the original printing, and Crawford's clarification from ~six months ago) is:
-Acid Splash
-Magic Missile
-Scorching Ray
-Eyebite (maybe)
That's it. All of this kerfuffle of complaints is entirely because of four spells. Although realistically, it's all about only two of them, and even then one is far more responsible than the other. Is this indicative of an endemic problem, or one or two problematic rules elements?
No, you cannot twin fireball.... it can target more than one person.
JefferyKnight wrote:
A better example is Eldritch Blast (which is why I think the errata was worded the way it was)
At levels 1-4, it only has one bolt and is therefore incapable of targeting more than one creature. Therefore, you can twin EB at these levels.
Upon hitting L5, EB can no longer be twinned as it has 2 bolts and could potentially target different creatures.
Another example would be a spell which lets you make one attack, but grants additional attacks when cast "at higher levels", without any restriction on targets with the iterative attacks (if iterative attacks had to hit the same target - you could still twin)
In this example: the spell could be twinned at its lowest level, but would not be able to be twinned when cast using a higher level slot
Tempest_Stormwind wrote:
Kalani wrote:
JefferyKnight wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
I just can't figure out why Agonizing Hex wasn't nerfed also.
I don't think Ice Knife should be twinnable. The initial attack is a single target, yes. But then it explodes and targets multiple targets.
arnwolf666 wrote: