It's option 3 in RegentCorreon's post (#55). I just posted the ruling that makes that clear in post #54. Each attack is rolled and resolved 1 at a time. If the target dies or is moved out of range (repelling blast is optional btw) while you still have beams, you choose a different target or the spell ends.
It's option 3 in RegentCorreon's post (#55). I just posted the ruling that makes that clear in post #54. Each attack is rolled and resolved 1 at a time. If the target dies or is moved out of range (repelling blast is optional btw) while you still have beams, you choose a different target or the spell ends.
This^^^
That’s why EB is so powerful, as it has slightly better action economy than a ranged Fighter taking the Attack action (Fighters don’t get a fourth shot until 20th level). Each and every attack is made independently, the target for each is chosen per attack and not all at once, and the Caster can move or use bonus actions and/or item interactions interspersed between the attacks as they wish.
Basically, when it comes to how targeting and damage are handled, the two most unique combat spells in 5e are:
Eldritch Blast. This is a Ranged Spell Attack that works almost exactly like Ranged Weapon Attacks with a bow work, and if one has the Agonizing Blast Invocation it works exactly like Ranged Weapon Attacks. The only other difference being that it requires no ammunition.
Magic Missile. This unique spell requires absolutely not attack rolls, nor does it offer targets an opportunity to save against its effects. This spell simply hits whatever you target without fail. The other unique mechanic it has is that it specifies that all darts hit their target(s) “simultaneously” which gives it the distinction of being the only spell in 5e where the damage is rolled 1ce for all targets exactly as if it were an AoE spell, but that also targets specific creatures, and can target the same creature multiple times so it can force Concentration checks like nobody’s business.
But one cannot take the “simultaneous” part from MM and apply it to EB, it just don’t work like that. And if the beams from EB did all strike simultaneously, then each beam would have to use the same 1d10 damage roll.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
Yeah, I appreciate the support, but also disagree on this point, Sposta.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
Yeah, second to that. We very clearly illustrated earlier that the general rule (RAW) dictates movement can only be split before or after taking an action, not during. The specific exception is for actions with more than one weapon attack involved.
I can't think of anything available to PCs other than the Attack action (with Extra Attack), or a Druid in Wild Shape using a form that has multi-attack. Features like GWM that allow you to make a weapon attack as a bonus action don't count for this purpose.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
Yeah, I appreciate the support, but also disagree on this point, Sposta.
and the Caster can move [...] between the attacks as they wish.
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
Yeah, second to that. We very clearly illustrated earlier that the general rule (RAW) dictates movement can only be split before or after taking an action, not during. The specific exception is for actions with more than one weapon attack involved.
I can't think of anything available to PCs other than the Attack action (with Extra Attack), or a Druid in Wild Shape using a form that has multi-attack. Features like GWM that allow you to make a weapon attack as a bonus action don't count for this purpose.
Okie dokie. I appear to have been mistaken on that front. Thanks for the correction. Although, I think i’ma houserule that one myself....
Magic Missile. This unique spell requires absolutely not attack rolls, nor does it offer targets an opportunity to save against its effects. This spell simply hits whatever you target without fail. The other unique mechanic it has is that it specifies that all darts hit their target(s) “simultaneously” which gives it the distinction of being the only spell in 5e where the damage is rolled 1ce for all targets exactly as if it were an AoE spell, but that also targets specific creatures, and can target the same creature multiple times so it can force Concentration checks like nobody’s business.
I wasn't referring to saving throws, I was thinking that Shield prevented the Magic Missile hit to begin with. It doesn't, it just prevents you from taking damage from the spell, meaning that you do in fact get hit by the spell. By the time I had verified it, it was already posted.
Sorry, I'm a little late, but this question came up in a game and I came here to get thoughts on it. Let me just add my thought process here. The community already accepts that agonizing blast applies to each successful hit of each beam of each casting of eldritch blast, and it's wording is no more ambiguous than repelling blast. As such, it seems a bit silly to pick one and apply it to each beam while limiting the other on a per-creature or per-round basis (which is NOT specified in either invocation). There are in fact other invocations that specify that they can only effect a single time per round.
Deep/technical rules aside, it doesn't seem intuitive (or RAI) to apply these two invocations differently when they were written so similarly. There is even sage advice that specifies the behavior of agonizing blast and how each hit applies.
RAW, you could choose to push a target only say.. 13 ft in order to position a creature to your liking, since, "You can push a creature up to 10 ft away from you in a straight line," (emphasis mine). That means that not only is the push at the option of the player on each hit, but the distance should also be chosen within the given range limit per blast.
Let me submit that if your DM is limiting your repelling blast to only 10 ft per round or 10 ft per creature hit by eldritch blast, you aught to speak with him/her privately and see they have something against warlocks or your playstyle in particular. If the issue can't be resolved, look into getting a different DM.
Just thinking out loud, how would the push affect an adversary who has no more space to go? Force damage?
Going purely by the book? Nothing happens. A DM might rule something else in the moment depending on how they like to run the game, but by default shoving a creature into a wall doesn't deal any additional damage to it, unless the spell or ability used overtly states that it does so.
That said, if the DM decides that pushing an enemy into a wall deals extra damage, it would most likely be Bludgeoning Damage rather than Force Damage.
Just thinking out loud, how would the push affect an adversary who has no more space to go? Force damage?
Going purely by the book? Nothing happens. A DM might rule something else in the moment depending on how they like to run the game, but by default shoving a creature into a wall doesn't deal any additional damage to it, unless the spell or ability used overtly states that it does so.
That said, if the DM decides that pushing an enemy into a wall deals extra damage, it would most likely be Bludgeoning Damage rather than Force Damage.
Thanks. That's fair, I'm thinking I might impose something like "vertically" prone requiring an action similar to "getting up" to "get off" off the wall.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Let me submit that if your DM is limiting your repelling blast to only 10 ft per round or 10 ft per creature hit by eldritch blast, you aught to speak with him/her privately and see they have something against warlocks or your playstyle in particular. If the issue can't be resolved, look into getting a different DM.
That's a very harsh, and pretty childish, way to look at it IMHO.
I'm not sure which way I would fall in the issue, but this is basically saying "if the DM doesn't agree with you, take your bat and ball home".
Let me submit that if your DM is limiting your repelling blast to only 10 ft per round or 10 ft per creature hit by eldritch blast, you aught to speak with him/her privately and see they have something against warlocks or your playstyle in particular. If the issue can't be resolved, look into getting a different DM.
That's a very harsh, and pretty childish, way to look at it IMHO.
I'm not sure which way I would fall in the issue, but this is basically saying "if the DM doesn't agree with you, take your bat and ball home".
Which is always a valid way to approach problems, though it might not be the most mature approach. It all depends on how important being able to move the creatures multiple times is for you and if you are willing to not play D&D over it. It could also depend on which other disagreements that you've had about it.
I personally don't think it's that critical on its own, but that doesn't mean it can't be for someone else.
I don't see any reason why it would be limited due to RAW, though.
For the Love of Pete you could have just told the people that thought the spell hit simultaneously it is a cumulative effect combined impact that's forcing the character back back additional feet since it is forced damage. Just mind Canon that s***.
We know for sure, by the way, that they do not strike simultaneously. They're in order just like scorching ray. Magic Missile has to specifiy that it's simultaneous in its own language.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This is going to be a great and poignant series of quotes.
It's option 3 in RegentCorreon's post (#55). I just posted the ruling that makes that clear in post #54. Each attack is rolled and resolved 1 at a time. If the target dies or is moved out of range (repelling blast is optional btw) while you still have beams, you choose a different target or the spell ends.
This^^^
That’s why EB is so powerful, as it has slightly better action economy than a ranged Fighter taking the Attack action (Fighters don’t get a fourth shot until 20th level). Each and every attack is made independently, the target for each is chosen per attack and not all at once, and the Caster can move or use bonus actions and/or item interactions interspersed between the attacks as they wish.
Basically, when it comes to how targeting and damage are handled, the two most unique combat spells in 5e are:
But one cannot take the “simultaneous” part from MM and apply it to EB, it just don’t work like that. And if the beams from EB did all strike simultaneously, then each beam would have to use the same 1d10 damage roll.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I agree with everything except this:
I covered this in reply #38 - but essentially the exception that allows movement during an action only applies to actions using weapon attacks so the caster can't moving during an Eldritch Blast.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Yeah, I appreciate the support, but also disagree on this point, Sposta.
Yeah, second to that. We very clearly illustrated earlier that the general rule (RAW) dictates movement can only be split before or after taking an action, not during. The specific exception is for actions with more than one weapon attack involved.
I can't think of anything available to PCs other than the Attack action (with Extra Attack), or a Druid in Wild Shape using a form that has multi-attack. Features like GWM that allow you to make a weapon attack as a bonus action don't count for this purpose.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Okie dokie. I appear to have been mistaken on that front. Thanks for the correction. Although, I think i’ma houserule that one myself....
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Shield would like a word.
Edit: I guess you just don't take damage so technically it still hits you.
Shield is not a saving throw, which is what Sposta was inferring. Lets not pile on or get pedantic here.
Sorry, but my inner pedant just cannot resist: I implied, they inferred.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Dang it Sposta! Just let me be nice to you, lol
(in my defense, I'm tired and English was never my best subject)
I wasn't referring to saving throws, I was thinking that Shield prevented the Magic Missile hit to begin with. It doesn't, it just prevents you from taking damage from the spell, meaning that you do in fact get hit by the spell. By the time I had verified it, it was already posted.
Sorry, I'm a little late, but this question came up in a game and I came here to get thoughts on it. Let me just add my thought process here. The community already accepts that agonizing blast applies to each successful hit of each beam of each casting of eldritch blast, and it's wording is no more ambiguous than repelling blast. As such, it seems a bit silly to pick one and apply it to each beam while limiting the other on a per-creature or per-round basis (which is NOT specified in either invocation). There are in fact other invocations that specify that they can only effect a single time per round.
Deep/technical rules aside, it doesn't seem intuitive (or RAI) to apply these two invocations differently when they were written so similarly. There is even sage advice that specifies the behavior of agonizing blast and how each hit applies.
RAW, you could choose to push a target only say.. 13 ft in order to position a creature to your liking, since, "You can push a creature up to 10 ft away from you in a straight line," (emphasis mine). That means that not only is the push at the option of the player on each hit, but the distance should also be chosen within the given range limit per blast.
Let me submit that if your DM is limiting your repelling blast to only 10 ft per round or 10 ft per creature hit by eldritch blast, you aught to speak with him/her privately and see they have something against warlocks or your playstyle in particular. If the issue can't be resolved, look into getting a different DM.
Just thinking out loud, how would the push affect an adversary who has no more space to go? Force damage?
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Going purely by the book? Nothing happens. A DM might rule something else in the moment depending on how they like to run the game, but by default shoving a creature into a wall doesn't deal any additional damage to it, unless the spell or ability used overtly states that it does so.
That said, if the DM decides that pushing an enemy into a wall deals extra damage, it would most likely be Bludgeoning Damage rather than Force Damage.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
Thanks. That's fair, I'm thinking I might impose something like "vertically" prone requiring an action similar to "getting up" to "get off" off the wall.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
That's a very harsh, and pretty childish, way to look at it IMHO.
I'm not sure which way I would fall in the issue, but this is basically saying "if the DM doesn't agree with you, take your bat and ball home".
Which is always a valid way to approach problems, though it might not be the most mature approach. It all depends on how important being able to move the creatures multiple times is for you and if you are willing to not play D&D over it. It could also depend on which other disagreements that you've had about it.
I personally don't think it's that critical on its own, but that doesn't mean it can't be for someone else.
I don't see any reason why it would be limited due to RAW, though.
For the Love of Pete you could have just told the people that thought the spell hit simultaneously it is a cumulative effect combined impact that's forcing the character back back additional feet since it is forced damage. Just mind Canon that s***.
We know for sure, by the way, that they do not strike simultaneously. They're in order just like scorching ray. Magic Missile has to specifiy that it's simultaneous in its own language.
This is going to be a great and poignant series of quotes.
- famous quote people
I see no usage limitation to Repelling Blast so each Eldritch Blast that hit should deal damage and rider accordingly.