|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, but you need to target the creature. The same would go for spells that make the target Save, you have to make the flat check to successfully target them or you miss. You are conflating concealment, where you can kinda see the creature but something is making them blurry/partially obstructed, with the Hidden condition, where you can't see them at all but know they're there.
Specifically, you only know the location of a Hidden creature, you explicitly can't see said creature. So if you have line of effect (nothing in the way) and you know their location, but you can't actually see them, there's a 50/50 chance you will miss.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does a magic missile really have a miss chance? The "automatic hit" makes me think no.
There has been much debate of what constitutes the "automatic hit", especially considering the potency of the spell in former editions of the game. And if I am not entirely mistaken there was a broad consensus that while there is no need for a successful to-hit roll the spell is still susceptable to the targeting rules and subsequent flat check. When dealing with concealed creatures all attacks have to pass two separate checks in order to confirm a hit and Magic Missile is only automatically passing the second one.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
By RAW, any spell that targets a creature requires you to see the target. The line in magic missile does not change anything about that, it just re-iterates the general rules.
The GM can allow you to "attempt to target a creature you can't see". This attempt is the flat check and it happens for all targeted spells against concealed or hidden creatures.
Magic Missile "always hits" just like an attack that with a successful attack roll "always hits". You still need to roll the flat check. The spell might always hit, but it can miss if you as the caster fail to perceive the target correctly.
Does a magic missile really have a miss chance? The "automatic hit" makes me think no.
I wouldn't really call it a "miss" chance, but rather a chance to not be hitting the right spot.
Think of it this way: if I was in a room and I got a strange feeling that there was something in the room and say "I cast magic missile on the closest enemy to me" the GM would look at me like I'm an idiot. The point of this hyperbolic example is to demonstrate that you still need to know where to point the spell to make it work, and that's exactly what the flat checks for hidden and concealed targets are: checks to see if you actually targeted the right thing.
A 5' by 5' square is pretty big. I can easily imagine knowing someone's within an area of that size and guessing wrong about where they are in that area. This is what would result in a failure to hit the right spot with magic missile. It still automatically hits the target, it's just not targeting what you want it to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Metric system has it right: The flat check happens before the spell comes in effect, to determine if you can target the creature. If you fail the flat check, it's not that you missed the creature, but that you didn't target it. As such, the "can't miss" doesn't affect it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Metric system has it right: The flat check happens before the spell comes in effect, to determine if you can target the creature. If you fail the flat check, it's not that you missed the creature, but that you didn't target it. As such, the "can't miss" doesn't affect it.That means that we can at least not waste a spell (slot), right?The Flat Check has to happen BEFORE you cast the spell since you are fundamentally unable to Target the Creature beforehand and only after succeeding on the Flat Check are you able to resolve that issue, after you'll be able to MM them into oblivion though.
Unfortunately not. The rules are clear: "If you fail to target a particular creature, this doesn’t change how the spell affects any other targets the spell might have."
So, the spell is gone, just it doesn't target this one creature.
|
I don't know actually, and I'm not certain enough to answer affirmatively on one way or another as SuperBidi has.
The reason for this is that there doesn't seem to be any codified rules that indicate that to actually begin casting you need to meet all of the "requirements" for the spell such as a valid target.
This seems to simply be a gap in the knowledge for how things mechanically flow. To be safe though, as the spellcaster I would advise asking the GM to make the Flat Check before spending the Actions to Cast the Spell so the situation where you lose your spell slot is avoided, that is, unless they GAIN the Hidden Condition in response or Reaction to your casting the spell.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know actually, and I'm not certain enough to answer affirmatively on one way or another as SuperBidi has.
The reason for this is that there doesn't seem to be any codified rules that indicate that to actually begin casting you need to meet all of the "requirements" for the spell such as a valid target.
This seems to simply be a gap in the knowledge for how things mechanically flow. To be safe though, as the spellcaster I would advise asking the GM to make the Flat Check before spending the Actions to Cast the Spell so the situation where you lose your spell slot is avoided, that is, unless they GAIN the Hidden Condition in response or Reaction to your casting the spell.
If you allow that, then the player just has to Cast the Spell until they succeed at the check. The loss of actions/spell is what you lose when failing the check.
Since I can see where this train of thought is heading...
Could someone Seek to identify the hidden target, then cast MM?
It's an extra action, but I imagine a wizard with limited spell slots would want to maximize their chances as opposed to a fighter who can swing a sword all day.
I guess the same would apply to an archer too?
|
|
Since I can see where this train of thought is heading...
Could someone Seek to identify the hidden target, then cast MM?
It's an extra action, but I imagine a wizard with limited spell slots would want to maximize their chances as opposed to a fighter who can swing a sword all day.
I guess the same would apply to an archer too?
Yes, this is what the Seek action is for. If you beat their Stealth DC, they will become Observed, and then you can successfully target them without a flat check (Assuming they aren't also Concealed, which you still do but it's DC5.)
I figured as much, but I wanted to have it out there. It's been pointed out above that failing the flat check costs your action and spell slot but before that, it was looking like the question was going to eventually be: Exactly HOW MUCH do I have to commit? Like these questions were eventually skirting the line of "dipping a toes in the water." Can I commit to casting, but then stop short if I can't see someone? I've never seen MM as so unerring that it's smarter than you are. It becomes magic echolocation if you can just cast into a darkened room and determine if enemies are in there or not.
As a sidenote - and maybe this ages me - I'm really surprised no one brought up "I cast Magic Missile at the darkness" from The Dead Alewives yet. :-D
Yes, this is what the Seek action is for. If you beat their Stealth DC, they will become Observed, and then you can successfully target them without a flat check (Assuming they aren't also Concealed, which you still do but it's DC5.)Since I can see where this train of thought is heading...
Could someone Seek to identify the hidden target, then cast MM?
It's an extra action, but I imagine a wizard with limited spell slots would want to maximize their chances as opposed to a fighter who can swing a sword all day.
I guess the same would apply to an archer too?
This is assuming they aren't Hidden by something that can't make them more observable than Hidden, like Invisibility, Darkness, etc.