Blazing bolt and flurry of claws are both spell attacks with multiple targets. Can any target hot be affected by the blood magic effect and thus be be propelled if you have propelling sorcery?
The force of your magic can be used to propel yourself or another. You know the following blood magic effect.
Blood Magic—Propelling Sorcery You channel your magic outward into a rush of movement. Either you Step as a free action or move the target 5 feet in a direction of your choice
Whenever you cast a bloodline spell using Focus Points or a granted spell from your bloodline using a spell slot, you gain a blood magic effect. If the blood magic offers a choice, make it before resolving the spell. The blood magic effect occurs after resolving any checks for the spell's initial effects and, against a foe, applies only if the spell is a successful attack or the foe fails its saving throw. If the spell has an area, you must designate yourself or one target in the area when you cast the spell to be the target of the blood magic effect. All references to spell level refer to the level of the spell you cast.
It won't work for force barrage because no attack, but these two seem to be valid with multiple targets.
"designate one target" seems to exclude multiple targets to me, even it relates to an area the intention seems clear.
Actually, an area spell has no targets, hence the comment of choosing one target in the area. Otherwise blood magic could not have been used at all while using area spells. So that remark is specifically overriding the general rule that area spells have no targets. So not related to the rest of the explanation, as far as I read it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For the blood magic effect with an AoE, you designate yourself, or one target in the AoE for the blood magic effect.
For instance, with Blazing Bolt, you might say something like 'I target the orc with the bow, the orc with the sword, and the wizard one, and my Blood Magic will affect the bow orc.", as you have to declare the blood magic before resolving the spell. If your attack on bow orc is missed, Propelling Sorcery would have no effect.
All three foes will not be hit by Propelling Sorcery in your example if that is what you are asking.
Actually, it's not always you or ONE target. Some blood magic specifically calls out one target:
You project a warming aura that protects you or one target, granting a +1 status bonus to saving throws for 1 round.
Others just mention target, like the propelling sorcery above, or for example this one:
You mentally broadcast brief glimpses into the darkest desires of the mind. Either a target takes a –1 status penalty to AC for 1 round, or you gain a +2 status bonus to Intimidation checks for 1 round.
There are not many multi target spells of effect outside of AoE spells (clearly defined, just one target), which also happen to be blood magic spells. But there is a clear difference between a target and one target in the different entries.
So my question remains relevant, in my opinion, and not answered by the answers above.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two targets is never “a target” in English. You would just say “targets” if the implication was that it could be 1 or more. Using “a” makes it singular. You might be thinking of something like “a fish has scales” as a statement that applies to multiple fish, but that is because you are saying it is an inherent condition of being a fish, and thus any individual fish also has scales. “A fish is getting caught in a net” is a sentence about a specific fish, not a potential group of fish could include any number of them.
If you cast an AoE spell and are allowed to pick one of the targets of the spell for the Blood Magic effect, I can't think of any good reason why you shouldn't be allowed to cast a multitarget spell like Blazing Bolt and pick one of those targets to affect with the Blood Magic.
No, you wouldn't be able to target all of the targets of Blazing Bolt with the Blood Magic effect if it only allows one target. But you also don't have to forego your Blood Magic effect entirely just because there are two or three available targets to choose between.
And I don't think that Falco271 has been arguing that Blazing Bolt would affect all of the targets with Blood Magic. That looks more like a misinterpretation that people are coming to.
Actually, I am arguing that blood magic effect are not limited to a single target.
1) Blood magic happens when casting a sorcerous gift spell granted by your bloodline or a bloodline spell.
2) Blood magic can affect:
2a) The caster (always applies)
2b) One Target (specific mention of singular target, in the description of the effect, or when using an AoE spell.
2c) A Target (no singular or plural is mentioned, only thing that follows is the description of a target)
3) A Target is
3a) hit by a targeted spell (example of targeted spells: force barrage, fear, blazing bolt, haste)
3b) only a target if the spell is a successful attack or the foe fails its saving throw
3c) designated by the caster as the one target in the area of an AoE spell
So haste and force barrage targets cannot have any blood magic effect applied ever, due to no successful attack or saving throw.
But in all the text of blood magic, no where does it say that blood magic can only be applied to only one target, except where that text is specifically added to the description of the blood magic effect. So RAW, using targeted sorcerous gift spell granted by your bloodline or a bloodline spell on multiple targets can grant multiple instances of the same blood magic effect.
And it could well be RAI, by the specific use of ONE target in multiple descriptions of blood magic effects and perhaps the increased importance of blood magic for the sorcerer class, with the remaster. And it would have been very simple to say in the description of blood magic, that it can only ever apply to the caster or only one target, making the description of all blood magic entries a lot shorter and simpler.
Actually, I am arguing that blood magic effect are not limited to a single target.
Clarification noted.
No, you don't get to target multiple enemies with a single-target blood magic effect just because you are using a multitarget spell instead of an AoE spell.
Many of the blood magic entries do specify 'one' target.
Abberant: Either one target takes a –1 status penalty to Will saving throws for 1 round or ...
Angelic: You project a warming aura that protects you or one target, granting ...
Draconic: Draconic scales grow briefly on you or one target, granting ...
Nymph: ... imposing a –1 status penalty on one target's Will saves for 1 round.
Some others instead use the word 'a'. Which is also singular. If the spell specifically targets three enemies, you do not choose 'a target' by picking all three of them.
At best you can argue that the rules are ambiguous since it doesn't say one way or the other on multitarget spells. But at that point, I am going to counter-argue that it fails the Ambiguous Rules rule for being too good to be true when compared to AoE blood magic rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But in all the text of blood magic, no where does it say that blood magic can only be applied to only one target, except where that text is specifically added to the description of the blood magic effect. So RAW, using targeted sorcerous gift spell granted by your bloodline or a bloodline spell on multiple targets can grant multiple instances of the same blood magic effect.
And it could well be RAI, by the specific use of ONE target in multiple descriptions of blood magic effects and perhaps the increased importance of blood magic for the sorcerer class, with the remaster. And it would have been very simple to say in the description of blood magic, that it can only ever apply to the caster or only one target, making the description of all blood magic entries a lot shorter and simpler.
Let us know if you find a GM that interprets this the way you are implying. None that I play with ever have, nor would I as a GM.
It's interesting that the Blood Magic entry states what to do with effects that are in an area, but not effects that target multiple creatures, so I can understand wanting Blood Magic to apply to each target, and given that you have to succeed (or they have to fail) in order for Blood Magic to apply, it's not necessarily unreasonable.
However, it's entirely possible that allowing it becomes "Too Good to Be True." It makes multi-target spells (like Mass Slow or Chain Lightning) more powerful than AoE spells (like Eclipse Burst) for Blood Magic effects, and honestly, AoE already has issues with the risk of friendly fire (doubly so for Eclipse Burst; 60 foot radius is crazy), so making targeted effects even more powerful as a result is likewise problematic for its own reasons.
In addition, I'm more of a "conservative" player; that is, I take the option less likely to break the game, and limiting it to one valid target, AoE or not, is less likely to break the game than allowing it for every valid target.
However, it's entirely possible that allowing it becomes "Too Good to Be True." It makes multi-target spells (like Mass Slow or Chain Lightning) more powerful than AoE spells (like Eclipse Burst) for Blood Magic effects, and honestly, AoE already has issues with the risk of friendly fire (doubly so for Eclipse Burst; 60 foot radius is crazy), so making targeted effects even more powerful as a result is likewise problematic for its own reasons.
There is also the requirement that a spell needs to be a sorcerous gift spell granted by your bloodline or a bloodline spell. So slow actually is (demonic) but Chain Lightning isn't.
A quick check: don't think there were any damage spells, but fear, charm, slow, suggestion and similar multi-target spells are also spells granted by bloodlines. But the number of spells for a bloodline are quite limited.
There's also the limit on blood magic effects that actually apply to possibly multiple targets.
So while I agree it makes some spells stronger due to blood magic, the effect seems to be quite limited. And not sure it would be too good to be true.
I did forget that, but assuming the example spell actually fits as a bloodline spell, the point still stands.