Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Or target the remaining missiles at an inert target so that fewer than the actual spread hit a given target?

One way to achieve that might be for the caster to "lower his level" for purposes of casting that spell. I know of nothing explicit in the rulebooks about intentionally lowering one's level in that way, but it seems reasonable to me. I might require it to be memorized that way, though. And certainly the lower level would apply to all details for the spell: Range, damage, whether it gets through magic resistance, etc.

Another way is just to interpret the phrase "one or more" in the early part of the magic missile description as implicitly allowing a magic-user to choose to create fewer missiles than his usual maximum.

But I only allow magic missiles to target creatures, not objects.

I don't think that btb there's an answer. But I think it should be allowable for a M-U to vary the missiles if he wants. It doesn't fit my image of an expert, or a master of their art, to have so little control.

If necessary for a btb solution, create another 1st level M-U spell that explicitly allows it.

Don't want to quote shit you already know, but looking at this bit "If the magic-user has multiple missile capability, he or she can have them strike a single target creature or single creature, as desired."(PHB. p.67) I definitely think the MU has control of what the effect of the MM is.

I can't see any reason why not.

T. Foster wrote:I can't see any reason why not.

It depends on how you understand Vancian magic to work. These are formulas set in stone from time immemorial. I'm not sure they can be altered w/o the magic-user researching a new form of the spell. So, the magic-user could concoct a variation that does what dungeondelver suggests, but not on the fly.

Burning the excess off into a sack of flour would be the best option for on-the-fly nerfing the missle spell.

The spell description refers to higher-level casters having the "capability" of firing multiple missiles, which reads to me that they are able but not required to do so. However, I doubt this is something that ever came up in playtesting, since the occasions where someone would want to fire fewer magic missiles than the maximum allowable are surely few and far between...

T. Foster wrote:..."capability" ...

Good point. Uncle!

TRP wrote:Burning the excess off into a sack of flour would be the best option for on-the-fly nerfing the missle spell.

While the spell does not unequivocally say so, the portion of the text "strike a single target creature or several target creatures" implies that the target has to be an enemy. However, I would not object if my DM interpreted it the way you do, because you can clearly target golems and prismatic spheres/walls, which are not living creatures

But it seems reasonable for the character to cast as many missiles, up to his or her maximum, as he or she wishes. It would be part of the art.

darnizhaan wrote:

TRP wrote:Burning the excess off into a sack of flour would be the best option for on-the-fly nerfing the missle spell.

While the spell does not unequivocally say so, the portion of the text "strike a single target creature or several target creatures" implies that the target has to be an enemy. However, I would not object if my DM interpreted it the way you do, because you can clearly target golems and prismatic spheres/walls, which are not living creatures

But it seems reasonable for the character to cast as many missiles, up to his or her maximum, as he or she wishes. It would be part of the art.

Also, some dungeon architecture (doors, for example) have set hit points and are target-able/damageable by weapon blows and other spells - you could just as easily send all but one missile caroming into the nearest door.

There isn't a BTB answer, as others have said. Common sense would dictate they could cast fewer missles than the spell description says.

genghisdon wrote:There isn't a BTB answer, as others have said. Common sense would dictate they could cast fewer missles than the spell description says.

Errr .. not necessarily common sense, but the text ("capability") implies he could.