As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
I’ll have three more quotes from the player’s handbook and then I’m done.
Long story short, “self” is a target for a spell, as “self” is a “point of origin”, and a “point of origin” is a target of a spell.
I bonded and underlined the main parts right from the handbook. The only thing better than incoherent ramblings of JC is the words right from the source
”The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range. For a spell like magic missile, the target is a creature. For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Most spells have ranges expressed in feet. Some spells can target only a creature (including you) that you touch. Other spells, such as the shield spell, affect only you. These spells have a range of self.
Spells that create cones or lines of effect that originate from you also have a range of self, indicating that the origin point of the spell’s effect must be you (see “Areas of Effect” later in the this chapter).”
“A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or apoint of origin for an area of effect (described below).”
”A spell’s description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell’s energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.”
As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
I’ll have three more quotes from the player’s handbook and then I’m done.
Long story short, “self” is a target for a spell, as “self” is a “point of origin”, and a “point of origin” is a target of a spell.
I bonded and underlined the main parts right from the handbook. The only thing better than incoherent ramblings of JC is the words right from the source
”The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range. For a spell like magic missile, the target is a creature. For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Most spells have ranges expressed in feet. Some spells can target only a creature (including you) that you touch. Other spells, such as the shield spell, affect only you. These spells have a range of self.
Spells that create cones or lines of effect that originate from you also have a range of self, indicating that the origin point of the spell’s effect must be you (see “Areas of Effect” later in the this chapter).”
“A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or apoint of origin for an area of effect (described below).”
”A spell’s description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell’s energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.”
As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
I’ll have three more quotes from the player’s handbook and then I’m done.
Long story short, “self” is a target for a spell, as “self” is a “point of origin”, and a “point of origin” is a target of a spell.
I bonded and underlined the main parts right from the handbook. The only thing better than incoherent ramblings of JC is the words right from the source
”The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range. For a spell like magic missile, the target is a creature. For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Most spells have ranges expressed in feet. Some spells can target only a creature (including you) that you touch. Other spells, such as the shield spell, affect only you. These spells have a range of self.
Spells that create cones or lines of effect that originate from you also have a range of self, indicating that the origin point of the spell’s effect must be you (see “Areas of Effect” later in the this chapter).”
“A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or apoint of origin for an area of effect (described below).”
”A spell’s description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell’s energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.”
Yeah, you're probably right. I think I got duped by his language. I wish his clarifications on the rules was exactly that, clarifications, rather than just reiterations of the rules with partial context. "The target of a spell must be within spell`s range" is pretty clear and concise.
Yep we all have been there. JC usually says the correct thing but there is always vagueness or sub-concepts missing. This can cause justifiable miss-interpretations. thanks for being understanding.
Many times in these types of interviews his “clarifications” end up being him reexplaining the words in the book as if he had one two many. What he says is typically helpful on some level, but he often waffles between RAW and RAI, which is not exactly what most people hope to get from him.
PHB 2024 brings up some interesting changes to the Beast Masters Shared Spells ability. Ensnaring Strike now has a more specific timing restriction and seems to clearly not work with Shared Spells.
However, the new Conjure Woodland Beings Spell (aka the better version of Spirit Guardians) has a range of Self with a 10ft Emanation. I'm very interested in the new rules for spell casting defines targets of an Emanation.
Will the Ranger and the Beast Companion each have their own Emanation dealing 5d8 Force Damage on a failed WIS save every time a creature enters the AOE or ends their there?
PHB 2024 brings up some interesting changes to the Beast Masters Shared Spells ability. Ensnaring Strike now has a more specific timing restriction and seems to clearly not work with Shared Spells.
However, the new Conjure Woodland Beings Spell (aka the better version of Spirit Guardians) has a range of Self with a 10ft Emanation. I'm very interested in the new rules for spell casting defines targets of an Emanation.
Will the Ranger and the Beast Companion each have their own Emanation dealing 5d8 Force Damage on a failed WIS save every time a creature enters the AOE or ends their there?
Remember multiple emminations won't apply the same effects 2x a turn.
You mean on the same target? Does that apply to damge? I thought that was just effects that have overlapping duration. Like you can't stack Magical Weapon +1 a bunch of times to get a +5 to hit and attacks.
Are your saying that the same named spell can't to damage multiple times in a spell? if (for some reason) an enemy triggered a two different Wizard's War Caster Reaction Shocking Grasp... that Enemy would only take damage from one of the wizards? That dosen't sound right...
Also, the effect of the spell is the Emanation targeting the Ranger and then Shared to the Beast Companion. It's not the same as casting the same spell twice on the same target with overlapping duration wich would not work.
As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
I’ll have three more quotes from the player’s handbook and then I’m done.
Long story short, “self” is a target for a spell, as “self” is a “point of origin”, and a “point of origin” is a target of a spell.
I bonded and underlined the main parts right from the handbook. The only thing better than incoherent ramblings of JC is the words right from the source
”The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range. For a spell like magic missile, the target is a creature. For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Most spells have ranges expressed in feet. Some spells can target only a creature (including you) that you touch. Other spells, such as the shield spell, affect only you. These spells have a range of self.
Spells that create cones or lines of effect that originate from you also have a range of self, indicating that the origin point of the spell’s effect must be you (see “Areas of Effect” later in the this chapter).”
“A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or apoint of origin for an area of effect (described below).”
”A spell’s description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell’s energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.”
By this logic would Conjure Barrage work with shared spells since the target is a point centered on you?
The spells with a range of "Self (X ft.)" have already been confirmed not to work, but I still think Primal Savagery would work for 3 main reasons.
The range being only "Self" sets it apart from the others mentioned above.
The school being Transmutation implies that the spell effect is actually the change that causes (within its effects and description, growing claws, etc.) the creature to be able to instantly make a spell attack (making it closer to a spell such as Alter Self than to Booming Blade). So, the spell effect is the 'buff' that grants the attack, not directly the attack itself.
Let's face it, the spell wasn't perfectly written, didn't consider all loose ends, and hasn't been updated. However, it doesn't really severely break anything in terms of DPR, only brings the Beast Master up half a step towards a decent Fighter build with Great Weapon Master. Also, since the beast lacks a proper spellcasting ability, their attack is only going to be a straight +Proficiency modifier to hit anyway.
The spells with a range of "Self (X ft.)" have already been confirmed not to work, but I still think Primal Savagery would work for 3 main reasons.
The range being only "Self" sets it apart from the others mentioned above.
The school being Transmutation implies that the spell effect is actually the change that causes (within its effects and description, growing claws, etc.) the creature to be able to instantly make a spell attack (making it closer to a spell such as Alter Self than to Booming Blade). So, the spell effect is the 'buff' that grants the attack, not directly the attack itself.
Let's face it, the spell wasn't perfectly written, didn't consider all loose ends, and hasn't been updated. However, it doesn't really severely break anything in terms of DPR, only brings the Beast Master up half a step towards a decent Fighter build with Great Weapon Master. Also, since the beast lacks a proper spellcasting ability, their attack is only going to be a straight +Proficiency modifier to hit anyway.
So you don't think Emanation type spells would work? Like Ashardalon’s Stride, Pass Without Trace, or the new Conjure Woodland Beings (basically Spirit Guardians)?? 🤔🤔 I think that they would. Mainly because they are a magical effect that can be removed from the Caster by the Dispel Magic Spell.
However I do agree that Conjure Barrage wouldn't. For the reason you listed about spell with range listed as "Self (Xft)"
As I said before, assuming that Ensnaring Strike is a buff that targets the caster, yes, it should be compatible with Share Spells. However, a range of self doesn't mean you are a target of a spell at all, as explained in J Craw`s elaboration on targeting. Also, being the point of origin isn't the same as being a target.
The way I see it, based on J Craw`s elaboration, Ensnaring Strike is a spell that may have no target at all until the applicable effect triggering condition (a hit) is met because he pretty explicitly say so in that Dragon Talk video, Sage Advice: Targeting Revisited at right around 5 minutes if you listen for about 20 secs. He seems to contradict himself a little by saying "also," but he later confirms that only the struck foe is a target of some spells with a range of self by saying they are compatible with War Caster which requires the spell to target only the provoking creature. It is maybe a little unclear whether or not spells like Ensnaring Strike, or the paladin smite spells, follow suit because they have some differences from Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (most notably, they require concentration and they don`t require the caster to make an attack when the spell is cast), but they function exactly the same way J Craw said the exceptions would.
Interestingly, when you cast Pass Without Trace, you are the point of origin of the aura but you can choose whether or not to be affected by the aura. Also, the spell`s description doesn't include the word target at all, but the verbiage, "each creature you choose within 30 feet of you (including you)," might imply that the selected creatures are the spell`s targets. It is strange that this spell has a range of self instead of self (30-foot radius), but, either way, being the point of origin still doesn't mean the same thing as being a target.
Does Primal Savagery work with Share Spells? Alternatively, would it work with War Caster as a spell substitute for an opportunity attack? 🤔 Watch the video before answering.
It may seem a little counterintuitive, but it seems like J Craw`s answers (if he gave you straight answers) would be no and yes, respectively.
Don't forget that you are empowered to roll with whatever adjudication your group sees as fitting.
I’ll have three more quotes from the player’s handbook and then I’m done.
Long story short, “self” is a target for a spell, as “self” is a “point of origin”, and a “point of origin” is a target of a spell.
I bonded and underlined the main parts right from the handbook. The only thing better than incoherent ramblings of JC is the words right from the source
”The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range. For a spell like magic missile, the target is a creature. For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Most spells have ranges expressed in feet. Some spells can target only a creature (including you) that you touch. Other spells, such as the shield spell, affect only you. These spells have a range of self.
Spells that create cones or lines of effect that originate from you also have a range of self, indicating that the origin point of the spell’s effect must be you (see “Areas of Effect” later in the this chapter).”
“A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).”
”A spell’s description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell’s energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.”
You're
Yeah, you're probably right. I think I got duped by his language. I wish his clarifications on the rules was exactly that, clarifications, rather than just reiterations of the rules with partial context. "The target of a spell must be within spell`s range" is pretty clear and concise.
Yep we all have been there. JC usually says the correct thing but there is always vagueness or sub-concepts missing. This can cause justifiable miss-interpretations. thanks for being understanding.
Many times in these types of interviews his “clarifications” end up being him reexplaining the words in the book as if he had one two many. What he says is typically helpful on some level, but he often waffles between RAW and RAI, which is not exactly what most people hope to get from him.
PHB 2024 brings up some interesting changes to the Beast Masters Shared Spells ability. Ensnaring Strike now has a more specific timing restriction and seems to clearly not work with Shared Spells.
However, the new Conjure Woodland Beings Spell (aka the better version of Spirit Guardians) has a range of Self with a 10ft Emanation. I'm very interested in the new rules for spell casting defines targets of an Emanation.
Will the Ranger and the Beast Companion each have their own Emanation dealing 5d8 Force Damage on a failed WIS save every time a creature enters the AOE or ends their there?
Remember multiple emminations won't apply the same effects 2x a turn.
You mean on the same target? Does that apply to damge? I thought that was just effects that have overlapping duration. Like you can't stack Magical Weapon +1 a bunch of times to get a +5 to hit and attacks.
Are your saying that the same named spell can't to damage multiple times in a spell? if (for some reason) an enemy triggered a two different Wizard's War Caster Reaction Shocking Grasp... that Enemy would only take damage from one of the wizards? That dosen't sound right...
Also, the effect of the spell is the Emanation targeting the Ranger and then Shared to the Beast Companion. It's not the same as casting the same spell twice on the same target with overlapping duration wich would not work.
Edit
By this logic would Conjure Barrage work with shared spells since the target is a point centered on you?
The spells with a range of "Self (X ft.)" have already been confirmed not to work, but I still think Primal Savagery would work for 3 main reasons.
Art Portfolio
So you don't think Emanation type spells would work? Like Ashardalon’s Stride, Pass Without Trace, or the new Conjure Woodland Beings (basically Spirit Guardians)?? 🤔🤔 I think that they would. Mainly because they are a magical effect that can be removed from the Caster by the Dispel Magic Spell.
However I do agree that Conjure Barrage wouldn't. For the reason you listed about spell with range listed as "Self (Xft)"
Nah, I'd say at a quick glance all of those do work.
Art Portfolio
Excellent! Thanks for being my second opinion! I got plans for my next one shot! Mwahahaha!!!