And yet, Range: self (5-foot-radius). Again, the game designers deliberately changed the spell TO this notation via errata in 2020. This notation isn't some sort of accident.
Since it seems you're uninterested in watching the video provided by Plaguescarred where JC (the one who wrote this errata) explain what it means, I'll have to explain it. He says, although most of the time range tells you the spell target, the self (x- foot y) is a special case where it does not necessarily describe the target. With that range, you have to look at what the spell does and how it affects creatures or objects.
Concerning booming blade specifically, JC explains that it was changed because the old range was wrong which allowed the spell to be twin spelled before. This was unintended, which is why they errataed it. Because it has self in it it cannot be twinned, but it still requires looking at the description, rather than the range, to determine the intended targets of the spell. Clearly the intended target is the attack target. No one else is even affected by the spell.
JC explains that this means booming blade does work with war caster. Now if you want to continue arguing, just recognize you're essentially trying to say you know more about how the spell works than the guy who wrote it.
Yeah, they wrote it badly the first time, then created another set of problems when they "fixed" it
Per JC's interpretation, destructive wave is a valid choice for Warcaster, provided you pick only that one creature to be affected. You could make an argument for spirit guardians too
Not as I understand the rules. The spell must target only that creature mentioned in War Caster. If the spell targets an area, then it isn't targeting only that creature.
After reading some tweets, this thread multiple times (including my previous opinion!), and watching the video provided by @Plaguescarred, I'll rule that Booming Blade doesn't create an area of effect. My life will be better.
He said that specifically for spell with a range of self. He clearly drew distinction between that and self (x-foot y). In that case, he said self describes the origin of the spell, not the intended target. The intended targets can only be discerned from the spell description in that case because these are unique spells. You need to listen to what he says as a whole, not in parts out of context.
And he seems to imply he did write it. He says "the old range was wrong, I mistake... quite possibly my mistake." But the point I was making is that you're trying to tell us the intent behind the errata for the range... what self (x- foot y) means. Well... he's telling you what he meant by it when he wrote it. How are you gonna say your interpretation is more accurate than the author's?
Yes, you are misunderstanding his explanations.
The reason for the distinction between "Range: self" and "Range: self (area)" is because the first notation is NOT an AOE spell. So, in that case that target IS the spellcaster. In the case of "Range: self (area)" the notation is indicating that it's an AoE spell and therefore we do not know if the origin point is the spellcaster himself or a point in space at the spellcaster's location -- so we have to learn that through the spell description. This is quite literally what he is explaining to you but you keep missing it.
I am not the one saying the intent behind the change. HE is telling you why they changed it! He literally says that they realized that the spell doesn't come into existence "over there", it must come from the spellcaster's location. Are you sure that you listened to it?
In every single spell in the entire game, whenever you see those parentheses in the spell parameters that means that it's an AoE spell and the size and shape of the area of effect is defined within the parentheses. Every single time. That goes for spells that might be "Range: self (5-foot-radius)" like Booming Blade or for spells with a notation something like "Range: 150 feet (20-foot-radius) like Fireball. The range of the spell is given first. The size and shape of the area of effect is then given in parentheses. This is a standard notation for the game and it has the same meaning every single time.
But seemingly, if you can destructive wave or fireball and only hit the creature triggering the attack, the rules would apparently be fine with you doing that. Because the requirement isn't 'can only possibly hit a single creature' but rather 'only does hit a single creature'.
Please listen to what you're saying here for a moment and try to think about it for a bit.
The reason for the distinction between "Range: self" and "Range: self (area)" is because the first notation is NOT an AOE spell. So, in that case that target IS the spellcaster. In the case of "Range: self (area)" the notation is indicating that it's an AoE spell and therefore we do not know if the origin point is the spellcaster himself or a point in space at the spellcaster's location -- so we have to learn that through the spell description. This is quite literally what he is explaining to you but you keep missing it.
I am not the one saying the intent behind the change. HE is telling you why they changed it! He literally says that they realized that the spell doesn't come into existence "over there", it must come from the spellcaster's location. Are you sure that you listened to it?
In every single spell in the entire game, whenever you see those parentheses in the spell parameters that means that it's an AoE spell and the size and shape of the area of effect is defined within the parentheses. Every single time. That goes for spells that might be "Range: self (5-foot-radius)" like Booming Blade or for spells with a notation something like "Range: 150 feet (20-foot-radius) like Fireball. The range of the spell is given first. The size and shape of the area of effect is then given in parentheses. This is a standard notation for the game and it has the same meaning every single time.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description. Thats what he said... if you disagree, rewatch it. He said it.
Now, in booming blade clearly the only indicated target is the attack target. Why? Because all effects of the spell are strictly applied to that creature. There is no effect on self in the description. You can create some head cannon about an invisible field that's generated around the caster, but it's not in the spell.
1. JC said the targets for those spells are discerned from the description.
2. The description only has effects which affect the attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
1. JC said the targets for those spells are discerned from the description.
2. The description only has effects which affect the attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
QED.
That', uhh, not how any of that works. You can't just tag a string of interpretations and opinions with a QED and claim you've made your case
For example:
1. booming blade has a listed range that suggests it's some sort of AoE spell, and AoE spells don't necessarily have to have a specific target
2. The description only has effects which affect a creature within that listed range once it has been targeted and hit by a melee attack.
3. Therefore the spell generates certain effects around the caster in the listed area when a condition is met (in this case, hit with a melee attack), just like other spells with a range of Self (X) such as spirit guardians or aura of life
QED
Now, you're going to say "well, nowhere in the spell does it say it creates an invisible field", but it also doesn't say the spell itself targets anybody. The only target listed is the target of the melee attack, and it explicitly says the damage from the weapon and the damage from the spell are separate things
You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack with it against one creature within 5 feet of you. On a hit, the target suffers the weapon attack’s normal effects and then becomes sheathed in booming energy until the start of your next turn. If the target willingly moves 5 feet or more before then, the target takes 1d8 thunder damage, and the spell ends.
In that video, JC admits that booming blade and green-flame blade were experiments. It shows, even after the revision
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
My last post was entirely consistent with the tweet it contained. War Caster, unlike Twinned spell, is entirely concerned with what the spell hits, rather than what the spell is capable of. If you need elaboration, just ask nicely.
Ok, here is the text in question for War Caster:
When a hostile creature's movement provokes an opportunity attack from you, you can use your reaction to cast a spell at the creature, rather than making an opportunity attack . . . and [the spell] must target only that creature.
Text for Fireball:
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range
Therefore, Fireball does not work with War Caster.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description.
I'll go ahead and explain this again. "Self" is a range. See Chapter 10: Spellcasting --> Casting a Spell --> Range. Also from Chapter 10, we know that "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range."
When the spell is NOT an AoE spell, the spellcaster must be the target of all spells which have a range of "self".
When the spell IS an AoE spell, the target of the spell is either the spellcaster or a point in space at the spellcaster's location. The spell description will tell you which one of these it is. The target of an AoE spell is its point of origin.
This actually doesn't matter at all. "Self" is the range of a spell. The range and the area specified for the AoE are two different things. Whether or not the spellcaster is affected by the spell's effects are irrelevant. Again, Burning Hands targets the spellcaster's location but the spellcaster is not affected by the spell. In other cases, the spellcaster is affected. In the case of Booming Blade, the spellcaster's location is the target of the spell and also (two different things) the spellcaster himself can be affected by the spell's effect if he chooses to attack himself.
I mean, I know you aren't going to like my response to that, but the truth is that Fireball is one of those few spells that uses the word "target" incorrectly. We know this for sure because Fireball itself is used as an example within the core general rules for spellcasting in Chapter 10:
Range
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.
However, even if we were to give it the benefit of the doubt and chalk this up to being some sort of specific vs general exception to the rules for targeting . . . it still doesn't work for War Caster because that Feat states: "The spell . . . must target only that creature."
In this case we would have a spell that targets "that creature" AND a point in space. Thus, it doesn't qualify.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description.
I'll go ahead and explain this again. "Self" is a range. See Chapter 10: Spellcasting --> Casting a Spell --> Range. Also from Chapter 10, we know that "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range."
When the spell is NOT an AoE spell, the spellcaster must be the target of all spells which have a range of "self".
When the spell IS an AoE spell, the target of the spell is either the spellcaster or a point in space at the spellcaster's location. The spell description will tell you which one of these it is. The target of an AoE spell is its point of origin.
Again, it's not range of self... It's self (x-foot y). I know you don't like that JC said that's different from just self, but he said it... now you have to live with it.
Yes, it says the target of the spell must be within the spell's range... but that does not mean all creatures within range are targets. JC specifically addressed this saying with range parentheses, you can't simply look to the range to see the spell's targets because it is a special type of spell. You must look at the spell's description in that case... Again... I know you don't like that he said that, but he said it. That's not my interpretation, that's from his mouth.
Furthermore we can read the PHB to gather information on this. In the very section you quoted, it also says:
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).
So spells with AOE's have an origin point on the caster... but it doesn't say anything about targeting the caster. Maybe that's under AOE's though... Lets see.
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.
A spell’s effect expands in straight lines from the point of origin. If no unblocked straight line extends from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn’t included in the spell’s area. To block one of these imaginary lines, an obstruction must provide total cover, as explained in chapter 9.
So this doesn't say anything about the requirement the caster needing to be a target of the spell when he's the point of origin... maybe that's under targeting... Let's see.
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).
Ok, so if the point of origin is targeted by the spell... It will say so in the spell description. That's clear as day isn't it? So does booming blade say it targets the point of origin in its description? I'll leave that question open to you. Since this is in the PHB, it's up to you to show where the spell indicates in its description that the point of origin for booming blade is a target.
This actually doesn't matter at all. "Self" is the range of a spell. The range and the area specified for the AoE are two different things. Whether or not the spellcaster is affected by the spell's effects are irrelevant. Again, Burning Hands targets the spellcaster's location but the spellcaster is not affected by the spell. In other cases, the spellcaster is affected. In the case of Booming Blade, the spellcaster's location is the target of the spell and also (two different things) the spellcaster himself can be affected by the spell's effect if he chooses to attack himself.
This is what the notation always means.
This is not supported by anything in the books. I've already given the references on spell's point of origin. Nothing says that the point of origin is necessarily a target for the spell. Your conflation here is completely unsupported.
And yet Fireball is printed in the rules. I guess we'll just have to use its 'incorrect' wording as rule text.
In fact, wouldn't it be simpler to understand the Range rule text to be incorrect? It obviously has a mistake when taken with the text of the Fireball spell and doesn't fit with what other features mean when they talk about targets. It doesn't even fit with the first sentence of the Target heading for spells -- with a few exceptions, you don't affect locations with spells, you instead affect creatures or objects within a space. It's actually the odd rule out. It's far more likely that it is the mistake and that target should be read as "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 location" and leave points of origin out on their own.
In fact, it's a much easier case that 'targets' should never mean 'point of origin of a spell.'
And therefore with that view, since point in space doesn't count, fireball is fine.
I have no idea what is going on with any of this unfortunately. You'll have to rephrase. What does simplicity have to do with anything? Are you actually still making a case for using Fireball with War Caster? Go ahead and cast your Fireball I guess. It's fine.
Again, it's not range of self... It's self (x-foot y). I know you don't like that JC said that's different from just self, but he said it... now you have to live with it.
Yes, it says the target of the spell must be within the spell's range... but that does not mean all creatures within range are targets. JC specifically addressed this saying with range parentheses, you can't simply look to the range to see the spell's targets because it is a special type of spell. You must look at the spell's description in that case... Again... I know you don't like that he said that, but he said it. That's not my interpretation, that's from his mouth.
First of all, I could care less what JC says about anything. He is wrong just as often as he is right, it's like flipping a coin.
But more importantly, do you still not understand the notation that is used in the spell parameters for 100% of all spells throughout the entire game? I am honestly trying to help you with that since it's a critical concept if you want to play the game by the rules.
The numbers used in the Range entry are always range (area). Always. There are no exceptions to that. It's the notation that is used to describe all spells. This can come in a few formats. For example, it might say:
"Range: 150 feet" (this means that the range is 150 feet -- NOT an AoE spell.)
or
"Range: 150 feet (20-foot-radius)" (this means that the range is 150 feet and the AoE fills a sphere with a radius of 20 feet -- such as Fireball.)
or
"Range: self" (this means that the range is self -- NOT an AoE spell -- the target is the spellcaster)
or
"Range: self (5-foot-radius)" (this means that the range is self and the AoE fills a sphere with a radius of 5 feet -- such as Booming Blade. In this case, the target might be the spellcaster but it might also be a point in space at the spellcaster's location and this is determined by the spell description.)
There are even a few other possibilities such as a range of "touch", but those spells are beyond the scope of the discussion except to note that even all of those spells follow the simple notation of range (area), just like every other spell in the game.
Also, when you say "but that does not mean all creatures within range are targets" it is clear that you are still not getting how AoE spells work. For AoE spells, NONE of the creatures are targets unless a creature (usually the spellcaster) is actually the origin point of the spell.
I already gave the simple example of Fireball. Fireball has a range of 150 feet. All that means is that the point of origin has to be placed within 150 feet of the spellcaster. However, the AREA of the Fireball's effect can extend an additional 20 feet because of its 20-foot radius. The target of the spell must be within range, by rule:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range . . .
For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Then, there is this other rule from Chapter 10:
Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise.
This is why the edge of the Fireball's area can be 170 feet away, even though the target of the spell must be within range.
An important consequence is that the affected creatures CANNOT be considered to be targets of the AoE. Otherwise, a creature that is standing 165 feet away and clearly within the Fireball's blast radius would suffer no ill effects from the spell since by rule the target of the Fireball spell cannot be farther away than 150 feet.
So spells with AOE's have an origin point on the caster... but it doesn't say anything about targeting the caster.
You are on the right track here, but this is not true of all AoE spells. For example, Fireball does not have to have an origin point at the spellcaster's location. Only spells with a range of "self" have to have their origin point at the spellcaster's location, because that's the only way for the spell to be cast "within range".
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).
Ok, so if the point of origin is targeted by the spell... It will say so in the spell description. That's clear as day isn't it? So does booming blade say it targets the point of origin in its description? I'll leave that question open to you.
Oh, I see. You are misunderstanding what this rule is saying. This breaks down the various ways that targeting works when it comes to spellcasting.
If the spell is NOT an AoE spell, then you have to look in the description to see if the spell targets a creature or an object and how many. This is because those spells simply define a range in the parameters. So when a spell like magic missile specifies a range of 120 feet, that only tells you that the targets must be within 120 feet. The description tells you that you target creatures with that spell, so those creatures must be within range.
OR, the spell description might specify that objects are targeted instead.
OR, the spell IS an AoE spell, in which case the spell description tells you about that target, which is always a point of origin for an area of effect.
Those are the choices.
Keep in mind also that the entire spellcasting section in Chapter 10 begins with this:
Casting a Spell
When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.
So, when the rule for Targets refers to "a spell's description" it is talking about the entire block of information, including the spell parameters. The range parameter always tells you if the spell is an AoE spell.
(Full Disclosure -- in most older hardcopy versions of the PHB there are a few spells which are missing the "area" designation even though the spell is clearly an AoE spell. The converse is never an issue, however. IF the notation is there THEN it is always an AoE spell.)
This actually doesn't matter at all. "Self" is the range of a spell. The range and the area specified for the AoE are two different things. Whether or not the spellcaster is affected by the spell's effects are irrelevant. Again, Burning Hands targets the spellcaster's location but the spellcaster is not affected by the spell. In other cases, the spellcaster is affected. In the case of Booming Blade, the spellcaster's location is the target of the spell and also (two different things) the spellcaster himself can be affected by the spell's effect if he chooses to attack himself.
This is what the notation always means.
This is not supported by anything in the books. I've already given the references on spell's point of origin. Nothing says that the point of origin is necessarily a target for the spell. Your conflation here is completely unsupported.
What in the world are you talking about with this?? I explained the entire concept to you in exact detail! Of course the point of origin has to be the target for an AoE spell! This is explained all over the place in Chapter 10. How else do you expect to be able to cast your Fireball spells? The Fireball has to be placed somewhere, doesn't it?
Range
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.
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
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.
A spell's effect expands in straight lines from the point of origin.
Sphere
You select a sphere's point of origin, and the sphere extends outward from that point.
Those weren't interpretations... they were from JC himself.
JC is just a guy. His statements may speak to RAI (Rules As Intended), but they don't change RAW (Rules As Written)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Likewise, Green-flame blade can be used with War Caster if you forgo targeting a second creature with the green fire according to the Dev,
@JeremyECrawford The Booming Blade spell continues to work with the War Caster feat. The spell targets one creature. The Green-Flame Blade spell continues to work with War Caster if you forgo targeting a second creature with the green fire.
Likewise, Green-flame blade can be used with War Caster if you forgo targeting a second creature with the green fire according to the Dev,
@JeremyECrawford The Booming Blade spell continues to work with the War Caster feat. The spell targets one creature. The Green-Flame Blade spell continues to work with War Caster if you forgo targeting a second creature with the green fire.
It makes sense. Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade share the same concept as far as I understand. They even have similar spell entries, and Green-Flame Blade can target one creature, with the second creature being optional.
Jeremy Crawford also explained this reasoning in the video you posted.
Those weren't interpretations... they were from JC himself.
JC is just a guy. His statements may speak to RAI (Rules As Intended), but they don't change RAW (Rules As Written)
Yeah... he's just a guy... who wrote the section you're trying to interpret. And in the case where he's explaining what a range notation means, I think his expertise is valid. Certainly more valid than yours.
No. The logical fallacy is cherry-picking a couple of unrelated rules which make loose reference to the targeting concept or a small handful of spells which use the word target in a sloppy way and clinging to those few examples and decrying that somehow THAT is the RAW for the entire game concept instead of paying any attention whatsoever to the entire chapter which details the game's general rules for Spellcasting. Specifically, the sections on Range, Targets and Areas of Effect along with hundreds of spell descriptions paint a decently clear picture of what is the intended use for the term "target" in the game. Spells target either creatures or objects or the point of origin for an Area of Effect unless explicitly written otherwise in a specific vs general exception.
And what "arbitrary revisions" of RAW are you even talking about? That was uncalled for and you should apologize. In this forum I never revise RAW. I quote it and I explain it.
The logical fallacy is choosing the rules you prefer that support your position. Have you considered the following rule from the DMG that VERY clearly calls creatures within an AoE as targets of the spell?
Let me cite it:
"Adjudicating Areas of Effect
Many spells and other game features create areas of effect, such as the cone and the sphere. If you’re not using miniatures or another visual aid, it can sometimes be difficult to determine who’s in an area of effect and who isn’t. The easiest way to address such uncertainty is to go with your gut and make a call.
If you would like more guidance, consider using the Targets in Areas of Effect table. To use the table, imagine which combatants are near one another, and let the table guide you in determining the number of those combatants that are caught in an area of effect. Add or subtract targets based on how bunched up the potential targets are. Consider rolling 1d3 to determine the amount to add or subtract.
Targets in Areas of Effect
Area
Number of Targets
Cone
Size ÷ 10 (round up)
Cube or square
Size ÷ 5 (round up)
Cylinder
Radius ÷ 5 (round up)
Line
Length ÷ 30 (round up)
Sphere or circle
Radius ÷ 5 (round up)
For example, if a wizard directs burning hands (a 15-foot cone) at a nearby group of orcs, you could use the table and say that two orcs are targeted (15 ÷ 10 = 1.5, rounded up to 2). Similarly, a sorcerer could launch a lightning bolt (100-foot line) at some ogres and hobgoblins, and you could use the table to say four of the monsters are targeted (100 ÷ 30 = 3.33, rounded up to 4).
This approach aims at simplicity instead of spatial precision. If you prefer more tactical nuance, consider using miniatures."
This table is EXPLICITLY labeled "Targets" in the Area of Effect. It explicitly calls the creatures affected by both Burning Hands AND Lightning Bolt as targets even though neither of these spells uses that description. Is this entire table also "erroneous"?
As I said before, 5e uses TWO definitions of the word target - the aiming point of the spell AND the creatures affected by it. I don't know how much more explicit this needs to be in terms of the available rules. You can choose to use one definition limited to the statements in the PHB contradicted by the text in a variety of spells (which you label erroneous) ... or you can read this section from the DMG that reinforces the verbiage found in a selection of the spells from the PHB that the creatures affected by the spell are also considered targets. It doesn't contradict the spell aiming text that specifies one definition of target BUT it is NOT the only definition of target in 5e as you seem to propose.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description.
I'll go ahead and explain this again. "Self" is a range. See Chapter 10: Spellcasting --> Casting a Spell --> Range. Also from Chapter 10, we know that "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range."
So before I took for granted your interpretation with a slight difference. I wanted to set the record straight by pointing out the mistaken interpretation of this. When it says in the PHB that "The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range," it is not telling you that the target is indicated by the range of the spell. It's telling you that the target must be within range of the spell to be cast. So it's not saying targets of the spell are defined by its range... it's saying the targets for the spell must be within range, or else you can't cast the spell.
So how are the targets defined? "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)." So it's defined by the caster, and a target is chosen specially to be affected by the spell's magic. This definitively answers the question. Booming Blade does not affect the caster with the spell's magic, therefore the caster cannot be a target for the spell.
Those weren't interpretations... they were from JC himself.
JC is just a guy. His statements may speak to RAI (Rules As Intended), but they don't change RAW (Rules As Written)
Yeah... he's just a guy... who wrote the section you're trying to interpret. And in the case where he's explaining what a range notation means, I think his expertise is valid. Certainly more valid than yours.
He headed the team that wrote it, and then gets to be the public face of the rules team
Or do you actually think Crawford wrote every word of the rules?
As for whether his opinion is more "valid" than mine, his perspective can be useful, sure. These forums are littered with examples where he gets stuff flat out wrong, though
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Those weren't interpretations... they were from JC himself.
JC is just a guy. His statements may speak to RAI (Rules As Intended), but they don't change RAW (Rules As Written)
Yeah... he's just a guy... who wrote the section you're trying to interpret. And in the case where he's explaining what a range notation means, I think his expertise is valid. Certainly more valid than yours.
He headed the team that wrote it, and then gets to be the public face of the rules team
Or do you actually think Crawford wrote every word of the rules?
As for whether his opinion is more "valid" than mine, his perspective can be useful, sure. These forums are littered with examples where he gets stuff flat out wrong, though
I gave my reason why I think he wrote this. He said he range for booming blade prior to the errata was a mistake and said it's likely his own mistake. That aside, I'll make the argument only using the books then.
1. PHB chapter 10 under targeting says "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)."
2. The description only has magical effects which affect the melee attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
It seems to me that Range shouldn't mention targets at all and only be concerned with the point of origin, and targets shouldn't mention point of origin at all and only be concerned with what the spell affects.
This wouldn't make sense. The common everyday usage of the term "Range" has to do with determining how far away something is. The common everyday usage of the term "Target" has to do with aiming at something. When you cast Fireball, you are aiming at a point in space. When you cast Magic Missile, you are aiming directly at one or more creatures. In both cases, the thing or the place that you are aiming at has to be "within range" by rule. Otherwise, we could always aim at anything that we wanted anywhere in the world. This is why the section about Range has to refer to targets and why the section on Targets has to mention points of origin. The game is designed for you to aim your spell anywhere within a given range and these rules explain these concepts.
Yes, it is actually. If you don't like that word, then maybe instead we can just say that it's problematic or inconsistent or something. The rules are not perfectly written, and some game concepts suffer from these occasional inconsistencies. Off of the top of my head the rules for Hiding and the rules for Movement come to mind.
Referring to a creature that is affected by an AoE as a "target" of the spell goes against the game design of aiming your spell at a thing or a place within the given range. It is inconsistent with the general rules for spellcasting that are explained in Chapter 10 of the PHB which presents that spellcasting game design for 5e.
I tried to give this example earlier, but I'll post it again:
I already gave the simple example of Fireball. Fireball has a range of 150 feet. All that means is that the point of origin has to be placed within 150 feet of the spellcaster. However, the AREA of the Fireball's effect can extend an additional 20 feet because of its 20-foot radius. The target of the spell must be within range, by rule:
The target of a spell must be within the spell's range . . .
For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts.
Then, there is this other rule from Chapter 10:
Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise.
This is why the edge of the Fireball's area can be 170 feet away, even though the target of the spell must be within range.
An important consequence is that the affected creatures CANNOT be considered to be targets of the AoE. Otherwise, a creature that is standing 165 feet away and clearly within the Fireball's blast radius would suffer no ill effects from the spell since by rule the target of the Fireball spell cannot be farther away than 150 feet.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description.
I'll go ahead and explain this again. "Self" is a range. See Chapter 10: Spellcasting --> Casting a Spell --> Range. Also from Chapter 10, we know that "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range."
So before I took for granted your interpretation with a slight difference. I wanted to set the record straight by pointing out the mistaken interpretation of this. When it says in the PHB that "The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range," it is not telling you that the target is indicated by the range of the spell. It's telling you that the target must be within range of the spell to be cast. So it's not saying targets of the spell are defined by its range... it's saying the targets for the spell must be within range, or else you can't cast the spell.
So how are the targets defined? "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)." So it's defined by the caster, and a target is chosen specially to be affected by the spell's magic. This definitively answers the question. Booming Blade does not affect the caster with the spell's magic, therefore the caster cannot be a target for the spell.
Unfortunately, I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say here so it will be hard for me to help you with this. Do you think that you could please rephrase it?
It just seems like you are mixing up some of the terminology or something so it's becoming confusing. When you say: "it is not telling you that the target is indicated by the range of the spell", are you talking about the actual target? Because no one has ever argued that the actual target is somehow specified in the range entry. If that's what you thought that we were saying, then I apologize for that confusion. The range is a number. Or "touch", or "self". The actual target must be selected by the spellcaster. Whatever the spellcaster chooses as his target for casting the spell, it must be "within range". The range is just a distance. The target is what you are aiming at. Whatever you aim at, it must be "within range". Hopefully that's more clear -- I'm not really sure at this point.
So, when you say: "It's telling you that the target must be within range of the spell to be cast." I actually 100% agree with this statement. The trouble is, I'm not sure that it means what you think it means. I have a feeling that you might be mixing up the "range" with the "area" in some places. Because, if the range is "self", it should be clear that the target must be at the spellcaster's location in order to be "within range". Being 5 feet away from the spellcaster is not "within the range of self". So, if you are making that statement with "the creature" in mind, you might be saying "range" when you actually mean "area". But the rule is that the target of a spell must be within the range.
Next, you say this: "So it's defined by the caster, and a target is chosen specially to be affected by the spell's magic. This definitively answers the question." I actually 100% agree with this statement as well, and again I'm pretty sure that this doesn't mean what you think it means, because you ended up coming to the wrong conclusion. When you cast Magic Missile, the spellcaster defines which creature within range will be the targets (to be affected by the spell's magic). When you cast Fireball, the spellcaster defines which point in space within range will be the target (to be affected by the spell's magic). Because Fireball has a large range, there are a lot of options for where the target of the spell can be. However, for AoE spells that have a range of "self", there are no options. The spell must target the spellcaster or the spellcaster's location in order to be "within range" of "self".
Booming Blade does not affect the caster with the spell's magic, therefore the caster cannot be a target for the spell.
Again, it doesn't actually matter if the spellcaster can or cannot be affected by the spell. It only matters what the valid target is based on the range of the spell. In this case, the spellcaster is not the target of the spell anyway -- the spellcaster's location (a point in space) is the target. But it turns out that if attacking yourself is allowed then the spellcaster actually can be affected. That's because the default for a sphere is that the origin point (where the spellcaster is located) is within the AoE. However, for Burning Hands, the spellcaster himself is the target. But he cannot be affected by the spell effect. That's because the default for a cone is that the origin point (the spellcaster) is not within the AoE. Some spells with a spherical AoE might even explicitly exclude the origin point in the description. If so, that would be a specific vs general exception. Again, the target of an AoE spell has nothing to do with who is affected by the spell effect. It has to do with where you are aiming your spell when you cast it.
1. PHB chapter 10 under targeting says "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)."
2. The description only has magical effects which affect the melee attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
QED.
Yes, the target of the spell is affected by the spell's magic because that's where you are casting it. When you cast it at a creature, the creature is affected by the spell's magic and when you cast it at a point in space, that point in space is affected by the spell's magic.
When the rule that you quoted refers to "a spell's description", we need to look at this other rule:
Casting a Spell
When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.
So, "a spell's description" actually refers to the entire entry for the spell, including the parameters. This is critical because the range parameter is actually telling you if a spell is an AoE spell before you even get to the rest of the spell entry that describes the spell's effect.
Now, you can indeed find examples where the (area) parameter is missing but when reading the entire spell description, it becomes clear that it's an AoE spell, which is fine. But when the parameter tells you right away that it's an AoE spell, you don't need to worry too much about how the effect is described because we already know that it's an AoE spell.
----------
I really do hope that this is helpful. Please don't misconstrue anything that I've said as being anything other than trying to help.
Unfortunately, I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say here so it will be hard for me to help you with this. Do you think that you could please rephrase it?
Sure… what I'm saying is that the first sentence under range is defining the range (imagine that). It's not telling you what the targets are or how to determine the targets… it's telling you that the range is the area where targets must be selected from. In other words… targets for a spell must only be selected by the player from the area within range. That's it.
When you cast it at a creature, the creature is affected by the spell's magic and when you cast it at a point in space, that point in space is affected by the spell's magic.
When the rule that you quoted refers to "a spell's description", we need to look at this other rule:
Casting a Spell
When a character casts any spell, the same basic rules are followed, regardless of the character's class or the spell's effects.
Each spell description begins with a block of information, including the spell's name, level, school of magic, casting time, range, components, and duration. The rest of a spell entry describes the spell's effect.
So, "a spell's description" actually refers to the entire entry for the spell, including the parameters. This is critical because the range parameter is actually telling you if a spell is an AoE spell before you even get to the rest of the spell entry that describes the spell's effect.
Now, you can indeed find examples where the (area) parameter is missing but when reading the entire spell description, it becomes clear that it's an AoE spell, which is fine. But when the parameter tells you right away that it's an AoE spell, you don't need to worry too much about how the effect is described because we already know that it's an AoE spell.
----------
I really do hope that this is helpful. Please don't misconstrue anything that I've said as being anything other than trying to help.
I think we agree mostly, except on how the target is determined. You seem adamant that the range is what tells you the target of the spell. It is not. The range is what tells you what the eligible targets for the spell are. The eligible target for firebolt, for example, is anyone within one hundred feet of the caster. But the actual target of the spell is a single creature or object which the caster targets. The description tells you what the caster can target, the range is the part of the description that tells him the area of eligible targets.
Now if your argument is that the caster is affected (thus is spell target) if they are casting the spell, then there are no spells that war caster works with. I assume you mean the caster is a target if he is a point of origin of the spell. But this is also wrong. There is nothing in the rules that says the spell's point of origin is a target of the spell. Point of origin is defined as "a location from which the spell’s energy erupts." It does not necessitates including the point of origin as a spell target.
Furthermore, There is nothing in booming blade, which indicates it affects anyone other than the attack target. Unless you can point out a magical effect that affects the caster of the spell, this spell only targets the attack target.
Sure… what I'm saying is that the first sentence under range is defining the range (imagine that). It's not telling you what the targets are or how to determine the targets… it's telling you that the range is the area where targets must be selected from. In other words… targets for a spell must only be selected by the player from the area within range. That's it.
Ok, yes, this is correct. That's what I've been saying the whole time. Now, when we talk about a range of "self", you just don't have any option for what you can select. The only valid target in that case is the spellcaster himself or the point in space at the spellcaster's location. Otherwise, you are trying to target something outside of the range, which is against the rules.
I'm not sure what you mean by "my shift", I am just telling you what the rules are. In the one that you quoted (and I have also quoted it several times), you pick the target "to be affected by the spell's magic". One of the three options given for that is "a point of origin for an area of effect". So, the point in space is the target for AoE spells, but later on there are other rules that say, depending on the shape of the AoE, the actual origin point's location may or may not be included in the Area of Effect. Those are the rules, I didn't make them up.
You seem adamant that the range is what tells you the target of the spell. It is not.
No, I've never said that. Sorry if there was some confusion on that point. The range is what you are saying here and what I've been saying the whole time -- it's the maximum distance away from the spellcaster that a target of the spell can be. The larger the range, the more options you have on where to target your spell. But as the range gets smaller and smaller you have less and less valid options. When the range becomes so small that it is listed as "self", then there is only one valid option left -- yourself or your location. Otherwise, the target is outside of the range.
Now if your argument is that the caster is affected (thus is spell target) if they are casting the spell, then there are no spells that war caster works with.
I've never said anything like this -- I'm not even really sure what this means. My argument is what I've just said above. As the range for the spell gets smaller and smaller you have less and less options for valid targets until you get all the way down to the range of "self" in which case the target must be yourself or your location because otherwise the target would be outside of the range.
I assume you mean the caster is a target if he is a point of origin of the spell. But this is also wrong. There is nothing in the rules that says the spell's point of origin is a target of the spell.
Yes, occasionally the point of origin for an AoE spell can be a creature and when that happens that creature is the target. The main example that we keep coming back to for this would be Burning Hands, where the magic spews forth straight out of the spellcaster's hands. But let's say that for some reason I wanted to target myself with a Fireball spell. I would not be the target in that case because the Fireball spell does not explode from a creature. It explodes from a point in space. I might be at the location of that point in space but I wouldn't be the target. My location would be the target.
The place in the rules which says that the spell's point of origin is a target of the spell is in the rule that you've recently quoted. It is listed as one of the three options for what can be a valid target of a spell:
Targets
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 targetscreatures, objects, ora point of origin for an area of effect
And remember, regardless of which of those three categories is chosen, the target must be within range. Very important.
Furthermore, There is nothing in booming blade, which indicates it affects anyone other than the attack target. Unless you can point out a magical effect that affects the caster of the spell, this spell only targets the attack target.
Correction: The spell only affects the attack target. It only targets the spellcaster's location.
Remember, the Range parameter for this particular spell defines a specific size and shape for an AoE. It also specifies that the range is "self". The only way that this is possible is if the target of the spell is at the spellcaster's location because, by rule, the target must be within range. Now, the AREA for the AoE extends outwards to a radius of 5 feet. The attacked creature must be within this area or else he will be unaffected by the spell. Because it's a cantrip, the creature still has a chance to take no damage. Instead of making a saving throw, he has to be on the good side of an attack roll mechanic. But the end result is a lot like other cantrips -- affected or unaffected (instead of half-affected, like many leveled spells do).
Booming Blade used to be written in such a way that the creature was directly targeted. The spell was changed in 2020 into an AoE spell.
Agreed. Also, if you look at up-to-date spells on the website it doesn't just say "Range", it says "Range/Area". Self (5 ft) means there is a restriction on its targets to be within 5 ft of the caster, NOT that it targets everything in that area or the area itself. This is the same as Fireball's Range/Area of "150 ft (20 ft )" indicating its targets are restricted to being within 20ft of a given point within 150ft of the caster. This is why Distant Spell metamagic can't increase the range of booming blade to 10ft even with reach weapons: it only increases the distance at which you can choose a point for the spell's origin, not the distance of the targets TO that point.
Further explaining the difference, you can look at a spell like Thunderwave. While Thunderwave states it targets each creature in its area (Range/Area: Self (15ft cube), Booming Blade states that it only targets one creature in its area (Range/Area: Self (5ft radius), which is chosen by making a melee attack against it. We can also look at:
Fireball, which has a Range/Area of 120 (20 ft sphere) and targets a point in space.
Sleet Storm, which has a Range/Area of 150 ft(40 ft cylinder) and targets the entire area itself, and not any creatures in it and not a point in space.
Transmute Rock has a Range/Area of 120ft (40 ft cube) and only targets some chosen amount of mud and rock that fits within the given area.
Slow has a Range/Area of 120 ft (40 ft cube) and only targets up to 6 creatures in that area, not a point in space and not all of them.
Phantasmal Force, with a Range/Area of 60 ft (10 ft cube) but yet targets only a single creature, and that creature does not even have to be inside the area of affect.
Steel Wind Strike, with a Range/Area of 30ft: there's no area of effect on it but it targets up to 5 creatures.
Antipathy/Sympathy, which has a Range/Area of 60ft (200ft cube), and targets EITHER a creature in range OR an area of effect, but not both.
Blade Barrier, which has a Range/Area of 90ft, but creates an area of effect, despite not having one listed in it's range/area.
This all only further illustrates alexdohm9191's previous post's point: the range/area of a spell does not completely determine its targets, but rather serves to place restrictions on or summarize the targets described in the remaining text of the spell.
Not as I understand the rules. The spell must target only that creature mentioned in War Caster. If the spell targets an area, then it isn't targeting only that creature.
After reading some tweets, this thread multiple times (including my previous opinion!), and watching the video provided by @Plaguescarred, I'll rule that Booming Blade doesn't create an area of effect. My life will be better.
Anyway, for discussing War Caster and targeting, go to War caster and targeting
Yes, you are misunderstanding his explanations.
The reason for the distinction between "Range: self" and "Range: self (area)" is because the first notation is NOT an AOE spell. So, in that case that target IS the spellcaster. In the case of "Range: self (area)" the notation is indicating that it's an AoE spell and therefore we do not know if the origin point is the spellcaster himself or a point in space at the spellcaster's location -- so we have to learn that through the spell description. This is quite literally what he is explaining to you but you keep missing it.
I am not the one saying the intent behind the change. HE is telling you why they changed it! He literally says that they realized that the spell doesn't come into existence "over there", it must come from the spellcaster's location. Are you sure that you listened to it?
In every single spell in the entire game, whenever you see those parentheses in the spell parameters that means that it's an AoE spell and the size and shape of the area of effect is defined within the parentheses. Every single time. That goes for spells that might be "Range: self (5-foot-radius)" like Booming Blade or for spells with a notation something like "Range: 150 feet (20-foot-radius) like Fireball. The range of the spell is given first. The size and shape of the area of effect is then given in parentheses. This is a standard notation for the game and it has the same meaning every single time.
Please listen to what you're saying here for a moment and try to think about it for a bit.
Self indicates the caster is the point of origin of the spell, but it *does not* indicate the spell's target. You keep conflating those things and they are not the same. He said with the notation of self parentheses, the range is not telling you the intended target anymore. Instead those details are taken from the description. Thats what he said... if you disagree, rewatch it. He said it.
Now, in booming blade clearly the only indicated target is the attack target. Why? Because all effects of the spell are strictly applied to that creature. There is no effect on self in the description. You can create some head cannon about an invisible field that's generated around the caster, but it's not in the spell.
1. JC said the targets for those spells are discerned from the description.
2. The description only has effects which affect the attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
QED.
That', uhh, not how any of that works. You can't just tag a string of interpretations and opinions with a QED and claim you've made your case
For example:
1. booming blade has a listed range that suggests it's some sort of AoE spell, and AoE spells don't necessarily have to have a specific target
2. The description only has effects which affect a creature within that listed range once it has been targeted and hit by a melee attack.
3. Therefore the spell generates certain effects around the caster in the listed area when a condition is met (in this case, hit with a melee attack), just like other spells with a range of Self (X) such as spirit guardians or aura of life
QED
Now, you're going to say "well, nowhere in the spell does it say it creates an invisible field", but it also doesn't say the spell itself targets anybody. The only target listed is the target of the melee attack, and it explicitly says the damage from the weapon and the damage from the spell are separate things
In that video, JC admits that booming blade and green-flame blade were experiments. It shows, even after the revision
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Ok, here is the text in question for War Caster:
Text for Fireball:
Therefore, Fireball does not work with War Caster.
I'll go ahead and explain this again. "Self" is a range. See Chapter 10: Spellcasting --> Casting a Spell --> Range. Also from Chapter 10, we know that "The target of a spell must be within the spell's range."
When the spell is NOT an AoE spell, the spellcaster must be the target of all spells which have a range of "self".
When the spell IS an AoE spell, the target of the spell is either the spellcaster or a point in space at the spellcaster's location. The spell description will tell you which one of these it is. The target of an AoE spell is its point of origin.
This actually doesn't matter at all. "Self" is the range of a spell. The range and the area specified for the AoE are two different things. Whether or not the spellcaster is affected by the spell's effects are irrelevant. Again, Burning Hands targets the spellcaster's location but the spellcaster is not affected by the spell. In other cases, the spellcaster is affected. In the case of Booming Blade, the spellcaster's location is the target of the spell and also (two different things) the spellcaster himself can be affected by the spell's effect if he chooses to attack himself.
This is what the notation always means.
I mean, I know you aren't going to like my response to that, but the truth is that Fireball is one of those few spells that uses the word "target" incorrectly. We know this for sure because Fireball itself is used as an example within the core general rules for spellcasting in Chapter 10:
However, even if we were to give it the benefit of the doubt and chalk this up to being some sort of specific vs general exception to the rules for targeting . . . it still doesn't work for War Caster because that Feat states: "The spell . . . must target only that creature."
In this case we would have a spell that targets "that creature" AND a point in space. Thus, it doesn't qualify.
That', uhh, not how any of that works. You can't just tag a string of interpretations and opinions with a QED and claim you've made your case
Those weren't interpretations... they were from JC himself.
Again, it's not range of self... It's self (x-foot y). I know you don't like that JC said that's different from just self, but he said it... now you have to live with it.
Yes, it says the target of the spell must be within the spell's range... but that does not mean all creatures within range are targets. JC specifically addressed this saying with range parentheses, you can't simply look to the range to see the spell's targets because it is a special type of spell. You must look at the spell's description in that case... Again... I know you don't like that he said that, but he said it. That's not my interpretation, that's from his mouth.
Furthermore we can read the PHB to gather information on this. In the very section you quoted, it also says:
So spells with AOE's have an origin point on the caster... but it doesn't say anything about targeting the caster. Maybe that's under AOE's though... Lets see.
So this doesn't say anything about the requirement the caster needing to be a target of the spell when he's the point of origin... maybe that's under targeting... Let's see.
Ok, so if the point of origin is targeted by the spell... It will say so in the spell description. That's clear as day isn't it? So does booming blade say it targets the point of origin in its description? I'll leave that question open to you. Since this is in the PHB, it's up to you to show where the spell indicates in its description that the point of origin for booming blade is a target.
This is not supported by anything in the books. I've already given the references on spell's point of origin. Nothing says that the point of origin is necessarily a target for the spell. Your conflation here is completely unsupported.
I have no idea what is going on with any of this unfortunately. You'll have to rephrase. What does simplicity have to do with anything? Are you actually still making a case for using Fireball with War Caster? Go ahead and cast your Fireball I guess. It's fine.
First of all, I could care less what JC says about anything. He is wrong just as often as he is right, it's like flipping a coin.
But more importantly, do you still not understand the notation that is used in the spell parameters for 100% of all spells throughout the entire game? I am honestly trying to help you with that since it's a critical concept if you want to play the game by the rules.
The numbers used in the Range entry are always range (area). Always. There are no exceptions to that. It's the notation that is used to describe all spells. This can come in a few formats. For example, it might say:
"Range: 150 feet" (this means that the range is 150 feet -- NOT an AoE spell.)
or
"Range: 150 feet (20-foot-radius)" (this means that the range is 150 feet and the AoE fills a sphere with a radius of 20 feet -- such as Fireball.)
or
"Range: self" (this means that the range is self -- NOT an AoE spell -- the target is the spellcaster)
or
"Range: self (5-foot-radius)" (this means that the range is self and the AoE fills a sphere with a radius of 5 feet -- such as Booming Blade. In this case, the target might be the spellcaster but it might also be a point in space at the spellcaster's location and this is determined by the spell description.)
There are even a few other possibilities such as a range of "touch", but those spells are beyond the scope of the discussion except to note that even all of those spells follow the simple notation of range (area), just like every other spell in the game.
Also, when you say "but that does not mean all creatures within range are targets" it is clear that you are still not getting how AoE spells work. For AoE spells, NONE of the creatures are targets unless a creature (usually the spellcaster) is actually the origin point of the spell.
I already gave the simple example of Fireball. Fireball has a range of 150 feet. All that means is that the point of origin has to be placed within 150 feet of the spellcaster. However, the AREA of the Fireball's effect can extend an additional 20 feet because of its 20-foot radius. The target of the spell must be within range, by rule:
Then, there is this other rule from Chapter 10:
This is why the edge of the Fireball's area can be 170 feet away, even though the target of the spell must be within range.
An important consequence is that the affected creatures CANNOT be considered to be targets of the AoE. Otherwise, a creature that is standing 165 feet away and clearly within the Fireball's blast radius would suffer no ill effects from the spell since by rule the target of the Fireball spell cannot be farther away than 150 feet.
You are on the right track here, but this is not true of all AoE spells. For example, Fireball does not have to have an origin point at the spellcaster's location. Only spells with a range of "self" have to have their origin point at the spellcaster's location, because that's the only way for the spell to be cast "within range".
Oh, I see. You are misunderstanding what this rule is saying. This breaks down the various ways that targeting works when it comes to spellcasting.
If the spell is NOT an AoE spell, then you have to look in the description to see if the spell targets a creature or an object and how many. This is because those spells simply define a range in the parameters. So when a spell like magic missile specifies a range of 120 feet, that only tells you that the targets must be within 120 feet. The description tells you that you target creatures with that spell, so those creatures must be within range.
OR, the spell description might specify that objects are targeted instead.
OR, the spell IS an AoE spell, in which case the spell description tells you about that target, which is always a point of origin for an area of effect.
Those are the choices.
Keep in mind also that the entire spellcasting section in Chapter 10 begins with this:
So, when the rule for Targets refers to "a spell's description" it is talking about the entire block of information, including the spell parameters. The range parameter always tells you if the spell is an AoE spell.
(Full Disclosure -- in most older hardcopy versions of the PHB there are a few spells which are missing the "area" designation even though the spell is clearly an AoE spell. The converse is never an issue, however. IF the notation is there THEN it is always an AoE spell.)
What in the world are you talking about with this?? I explained the entire concept to you in exact detail! Of course the point of origin has to be the target for an AoE spell! This is explained all over the place in Chapter 10. How else do you expect to be able to cast your Fireball spells? The Fireball has to be placed somewhere, doesn't it?
JC is just a guy. His statements may speak to RAI (Rules As Intended), but they don't change RAW (Rules As Written)
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Likewise, Green-flame blade can be used with War Caster if you forgo targeting a second creature with the green fire according to the Dev,
It makes sense. Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade share the same concept as far as I understand. They even have similar spell entries, and Green-Flame Blade can target one creature, with the second creature being optional.
Jeremy Crawford also explained this reasoning in the video you posted.
Yeah... he's just a guy... who wrote the section you're trying to interpret. And in the case where he's explaining what a range notation means, I think his expertise is valid. Certainly more valid than yours.
The logical fallacy is choosing the rules you prefer that support your position. Have you considered the following rule from the DMG that VERY clearly calls creatures within an AoE as targets of the spell?
Let me cite it:
"Adjudicating Areas of Effect
Many spells and other game features create areas of effect, such as the cone and the sphere. If you’re not using miniatures or another visual aid, it can sometimes be difficult to determine who’s in an area of effect and who isn’t. The easiest way to address such uncertainty is to go with your gut and make a call.
If you would like more guidance, consider using the Targets in Areas of Effect table. To use the table, imagine which combatants are near one another, and let the table guide you in determining the number of those combatants that are caught in an area of effect. Add or subtract targets based on how bunched up the potential targets are. Consider rolling 1d3![]()
to determine the amount to add or subtract.
Targets in Areas of Effect
For example, if a wizard directs burning hands (a 15-foot cone) at a nearby group of orcs, you could use the table and say that two orcs are targeted (15 ÷ 10 = 1.5, rounded up to 2). Similarly, a sorcerer could launch a lightning bolt (100-foot line) at some ogres and hobgoblins, and you could use the table to say four of the monsters are targeted (100 ÷ 30 = 3.33, rounded up to 4).
This approach aims at simplicity instead of spatial precision. If you prefer more tactical nuance, consider using miniatures."
This table is EXPLICITLY labeled "Targets" in the Area of Effect. It explicitly calls the creatures affected by both Burning Hands AND Lightning Bolt as targets even though neither of these spells uses that description. Is this entire table also "erroneous"?
As I said before, 5e uses TWO definitions of the word target - the aiming point of the spell AND the creatures affected by it. I don't know how much more explicit this needs to be in terms of the available rules. You can choose to use one definition limited to the statements in the PHB contradicted by the text in a variety of spells (which you label erroneous) ... or you can read this section from the DMG that reinforces the verbiage found in a selection of the spells from the PHB that the creatures affected by the spell are also considered targets. It doesn't contradict the spell aiming text that specifies one definition of target BUT it is NOT the only definition of target in 5e as you seem to propose.
So before I took for granted your interpretation with a slight difference. I wanted to set the record straight by pointing out the mistaken interpretation of this. When it says in the PHB that "The target of a spell must be within the spell’s range," it is not telling you that the target is indicated by the range of the spell. It's telling you that the target must be within range of the spell to be cast. So it's not saying targets of the spell are defined by its range... it's saying the targets for the spell must be within range, or else you can't cast the spell.
So how are the targets defined? "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)." So it's defined by the caster, and a target is chosen specially to be affected by the spell's magic. This definitively answers the question. Booming Blade does not affect the caster with the spell's magic, therefore the caster cannot be a target for the spell.
He headed the team that wrote it, and then gets to be the public face of the rules team
Or do you actually think Crawford wrote every word of the rules?
As for whether his opinion is more "valid" than mine, his perspective can be useful, sure. These forums are littered with examples where he gets stuff flat out wrong, though
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I gave my reason why I think he wrote this. He said he range for booming blade prior to the errata was a mistake and said it's likely his own mistake. That aside, I'll make the argument only using the books then.
1. PHB chapter 10 under targeting says "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)."
2. The description only has magical effects which affect the melee attack target.
3. Therefore the spell only targets the attack target.
QED.
This wouldn't make sense. The common everyday usage of the term "Range" has to do with determining how far away something is. The common everyday usage of the term "Target" has to do with aiming at something. When you cast Fireball, you are aiming at a point in space. When you cast Magic Missile, you are aiming directly at one or more creatures. In both cases, the thing or the place that you are aiming at has to be "within range" by rule. Otherwise, we could always aim at anything that we wanted anywhere in the world. This is why the section about Range has to refer to targets and why the section on Targets has to mention points of origin. The game is designed for you to aim your spell anywhere within a given range and these rules explain these concepts.
Yes, it is actually. If you don't like that word, then maybe instead we can just say that it's problematic or inconsistent or something. The rules are not perfectly written, and some game concepts suffer from these occasional inconsistencies. Off of the top of my head the rules for Hiding and the rules for Movement come to mind.
Referring to a creature that is affected by an AoE as a "target" of the spell goes against the game design of aiming your spell at a thing or a place within the given range. It is inconsistent with the general rules for spellcasting that are explained in Chapter 10 of the PHB which presents that spellcasting game design for 5e.
I tried to give this example earlier, but I'll post it again:
I already gave the simple example of Fireball. Fireball has a range of 150 feet. All that means is that the point of origin has to be placed within 150 feet of the spellcaster. However, the AREA of the Fireball's effect can extend an additional 20 feet because of its 20-foot radius. The target of the spell must be within range, by rule:
Then, there is this other rule from Chapter 10:
This is why the edge of the Fireball's area can be 170 feet away, even though the target of the spell must be within range.
An important consequence is that the affected creatures CANNOT be considered to be targets of the AoE. Otherwise, a creature that is standing 165 feet away and clearly within the Fireball's blast radius would suffer no ill effects from the spell since by rule the target of the Fireball spell cannot be farther away than 150 feet.
Unfortunately, I genuinely don't know what you're trying to say here so it will be hard for me to help you with this. Do you think that you could please rephrase it?
It just seems like you are mixing up some of the terminology or something so it's becoming confusing. When you say: "it is not telling you that the target is indicated by the range of the spell", are you talking about the actual target? Because no one has ever argued that the actual target is somehow specified in the range entry. If that's what you thought that we were saying, then I apologize for that confusion. The range is a number. Or "touch", or "self". The actual target must be selected by the spellcaster. Whatever the spellcaster chooses as his target for casting the spell, it must be "within range". The range is just a distance. The target is what you are aiming at. Whatever you aim at, it must be "within range". Hopefully that's more clear -- I'm not really sure at this point.
So, when you say: "It's telling you that the target must be within range of the spell to be cast." I actually 100% agree with this statement. The trouble is, I'm not sure that it means what you think it means. I have a feeling that you might be mixing up the "range" with the "area" in some places. Because, if the range is "self", it should be clear that the target must be at the spellcaster's location in order to be "within range". Being 5 feet away from the spellcaster is not "within the range of self". So, if you are making that statement with "the creature" in mind, you might be saying "range" when you actually mean "area". But the rule is that the target of a spell must be within the range.
Next, you say this: "So it's defined by the caster, and a target is chosen specially to be affected by the spell's magic. This definitively answers the question." I actually 100% agree with this statement as well, and again I'm pretty sure that this doesn't mean what you think it means, because you ended up coming to the wrong conclusion. When you cast Magic Missile, the spellcaster defines which creature within range will be the targets (to be affected by the spell's magic). When you cast Fireball, the spellcaster defines which point in space within range will be the target (to be affected by the spell's magic). Because Fireball has a large range, there are a lot of options for where the target of the spell can be. However, for AoE spells that have a range of "self", there are no options. The spell must target the spellcaster or the spellcaster's location in order to be "within range" of "self".
Again, it doesn't actually matter if the spellcaster can or cannot be affected by the spell. It only matters what the valid target is based on the range of the spell. In this case, the spellcaster is not the target of the spell anyway -- the spellcaster's location (a point in space) is the target. But it turns out that if attacking yourself is allowed then the spellcaster actually can be affected. That's because the default for a sphere is that the origin point (where the spellcaster is located) is within the AoE. However, for Burning Hands, the spellcaster himself is the target. But he cannot be affected by the spell effect. That's because the default for a cone is that the origin point (the spellcaster) is not within the AoE. Some spells with a spherical AoE might even explicitly exclude the origin point in the description. If so, that would be a specific vs general exception. Again, the target of an AoE spell has nothing to do with who is affected by the spell effect. It has to do with where you are aiming your spell when you cast it.
Yes, the target of the spell is affected by the spell's magic because that's where you are casting it. When you cast it at a creature, the creature is affected by the spell's magic and when you cast it at a point in space, that point in space is affected by the spell's magic.
When the rule that you quoted refers to "a spell's description", we need to look at this other rule:
So, "a spell's description" actually refers to the entire entry for the spell, including the parameters. This is critical because the range parameter is actually telling you if a spell is an AoE spell before you even get to the rest of the spell entry that describes the spell's effect.
Now, you can indeed find examples where the (area) parameter is missing but when reading the entire spell description, it becomes clear that it's an AoE spell, which is fine. But when the parameter tells you right away that it's an AoE spell, you don't need to worry too much about how the effect is described because we already know that it's an AoE spell.
----------
I really do hope that this is helpful. Please don't misconstrue anything that I've said as being anything other than trying to help.
Sure… what I'm saying is that the first sentence under range is defining the range (imagine that). It's not telling you what the targets are or how to determine the targets… it's telling you that the range is the area where targets must be selected from. In other words… targets for a spell must only be selected by the player from the area within range. That's it.
Funny… you backtrack on that here.
Did you not notice your shift? But let's look at your argument.
I think we agree mostly, except on how the target is determined. You seem adamant that the range is what tells you the target of the spell. It is not. The range is what tells you what the eligible targets for the spell are. The eligible target for firebolt, for example, is anyone within one hundred feet of the caster. But the actual target of the spell is a single creature or object which the caster targets. The description tells you what the caster can target, the range is the part of the description that tells him the area of eligible targets.
Now if your argument is that the caster is affected (thus is spell target) if they are casting the spell, then there are no spells that war caster works with. I assume you mean the caster is a target if he is a point of origin of the spell. But this is also wrong. There is nothing in the rules that says the spell's point of origin is a target of the spell. Point of origin is defined as "a location from which the spell’s energy erupts." It does not necessitates including the point of origin as a spell target.
Furthermore, There is nothing in booming blade, which indicates it affects anyone other than the attack target. Unless you can point out a magical effect that affects the caster of the spell, this spell only targets the attack target.
Ok, yes, this is correct. That's what I've been saying the whole time. Now, when we talk about a range of "self", you just don't have any option for what you can select. The only valid target in that case is the spellcaster himself or the point in space at the spellcaster's location. Otherwise, you are trying to target something outside of the range, which is against the rules.
I'm not sure what you mean by "my shift", I am just telling you what the rules are. In the one that you quoted (and I have also quoted it several times), you pick the target "to be affected by the spell's magic". One of the three options given for that is "a point of origin for an area of effect". So, the point in space is the target for AoE spells, but later on there are other rules that say, depending on the shape of the AoE, the actual origin point's location may or may not be included in the Area of Effect. Those are the rules, I didn't make them up.
No, I've never said that. Sorry if there was some confusion on that point. The range is what you are saying here and what I've been saying the whole time -- it's the maximum distance away from the spellcaster that a target of the spell can be. The larger the range, the more options you have on where to target your spell. But as the range gets smaller and smaller you have less and less valid options. When the range becomes so small that it is listed as "self", then there is only one valid option left -- yourself or your location. Otherwise, the target is outside of the range.
I've never said anything like this -- I'm not even really sure what this means. My argument is what I've just said above. As the range for the spell gets smaller and smaller you have less and less options for valid targets until you get all the way down to the range of "self" in which case the target must be yourself or your location because otherwise the target would be outside of the range.
Yes, occasionally the point of origin for an AoE spell can be a creature and when that happens that creature is the target. The main example that we keep coming back to for this would be Burning Hands, where the magic spews forth straight out of the spellcaster's hands. But let's say that for some reason I wanted to target myself with a Fireball spell. I would not be the target in that case because the Fireball spell does not explode from a creature. It explodes from a point in space. I might be at the location of that point in space but I wouldn't be the target. My location would be the target.
The place in the rules which says that the spell's point of origin is a target of the spell is in the rule that you've recently quoted. It is listed as one of the three options for what can be a valid target of a spell:
And remember, regardless of which of those three categories is chosen, the target must be within range. Very important.
Correction: The spell only affects the attack target. It only targets the spellcaster's location.
Remember, the Range parameter for this particular spell defines a specific size and shape for an AoE. It also specifies that the range is "self". The only way that this is possible is if the target of the spell is at the spellcaster's location because, by rule, the target must be within range. Now, the AREA for the AoE extends outwards to a radius of 5 feet. The attacked creature must be within this area or else he will be unaffected by the spell. Because it's a cantrip, the creature still has a chance to take no damage. Instead of making a saving throw, he has to be on the good side of an attack roll mechanic. But the end result is a lot like other cantrips -- affected or unaffected (instead of half-affected, like many leveled spells do).
Booming Blade used to be written in such a way that the creature was directly targeted. The spell was changed in 2020 into an AoE spell.
I hope that helps!
Agreed. Also, if you look at up-to-date spells on the website it doesn't just say "Range", it says "Range/Area". Self (5 ft) means there is a restriction on its targets to be within 5 ft of the caster, NOT that it targets everything in that area or the area itself. This is the same as Fireball's Range/Area of "150 ft (20 ft )" indicating its targets are restricted to being within 20ft of a given point within 150ft of the caster. This is why Distant Spell metamagic can't increase the range of booming blade to 10ft even with reach weapons: it only increases the distance at which you can choose a point for the spell's origin, not the distance of the targets TO that point.
Further explaining the difference, you can look at a spell like Thunderwave. While Thunderwave states it targets each creature in its area (Range/Area: Self (15ft cube), Booming Blade states that it only targets one creature in its area (Range/Area: Self (5ft radius), which is chosen by making a melee attack against it. We can also look at:
Fireball, which has a Range/Area of 120 (20 ft sphere) and targets a point in space.
Sleet Storm, which has a Range/Area of 150 ft (40 ft cylinder) and targets the entire area itself, and not any creatures in it and not a point in space.
Transmute Rock has a Range/Area of 120ft (40 ft cube) and only targets some chosen amount of mud and rock that fits within the given area.
Slow has a Range/Area of 120 ft (40 ft cube) and only targets up to 6 creatures in that area, not a point in space and not all of them.
Phantasmal Force, with a Range/Area of 60 ft (10 ft cube) but yet targets only a single creature, and that creature does not even have to be inside the area of affect.
Steel Wind Strike, with a Range/Area of 30ft: there's no area of effect on it but it targets up to 5 creatures.
Antipathy/Sympathy, which has a Range/Area of 60ft (200ft cube), and targets EITHER a creature in range OR an area of effect, but not both.
Blade Barrier, which has a Range/Area of 90ft, but creates an area of effect, despite not having one listed in it's range/area.
This all only further illustrates alexdohm9191's previous post's point: the range/area of a spell does not completely determine its targets, but rather serves to place restrictions on or summarize the targets described in the remaining text of the spell.