Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Hello,
I remember at one point there was a great deal of discussion about the warcaster reaction being able to only cast a spell that could target only one creature ( I think). But as written now,
Reactive Spell. When a creature provokes an Opportunity Attack from you by leaving your reach, you can take a Reaction to cast a spell at the creature rather than making an Opportunity Attack. This spell must have a casting time of one action and must target only that creature.
So, can I cast a spell that has the potential for targeting multiple creatures, but is focused entirely upon this one ( Magic Missile, Slow, etc)?
Thanks,
SirEvan
That sounds like it, any spell that won’t allow you to target a single individual would probably not be allowed, like Fireball.
The wording says that the spell you cast "must target only that creature". The spell can be capable of targeting multiple creature, but you must aim it only at the creature that provoked the Opportunity Attack. A good example of a spell like this would be Scorching Ray. As long as you direct all of the beams at the creature who provoked the Opportunity Attack, you can cast it with Reactive Spell.
AoE spells like Fireball actually target a point, not a creature, so they are inelligible for casting with the Reactive Spell feature even if they would only hit that one creature (no other targets in the area).
I have a different interpretation regarding Range and Targets.
Fireball has a point of origin (its Range), but the targets are the creatures affected by the spell's Effect. By this reading or ruling, you could technically use War Caster with Fireball as long as you only target one creature.
But I know this interpretation of Range and Targets isn't read the same way by everyone, so I'm leaving some threads here with similar or different interpretations:
- 2024 Evoker Wizard, Potent Cantrip and Weapon Cantrips (starting from comment #9)
- Is the attack from True Strike both a Weapon and Spell Attack ? (starting from comment #20)
- True strike and Arcane Grimoire stack?
- True strike and overthinking it (starting from comment #7)
- Use of Booming Blade during a Reaction
The first problem with Fireball is that it will generally target at least two creatures because its radius is larger than your Reach for the Opportunity Attack.
The second problem is that you have to make a decision about whether Fireball is legal before you know whether or not it potentially could be. There very well could be an Invisible enemy within the radius that you don't know about. Since you can't have rules determined by future knowledge, this means we really need to read the rule as "only potentially have one target".
There's no explicit RAW answer, from the books or Sage Advice, in 5e or 5.5e.
There are some tweets or such from Crawford from a few years ago suggesting this is fine (he used Green-Flame Blade as an example, where you choose to forego the secondary damage against a second target). So, in principle, there is an argument that you could do this with any spell as long as you can and do only target one thing.
As mentioned, AoE spells that might target a creature or object you don't know is there are a problem.
(People also love to get hung up on the difference between "range" and "target" and such, which makes this more complicated than it needs to be.)
Regarding the Dev tweets, here are the ones I know of that relate to this topic, in case they're useful for you @SirEvangelos or anyone:
And this is similar to the Scorching Ray example that Sequilonis mentioned, but using Eldritch Blast:
EDIT: for clarity.
I disagree with Tarod_, but if that is the table's interpretation, you just place the point of origin about 15 feet behind your target. If you are in close quarters, it won't work.
It's another case of discuss it with your DM before relying on the strategy.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Keep in mind that Fireball affects both creatures and objects.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
If you were to allow spells like Fireball that have an AoE to be used with Warcaster, would you also then allow spells like Hunger of Hadar or Wall of Fire so long as only one creature is in the area at the time of casting? What would happen if another creature moved into the area? Would the spell continue but not be able to affect any new creatures entering the area? Would the spell end immediately?
Allowing AoE spells that target an area rather than a creature would be greatly increasing the power of the feat beyond its intended use.
The use of the word "target" in this case relates to spell targeting, meaning, the process of selecting the point of origin such as how the term is used in the Clear Path rule and a couple of other places. It's not talking about creatures being affected by the spell effect as per the common Rules Glossary version of the term.
However, there is a simpler reason why spells such as Fireball are disqualified. Warcaster requires the spell to be cast "at" the creature, which is very deliberate wording. Fireball is cast at a point in space, not at a creature.
A DM will likely be ok with direct targeting spells like Scorching Ray or Magic Missile, particularly if such spell descriptions are interpreted and played such that all of the targets are declared all at once instead of how many people play such spells by rolling damage dice one at a time and then potentially switching targets if the first target creature goes down. This would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis determined by the particular wording of the spell description in question.
The spell would be targeting other creatures and thus retroactively would no longer be a valid spell for warcaster. If you cannot guarantee with 100% confidence the spell only targets that one creature, you can't cast it.
There's no basis for that assertion. Per the 2024 rules, AoE spells don't target a point, they have a point of origin from which you determine what the spell targets. You can totally use fireball with Warcaster, provided the point of origin can be placed in such a way that the spells area of effect only includes the single creature as a valid target.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Hard disagree. The feature explicitly requires the spell to be cast "at" the provoking creature.
Also, the 2024 spellcasting rules clearly use the verb "target" in two ways -- one of which is the process of selecting the Point of Origin for the effect as demonstrated in the wording for the Clear Path rule as one example.
I can see the logic behind Tarod_ making exceptions for things like single-target Fireball at their table, and might make the same decision at my table (depending on how good the snacks were that night). However I do think that it is an exception/house rule, and not RAI at all. The examples brought up regarding an invisible creature in the AOE for Fireball, or the same logic being used to cast something like "Wall of Fire" that has a continuous battlefield changing effect really illustrate how the intent behind the wording of the spell seems to be that the use of the word "target" is not referring only to the creatures affected by the spell, but also to the specific targeting language of the spell (target a creature vs a point).
I guess you might run into some of the same challenges as Twinned Spell had in 5e, such as Ice Knife. If the devs suggested that Green Flame Blade could work as long as you didn't activate the secondary damage, and we assume spells with an AOE component cannot be used because of the possibility of an invisible enemy, then even something that targets one creature cannot be used if it has the chance to effect multiple creatures (without choice).
RAW, because the devs have decided to use the term "Targets" for both the specific target of a spell as used in the casting, as well as relating to any creature effected by the spell (like having to make a Saving Throw in response to the effect of th spell), leaves it a bit more open to things like "Single-target Fireball", though I still think it is not RAI. They really should have used different terms, like the "target" of a spell is a creature specifically selected for the effect of a spell as through the targeting language (i.e. "choose up to 3 creatures", "you blast the mind of a creature... the target makes an INT saving throw", etc) and call creatures affected by the effect of an AOE spell something like "the Subject(s) of the spell".
I don't understand why the need for a loophole to cast AOE spells? What is the issue have a limit of what type of spells you can use? If you know you might use the limitations of a spell with the feat, pick a spell that can be used , and keep it in reserve if you have to use it for this purpose.
There isn't much reason...even if your DM says you can cast Fireball via Warcaster, with the limitation that it only target one thing, it'd be a waste. It's hardly a "loophole."
FWIW, throughout the PHB, "point of origin" is only mentioned in Area of Effect:
The rules for Range, in chapter 7, use the term "originate:"
"A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate, and the spell’s description specifies which part of the effect is limited by the range" etc.
As it happens, this coincides with how point of origin is used in the AoE rules, but that connection isn't really necessary for anything. Using a term like "point of origin" is mostly just useful for the line-of-sight disconnect for AoEs --- caster needs LoS with the PoO; the PoO needs line of sight with affected things in the AoE...
@kenclary I agree with you.
I was just highlighting that "point of origin", as a term, is not really used in the "A Clear Path to the Target" rule. It only appears in Area of Effect rules.
Why is it a waste to only cast against a single being/monster/BBEG? This is what I don't understand.
Everything has some sort of limitation, why is only being able to target a single being/monster/BBEG a problem? Have a spell that meets this limitation and only use it when the limitation is in effect.