A target can be locations, objects, and/or creatures. Everything that is affected by a spell/effect is a target of the spell/effect itself. If the spell in question affects more than only yourself (SM), or more than only one creature (WC), then the features are not applicable with the spell.
Fireball targets a location. It then explodes, targeting all creatures and flammable objects within 20 ft of that location. Targeting a location is an immediate disqualification for those features; whether anything else is within range is irrelevant at this point. Targeting additional creatures and/or objects is also an immediate disqualification for those features.
That is not what War Caster says. it says "targets" only one creature, not "affects" only one creature. As you say, a point of origin is a target. Precise words please.
Look, here's what it all comes down to: a spell that targets a creature within Range: 60 and one that targets a creature within Range: Self (60-foot radius) threaten the exact same squares. They draw the same lines, to the same targets. One would be very tempted to say that those are both spells with a range of 60 feet.... But that's not what Chapter 10 tells us when it calls such spells "range of self" spells, and when the authors rewrite a spell from "Range: X" to "Range: Self (X-foot radius)," they're clearly trying to communicate that we should specifically pay attention to what Chapter 10 tells us about range of self spells.
Chapter 10 tells us that range of self spells either target the caster, or treat the caster as a point of origin. Chapter 10 also tells us that points of origin are targets. So there's some hair splitting on whether the caster-as-creature is the target in both of those circumstances, or if caster-as-point-of-origin makes their own space, or a point in that space the target... but either way you come down on that, there's a target there in that space. Chapter 10 says so.
So I'm sorry, but if War Caster means "one and only one target, which is a creature," then any spell with "Range: Self" is right off the list, by definition. If JC is saying that isn't the case, then he must be saying that War Caster does not mean "one and only one target, which is a creature," but something more like "one and only one creature," not caring about POO targets.
This is not about me caring whether Booming Blade is War Caster eligible or not, or wanting WC to be usable with all AOE spells. Y'all are hand waiving to the desired outcome, and not tracking the step-by-step operation that must be satisfied to arrive at that outcome. If the intent was to revise Booming Blade to say "Can be War Castered, cannot be Twinned or Distant Spelled or Spell Snipered".... then they should have just said that, because they took a sledgehammer to a light switch, and knocked the power out to the whole block with unintended consequences.
Another thing I want to point at is: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1021074364832231424 Blinding smite per JC has more than two targets but now BB with similar description has only one. I really love what JC is doing for us all but sometimes he is confusing.
Anything affected by a spell/effect is a target of the spell/effect. I'm really tired of seeing you constantly asserting differently without any support. A point of origin is not necessarily a target, though it almost always will be, nor did I say as such. Please don't put words in my mouth. I do agree that JC's latest shenanigans (range of self, but not really; has an area, but also not really) are absurd, yet those are changes to specific spells, not the system itself.
The point of origin being "self" for errata'd GFB doesn't make the caster an actual target of the spell any more than it would make the caster a target of Fireball (when not actually in the explosion itself). It's a red herring.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Anything affected by a spell/effect is a target of the spell/effect. I'm really tired of seeing you constantly asserting differently without any support. A point of origin is not necessarily a target, though it almost always will be, nor did I say as such. Please don't put words in my mouth. I do agree that JC's latest shenanigans (range of self, but not really; has an area, but also not really) are absurd, yet those are changes to specific spells, not the system itself.
The point of origin being "self" for errata'd GFB doesn't make the caster an actual target of the spell any more than it would make the caster a target of Fireball (when not actually in the explosion itself). It's a red herring.
I think you misunderstood me. I am not having the argument about whether all affected creatures are targets, I am saying that War Caster doesn't check for "affected" targets or creatures, it checks for "targeted" creatures. If there are other non-affected targets (such as, the targeted point of origin of the effect), that is a "target" even though it is not "affected."
Points of Origin are always necessarily a target, due to Chapter 10's rules on (1) Points of Origin being counted among the list of possible targets, and (2) all spells needing an identifiable target within their range, and (3) a Range: Self (X-foot radius) spell's range being "Self", not "X feet." Those three true statements have nothing to do with putting words in your mouth, or any statement of opinion, or any ruling from JC... they're all printed within Chapter 10.
GFB and BB target the enemies they attack because those enemies are affected. Fine, great, not fighting about that right now. It is ALSO indisputably true that the caster (or his square) is targeted as a point of origin. Quit getting mad at me, and point out what where I'm going wrong with my citations to get to that point? If I haven't made an error up to that point, then IF War Caster can still be used with BB, then it MUST be because War Caster doesn't care about spells having other targets that are points of origin in addition to a single creature.
Dude, you can say you're not arguing that until the cows come home, yet the content of your (current) argument is derived entirely from that argument.
If War Caster is checking for targets, it is implicitly checking for everything that the spell is affecting. Is it affecting more than only the creature which provoked the OA? No? Cool. Yes? Ineligible. If this is what you meant to say then, yes, I did misunderstand you, and I will apologize for it. If this is not what you meant to say, you're wrong.
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).
Are you insinuating that the errata'd GFB & BB are area of effect spells? Because that's the one-and-only circumstance in which the point of origin is considered a target.
The point of origin for Fireball is the location you select to center the explosion, creating an area of effect. That's a target.
The point of origin for Green-Flame Blade is (now) yourself, but the spell does not create an area of effect. You choose one creature within the stated range to affect. It is the target. You are not.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Yes, GFB and BB are area of effect spells, that is what I am saying. They meet the definition of "range of self" area of effect spells that is provided by Chapter 10, and there is absolutely no reason to treat them as if they are anything else. That "effect" is to choose one creature within that AOE to make a melee attack+stuff against, but the fact that it's a single-target AOE instead of a multi-target AOE does not mean that it isn't at its most basic level telling you to target a point ("Self"), and then apply an effect within an area drawn around that point.
I am really really not arguing that the BB-efffected-enemy-creature is not a "target." I am saying that it is not the only target, because a range of self AOE spell like BB must also target a point of origin for the AOE.
It may be true that, as you've argued, all "affected" creatures/objects/areas/points must be considered to be spell targets. But I haven't heard you say (and, I don't think there's only support for) that ONLY affected creatures/objects/areas/points are targets, I think it's pretty obvious that many spells target a point to place a spell effect, even when that point is not "affected" meaningfully by that spell effect (like, Arcane Eye or something, or the current Booming Blade we're discussing).
Remember that if your casting BB with Warcaster, it will 100% always be a creature. Warcastor replaces your AoO with a spell that targets only that creature you were hitting with that AoO. It is impossible to get a AoO on a object or location, thus no need to worry about BB targetting a object (can't happen), and spells such as Call Lightning will never work even if the "one target" rule wasn't there since good luck getting a AoO on a location.
Edit: Clarity.
"Warcastor allows you to use the spell if it targets only what you would normally be able to hit with a AoO" was a bad sentence by me, replaced by the far better "Warcastor replaces you AoO with a spell that targets only that creature you were hitting with that AoO"
Dude, you can say you're not arguing that until the cows come home, yet the content of your (current) argument is derived entirely from that argument.
If War Caster is checking for targets, it is implicitly checking for everything that the spell is affecting. Is it affecting more than only the creature which provoked the OA? No? Cool. Yes? Ineligible. If this is what you meant to say then, yes, I did misunderstand you, and I will apologize for it. If this is not what you meant to say, you're wrong.
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).
Are you insinuating that the errata'd GFB & BB are area of effect spells? Because that's the one-and-only circumstance in which the point of origin is considered a target.
The point of origin for Fireball is the location you select to center the explosion, creating an area of effect. That's a target.
The point of origin for Green-Flame Blade is (now) yourself, but the spell does not create an area of effect. You choose one creature within the stated range to affect. It is the target. You are not.
Pretty sure the "target" of Fireball isn't the point of origin, but, instead: What the spell's description says it is. Can an AOE target the point of origin? Sure, if the Spell's Description says so.
Fireball's Spell Description?
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Dude, you can say you're not arguing that until the cows come home, yet the content of your (current) argument is derived entirely from that argument.
If War Caster is checking for targets, it is implicitly checking for everything that the spell is affecting. Is it affecting more than only the creature which provoked the OA? No? Cool. Yes? Ineligible. If this is what you meant to say then, yes, I did misunderstand you, and I will apologize for it. If this is not what you meant to say, you're wrong.
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).
Are you insinuating that the errata'd GFB & BB are area of effect spells? Because that's the one-and-only circumstance in which the point of origin is considered a target.
The point of origin for Fireball is the location you select to center the explosion, creating an area of effect. That's a target.
The point of origin for Green-Flame Blade is (now) yourself, but the spell does not create an area of effect. You choose one creature within the stated range to affect. It is the target. You are not.
Pretty sure the "target" of Fireball isn't the point of origin, but, instead: What the spell's description says it is. Can an AOE target the point of origin? Sure, if the Spell's Description says so.
Fireball's Spell Description?
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
💩. Foiled again by 5e using the same names for everything.
The point of origin of an area spell is in fact its target. The text of fireballalso calls creatures and objects affected by it targets.
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
💩. Foiled again by 5e using the same names for everything.
The point of origin of an area spell is in fact its target. The text of fireballalso calls creatures and objects affected by it targets.
What makes the point of origin the target? The above rule for determining targets says the description tells you, and the only thing the description calls a target is a creature. Genuinely curious, as I may have easily overlooked something here. The only "what is the target" rule I know of is that one that says to consult the spell description.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
💩. Foiled again by 5e using the same names for everything.
The point of origin of an area spell is in fact its target. The text of fireballalso calls creatures and objects affected by it targets.
What makes the point of origin the target? The above rule for determining targets says the description tells you, and the only thing the description calls a target is a creature. Genuinely curious, as I may have easily overlooked something here. The only "what is the target" rule I know of is that one that says to consult the spell description.
What makes the point of origin the target? The rules do: "For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts."
The rules for targets of spells and the description of the spell.
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame.
This is EXACTLY choosing the target of an area spell. The fact that the description goes on to use the term again is the problem.
Also, thanks Saga for finding the quote that I couldn't find quickly.
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.
The game seems to treat creatures in the AOE as the targets. I certainly always have. I'm a bit shocked so many other people do something different and treat the Point of Origin as the target and I'm not sure why they do so when all other guidance is to the contrary.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one.
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
💩. Foiled again by 5e using the same names for everything.
The point of origin of an area spell is in fact its target. The text of fireballalso calls creatures and objects affected by it targets.
What makes the point of origin the target? The above rule for determining targets says the description tells you, and the only thing the description calls a target is a creature. Genuinely curious, as I may have easily overlooked something here. The only "what is the target" rule I know of is that one that says to consult the spell description.
What makes the point of origin the target? The rules do: "For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts."
I'm sorry but, that rule says the spell's description tells you its target.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The rules for targets of spells and the description of the spell.
A typical spell requires you to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell's magic. A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame.
This is EXACTLY choosing the target of an area spell. The fact that the description goes on to use the term again is the problem.
Also, thanks Saga for finding the quote that I couldn't find quickly.
You're not parsing the enlarged text.
The description tells you what you target. It could target a creatures. It could target objects. it could, indeed, target an area. But the spell's description tells you which it does target.
Fireball's description doesn't "target" an area. It targets the creatures in the area. Many AOEs are worded this way. But not all of them. Some do indeed target areas.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The spell's description tells you the point of origin (which is defined as a target in the rules) and then goes on to tell you about creatures targeted by damage, sure. That IS the issue. I don't know what is so confounding about this.
Saga even pointed out the quote in range that tells us explicitly that the point of origin of fireball is its target again. For redundancy's sake.
The rules use target as both "affected creature" and "point of aim" at various points to their comprehensibility detriment. Hence my #30 post.
I'm not sure the rules says that an AOE point of origin is always a target. It could be one, but is always one?
I'm not sure anyone could really read the rules for adjudicating AOEs and ever come away with the idea that AOEs aren't targeting the creatures in the area. Just read what the DMG says:
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.
Even the examples are super clear, if the general instructions somehow aren't clear. You target the creatures in the area if those are what is getting affected by the spell. "Two orcs are targeted", "four hobgoblins are targeted". etc. Why is this not how people do it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The spell's description tells you the point of origin (which is defined as a target in the rules) and then goes on to tell you about creatures targeted by damage, sure. That IS the issue. I don't know what is so confounding about this.
Saga even pointed out the quote in range that tells us explicitly that the point of origin of fireball is its target again. For redundancy's sake.
Where is "it defined in the rules"? I don't think that it is. The rules define the opposite. See my post about Adjudicating Area of Effects. See the rule that says a Spell's Description tells you what it is targeting.
You point to this rule:
A spell's description tells you whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or a point of origin for an area of effect (described below).
But it doesn't say what you say it says. It tells you that the spell's description tells you what the target is. It gives 3 options for what the spell's description might tell you it is.
The spell's description might tell you the target is:
creature
objects
point of origin
But it doesn't at ALL tell you, here, which of those 3 the target is. It tells you the Description will determine that.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
That is not what War Caster says. it says "targets" only one creature, not "affects" only one creature. As you say, a point of origin is a target. Precise words please.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Look, here's what it all comes down to: a spell that targets a creature within Range: 60 and one that targets a creature within Range: Self (60-foot radius) threaten the exact same squares. They draw the same lines, to the same targets. One would be very tempted to say that those are both spells with a range of 60 feet.... But that's not what Chapter 10 tells us when it calls such spells "range of self" spells, and when the authors rewrite a spell from "Range: X" to "Range: Self (X-foot radius)," they're clearly trying to communicate that we should specifically pay attention to what Chapter 10 tells us about range of self spells.
Chapter 10 tells us that range of self spells either target the caster, or treat the caster as a point of origin. Chapter 10 also tells us that points of origin are targets. So there's some hair splitting on whether the caster-as-creature is the target in both of those circumstances, or if caster-as-point-of-origin makes their own space, or a point in that space the target... but either way you come down on that, there's a target there in that space. Chapter 10 says so.
So I'm sorry, but if War Caster means "one and only one target, which is a creature," then any spell with "Range: Self" is right off the list, by definition. If JC is saying that isn't the case, then he must be saying that War Caster does not mean "one and only one target, which is a creature," but something more like "one and only one creature," not caring about POO targets.
This is not about me caring whether Booming Blade is War Caster eligible or not, or wanting WC to be usable with all AOE spells. Y'all are hand waiving to the desired outcome, and not tracking the step-by-step operation that must be satisfied to arrive at that outcome. If the intent was to revise Booming Blade to say "Can be War Castered, cannot be Twinned or Distant Spelled or Spell Snipered".... then they should have just said that, because they took a sledgehammer to a light switch, and knocked the power out to the whole block with unintended consequences.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Another thing I want to point at is: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/1021074364832231424
Blinding smite per JC has more than two targets but now BB with similar description has only one. I really love what JC is doing for us all but sometimes he is confusing.
Anything affected by a spell/effect is a target of the spell/effect. I'm really tired of seeing you constantly asserting differently without any support. A point of origin is not necessarily a target, though it almost always will be, nor did I say as such. Please don't put words in my mouth. I do agree that JC's latest shenanigans (range of self, but not really; has an area, but also not really) are absurd, yet those are changes to specific spells, not the system itself.
The point of origin being "self" for errata'd GFB doesn't make the caster an actual target of the spell any more than it would make the caster a target of Fireball (when not actually in the explosion itself). It's a red herring.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I think you misunderstood me. I am not having the argument about whether all affected creatures are targets, I am saying that War Caster doesn't check for "affected" targets or creatures, it checks for "targeted" creatures. If there are other non-affected targets (such as, the targeted point of origin of the effect), that is a "target" even though it is not "affected."
Points of Origin are always necessarily a target, due to Chapter 10's rules on (1) Points of Origin being counted among the list of possible targets, and (2) all spells needing an identifiable target within their range, and (3) a Range: Self (X-foot radius) spell's range being "Self", not "X feet." Those three true statements have nothing to do with putting words in your mouth, or any statement of opinion, or any ruling from JC... they're all printed within Chapter 10.
GFB and BB target the enemies they attack because those enemies are affected. Fine, great, not fighting about that right now. It is ALSO indisputably true that the caster (or his square) is targeted as a point of origin. Quit getting mad at me, and point out what where I'm going wrong with my citations to get to that point? If I haven't made an error up to that point, then IF War Caster can still be used with BB, then it MUST be because War Caster doesn't care about spells having other targets that are points of origin in addition to a single creature.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Dude, you can say you're not arguing that until the cows come home, yet the content of your (current) argument is derived entirely from that argument.
If War Caster is checking for targets, it is implicitly checking for everything that the spell is affecting. Is it affecting more than only the creature which provoked the OA? No? Cool. Yes? Ineligible. If this is what you meant to say then, yes, I did misunderstand you, and I will apologize for it. If this is not what you meant to say, you're wrong.
Are you insinuating that the errata'd GFB & BB are area of effect spells? Because that's the one-and-only circumstance in which the point of origin is considered a target.
The point of origin for Fireball is the location you select to center the explosion, creating an area of effect. That's a target.
The point of origin for Green-Flame Blade is (now) yourself, but the spell does not create an area of effect. You choose one creature within the stated range to affect. It is the target. You are not.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Yes, GFB and BB are area of effect spells, that is what I am saying. They meet the definition of "range of self" area of effect spells that is provided by Chapter 10, and there is absolutely no reason to treat them as if they are anything else. That "effect" is to choose one creature within that AOE to make a melee attack+stuff against, but the fact that it's a single-target AOE instead of a multi-target AOE does not mean that it isn't at its most basic level telling you to target a point ("Self"), and then apply an effect within an area drawn around that point.
I am really really not arguing that the BB-efffected-enemy-creature is not a "target." I am saying that it is not the only target, because a range of self AOE spell like BB must also target a point of origin for the AOE.
It may be true that, as you've argued, all "affected" creatures/objects/areas/points must be considered to be spell targets. But I haven't heard you say (and, I don't think there's only support for) that ONLY affected creatures/objects/areas/points are targets, I think it's pretty obvious that many spells target a point to place a spell effect, even when that point is not "affected" meaningfully by that spell effect (like, Arcane Eye or something, or the current Booming Blade we're discussing).
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Remember that if your casting BB with Warcaster, it will 100% always be a creature. Warcastor replaces your AoO with a spell that targets only that creature you were hitting with that AoO. It is impossible to get a AoO on a object or location, thus no need to worry about BB targetting a object (can't happen), and spells such as Call Lightning will never work even if the "one target" rule wasn't there since good luck getting a AoO on a location.
Edit: Clarity.
"Warcastor allows you to use the spell if it targets only what you would normally be able to hit with a AoO" was a bad sentence by me, replaced by the far better "Warcastor replaces you AoO with a spell that targets only that creature you were hitting with that AoO"
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Pretty sure the "target" of Fireball isn't the point of origin, but, instead: What the spell's description says it is. Can an AOE target the point of origin? Sure, if the Spell's Description says so.
Fireball's Spell Description?
Pretty clear here that the spell targets the creatures within the area.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
💩. Foiled again by 5e using the same names for everything.
The point of origin of an area spell is in fact its target. The text of fireball also calls creatures and objects affected by it targets.
What makes the point of origin the target? The above rule for determining targets says the description tells you, and the only thing the description calls a target is a creature. Genuinely curious, as I may have easily overlooked something here. The only "what is the target" rule I know of is that one that says to consult the spell description.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
What makes the point of origin the target? The rules do: "For a spell like fireball, the target is the point in space where the ball of fire erupts."
The rules for targets of spells and the description of the spell.
This is EXACTLY choosing the target of an area spell. The fact that the description goes on to use the term again is the problem.
Also, thanks Saga for finding the quote that I couldn't find quickly.
For your consideration:
The game seems to treat creatures in the AOE as the targets. I certainly always have. I'm a bit shocked so many other people do something different and treat the Point of Origin as the target and I'm not sure why they do so when all other guidance is to the contrary.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I'm sorry but, that rule says the spell's description tells you its target.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The rules use target as both "affected creature" and "point of aim" at various points to their comprehensibility detriment. Hence my #30 post.
You're not parsing the enlarged text.
The description tells you what you target. It could target a creatures. It could target objects. it could, indeed, target an area. But the spell's description tells you which it does target.
Fireball's description doesn't "target" an area. It targets the creatures in the area. Many AOEs are worded this way. But not all of them. Some do indeed target areas.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The spell's description tells you the point of origin (which is defined as a target in the rules) and then goes on to tell you about creatures targeted by damage, sure. That IS the issue. I don't know what is so confounding about this.
Saga even pointed out the quote in range that tells us explicitly that the point of origin of fireball is its target again. For redundancy's sake.
I'm not sure the rules says that an AOE point of origin is always a target. It could be one, but is always one?
I'm not sure anyone could really read the rules for adjudicating AOEs and ever come away with the idea that AOEs aren't targeting the creatures in the area. Just read what the DMG says:
Even the examples are super clear, if the general instructions somehow aren't clear. You target the creatures in the area if those are what is getting affected by the spell. "Two orcs are targeted", "four hobgoblins are targeted". etc. Why is this not how people do it?
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Where is "it defined in the rules"? I don't think that it is. The rules define the opposite. See my post about Adjudicating Area of Effects. See the rule that says a Spell's Description tells you what it is targeting.
You point to this rule:
But it doesn't say what you say it says. It tells you that the spell's description tells you what the target is. It gives 3 options for what the spell's description might tell you it is.
The spell's description might tell you the target is:
But it doesn't at ALL tell you, here, which of those 3 the target is. It tells you the Description will determine that.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.