The Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade spells both have a range of 5'. This makes those spells far less effective for characters using them with reach (either using a reach weapon or as a Bugbear with extended reach, or both!).
Why were the spells written in such a way as to exclude their usage in situations where weapons could hit targets within melee reach but outside of 5'? Is there some game balance issue I am not recognizing that would give an imbalancing advantage to using these spells if the range were "melee reach" instead of 5'?
I don't think the game designers have specifically addressed this. It's likely that since these cantrips are often better than the Attack action and they can be used by full spellcasters, they wanted to ensure the caster had to put themselves at risk.
They were never originally intended to have more than a 5’ range - sloppy wording opened a loophole that got abused. Now working as intended. JC was speaking about this (and a whole bunch of other Tashas-related content) in last week’s Dragon Talk.
I read the wording and the requirements of the spell as:
The casting of the spell is on yourself (range of self)
You then make your melee attack with your weapon of choice used in the materials of the spell, if that weapon has reach then the attack can be made within the reach of that weapon.
The 5ft requirement comes in when that creature moves 5ft, the additional damage occurs.
At least that is how i would rule it within the games i DM. As Grumblesmurf mentioned in Dragon talk last week JC did confirm that the original printing was an oversight so they've used this oppurtunity to get the spell working as they indended it to be (at least that's the company line on why the change)
Yet another nerf for these spells I didn't notice (first nerf: inability to use any weapon without set price). They removed compatibility with spell sniper and reach weapons.
Yet another nerf for these spells I didn't notice (first nerf: inability to use any weapon without set price). They removed compatibility with spell sniper and reach weapons.
I don’t believe that’s true. It still has 5 feet listed as its range. It’s not an AoE. The magic originates from the caster (self) but targets a single creature within a 5 foot range (the 5-foot radius mentioned in the new range). Spell Sniper’s text doesn’t say anything about not working with spells with a range of self. I don’t see any reason that the 5 feet listed in these spells’ range shouldn’t be doubled to 10 with the feat.
I don’t believe that’s true. It still has 5 feet listed as its range. It’s not an AoE. The magic originates from the caster (self) but targets a single creature within a 5 foot range (the 5-foot radius mentioned in the new range). Spell Sniper’s text doesn’t say anything about not working with spells with a range of self. I don’t see any reason that the 5 feet listed in these spells’ range shouldn’t be doubled to 10 with the feat.
According to Jeremy himself that's the case. The parenthesized value is the size of an area effect, not how far you can place its origin.
If you think about it, the only reason that number's even there is because they insisted on overloading the range of "Self" to mean both "targets the caster" and "area that originates from caster." In retrospect they could've saved us all a lot of headaches by using "Range: 0 ft" for the latter since they behave exactly the same as area spells with non-Self ranges and there'd be absolutely no question what doubling the range of that spell does.
On the other hand it's clear to me they originally intended a range of Self (X) to be used only with area effects and retroactively decided to use that for single-target spells. There's really no radius involved in GFB or BB but they have to define them in terms of an area to stick to the rules of Self (X) range. It's possible Spell Sniper would've been worded more generously if they'd foreseen that situation.
Yet another nerf for these spells I didn't notice (first nerf: inability to use any weapon without set price).
It's not that you're unable to use it with weapons that lack a price, it's that the DM determines the value of items without a listed price. I'm sure that's cold comfort for Adventurer's League players, but still needs to be said for home games.
I do agree with you that this errata was unnecessary and mostly just confused and pissed off a lot of people though.
I also just realized, with a range of self, they cant be cast with war caster anymore can they?
Did the errata clear up the spells in any way? All I can see is that everything they changed only created more confusion, and possibly prevent the spells from working as was previously understood.
Well, that would be even worse if War Caster doesn't apply at all with Booming Blade. The genesis of my original question was for a character with Polearm Master and War Caster, using Booming Blade on opportunity attacks of creatures moving into or out of the polearm's extended reach.
War Caster says when using a spell for an opportunity attack that "[t]he spell must have a casting time of 1 action and must target only that creature." Jeremy Crawford said in the podcast referenced earlier in this thread that there has been much intertwining of the wording of spell "range" and "target". Perhaps there is some differentiation there, particularly when the description of Booming Blade uses the word "target" over and over again to reference the creature being attack. That could mean that the target of the spell is that creature, or it could mean the target of the spell is self and the target of the accompanying melee attack is the creature.
It is still entirely unclear to me what the target of the Booming Blade spell is. Other spells, like fireball, have a range and a point of origin of the spell, but the targets of the spell are the creatures affected by the fireball that must make saving throws, correct? Some of those fireball targets may even be up to 20' beyond the range of the spell.
I don't know where that leaves Booming Blade, but I hope it can synergize with War Caster. It would be a really big nerf if it does not.
I don't think the game designers have specifically addressed this. It's likely that since these cantrips are often better than the Attack action and they can be used by full spellcasters, they wanted to ensure the caster had to put themselves at risk.
If you take the Magic Initiate feat or play an Eldritch Knight Fighter, Extra Attacks will usually be better than one of those blade cantrips, well at least if you have Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
The Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade spells both have a range of 5'. This makes those spells far less effective for characters using them with reach (either using a reach weapon or as a Bugbear with extended reach, or both!).
Why were the spells written in such a way as to exclude their usage in situations where weapons could hit targets within melee reach but outside of 5'? Is there some game balance issue I am not recognizing that would give an imbalancing advantage to using these spells if the range were "melee reach" instead of 5'?
I don't think the game designers have specifically addressed this. It's likely that since these cantrips are often better than the Attack action and they can be used by full spellcasters, they wanted to ensure the caster had to put themselves at risk.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
They were never originally intended to have more than a 5’ range - sloppy wording opened a loophole that got abused. Now working as intended. JC was speaking about this (and a whole bunch of other Tashas-related content) in last week’s Dragon Talk.
I read the wording and the requirements of the spell as:
At least that is how i would rule it within the games i DM. As Grumblesmurf mentioned in Dragon talk last week JC did confirm that the original printing was an oversight so they've used this oppurtunity to get the spell working as they indended it to be (at least that's the company line on why the change)
Yet another nerf for these spells I didn't notice (first nerf: inability to use any weapon without set price). They removed compatibility with spell sniper and reach weapons.
I don’t believe that’s true. It still has 5 feet listed as its range. It’s not an AoE. The magic originates from the caster (self) but targets a single creature within a 5 foot range (the 5-foot radius mentioned in the new range). Spell Sniper’s text doesn’t say anything about not working with spells with a range of self. I don’t see any reason that the 5 feet listed in these spells’ range shouldn’t be doubled to 10 with the feat.
According to Jeremy himself that's the case. The parenthesized value is the size of an area effect, not how far you can place its origin.
If you think about it, the only reason that number's even there is because they insisted on overloading the range of "Self" to mean both "targets the caster" and "area that originates from caster." In retrospect they could've saved us all a lot of headaches by using "Range: 0 ft" for the latter since they behave exactly the same as area spells with non-Self ranges and there'd be absolutely no question what doubling the range of that spell does.
On the other hand it's clear to me they originally intended a range of Self (X) to be used only with area effects and retroactively decided to use that for single-target spells. There's really no radius involved in GFB or BB but they have to define them in terms of an area to stick to the rules of Self (X) range. It's possible Spell Sniper would've been worded more generously if they'd foreseen that situation.
It's not that you're unable to use it with weapons that lack a price, it's that the DM determines the value of items without a listed price. I'm sure that's cold comfort for Adventurer's League players, but still needs to be said for home games.
I do agree with you that this errata was unnecessary and mostly just confused and pissed off a lot of people though.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
I also just realized, with a range of self, they cant be cast with war caster anymore can they?
Did the errata clear up the spells in any way? All I can see is that everything they changed only created more confusion, and possibly prevent the spells from working as was previously understood.
Well, that would be even worse if War Caster doesn't apply at all with Booming Blade. The genesis of my original question was for a character with Polearm Master and War Caster, using Booming Blade on opportunity attacks of creatures moving into or out of the polearm's extended reach.
War Caster says when using a spell for an opportunity attack that "[t]he spell must have a casting time of 1 action and must target only that creature." Jeremy Crawford said in the podcast referenced earlier in this thread that there has been much intertwining of the wording of spell "range" and "target". Perhaps there is some differentiation there, particularly when the description of Booming Blade uses the word "target" over and over again to reference the creature being attack. That could mean that the target of the spell is that creature, or it could mean the target of the spell is self and the target of the accompanying melee attack is the creature.
It is still entirely unclear to me what the target of the Booming Blade spell is. Other spells, like fireball, have a range and a point of origin of the spell, but the targets of the spell are the creatures affected by the fireball that must make saving throws, correct? Some of those fireball targets may even be up to 20' beyond the range of the spell.
I don't know where that leaves Booming Blade, but I hope it can synergize with War Caster. It would be a really big nerf if it does not.
Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade (with restrictions) continue to work with War Caster, per Jeremy Crawford quoted here: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2020/11/16/the-booming-blade-spell-continues-to-work-with-the-war-caster-feat/amp/
If you take the Magic Initiate feat or play an Eldritch Knight Fighter, Extra Attacks will usually be better than one of those blade cantrips, well at least if you have Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter.
Brains over brawn? Mind over matter? These canny warriors rightly answer, "Why not both?" - Tasha
My Homebrews: Monsters, Magic Items, Spells, Races
Rhulg- Hobgoblin Gunsmith