Is the Evoker secretly the most powerful sub-class? A (likely erroneous) hot take!

[bendking]

Or, is Sculpt Spell broken?

Due to my recent obsession with full-casters I've been thinking about the Evoker a bit. Here's my case:
The Evoker is not only a Wizard, considered by most to be at least tied for the most powerful full-caster but has the Sculpt Spell sub-class feature which lets him chuck Fireballs and other damaging goodies with impunity. This, combined with the fact that the most effective non-concentration spells in the game are (arguably) damage spells, makes it so the Evoker has an unparalleled usage of his actions.
While most full-casters will throw their concentration spell then continue using some probably-not-amazing non-concentration spell or cantrip, the Evoker can continue throwing his high-damage AoE spells to his sadistic's heart content (while hitting a large amount of enemies, of course).

That's basically it. It seems to me at least in the Action department that the Evoker is top of the class.
Of course, other classes can better utilize their Bonus Action & Reactions, but I would contend that neither ever compares to the power of chucking Fireballs all day.

I'm probably missing something or not taking something into consideration. But hey, that's why I'm posting this.

[Chronos]

The Evoker gets nice goodies. So do all of the other wizard subclasses. That's part of why wizards are so highly regarded in the first place.

The Evoker's features are the best for throwing Fireballs. So if you really like throwing Fireballs, then Evoker is the choice for you. But there are other playstyles for which other subclasses are better.

[Frozenstep]

It is definitely a powerful ability, but between needing to cast that concentration spell round 1, the possibility of losing concentration and needing to recast it, your limited spell slots which also need to be used for some of those concentration spells, the times you'll need to focus on disengaging or dashing to escape being killed (you're still a wizard, and you can't cast if your hp is 0), and sometimes where your concentration spell was a debuff for the enemy but it didn't land and you want to try again, there are downsides.

It eventually ends up biasing you towards certain strategies (since you want to take advantage of evocation, you'll likely not make use of things like hypnotic pattern because the chance of failure which means either your concentration isn't being used effectively, so you either need to cast another concentration spell or just not make use of it which is a waste).

[Maan]

In his thread, LudicSavant posted a build just optimizing the Evoker. I find it pretty impressive.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23998967&postcount=170

[TheUser]

Spells that become insane with Sculpt Spells:
Fireball
Sickening Radiance
Dawn

At level 14 they are -extremely- strong.
Not only do they have Overchannel but they also have a simulacrum that can also Overchannel.

2 Dawn spells shelling out 20-40 AoE radiant damage or 2 Overchanneled Sickening Radiance for the same damage with double exhaustion (but not movable)

I like optimizing it as a 2 level splash for a blasting sorcerer.

You still get a bunch of utility spells that don't really operate off of the intelligence casting stat (Shield, Absorb Elements, Find Familiar), access to ritual casting, and all the perks of being a sorcerer, like

[bendking]

Spells that become insane with Sculpt Spells:
Fireball
Sickening Radiance
Dawn

At level 14 they are -extremely- strong.
Not only do they have Overchannel but they also have a simulacrum that can also Overchannel.

2 Dawn spells shelling out 20-40 AoE radiant damage or 2 Overchanneled Sickening Radiance for the same damage with double exhaustion (but not movable)

I like optimizing it as a 2 level splash for a blasting sorcerer.

You still get a bunch of utility spells that don't really operate off of the intelligence casting stat (Shield, Absorb Elements, Find Familiar), access to ritual casting, and all the perks of being a sorcerer, like

Oh yeah, multiclass-wise a 2-level splash with a Draconic Sorcerer is definitely the most optimized for a straight-forward blaster.|
However, you do miss out on Simulacrum, Contingency, Wall of Force, and all the other amazing Wizard spells that a Sorcerer doesn't get. Whether it surpasses the utility of the extra damage Sorcerer gets - I'd say it easily does once you get Simulacrum (most broken spell in the game besides Wish which breaks it further), but that isn't really the point of the post.
My thoughts are that as a single-class, not only does Evoker (Invoker for you) outclass other blasters but basically every other class in terms of his optimal use of his action economy (due to the reasons I listed in the post) simply because of Sculpt Spell being damn near broken.

EDIT: Added a few sentences. It also seems your comment was broken mid-sentence.


The Evoker gets nice goodies. So do all of the other wizard subclasses. That's part of why wizards are so highly regarded in the first place.

The Evoker's features are the best for throwing Fireballs. So if you really like throwing Fireballs, then Evoker is the choice for you. But there are other playstyles for which other subclasses are better.

Of course the Evoker is the best for blasting, but my point was that the Evoker trumps all of the other sub-classes in terms of overall helpfulness/effectiveness (which addmitedly is hard to measure) because of his incredible usage of his actions every single turn.


It is definitely a powerful ability, but between needing to cast that concentration spell round 1, the possibility of losing concentration and needing to recast it, your limited spell slots which also need to be used for some of those concentration spells, the times you'll need to focus on disengaging or dashing to escape being killed (you're still a wizard, and you can't cast if your hp is 0), and sometimes where your concentration spell was a debuff for the enemy but it didn't land and you want to try again, there are downsides.

It eventually ends up biasing you towards certain strategies (since you want to take advantage of evocation, you'll likely not make use of things like hypnotic pattern because the chance of failure which means either your concentration isn't being used effectively, so you either need to cast another concentration spell or just not make use of it which is a waste).

I see what you mean. It definitely isn't as clear cut as I might have made it seem, though I think my point still stands, because I imagine in most scenarios you will still get a couple of turns in which you could blast away, which other casters can't make us of that well.

[Frozenstep]

I see what you mean. It definitely isn't as clear cut as I might have made it seem, though I think my point still stands, because I imagine in most scenarios you will still get a couple of turns in which you could blast away, which other casters can't make us of that well.

In my most recent combats, I've spent more time teleporting, dispelling enemy magic effects, and using wall of force then anything else. Even if I had sculpt spells, fireball just wasn't the best use of my action, and sometimes I don't have the spell slots to spare for it because I constantly need to keep 3rd level spell slots for counterspell. It really depends on your campaign.

[Keravath]

An evoker's sculpt spell ability is very useful. However, in most fights I have been in, the wizard can make do with careful placement of the spell and either get all the targets an evoker would get or possibly miss one or have to include targets not right on the front lines. It is a very good feature but unless your front line has been swarmed with creatures on both sides surrounding everyone then it may not make much difference. It just makes it much easier to place your area of effect evocation spells.

Sculpt spell only works for evocations, not spells like hypnotic pattern which is also a great spell. Whether to use fireball or hypnotic pattern depends on the opponents and how they are set up. My evoker has both spells prepared.

The Divination wizards portent is arguably much more powerful but has much fewer uses while scuplt spells doesn't actually add any damage or make things more difficult for the opponents, it is mostly for ease of targeting.

Other wizard archetypes have features that are also fairly useful and relatively thematic for the archetypes.

Also, with the addition of Toll the Dead to the wizard's spell list in Xanathar's the Evoker level 6 ability also becomes useful since targets will take 1/2 damage on a successful save. Before this there weren't many if any options that would have used the Evoker level 6 ability.

[TheUser]

Oh, I forgot to mention that Invoker's (seriously who came up with Evoker? I find it such an ugly word to say...) after they get Overchannel they make -amazing- Magic Jar specialists. (Start with one level in Paladin for Charisma saves and take the lucky feat and you'll be able to body hop super well, you have full armor proficiency and can cast spells in all your new bodies).

Essentially, you have your simulacrum with a bag of holding that has your original body inside and has a necklace holding a magic jar that has had the sequester spell cast on it around it's neck acts as an invisible carrier for your soul.

Either 1 of 2 things happens. Your new body gets to reset your Overchannel counter or it doesn't and the invoker just overchannels in the new body to immediately blow it up before anyone can dispel magic (whilst also maximizing a spell :D)

Only had the opportunity to try it once in a 1-shot, but it's really fun for encounters where lots of humanoid enemies are present.
Divine Soul Sorcerer is another fun alternative as it allows for +2d4 to a botched Magic Jar save as well as quickening spells out after you possess someone.

[LudicSavant]

https://media.giphy.com/media/XDAWZ8y9p4mK11N4Re/giphy.gif
Sculpt Spells is fun :smallsmile:


An evoker's sculpt spell ability is very useful. However, in most fights I have been in, the wizard can make do with careful placement of the spell and either get all the targets an evoker would get or possibly miss one or have to include targets not right on the front lines. It is a very good feature but unless your front line has been swarmed with creatures on both sides surrounding everyone then it may not make much difference. It just makes it much easier to place your area of effect evocation spells.


scuplt spells doesn't actually add any damage or make things more difficult for the opponents, it is mostly for ease of targeting.

To me, Sculpt Spells isn't just about getting more targets in your Fireball, it's about fundamentally altering the strategies your party can play by. It's a big deal if your party can just stand in an ongoing AoE like Sickening Radiance. Enemies who want to get out of it now have to eat OAs from the front lines. Enemies who want to engage with your front line now have to walk into it. And so forth.

[Mitsu]

Evoker is amazing sublcass not only because it can surpass single target spell Nova of Sorlock (though at resource cost but Wands of Magic Missles!) but Sculpt is game-changing feature:

1. You can cast ongoing effects like Sickening Radiance and see enemies trying to run away from it while your party can chase them and murder them ignoring it's effects.

2. You can cast Wall of Fire and have your allies run to enemies, hit them and run back through wall and force enemies to eat damage or waste turn.

3. Sphere spell ignores allies

4. Mealstorm becomes one of best CC spells as allies ignore it's effects and enemies are in difficult terrain, take damage and are being pulled toward centre of the spell.

5. Delayed Blast Fireball if casted in fight that can last few rounds becomes a great combo with normal fireball. Detonate DBF + cast Fireball and you can devastate enemies and your allies just ignore it.

Combined with Hexblade + Fighter it's imo best battle/war mage Wizard you can do as it actually does what battle mage should- destroy enemies without touching his allies.

Awesome sublcass for people who love damage.

[Nagog]

For battlefield-wide damage, Evoker is pretty nice, and very well could be the best. But if an enemy sneaks into melee range, you're in trouble, as your defenses (most being just having high offense) have been bypassed. Conversely, the Abjurer wizard will have their arcane ward if they've cast an abjuration spell even if they don't know there's an enemy nearby. So while the Evoker is powerful, it's due to their specialization in dealing damage.

[Misterwhisper]

For battlefield-wide damage, Evoker is pretty nice, and very well could be the best. But if an enemy sneaks into melee range, you're in trouble, as your defenses (most being just having high offense) have been bypassed. Conversely, the Abjurer wizard will have their arcane ward if they've cast an abjuration spell even if they don't know there's an enemy nearby. So while the Evoker is powerful, it's due to their specialization in dealing damage.

There are plenty of spells and things to deal with people in melee.

Shield, misty step, shocking grasp, invisibility, ect.

Evoker with magic missile is broken, due to the way things are worded, and it was done intentionally, their magic missiles are 1d4 + 1 + int each.

That is a 24 damage first level spell that can’t miss and is the best damage type and just gets better.

[Nagog]

There are plenty of spells and things to deal with people in melee.

Shield, misty step, shocking grasp, invisibility, ect.

Indeed there are, but Evoker is not specialized for it. Doesn't mean they can't make do, but just because they can do something with it doesn't mean they surpass others that can do it better. Another example is: Your character is on trial for a crime they did not commit. While you could roll persuasion as an Evoker Wizard, a Bard or Rogue may be able to handle the situation better with expertise in a social skill. Specialization is what makes a party of adventurers more powerful than a single adventurer.

[Mitsu]

Indeed there are, but Evoker is not specialized for it. Doesn't mean they can't make do, but just because they can do something with it doesn't mean they surpass others that can do it better. Another example is: Your character is on trial for a crime they did not commit. While you could roll persuasion as an Evoker Wizard, a Bard or Rogue may be able to handle the situation better with expertise in a social skill. Specialization is what makes a party of adventurers more powerful than a single adventurer.

That is why you take that 1 level dip into Hexblade. You get shield + half-plate for decent AC of 19 (24 with Shield which is 2x to use per SHORT rest), and suddenly melee is not that scary anymore for Evoker. And Evoker Magic missles is one of best spells to deal with melee enemies because it ignores AC.

Sure, Evoker won't be able to be social or skill monkey like Bard or Rogue, but they always have Suggestion or Mass Suggestion if they need to.

I think every Subclass of Wizard is great, but Evoker imo takes cake as he doesn't lose anything of Wizard utility, while getting enormous single-target nuke potential and best combat spell effects, because he can ignore friendly fire.

Also DnD (not at all tables) is generally combat-heavy system among other RPG systems. Evokers go really well with it.

As old MMO saying says "Nothing tanks or heal better than enough damage to win before that is even needed"

[Nagog]

That is why you take that 1 level dip into Hexblade. You get shield + half-plate for decent AC of 19 (24 with Shield which is 2x to use per SHORT rest), and suddenly melee is not that scary anymore for Evoker. And Evoker Magic missles is one of best spells to deal with melee enemies because it ignores AC.

Sure, Evoker won't be able to be social or skill monkey like Bard or Rogue, but they always have Suggestion or Mass Suggestion if they need to.

I think every Subclass of Wizard is great, but Evoker imo takes cake as he doesn't lose anything of Wizard utility, while getting enormous single-target nuke potential and best combat spell effects, because he can ignore friendly fire.

Also DnD (not at all tables) is generally combat-heavy system among other RPG systems. Evokers go really well with it.

As old MMO saying says "Nothing tanks or heal better than enough damage to win before that is even needed"

If you're discussing a build and it's inherent ability, we can do that too. But I believe the stated topic is if the Evoker is the top tier of subclass.

While Combat is definitely a strong pillar of D&D, it's by no means the most important. I had a DM that only ran Combat Combat Combat in every session, and the campaign died because of it. Nothing changed, nothing interesting happened. The combat had no purpose other than fill the 3 hours of the evening with rolling dice. So you can be really great at combat, but there will inevitably be other pillars you won't be as great at.

However, if you'd like a debate as to what subclass is the best, I'd say it's definitely the Hexblade patron. It radically changes the class from a middling Spellcaster class to a front-line damage heavy martial/caster class. Hexblade is pretty much it's own class from Warlock in playstyle, in a similar fashion to Paladins and Clerics, except Hexblades still get all the spellcasting awesomeness of other Warlocks.

Also, for damage potential you should read this thread, it's based on scientific probability and may require a lenient DM to pull off, but it potentially deals infinitely more damage than an Evoker:

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/100751/my-wizard-is-conjuring-a-piece-of-the-sun-how-will-this-affect-my-setting/100756

[Bobthewizard]

I would say either divination or enchantment is best from 2-4, then maybe evocation at 5 with sculpted fireballs. But blasting spells fall off in damage and usefulness so by level 10 the enchanters’ split enchantment probably wins and then at 14 and higher the illusionist is king. Even sculpted, over-channeled Meteor Swarm doesn’t compete with illusory realty.

Overall, blasting is a bad use of higher level spell slots. You can upcast fireball or pick a higher level blast, but as the HP of monsters increase with CR, a blast becomes less efficient. The damage doesn’t keep up with the increased HP. Spells like Tasha’s laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, though, scale without even needing to upcast. At first level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 1 monster. At 10th level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 10 monster even at a 1st level slot.

[KorvinStarmast]

Spells that become insane with Sculpt Spells:
Fireball
Sickening Radiance
Dawn
The wizard can be in the second row of a melee combat, cast thunderwave, and his allies are not harmed while the enemy takes damage and or gets knocked away. I've seen this really swing a battle on multiple occasions, but usually underground. During a battle while the party is level 2 or 3, this can be really handy.

[Keravath]

Evoker is amazing sublcass not only because it can surpass single target spell Nova of Sorlock (though at resource cost but Wands of Magic Missles!) but Sculpt is game-changing feature:

1. You can cast ongoing effects like Sickening Radiance and see enemies trying to run away from it while your party can chase them and murder them ignoring it's effects.

2. You can cast Wall of Fire and have your allies run to enemies, hit them and run back through wall and force enemies to eat damage or waste turn.

3. Sphere spell ignores allies

4. Mealstorm becomes one of best CC spells as allies ignore it's effects and enemies are in difficult terrain, take damage and are being pulled toward centre of the spell.

5. Delayed Blast Fireball if casted in fight that can last few rounds becomes a great combo with normal fireball. Detonate DBF + cast Fireball and you can devastate enemies and your allies just ignore it.

Combined with Hexblade + Fighter it's imo best battle/war mage Wizard you can do as it actually does what battle mage should- destroy enemies without touching his allies.

Awesome sublcass for people who love damage.

Most of these work fine. However, Wall of Fire on subsequent rounds doesn't work like this since there is no save and all sculpt spell does is allow the designated creatures to automatically be successful on their saving throw and take no damage as a result. They aren't immune to the spell, they auto save and take no damage.

[bendking]

I would say either divination or enchantment is best from 2-4, then maybe evocation at 5 with sculpted fireballs. But blasting spells fall off in damage and usefulness so by level 10 the enchanters’ split enchantment probably wins and then at 14 and higher the illusionist is king. Even sculpted, over-channeled Meteor Swarm doesn’t compete with illusory realty.

Overall, blasting is a bad use of higher level spell slots. You can upcast fireball or pick a higher level blast, but as the HP of monsters increase with CR, a blast becomes less efficient. The damage doesn’t keep up with the increased HP. Spells like Tasha’s laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, though, scale without even needing to upcast. At first level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 1 monster. At 10th level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 10 monster even at a 1st level slot.

By the time pure damage spells become sub-optimal you get other spells that work amazing with Sculpt Spell.
To name a few: Sickening Radiance, Storm Sphere, Maelstrom.

That said, even pure damage spells should remain relevant since in 5e a group of mooks is still potentially a high CR challenge, and thus AoE damage should remain useful.
If your DM refuses to do those kinds of encounters though, I guess it's not as good, but then look at my above statement.

[DrLoveMonkey]

Having recently DM'd a game up to 20th level with an evokes I can say they're extremely powerful with sculp spell. I can say with 100% certainty that the wizard did more damage than the entire rest of the party combined, and it seems not even close. Dropping meteor swarms and level 5 overchannled fireballs all the time, with elemental adept Fire of course. Normally intelligent enemies will notice or have been told about the caster who can conjure fire and will tactically interlace themselves with said spellslinger's allies, but in this case no avail.

[Makorel]

Okay so level 2 dip into Evoker by Sorcerer was mentioned. How about a level 3 dip by an Evoker into Sorcerer for Empowered spells? Worth it? Not worth it? Maybe after 10 when you get Int mod to damage? Maybe not because you get Overchannel anyway?

[LudicSavant]

Okay so level 2 dip into Evoker by Sorcerer was mentioned. How about a level 3 dip by an Evoker into Sorcerer for Empowered spells? Worth it? Not worth it? Maybe after 10 when you get Int mod to damage? Maybe not because you get Overchannel anyway?

Let's say you're level 10, and then choose that moment to jump off into Sorcerer 3. The level 13 Evoker will have a Simulacrum. The level 10 Evoker / Sorcerer 3 will have things that are not a Simulacrum.

And then at level 14, the straight Evoker will have Overchannel. And a Simulacrum that can also Overchannel.

[Waazraath]

Haven't played (with) enough wizards to have an opinion on this but wasn't there a few weeks / months ago a thread on 'best wizard sub class', with evoker ranking (to a lot of people) surprisingly high?

[Bobthewizard]

By the time pure damage spells become sub-optimal you get other spells that work amazing with Sculpt Spell.
To name a few: Sickening Radiance, Storm Sphere, Maelstrom

Ok. Those do seem a lot more fun than just fireball/cone of cold. Evoker might be the best in combat until level 14 instead of just level 9. That would let it cover most levels of play.

[Anjun]

I totally agree with the OP. I currently play an Evoker in T3 (lvl13) and "sculp spell" is great. In dungeons it s almost everytime possible to get all enemies in my fireball (cone of cold or other blast spell) which leads to huge damage. In the last couple of sessions I had fights with 12, 11, and 9 enimies in my blast, while our sorcerer could only target 3, once 4, enemies without friendly fire.
So on paper it doesnt seem that great, but at least in my experience, it s in a lot of situations a +100% boost. Further it s an "always-on" boost and not only twice a day like the divination wizard´s "portant". (I played an low level divination wizard for a short campain and was almost disapointed by this subclass, that is commonly referred as best)
I also like the Empowered Evocation (the +5dmg adds more than I expected) and looking forward to "overchannel" but "sculp spell" is the strongest of the class features.
So even with the errata and without "nuclear magic missile" (my DM dont allow the 1dmg-roll RAW MM and I can only add my INT to 1 dart) Evocation is very strong and my favourite school. :smallsmile:

[Chronos]

Bobthewizard, the illusionist's strongest ability is actually Malleable Illusions, not Illusory Reality, and it really takes off at levels 9 (when you can cast Creation), 11 (when you can make Major Illusion permanent), and 13 (Mirage Arcane). Creation and Mirage Arcane are both real enough already, and permanent malleable Major Image gives you the equivalent of a 3rd-level spell (and a fairly good one, at that) at will.

[Bobthewizard]

Ok. Those do seem a lot more fun than just fireball/cone of cold. Evoker might be the best in combat until level 14 instead of just level 9. That would let it cover most levels of play.

On second thought, maelstrom is a Druid spell so take that out. Sickening radiance still needs some sort of movement control or they will just leave the area. Storm sphere would be great if you could exclude yourself. But since Sculpt spells only lets you exclude allies, the enemies’ best option is to leave the area and attack you. I think I’ll stick with twinned enchantment being overall better at level 10.

[GrumpyHobbit]

Evoker with magic missile is broken, due to the way things are worded, and it was done intentionally, their magic missiles are 1d4 + 1 + int each.

That is a 24 damage first level spell that can’t miss and is the best damage type and just gets better.

plz tell me how? the only Thing i found is

"Empowered Evocation
Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast."

and that would mean 3d4+3+int

[Mitsu]

plz tell me how? the only Thing i found is

"Empowered Evocation
Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast."

and that would mean 3d4+3+int

Magic missle is exception and you roll how much damage EACH bolt hit. For example for Scorching Ray you roll one damage dice per ray. Here you roll damage and each of missles does the same damage.

Therefore all flat bonuses like Evoker bonus, Hexblade Curse etc. add bonus damage to a roll, which then affect every single missle.

Here you can see Jeremy confirming it:

https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/557820938402947072

[Bobthewizard]

Bobthewizard, the illusionist's strongest ability is actually Malleable Illusions, not Illusory Reality, and it really takes off at levels 9 (when you can cast Creation), 11 (when you can make Major Illusion permanent), and 13 (Mirage Arcane). Creation and Mirage Arcane are both real enough already, and permanent malleable Major Image gives you the equivalent of a 3rd-level spell (and a fairly good one, at that) at will.

I think illusory realty is the most powerful subclass ability in the game. Making a real wall or cage with a first level spell is great. But if malleable illusions is more powerful it just makes illusionists better earlier. A couple things on malleable illusions. With creation, you can’t change the material type since it is a component of the spell. You can’t crate a piece of wood and change it into an adamantium cage. I like to carry a small granite stone and make bigger granite objects.

For major image, movement costs your action every round and technically you can’t move it out of the original range of the spell. Nothing in malleable illusion changes the range of the spell.

For mirage arcane, I wouldn’t let someone use it to cover an area they’ve never seen before. You can’t cast it when you walk into a dungeon or city and control the whole area. It is for covering an area you know.

Anyway, sorry to the OP for hijacking a thread on evokers.

[NNescio]

I think illusory realty is the most powerful subclass ability in the game. Making a real wall or cage with a first level spell is great. But if malleable illusions is more powerful it just makes illusionists better earlier. A couple things on malleable illusions. With creation, you can’t change the material type since it is a component of the spell. You can’t crate a piece of wood and change it into an adamantium cage. I like to carry a small granite stone and make bigger granite objects.

You can. Just use a spellcasting focus. No listed cost for the material component, and it isn't consumed by the casting either.


Material (M)

Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.

If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell. A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

Doesn't matter what component it is.

(Of course, if it winds up consumed by the casting, like Protection from Evil/Good or the optional circle-forming part of Summon Lesser/Greater Demons, then you can't sub with a focus, even if it has no listed cost.)



For major image, movement costs your action every round and technically you can’t move it out of the original range of the spell. Nothing in malleable illusion changes the range of the spell.

It's either within range of you, or within range of the illusion. (Classic attachment ambiguity, like "Cop shoots man with knife.") The "original point where you stood X rounds ago to cast the spell" doesn't exist as an entity.

Ruling otherwise makes more assumptions (that every active spell has a "origin casting point" [on top of the usual point of origin, if any]), and hoses spells like Witch Bolt and Maximilian Earthern's Grasp, as well as Hex and Hunter's Mark (which implicitly inherit the range from how the original hex/mark were applied earlier.)

So, the caster can move the Major Illusion either 120 ft or 240 ft. so he doesn't need to do so every turn. He, could, conceivably, move up to 4 or 8 illusions (assuming a movement speed of 30 ft.), but that's a lot of micromanaging. It also becomes considerably less practical in closed spaces with twists and turns.

There is an easier way to move around a large number of permanent Major Images. All you need is access to a Bag of Holding or Demiplane (the spell). Store them inside and take them out when you need them.



For mirage arcane, I wouldn’t let someone use it to cover an area they’ve never seen before. You can’t cast it when you walk into a dungeon or city and control the whole area. It is for covering an area you know.

You use Malleable to do your interior decorating after seeing the inside of a structure. From outside, you can fill the whole city with swamp (or stuff every square you see with gates/palisades/walls/sheds), or 'accidentally' open a crevasse on the flat ground above a dungeon. These are all explicit examples given by the spell.

In any case, the Wizard has a lot of scrying and remote-sensing spells anyway, and surface cities are viewable from a distance. You can also use a spyglass.

[bid]

"Empowered Evocation
Beginning at 10th level, you can add your Intelligence modifier to one damage roll of any wizard evocation spell you cast."
You know how fireball has one damage roll, everyone in the AoE gets the same damage (half on save)?
Well, MM works the same way, all darts use the same damage roll.

[Bobthewizard]

You can. Just use a spellcasting focus...

It's either within range of you, or within range of the illusion. (Classic attachment ambiguity, like "Cop shoots man with knife.") The "original point where you stood X rounds ago to cast the spell" doesn't exist as an entity.

Ruling otherwise makes more assumptions (that every active spell has a "origin casting point" [on top of the usual point of origin, if any]), and hoses spells like Witch Bolt and Maximilian Earthern's Grasp, as well as Hex and Hunter's Mark (which implicitly inherit the range from how the original hex/mark were applied earlier.)

So, the caster can move the Major Illusion either 120 ft or 240 ft. so he doesn't need to do so every turn. He, could, conceivably, move up to 4 or 8 illusions (assuming a movement speed of 30 ft.), but that's a lot of micromanaging. It also becomes considerably less practical in closed spaces with twists and turns.


For malleable illusion, at the very least changing the material would change the duration which would need to be calculated from the time of casting the spell. Changing from string to metal would make the spell end immediately if it is past metal’s shorter duration.

For major image I disagree with your explanation based on the wording of the spell itself.

“As long as you are within range of the illusion, you can use your action to cause the image to move to any other spot within range.”

I think this makes it clear you can leave the range of the spell and you can only move it within its original range. To me, the range has to be from a fixed point at the time of the casting. However, while I don’t think your interpretation is right, I can see how you get there. Is there a Sage Advice on it?


Edit: I think I'm wrong on this and you are right. It says within range of the illusion, not within range of the spell so I think the range does apply to the current position off the illusion and you can move it.

Should we start another thread to let everyone else get back to talking about Evokers?

[LudicSavant]

Ok. Those do seem a lot more fun than just fireball/cone of cold. Evoker might be the best in combat until level 14 instead of just level 9. That would let it cover most levels of play.

It's odd that you see 14 as the dropoff point, because this is actually when optimized Evoker builds start scaling off into the stratosphere and obliterating high level encounters outright, right through legendary saves and magic resistance and all. It's when stuff like Simulacrum, Crown of Stars, Empowered Evocation Missiles, Overchannel combos, and so on and so forth are all lining up and synergizing to become more than the sum of their parts.

Evoker damage doesn't scale primarily by "upcasting fireball," but by them gaining access to action economy and resource management tools, as well as things like Overchannel and Empowered Evocation (which is a big deal in conjunction with Magic Missiles, as mentioned by others above).

Another thing that's important to understand is that Evokers, more than most subclasses, alter the value of various spell choices. Magic Missile, Whirlwind, Sickening Radiance, Dawn, Wall of Stone, Wall of Ice, and so forth have very different applications in an Evoker's hands. And it isn't just about blasting. For example, the ability to cover the whole party (minus you) in a deadly, ongoing AoE that they can just stand in has a big impact on tactics. Or things like, say, the fact that you can reliably move allies with Wall of Stone (because you can Sculpt it, and when allies save against it, they can move up to their speed as a reaction).

[NNescio]

It's odd that you see 14 as the dropoff point, because this is actually when optimized Evoker builds start scaling off into the stratosphere and obliterating high level encounters outright, right through legendary saves and all. It's when stuff like Simulacrum, Crown of Stars, Empowered Evocation Missiles, Overchannel combos, and so on and so forth are all lining up.

Evoker damage doesn't scale primarily by "upcasting fireball," but by them gaining access to action economy and resource management tools, as well as things like Overchannel and Empowered Evocation (which is a big deal in conjunction with Magic Missiles, as mentioned above).

Another thing that's important to understand is that Evokers, more than most subclasses, alter the value of various spell choices. Magic Missile, Whirlwind, Sickening Radiance, Dawn, Wall of Stone, Wall of Ice, and so forth have very different applications in an Evoker's hands. And it isn't just about blasting. For example, the ability to cover the whole party (minus you) in a deadly, ongoing AoE that they can just stand in has a big impact on tactics. Or things like, say, the fact that you can move allies with Wall of Stone (because you can Sculpt it, and when allies save against it, they can move as a reaction).

Because a Level 14 Illusionist gets Illusory Reality, AKA the Green Lantern-esque ability that effectively allows the caster to make functional hard light constructs to do things like No-Save-Encase-People-In-Solid-Adamantine with a single level 1 spell slot. Among other things.

[GrumpyHobbit]

Magic missle is exception and you roll how much damage EACH bolt hit. For example for Scorching Ray you roll one damage dice per ray. Here you roll damage and each of missles does the same damage.

Therefore all flat bonuses like Evoker bonus, Hexblade Curse etc. add bonus damage to a roll, which then affect every single missle.

Here you can see Jeremy confirming it:

https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/557820938402947072

well this - mike disapproved Jeremys tweet

https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487995399899074560

if you follow Jeremys logic, a FIREBALL would go in for 8d6+int(x8) oO

[Misterwhisper]

well this - mike disapproved Jeremys tweet

https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/487995399899074560

if you follow Jeremys logic, a FIREBALL would go in for 8d6+int(x8) oO

Jeremy does not care what mike thinks.

Jeremy is the rules and crunch guy, mike is the fluff and idea guy although most of his ideas are just ripoffs of videogames he plays.

Also that is not how Jeremy said it.

Magic missile is one damage roll that is then applied to X missiles.

8d6 is the only damage roll of fireball and it is applied to each target so it is 8d6 + int.

Most of this stems from JC insane love of wizards and specifically magic missile.

Also the same reason magic missile is “not an attack” because there is no attack roll but grapple that has no attack roll is considered one.

[LudicSavant]

Because a Level 14 Illusionist gets Illusory Reality, AKA the Green Lantern-esque ability that effectively allows the caster to make functional hard light constructs to do things like No-Save-Encase-People-In-Solid-Adamantium with a single level 1 spell slot. Among other things.

Illusory Reality is a very strong ability, for sure.

However, I think BobtheWizard is missing some important things about the Evoker. He mentions "overchanneled meteor swarm" (even though you can't Overchannel Meteor Swarm), mentions Meteor Swarm as if it's the strongest option in an Evoker's bag (it's not), and claims that damage scaling doesn't keep up with monster hit points (even though they can just kill Tiamat in one round with a bit of optimization).

[bid]

if you follow Jeremys logic, a FIREBALL would go in for 8d6+int(x8) oO
So, do you save for each 1d6 of damage separately?

[Snails]

I think it really matters what is your party size and composition.

If you are in a smallish party (4 or less), casting an Enchantment that fails because of the save is a big opportunity cost.

Softening up a couple targets so the meleeists can obliterate them early is very effective. And the targets making their save for half is not terrible, and you are reliably getting at least some damage on target.

But in larger parties, cleverly applied area control tends to be a sure thing, and it has the nice social effect of leaving the other PCs room to explore their combat strengths. Even from a selfish point of view, the last point is not small, because happy meatshields tend to be brave meatshields.

[GrumpyHobbit]

Magic missile is one damage roll that is then applied to X missiles.



so if magic Missile is one Damage roll, logically you add your int to it - lets say +5 - and you get the sum of 3d4+3+5.

if it is one roll you can - per errata - only apply your int modifier once. i'm not trying to be a douche, i just cant grasp how one would argue its one roll (which only gets the int mod ONCE) and still add the int mod three times… its just inconsistent

[LudicSavant]

if you follow Jeremys logic, a FIREBALL would go in for 8d6+int(x8) oO

so if magic Missile is one Damage roll, logically you add your int to it - lets say +5 - and you get the sum of 3d4+3+5.

That's not how JC is saying it works. He's saying you roll 1d4+1+Int, and apply the result of that roll to every dart. You do not roll 3d4.

For Fireball, you would roll 8d6+Int, once, and apply the results of that roll to every target.

[NNescio]

so if magic Missile is one Damage roll, logically you add your int to it - lets say +5 - and you get the sum of 3d4+3+5.

if it is one roll you can - per errata - only apply your int modifier once. i'm not trying to be a douche, i just cant grasp how one would argue its one roll (which only gets the int mod ONCE) and still add the int mod three times… its just inconsistent

Also why does it trigger only one Concentration save or one death saving fail?

(Because Crawford likes direct damage-dealing classes and consistently rules more liberally whenever something that can deal more direct damage comes up, while nerfing or shutting off things that rely on less obvious rules interaction, throwing away rules consistency to the wayside. The many different ways "When..." is interpreted (e.g. "During the process of...", "If...", "If, but only within some unspecified time period that we didn't mention in the text", "Before, if you promise really hard to do so in the future..."), for example, are a giant headache that requires following numerous unrelated tweets to keep up with RAI. Generally speaking, though, if it allows you to deal more direct damage, the answer is yes. If it involves interaction with some other rule that you have to look up in a distant chapter [relative to the section] or another book, the answer is no.)

[GrumpyHobbit]

That's not how JC is saying it works. He's saying you roll 1d4+1+Int, and apply the result of that roll to every dart. You do not roll 3d4.


good to know - because thats not what the spellcard/phb says.

i'm really in love with D&D for 25 years now… but the wording of rules STILL is a fricking pain in the ass. i thought switching from the german translations to originals would suffice - seems it doesnt.

so thanks anyways for claryfying this matter for me

[bid]

good to know - because thats not what the spellcard/phb says.

PHB p 196: "If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell’s damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast."

[LudicSavant]

good to know - because thats not what the spellcard/phb says.

i'm really in love with D&D for 25 years now… but the wording of rules STILL is a fricking pain in the ass. i thought switching from the german translations to originals would suffice - seems it doesnt.

so thanks anyways for claryfying this matter for me

NP.

In JC's defense, the ruling is consistent with how community rules lawyers were already interpreting the spell before he ever said anything about it. The perhaps unintuitive result comes from the interaction of the spell card's wording with the general rule on page 196 of the Player's Handbook.

Edit

PHB p 196: "If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell’s damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast."

ShadowMonk'd :smallbiggrin:

[Zuras]

Anyone who has ever played as or with an Evoker will note that they aren’t big into secrecy or subtlety at all, so they are unlikely to be anything secretly.

[Mitsu]

I like Evoker (especially Nuclear Wizard build) because it gives you more freedom during a fight. If you fight creatures that have very weak WIS saves, there is nothing stopping you from casting Hypnotic Pattern and then focusing with rest of the team single target with your magic missiles.

If you however fight enemies with strong WIS saves but weak DEX saves- nothing stops you from Fireballing them etc because you don't care about friendly fire.

Also it's really nice to be able to use spells like Shatter, Gust of Wind, Whirlwind or Maddening Darkness without friendly fire as they finally become more free to use.

And while all AOE damage spell are there now for free usage, utility is still there as for every Wizard- he gets access to single target nuking ability combo and it's the only Wizard build that can match and surpass single target Nova of builds like Sorlocks, Sorcadins or Samurai Archer/Gloom Stalkers.

[Bobthewizard]

Illusory Reality is a very strong ability, for sure.

However, I think BobtheWizard is missing some important things about the Evoker. He mentions "overchanneled meteor swarm" (even though you can't Overchannel Meteor Swarm), mentions Meteor Swarm as if it's the strongest option in an Evoker's bag (it's not), and claims that damage scaling doesn't keep up with monster hit points (even though they can just kill Tiamat in one round with a bit of optimization).

My bad on Meteor swarm. I’m sure your right. Not trying to troll you. I really want to know.
1. What is the strongest option in an evoker’s bag?
2. How does an evoker kill Tiamat in one round?

[Aimeryan]

Did the Crawford tweet make it into the Sage Advice Compendium? Otherwise, its not official.

~~~


If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.

The bold is actually in the text, not mine. If you cast Magic Missile at only one target this text does not apply.

I am also not convinced that the text supports there being one damage roll, as opposed to just rolling once for all damage rolls. This may seem the same at first glance because of the name, but a damage roll is not just the roll:


You roll the damage die or dice, add any modifiers, and apply the damage to your target.

So you roll for all once, but the modifiers can still be different.

[Mitsu]

My bad on Meteor swarm. I’m sure your right. Not trying to troll you. I really want to know.
1. What is the strongest option in an evoker’s bag?
2. How does an evoker kill Tiamat in one round?

I think strongest evoker options when we talk Overchannel (This is my opinion) is Dawn and Bigbys Hand. About why- Dawn is bonus action concentration spell that covers huge radius and you can move it as bonus action + it still applies to Scuplt. So each turn as bonus action you deal guarantee 20 radiant AOE damage or 40 on fail save, while you can still dish out damage with your Action.

Simillar situation with Bigbys Hand- guarantee 32 force dmg per bonus action per turn. That is 96 dmg in 3 turns with your Action free for MM cheese. It can add up quickly.

Another one is Sickening Radiance dealing maximum damage.

As for how Tiamat dies quickly (dunno if in one turn), but I guess it's:

1. Bonus Action Curse, Overchannel 9th level slot MM
2. Action Surge: Overchannel 8th level Slot MM

Then your Sim does the same.

Result is well.. nuclear hence why this build is called that way "Nuclear Wizard" 1 Hex/17 Evoker/2 Fighter.

[LudicSavant]

My bad on Meteor swarm. I’m sure your right. Not trying to troll you. I really want to know.
1. What is the strongest option in an evoker’s bag?
2. How does an evoker kill Tiamat in one round?

I made a post a little while back regarding the optimization of Evokers. I think Maan linked it earlier in this thread actually.

Edit:

In his thread, LudicSavant posted a build just optimizing the Evoker. I find it pretty impressive.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=23998967&postcount=170

[Bobthewizard]

I made a post a little while back regarding the optimization of Evokers. I think Maan linked it earlier in this thread actually.

Edit:

I read it, and I like Evokers, but I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker is going to kill Tiamat in one round.

[Aimeryan]

I read it, and I like Evokers, but I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker is going to kill Tiamat in one round.

This (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/bc342g/magic_missile_build_572_damage_in_one_round/) may help, presuming you agree with the Empowered argument.

[LudicSavant]

I read it, and I like Evokers, but I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker is going to kill Tiamat in one round.

A level 14 Evoker doesn't cast Meteor Swarm, either. :smallconfused:

I feel like there has been a miscommunication here. My comment was regarding the rate of damage scaling of high level Evokers in general, not specifically at level 14.

Specifically, I was addressing this line of discussion:


Even sculpted, over-channeled Meteor Swarm doesn’t compete with illusory realty.

Overall, blasting is a bad use of higher level spell slots. You can upcast fireball or pick a higher level blast, but as the HP of monsters increase with CR, a blast becomes less efficient. The damage doesn’t keep up with the increased HP. Spells like Tasha’s laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, though, scale without even needing to upcast. At first level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 1 monster. At 10th level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 10 monster even at a 1st level slot.

[Bobthewizard]

As for how Tiamat dies quickly (dunno if in one turn), but I guess it's:

1. Bonus Action Curse, Overchannel 9th level slot MM
2. Action Surge: Overchannel 8th level Slot MM




This (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/bc342g/magic_missile_build_572_damage_in_one_round/) may help, presuming you agree with the Empowered argument.

You can't Overchannel a 9th level Magic missile. When cast with a 9th level slot, it is a 9th level spell and not applicable for Overchannel. Globe of Invulnerability specifically says, "even if cast from a higher spell slot" so it is an exception to that rule. Also, I don't think you would apply Overchannel on the Hexblade's curse since it is a different ability and isn't part of the Evocation spell. Anyway, you couldn't have both Hexblade's curse and Overchannel at level 14.

I'm pretty sure an illusionist with an average party could defeat Tiamat at level 14. I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker could do it in one round.

[Aimeryan]

You can't Overchannel a 9th level Magic missile. When cast with a 9th level slot, it is a 9th level spell and not applicable for Overchannel. Globe of Invulnerability specifically says, "even if cast from a higher spell slot" so it is an exception to that rule. Also, I don't think you would apply Overchannel on the Hexblade's curse since it is a different ability and isn't part of the Evocation spell. Anyway, you couldn't have both Hexblade's curse and Overchannel at level 14.

I'm pretty sure an illusionist with an average party could defeat Tiamat at level 14. I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker could do it in one round.

The Overchannel part was a mistake made by the OP; if you read on the calculations without it still prove to be very high.


EDIT: 579-705 Damage. Tweaked to remove Overchannel and used average damage.

[bendking]

You can't Overchannel a 9th level Magic missile. When cast with a 9th level slot, it is a 9th level spell and not applicable for Overchannel. Globe of Invulnerability specifically says, "even if cast from a higher spell slot" so it is an exception to that rule. Also, I don't think you would apply Overchannel on the Hexblade's curse since it is a different ability and isn't part of the Evocation spell. Anyway, you couldn't have both Hexblade's curse and Overchannel at level 14.

I'm pretty sure an illusionist with an average party could defeat Tiamat at level 14. I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker could do it in one round.

The Evoker simply doesn't need a party to do it :)

[LudicSavant]

You can't Overchannel a 9th level Magic missile. When cast with a 9th level slot, it is a 9th level spell and not applicable for Overchannel. Globe of Invulnerability specifically says, "even if cast from a higher spell slot" so it is an exception to that rule. Also, I don't think you would apply Overchannel on the Hexblade's curse since it is a different ability and isn't part of the Evocation spell. Anyway, you couldn't have both Hexblade's curse and Overchannel at level 14.

I'm pretty sure an illusionist with an average party could defeat Tiamat at level 14. I still don't see how a level 14 Evoker could do it in one round.

Nobody said the Evoker was level 14. As I mentioned above, I was referring to your comment about damage scaling vs monster hit points in general.

That said, I'm curious what the plan is to defeat her with a level 14 illusionist, given that she can just ignore spells of 6th level or lower. If you make a real illusion of an adamantine wall, she can literally walk through it (similar to JC's Rakshasa ruling).

[Bobthewizard]

Nobody said the Evoker was level 14. As I mentioned above, I was referring to your comment about damage scaling vs monster hit points in general.

That said, I'm curious what the plan is to defeat her with a level 14 illusionist, given that she can just ignore spells of 6th level or lower. If you make a real illusion of an adamantine wall, she can literally walk through it.

I apologize for moving the goalposts. The meteor swarm comment was a mistake and I should be more clear. We were originally debating 14th level characters and you correctly assumed higher level due to me bringing up meteor swarm.

But now we have another point we can debate! Tiamat's stat block says she is immune to spells of 6th level or lower, and has advantage on saves versus other spells or magical effects. I would rule that this means no damage or effects from spells of 6th or lower, but would still allow environmental control to work. It's not really doing anything to her, but is just changing the environment. So for Wall of Stone, I would have her automatically make her save but the wall would still be there. I can see a debate about that since it is a spell.

For Illusory Realty, though, sage advice for dispel magic and illusory realty says "Dispel magic ends spells. Illusory Reality is not a spell, and the object it creates has a duration independent of any spell" so it would still work on Tiamat.

[LudicSavant]

So for Wall of Stone, I would have her automatically make her save but the wall would still be there. According to Sage Advice, she can walk through Wall of Stone. Which is weird, because Wall of Stone says it makes a nonmagical wall.


For Illusory Realty, though, sage advice for dispel magic and illusory realty says "Dispel magic ends spells. Illusory Reality is not a spell, and the object it creates has a duration independent of any spell" so it would still work on Tiamat.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of that Sage Advice. If Illusory Reality is not considered part of a spell, then it seems like it indeed wouldn't be affected by Limited Magic Immunity.

In that case, I think she'd just break through the wall with her Legendary actions. The fact that the wall is made of Adamantine means it has 23 AC (by DMG guidelines). The hit points would be in the DM's court, though, AFAIK. But either way it's just delaying her, what's the plan to actually defeat her? It's not like you can whittle her down with delaying tactics; she'll regenerate. You have to actually burst her.

There's also the issue of making an illusion that is large enough to enclose her. She's pretty big, so 1st level spells won't do the trick.

[Corran]

Another thing that's important to understand is that Evokers, more than most subclasses, alter the value of various spell choices. Magic Missile, Whirlwind, Sickening Radiance, Dawn, Wall of Stone, Wall of Ice, and so forth have very different applications in an Evoker's hands.
That's something that bugs me about evokers. I don't value very highly most of the spells that they boost.

Sculpt spells + sickening radiance/ dawn seems to me like a watered down version of spirit guardians. Both spells have some issues, but by far the most severe drawback for me is that it is not safe for us to stay in that area. This can really complicate things (I can expand on this and we can discuss it if you want; this is possibly the most interesting point of discussion from whatever else I am mentioning in this post).

The wall spells are kind of ok, but the benefit of having allies spend their reaction and move in the case of wall of stone, while clever, does not seem like anything that much valuable to make these spells stand out for evokers in particular. Wall of ice could be really good if it had more hit points so you can use it as a choke point (with sculpt) for a longer duration, but as it is, it's meh.

Whirlwind (I feel betrayed by this spell, so it's quite likely that I am exaggerating) is crap. At least for its level. It's the perfect example of a spell that could really shine with sculpt spells, and the double save kills it.

In short, it seems to me that all the big evocation spells are lacking. Yeah, sculpt makes them better, but they are pretty weak to start with.

ps: As an aside, yeah, magic missile is bonkers (with that hexblade level). It's at ''this is so good that I want to play it, but maybe I shouldn't'' level of power. No arguments there from me.

[NNescio]

That's something that bugs me about evokers. I don't value very highly most of the spells that they boost.

Sculpt spells + sickening radiance/ dawn seems to me like a watered down version of spirit guardians. Both spells have some issues, but by far the most severe drawback for me is that it is not safe for us to stay in that area. This can really complicate things (I can expand on this and we can discuss it if you want; this is possibly the most interesting point of discussion from whatever else I am mentioning in this post).

Sculpt spell doesn't exclude squares in 5e, despite the name (and the effects of its predecessors in earlier editions). It straight up lets you designate creatures to be functionally immune to the spell (autosave, take no damage if would otherwise take half damage when saved). So, you (you can still see yourself unless you're invisible or something) and your allies can just sit in the AoE, turning any ongoing AoE effect into a BFC spell.

This works really well with Xanathar's Guide to Everything spells, which also come with nice damage types (radiant) and interesting rider effects. When sculpted they become far, far better than Spiritual Guardians (and are arguably better even when unsculpted).

(...Which is frustrating for non-Evokers, really, because they nerfed a bunch of control effects from spells of different schools, and eliminated interesting rider effects like Tidal Wave creating water, but then decide to give a bunch of overpowered spells that do both damage and control to the damage school.)




The wall spells are kind of ok, but the benefit of having allies spend their reaction and move in the case of wall of stone, while clever, does not seem like anything that much valuable to make these spells stand out for evokers in particular.

You do something else with Wall of Stone (block off enemies) while getting your allies a reaction move to maneuver themselves further. It's Buy One Get One, as Director Lee in the GITP comic would say.

[bendking]

(...Which is frustrating for non-Evokers, really, because they nerfed a bunch of control effects from spells of different schools, and eliminated interesting rider effects like Tidal Wave creating water, but then decide to give a bunch of overpowered spells that do both damage and control to the damage school.)


This is a solid point. Evoker essentially becomes the best controller in the game past level 7 when he gets some big-boy Evocation spells (Wall of Fire, Sickening Radiance, etc.).

[NNescio]

Nobody said the Evoker was level 14. As I mentioned above, I was referring to your comment about damage scaling vs monster hit points in general.

That said, I'm curious what the plan is to defeat her with a level 14 illusionist, given that she can just ignore spells of 6th level or lower. If you make a real illusion of an adamantine wall, she can literally walk through it (similar to JC's Rakshasa ruling).

Assuming a party to do damage...

Mirage Arcane + Malleable Illusions for at-will obstructions.

Precast Level 7+ Major Images (stacked in a Demiplane or BoH).
(I don't really agree with the "real means its not a spell" interpretation, because Fireball has real fire and Wall of Stone has real, nonmagical stone. Plus it leads to Illusory Reality spell components.

That said, Limited Magic Immunity that also foils indirect effects like divination senses is kinda silly anyway...)

Then there's this gem...


@JeremyECrawford I know you must get this all the time, but I can't find a real definitive answer on the subject. If I used Mirage Arcane to transform a lake of water into a lake of lava, would someone interacting with that lava take lava though it was an illusion? #dnd5e

— Marc Turner (@xMaly23) April 24, 2018

The mirage arcane spell gives you tremendous latitude in how you make the affected terrain look and feel. The altered terrain can even hurt someone. You could drown in the spell’s illusory lake, for example, or fall off an illusory cliff.

Which I don't necessarily agree, but if Empowered Evocation MM is on the table (which hinges on a torturous reading of "one roll")... drown Tiamat with (Malleable) Mirage Arcane. Ideally while using a remote sensor for maximum insult.

[LudicSavant]

Assuming a party to do damage...

Mirage Arcane + Malleable Illusions for at-will obstructions.

Precast Level 7+ Major Images (stacked in a Demiplane or BoH).

Then there's this gem...



Which I don't necessarily agree, but if Empowered Evocation MM is on the table... drown Tiamat with Malleable Mirage Arcane.

I'm a bit unclear on how you see this working out. Mirage Arcane takes 100 rounds to cast. And she can fly. And break obstructions to the tune of 300 damage a round.

[NNescio]

I'm a bit unclear on how you see this working out. Mirage Arcane takes 100 rounds to cast. And she can fly. And break obstructions to the tune of 300 damage a round.

Precast, then Malleable to form obstructions on the fly.

[LudicSavant]

Precast, then Malleable to form obstructions on the fly.

That doesn't really answer my question.

Malleable Illusion lets you alter the nature of the illusion within the parameters of the spell. Mirage Arcane cannot change the general shape of the terrain.

How are you getting her underwater, and how are you keeping her there? How are you stopping her from simply flying off as soon as she notices that an illusion has been cast over the terrain with her Truesight? How is your party doing enough burst damage to discorporate her?

What precisely is your plan?

[Mitsu]

I think like discussion went little off here.

From mathematical stand point - you can't argue that Evoker/1 Hexblade Wizard can pretty much nuke any single enemy in record time when he decides too. I think this is cool part of him "I will now unleash my full power". I don't think even fully optmized EA Hexblade/Paladin/Sorcerer/3 Champion Fighter using maxed Shadow Blade, fully made only for single target burst can match that killing speed and ease (MM doesn't care about AC).

[NNescio]

That doesn't really answer my question.

Malleable Illusion lets you alter the nature of the illusion within the parameters of the spell. Mirage Arcane cannot change the general shape of the terrain.

It says that, then it goes on and says "Open fields or a road could be made to resemble a swamp, hill, crevasse, or some other difficult or impassable terrain. A pond can be made to seem like a grassy meadow, a precipice like a gentle slope, or a rock-strewn gully like a wide and smooth road" right after. So there is significant leeway in interpreting "cannot change the general shape of the terrain".

Also, "you can alter the appearance of structures, or add them where none are present", with no limitations given for size and number.


How are you getting her underwater, and how are you keeping her there?

Well, if we assume the drowning trick is legit...

Flooded mining borehole. Flooded valley. Flooded mining borehole on top of a hill. Flooded lake on top of a hill. Etc. etc. Followed by Malleable to caved-in borehole or glacial sublake.

Or lava equivalents, maybe. No fire damage but way harder to swim through.



How are you stopping her from simply flying off as soon as she notices that an illusion has been cast over the terrain with her Truesight?

True sight only pierces visual illusions ("see through" and "can still physically interact" can be construed as ambiguous within the text of the spell, but are not so when combined with the actual Truesight entry). Just don't make anything visual on the initial cast of MA.



How is your party doing enough burst damage to discorporate her?
What precisely is your plan?

I'm just going to assume that the party Fighter or Paladin or Blaster or whatever damage guys can do enough damage to whittle her down through 30 HP/turn regen. They are doing their job, the Illusionist is just there doing control (assuming no drowning trick).

Like, I dunno, how the Kill-Tiamat-Solo-in-One-Round camp has been assuming the Evoker multiclass can just get surprise and walk in within 30ft to drop Hexblade's Curse, even if we assume precast Mind Blank. So likewise I have been outlining some general tactics instead of a specific foolproof A to Z plan.

[Mitsu]

Like, I dunno, how the Kill-Tiamat-Solo-in-One-Round camp has been assuming the Evoker multiclass can just get surprise and walk in within 30ft to drop Hexblade's Curse, even if we assume precast Mind Blank. So likewise I have been outlining some general tactics instead of a specific foolproof A to Z plan.

And what is the problem of walking 30ft to her and use curse. Hexblade 1/X Evoker would at least be level 16 at this point if we talk about Tiamat. His AC would be min 19, probably 21 with two +1 items at least. 27 with Shield SPell. Absorb Elements for breath. All what he needs is not die in first turn which not hard on this level. Tiamat is not designed to outright insta-gib players.

There is also Sim which has Curse too.

All in all it's much less complicated for Evoker + Sim to burst her down then all the tactic and troubles going through Illusion, party positioning and assuming party can do as much dmg as fast as Evoker + his Sim can.

In 5e more often than not a direct, simple approach with more damage is very effective. If enemy dies in 1-2 turns, who needs CC?

[Skylivedk]

I would say either divination or enchantment is best from 2-4, then maybe evocation at 5 with sculpted fireballs. But blasting spells fall off in damage and usefulness so by level 10 the enchanters’ split enchantment probably wins and then at 14 and higher the illusionist is king. Even sculpted, over-channeled Meteor Swarm doesn’t compete with illusory realty.

Overall, blasting is a bad use of higher level spell slots. You can upcast fireball or pick a higher level blast, but as the HP of monsters increase with CR, a blast becomes less efficient. The damage doesn’t keep up with the increased HP. Spells like Tasha’s laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, though, scale without even needing to upcast. At first level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 1 monster. At 10th level, Tasha’s can incapacitate a CR 10 monster even at a 1st level slot.

This! Illusory Reality is stupidly broken.

And I rank Diviner highly for a long long time - not far from enchanter at 10.

[LudicSavant]

It says that, then it goes on and says "Open fields or a road could be made to resemble a swamp, hill, crevasse, or some other difficult or impassable terrain. A pond can be made to seem like a grassy meadow, a precipice like a gentle slope, or a rock-strewn gully like a wide and smooth road" right after. So there is significant leeway in interpreting "cannot change the general shape of the terrain".

Tiamat is enormous. It is a significant change to the terrain to create a depth necessary to get her heads underwater. And even if it wasn't... she can just swim on top of the water. Or fly.


Well, if we assume the drowning trick is legit...

Flooded mining borehole. Flooded valley. Flooded mining borehole on top of a hill. Flooded lake on top of a hill. Etc. etc. Followed by Malleable to caved-in borehole or glacial sublake.

So let me try to understand this. Your plan is to blow your 7th level spell slot, then use your action to create a flooded area. Now you have a Tiamat who is free to act, floating on top of some water. She proceeds to take her turn.

I'm not sure this is a good plan.


I'm just going to assume that the party Fighter or Paladin or Blaster or whatever damage guys can do enough damage to whittle her down through 30 HP/turn regen. They are doing their job, the Illusionist is just there doing control (assuming no drowning trick). What is stopping Tiamat from killing your Paladin when they go to stab Tiamat?


Like, I dunno, how the Kill-Tiamat-Solo-in-One-Round camp has been assuming the Evoker multiclass can just get surprise and walk in within 30ft to drop Hexblade's Curse, even if we assume precast Mind Blank.

What the heck are you talking about? Nobody assumed surprise, or that Mind Blank was precast (or even used at all).

[ThePolarBear]

The bold is actually in the text, not mine. If you cast Magic Missile at only one target this text does not apply.


If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell's damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast.

Simply reading a part of the spell doesn't ever give the full picture. A rule for hitting multiple creatures doesn't apply to hitting a single creature, obviously, but this doesn't mean that you can roll 519351515 times for fireball if it only hits a single creature, too.

The logic is that since you can direct each dart to a different creature, and each dart deals 1d4+1, the spell is one that falls under the multiple targets rule.
The exception from other spells that can target more than a creature is that you can choose a single creature to have the damage dealt multiple times., which normally isn't the case.
At this point, however, you fall under the normal rule, which is still "You roll the damage die or dice, add any modifiers, and apply the damage to your target." The damage is still 1d4+1+modifiers. It is never "3d4+3", (but 1d4+1)x3. Which, with modifiers, is still (1d4+1+mods)x3.


So, you (you can still see yourself unless you're invisible or something)

"You" are not "other creature[s]". You can only exclude "them".

[bendking]

-snip-

Like, dude... You are not going to drown a huge legendary dragon.
It's not going to happen. She can literally just fly away.

We just showed you the Evoker doesn't need any party members and cande delete Tiamat in one turn with no surprise.
You are trying to argue you can somehow kill an enormous and hugely powerful by... drowning? It'd also take like, a lot of time, since drowning doesn't do a lot of damage.

EDIT: I don't know if OPs have any authority (who am I kidding, of course they don't) but my decree as OP I announce this discussion a waste of time.

EDIT 2: I realized now we are talking about a level 14 encounter, when Evoker can't one-turn Tiamat yet. This discussion is still a waste of time.

[NNescio]

Tiamat is enormous. It is a significant change to the terrain to create a depth necessary to get her heads underwater.

Debatable.



And even if it wasn't... she can just swim on top of the water. Or fly.

She can on her turn. No, there's no automatic floating. And you can't fly underwater. So... 30ft. movement underwater before it gets sealed with reforming walls.




So let me try to understand this. Your plan is to blow your 7th level spell slot, then use your action to create a flooded area. Now you have a Tiamat who is free to act, floating on top of some water. She proceeds to take her turn.


Mirage Arcane has range Sight and duration 10 days. Mallaable Illusions And Tiamat doesn't get to autofloat out of turn.



I'm not sure this is a good plan.

Well, I'm not saying it's guaranteed to work, but the Illusionist is far away enough if the plan fails.




What is stopping Tiamat from killing your Paladin when they go to stab Tiamat?

Wall with appropriately-sized hole in it. Followed by more walls when they get torn down.



What the heck are you talking about? Nobody assumed surprise, or that Mind Blank was precast (or even used at all).

I was assuming you were using Mind Blank (precast the day before) to bypass Frightful Presence


Like, dude... You are not going to drown a huge legendary dragon.
It's not going to happen. She can literally just fly away.

CAN'T. FLY. UNDERWATER.

[bendking]

CAN'T. FLY. UNDERWATER.

OK, swim away. Look, this is obviously a really shoddy plan, but I don't mind saying it'll work if you stop discussing it.
It's really veering off the topic of the discussion and I doubt we'll change each other's mind so how about we give it a rest?

[LudicSavant]

*snip*

If you throw someone who can swim in the ocean, they do not sink to the bottom just because it's not their turn.

Anyways, let's get back on topic. This is getting beyond silly.

[NNescio]

OK, swim away. Look, this is obviously a really shoddy plan, but I don't mind saying it'll work if you stop discussing it.
It's really veering off the topic of the discussion and I doubt we'll change each other's mind so how about we give it a rest?


If you throw someone who can swim in the ocean, they do not sink to the bottom just because it's not their turn.

Anyways, let's get back on topic. This is getting beyond silly.

Alright. I apologize for the outburst.

[Corran]

Sculpt spell doesn't exclude squares in 5e, despite the name (and the effects of its predecessors in earlier editions). It straight up lets you designate creatures to be functionally immune to the spell (autosave, take no damage if would otherwise take half damage when saved). So, you (you can still see yourself unless you're invisible or something) and your allies can just sit in the AoE, turning any ongoing AoE effect into a BFC spell.
Notice though that the description specifies 'other creatures', so we cannot include ourselves in automatically passing those saves. This creates a problem when you take into account that the aforementioned spells work best when fighting in tight spaces. Agreed on the rest.


This works really well with Xanathar's Guide to Everything spells, which also come with nice damage types (radiant) and interesting rider effects. When sculpted they become far, far better than Spiritual Guardians (and are arguably better even when unsculpted).
I wouldn't say so. The rider of sickening radiance is interesting only if you are fighting with impunity, such as by throwing it into a small room and closing the door behind you, or combining it with a forcecage, or sth like that. Otherwise, I don't think we are going to come up against any encounter that will last long enough for anything to die from exhaustion. Even hitting level 3 exhaustion will take several turns, by which time the fight will either be over or decided.
Putting sculpt spells aside for a moment, spirit guardians have some advantage over both these spells. It is mobile (opposed to sickening radiance) and it triggers at the start of the enemies' turn (opposed to dawn). These advantages may seem pretty significant at first glance, though what they actually do is that they just make spirit guardians a little more flexible. Ok, I may be downplaying this a bit, but my point is, that the common thing these spells have in common is that they work best when you are being swarmed in a tight space. And when you are fighting in a tight space, then you might not care too much about moving the AoE around or if it triggers at the end instead of at the start of the enemy's turn (it can still make a difference, but in the ideal scenario for these spells it wont make much difference). The problem is though, that if you are being swarmed in a tight space, it is not easy to set a sickening radiance/dawn and get out of the way without having many enemies follow you.


You do something else with Wall of Stone (block off enemies) while getting your allies a reaction move to maneuver themselves further. It's Buy One Get One, as Director Lee in the GITP comic would say.
It's an additional benefit. But it's a small benefit. I can't see me picking wall of stone just because I am playing an evoker.

[Bobthewizard]

I don't see how Mirage Arcane would work in that fight. I would use Silent Image to create 15' blocks of Adamantium around one of her heads. A 15' block of Adamantium weighs something like 1.5 million pounds. Even assuming about half of that volume for her head, it would weigh about 750,000 pounds and it would just drop to the ground. Each round pick another head. Everyone else attack with ranged magical weapons while I keep her locked own. That is just a straight Illusionist. Silent Image doesn't give an initial save and by the time she gets to interact with it or make an investigation check it is already real.

I still haven't seen anyone show me a straight Evoker taking out Tiamat. I've seen how a level 20 Evoker, Hexblade, Fighter multi class might be able to do it with generous rulings, but that doesn't mean Evoker is overpowered so much as Hexblade is a stupidly overpowered dip. I also don't think that this multi class would be fun to play through HOTDQ and ROT so I don't think I'd see it. You'd be behind in your spellcasting level the whole time. You run into Tiamat at about level 14 so if you add in the Fighter and Hexblade you'd only be a level 11 wizard.

Of course this is all theoretical and silly, but this debate can still be fun. I mean, if I were DM, I would probably rule that her immunity to spells works like a Globe of Invulnerability and not let those magic missiles do any damage. In fairness, I'd give her a DEX save to avoid the illusory realty too. Auto wins by the Wizard just aren't that fun for anyone. It's fun to debate the rules, and I learn a lot here, especially when I'm wrong, but I wouldn't actually play any of these builds.

[Mitsu]

I don't see how Mirage Arcane would work in that fight. I would use Silent Image to create 15' blocks of Adamantium around one of her heads. A 15' block of Adamantium weighs something like 1.5 million pounds. Even assuming about half of that volume for her head, it would weigh about 750,000 pounds and it would just drop to the ground. Each round pick another head. Everyone else attack with ranged magical weapons while I keep her locked own. That is just a straight Illusionist. Silent Image doesn't give an initial save and by the time she gets to interact with it or make an investigation check it is already real.

I still haven't seen anyone show me a straight Evoker taking out Tiamat. I've seen how a level 20 Evoker, Hexblade, Fighter multi class might be able to do it with generous rulings, but that doesn't mean Evoker is overpowered so much as Hexblade is a stupidly overpowered dip. I also don't think that this multi class would be fun to play through HOTDQ and ROT so I don't think I'd see it. You'd be behind in your spellcasting level the whole time. You run into Tiamat at about level 14 so if you add in the Fighter and Hexblade you'd only be a level 11 wizard.

Of course this is all theoretical and silly, but this debate can still be fun. I mean, if I were DM, I would probably rule that her immunity to spells works like a Globe of Invulnerability and not let those magic missiles do any damage. In fairness, I'd give her a DEX save to avoid the illusory realty too. Auto wins by the Wizard just aren't that fun for anyone. It's fun to debate the rules, and I learn a lot here, especially when I'm wrong, but I wouldn't actually play any of these builds.

Just nitpick:

1. Multiclass build mentioned here is still Evoker build because you can't do that combo/Nova without Evoker. Evoker with his kit is essential to nuke Tiamat.

2. We talked solo scenario with level 20 build before it somehow go to level 14-16 vs Tiamat. With full party Evoker/Hexblade with Sim + Magic Misslies would still take more than half of her HP in one turn. Assuming rest of the party deals their damage- she would still die way faster thanks to Evoker/Hexblade in party than any other build at this level.

The 20 build vs Tiamat was just a showcase of how strong it is. No other build can solo take Tiamat out in one turn at level 20.

3. Nuclear Wizard recommends taking 2 levels Fighter after you get at least Sim.

4. There is not "generous ruling" here- it's all RAW. Houserules are DM piece, but any nerf to this build is houserule. By RAW- whole combo is legit.

5. Tiamat already ignores spells level 6 (or 5) or lower so no need for GoI on her. Also upcasted MM will pass that as upcased spells counts as spells of higher level RAW.

I understand that this build is like boiling point for most DMs "I would not allow it", but RAW it's fully legit and fully legit you can almost one-shot everything with it when properly optimized.

It's fun munchkin build, nobody cares how someone would house rule it. Discussion is RAW-based about Evoker subclass, so let's stick to RAW.

[Aimeryan]

Simply reading a part of the spell doesn't ever give the full picture. A rule for hitting multiple creatures doesn't apply to hitting a single creature, obviously, but this doesn't mean that you can roll 519351515 times for fireball if it only hits a single creature, too.

The logic is that since you can direct each dart to a different creature, and each dart deals 1d4+1, the spell is one that falls under the multiple targets rule.
The exception from other spells that can target more than a creature is that you can choose a single creature to have the damage dealt multiple times., which normally isn't the case.
At this point, however, you fall under the normal rule, which is still "You roll the damage die or dice, add any modifiers, and apply the damage to your target." The damage is still 1d4+1+modifiers. It is never "3d4+3", (but 1d4+1)x3. Which, with modifiers, is still (1d4+1+mods)x3.

What? A fireball hitting one target would require that you roll the damage once. The rule for hitting multiple targets at the same time only should apply when hitting multiple targets at the same time - the text does not start with 'If you could potentially hit multiple targets with the spell at any point in existence, then...'

The text for the multiple targets rule never uses the term 'damage roll'; it uses the phrase 'roll the damage once for all them'. This may seem the same, however, 'damage roll' is a defined term which included rolling for damage and adding modifiers. The rule here means you don't repeat the rolling part, nothing more - you still apply modifiers per creature (which will be the same in the vast majority of cases). Since Empowered Evocation states it may be added to one damage roll, not one rolling for damage, it should not duplicate.

[Mitsu]

Notice though that the description specifies 'other creatures', so we cannot include ourselves in automatically passing those saves. This creates a problem when you take into account that the aforementioned spells work best when fighting in tight spaces. Agreed on the rest.


I wouldn't say so. The rider of sickening radiance is interesting only if you are fighting with impunity, such as by throwing it into a small room and closing the door behind you, or combining it with a forcecage, or sth like that. Otherwise, I don't think we are going to come up against any encounter that will last long enough for anything to die from exhaustion. Even hitting level 3 exhaustion will take several turns, by which time the fight will either be over or decided.
Putting sculpt spells aside for a moment, spirit guardians have some advantage over both these spells. It is mobile (opposed to sickening radiance) and it triggers at the start of the enemies' turn (opposed to dawn). These advantages may seem pretty significant at first glance, though what they actually do is that they just make spirit guardians a little more flexible. Ok, I may be downplaying this a bit, but my point is, that the common thing these spells have in common is that they work best when you are being swarmed in a tight space. And when you are fighting in a tight space, then you might not care too much about moving the AoE around or if it triggers at the end instead of at the start of the enemy's turn (it can still make a difference, but in the ideal scenario for these spells it wont make much difference). The problem is though, that if you are being swarmed in a tight space, it is not easy to set a sickening radiance/dawn and get out of the way without having many enemies follow you.


It's an additional benefit. But it's a small benefit. I can't see me picking wall of stone just because I am playing an evoker.

Descriptions says:

"When you cast an evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 + the spell's level."

Other creatures means spells that can affect more than a caster, because otherwise there is no point. Also when it says "creatures that you can see" you can chose yourself as per Sage Advice. Mike also confirmed that for Sculpt Spells:

Twitter: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/05/25/you-are-a-creature-can-you-see-yourself/

Mike confirms it: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/02/09/can-sculpt-spell-target-the-wizard/


As for Dawn vs Spirit Guardians. I think you miss that Dawn has 30 foot radius. That means it covers 60 foot area. If a creature wants to not end up inside Dawn on his turn, it needs to move at least 30 feet away. Most creatures have 30 feet movement. Also you force a creature to either: move away and cause OA from your allies or wasting action for disengage. It's very good trade.

Also it's bonus action to move Dawn, and it has 60 feet radius. With SG (15 feet radius) you need to be in melee range to affect enemies. Not where you want to be as Wizard. On the other hand being 60 feet away and moving as bonus action your Dawn while still using spells with your Action is safer bet for a Wizard.

Both spells serves different purpouse - SG is melee spell, good on heavy armored Clerics, Paladins or Sorcadins. But not really for a Wizards.

[Mitsu]

What? A fireball hitting one target would require that you roll the damage once. The rule for hitting multiple targets at the same time only should apply when hitting multiple targets at the same time - the text does not start with 'If you could potentially hit multiple targets with the spell at any point in existence, then...'

The text for the multiple targets rule never uses the term 'damage roll'; it uses the phrase 'roll the damage once for all them'. This may seem the same, however, 'damage roll' is a defined term which included rolling for damage and adding modifiers. The rule here means you don't repeat the rolling part, nothing more - you still apply modifiers per creature (which will be the same in the vast majority of cases). Since Empowered Evocation states it may be added to one damage roll, not one rolling for damage, it should not duplicate.

"Only should apply" is not what PHB says. As Jeremy confirmed - MM is rolled like that because it CAN hit multiple targets. It doesn't have to. Fireball also CAN hit multiple targets but doesn't have to. You can aim it to hit one.

Also I know Sage Advice is treated with either trust or deny (I myself not always include what Jeremy says) but truth is- I think Jeremy knows better what he meant in ruling.

[Bobthewizard]

4. There is not "generous ruling" here- it's all RAW. Houserules are DM piece, but any nerf to this build is houserule. By RAW- whole combo is legit.

5. Tiamat already ignores spells level 6 (or 5) or lower so no need for GoI on her. Also upcasted MM will pass that as upcased spells counts as spells of higher level RAW.



Sorry, this is getting offtrack somewhat. I originally made the comment that I thought the illusionist was best at level 14 and above, and was told that was ridiculous since an Evoker can kill Tiamat in one round. I'm still waiting for someone to show me how, and I really want to see it. The build I was shown allowed Overchannel on 8th and 9th level spells, which I think is an erroneous ruling in that build. I think Evokers are really powerful, and I am sold that they can keep up damage better than I thought they would, I just think some on this thread are underrating illusory reality.

[Aimeryan]

"Only should apply" is not what PHB says. As Jeremy confirmed - MM is rolled like that because it CAN hit multiple targets. It doesn't have to. Fireball also CAN hit multiple targets but doesn't have to. You can aim it to hit one.

Also I know Sage Advice is treated with either trust or deny (I myself not always include what Jeremy says) but truth is- I think Jeremy knows better what he meant in ruling.

Sage Advice Compendium is official, no dispute there. What you are talking about are tweets, which are not official. There is a 3rd party non-official site call 'Sage Advice', this is misleading, ignore it.

[Chronos]

"When you cast an evocation spell that effects other creatures" means creatures other than you. In "you can pick a number of them", "them" refers to the "other creatures", i.e., creatures other than you. If we unfold the pronoun, we get "When you cast an evocation spell that effects creatures other than you, you can pick a number of the creatures other than you...".

Yes, you're a creature you can see. That part's not the problem. The problem is that you are not an "other creature".

[bendking]

Sage Advice Compendium is official, no dispute there. What you are talking about are tweets, which are not official. There is a 3rd party non-official site call 'Sage Advice', this is misleading, ignore it.

I'm curious, how do you treat JC tweets then? Some of his tweets don't appear in the Sage Advice Compendium, do you just ignore those?
For example, people often refer to his tweet on Careful Spell that clarifies that it only applies on the first save for the spell, but it doesn't appear in the compendium.

EDIT: Hmm, looks like you're right. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140221/with-the-2019-sage-advice-compendium-release-are-jeremy-crawfords-tweets-consi)

[Aimeryan]

I'm curious, how do you treat JC tweets then? Some of his tweets don't appear in the Sage Advice Compendium, do you just ignore those?
For example, people often refer to his tweet on Careful Spell that clarifies that it only applies on the first save for the spell, but it doesn't appear in the compendium.

EDIT: Hmm, looks like you're right. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140221/with-the-2019-sage-advice-compendium-release-are-jeremy-crawfords-tweets-consi)

Yeah, I mean, I always did anyway since tweets are just not a useful way of making official rulings. The change this year to make the tweets no longer official was met by much fanfare in my group!

It does mean that a lot of 'official' knowledge that some of the forumers have here is no longer official - its always worth checking if it is actually in the compendium and not just a tweet.

[Mitsu]

"When you cast an evocation spell that effects other creatures" means creatures other than you. In "you can pick a number of them", "them" refers to the "other creatures", i.e., creatures other than you. If we unfold the pronoun, we get "When you cast an evocation spell that effects creatures other than you, you can pick a number of the creatures other than you...".

Yes, you're a creature you can see. That part's not the problem. The problem is that you are not an "other creature".

It only means that it applies to spell that affect creatures other than you. Because it needs to be in order for Scuplt to work, as if that spell was targeting only you then there would be no point in excluding Friendly Fire if spell only worked on you, no?. It says you can pick number of creatures you can see. You can see yourself.

I would agree if it would say "When you pick number of creatures other than you" then yes. Thing is there is no "other than you there" and creatures you can see refer to you too.

[bendking]

Yeah, I mean, I always did anyway since tweets are just not a useful way of making official rulings. The change this year to make the tweets no longer official was met by much fanfare in my group!

It does mean that a lot of 'official' knowledge that some of the forumers have here is no longer official - its always worth checking if it is actually in the compendium and not just a tweet.

That is quite awesome actually!
Just out of curiosity, how do you rule things like Careful Spell? I only ask because that tweet seems to me like a clarification, not an actual ruling.
The Metamagic says "... A chosen creature automatically succeeds on its saving throw against the spell", saving throw, as in singular.
It seems to me in this case the tweet just clarifies this.

It also seems that this "de-officializing" is really recent, isn't it? It seems like the latest article publishing the compendium was in June 30th? Was there any earlier draft of the compendium which included this de-officializing?

[Aimeryan]

That is quite awesome actually!
Just out of curiosity, how do you rule things like Careful Spell? I only ask because that tweet seems to me like a clarification, not an actual ruling.
The Metamagic says "... A chosen creature automatically succeeds on its saving throw against the spell", saving throw, as in singular.
It seems to me in this case the tweet just clarifies this.

It also seems that this "de-officializing" is really recent, isn't it? It seems like the latest article publishing the compendium was in June 30th? Was there any earlier draft of the compendium which included this de-officializing?

Its ambiguous; a single saving throw would be unambiguous as '...succeeds on a saving throw against the spell', or possibly '...succeeds on the first saving throw against the spell'. Likewise, 'any' or perhaps 'all' would make it unambiguous for multiple saving throws.

For my group we rule it as all saving throws, with the debate having been settled with the agreement that any time the spell forcing a saving throw on the creature it would still be 'its saving throw against the spell', and so should automatically succeed as per stated.

[bendking]

Its ambiguous; a single saving throw would be unambiguous as '...succeeds on a saving throw against the spell', or possibly '...succeeds on the first saving throw against the spell'. Likewise, 'any' or perhaps 'all' would make it unambiguous for multiple saving throws.

For my group we rule it as all saving throws, with the debate having been settled with the agreement that any time the spell forcing a saving throw on the creature it would still be 'its saving throw against the spell', and so should automatically succeed as per stated.

I like it. I always thought the JC tweet on Careful Spell was a horrible ruling. This makes the metamagic kind of good now!
Plus, the fact he didn't include that tweet in the compendium might mean he intentionally ignored it because it was bad.

EDIT: After going through the spells it's compatible with in the Sorcerer list after 3rd-level spells (what spells?)... It's still not that good.
At least there's Web & Stinking Cloud to play with now!

EDIT 2: WAIT A GODAMN SECOND.
Sickening Radiance doesn't do damage on a failed save. This means Careful Metamagic Sorcerers can now use it! HOLY CRAP. IS CONTROL SORCERER VIABLE?
This deserves a thread of its own.

[Misterwhisper]

I like it. I always thought the JC tweet on Careful Spell was a horrible ruling. This makes the metamagic kind of good now!
Plus, the fact he didn't include that tweet in the compendium might mean he intentionally ignored it because it was bad.

EDIT: After going through the spells it's compatible with in the Sorcerer list after 3rd-level spells (what spells?)... It's still not that good.
At least there's Web & Stinking Cloud to play with now!

EDIT 2: WAIT A GODAMN SECOND.
Sickening Radiance doesn't do damage on a failed save. This means Careful Metamagic Sorcerers can now use it! HOLY CRAP. IS CONTROL SORCERER VIABLE?
This deserves a thread of its own.

Pretty sure everyone already knew that.

[bendking]

Pretty sure everyone already knew that.

I'm not sure everyone rules Careful Spell this way as I still see some quote that tweet.
Anyway, I didn't know that.

[Chronos]

If it said "you can choose a number of creatures you can see", then yes, you could choose yourself. But it doesn't. What it says is that you can choose a number of "them", and "them" is "other creatures you can see".

[bid]

"When you cast an evocation spell that effects other creatures"
*affect.

Unless it's one of the conjure creature spells.:smallbiggrin:

[Skylivedk]

I'm curious, how do you treat JC tweets then? Some of his tweets don't appear in the Sage Advice Compendium, do you just ignore those?
For example, people often refer to his tweet on Careful Spell that clarifies that it only applies on the first save for the spell, but it doesn't appear in the compendium.

EDIT: Hmm, looks like you're right. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/140221/with-the-2019-sage-advice-compendium-release-are-jeremy-crawfords-tweets-consi)

If there's a point to what he says, I'll let the point stand. I also use tweets to check RAI. It doesn't change much though. After all, the flip flopping around Shield Master, releasing Hexblade in its current form and somehow having both the Frenzy Barbarian, Simulacrum and Wish in the guest book aren't really screaming: "I know what I do, I'm a great game designer and when I'm wrong, I'm humble enough to admit it".

In other words, I'm more than happy to change the rules as long as the table likes it. With my more by-the-book DM (where I'm a player), I sometimes use the tweets because apparently they carry weight to him. Not always though, ie. he didn't let cloud of daggers affect more than one square. In those cases I probe for his rulings and build/play around what I perceive to be design flaws.

[LudicSavant]

In other words, I'm more than happy to change the rules as long as the table likes it. With my more by-the-book DM (where I'm a player), I sometimes use the tweets because apparently they carry weight to him. Not always though, ie. he didn't let cloud of daggers affect more than one square. In those cases I probe for his rulings and build/play around what I perceive to be design flaws.

I really can't understand DMs that wouldn't let Cloud of Daggers affect more than one square. It's clearly intended to; it's why the "playing without a grid" figures suggest that an X-foot cube hits as many creatures as an X-foot radius sphere.

[ThePolarBear]

What? A fireball hitting one target would require that you roll the damage once.

Exactly. So why are you rolling the damage multiple times for MM? Because there are three darts? What if each dart dealt the same damage?
Would a dart dealing 1d4+1+int be dealing the same damage as a dart dealing 1d4+1?

That is the logic behind the tweet. You only roll for MM damage ONCE, regardless of single creature or not. And by rolling only once, you apply the same damage roll - of which you make only one - each time you apply the damage.

It is essentially a multitarget spell that has the exception of hitting the same creature multiple times, but the damage is calculated in the same way as an aoe anyway.


The rule for hitting multiple targets at the same time only should apply when hitting multiple targets at the same time - the text does not start with 'If you could potentially hit multiple targets with the spell at any point in existence, then...'

The rule is for spells and effects that deal damage to more than one target at the same time.
The example is for fireball or flamestrike. Both spells can target a single target, and even if there is a single target, you STILL only roll once.
So, MM can target more than one target, and can target a single creature. Why do you roll three times for the latter case, and not for the former?

Because if you hit more than one target, there are rules, but if you hit a single target...there's no indication for either? Even the spell is really not crystal clear.

The rationale of the answer is that, factually, it works as an "AoE" spell that makes an exception on the amounts of targets inside the "area", which might be one, and at that point the amount of damage made is multiplied on those targets. The damage roll is always one for all darts.

(not seriously:) We could also make a (pretty lame) argument: MM always has three targets, and can have one target. All hit instantly, at times it happens to be the same creature. It doesn't ask for different targets, just more than one. You do have to choose three targets, one for each missile, and thus MM qualifies anyway, while other spells do not because do not fall under the "same time".


This may seem the same, however, 'damage roll' is a defined term which included rolling for damage and adding modifiers.

The damage roll is defined as rolling damage die/ce and adding modifiers. Rolling damage is the act of determining an amount of damage when a damage roll is made - i.e. making a damage roll. You know... english meaning.


The rule here means you don't repeat the rolling part, nothing more - you still apply modifiers per creature (which will be the same in the vast majority of cases).

You apply the modifiers per creature when those modifiers are per creature. For example, Hex only affecting one creature modifies the damage rolls against that creature. Your damage roll when you roll for damage is different against them than against others. For them, you roll an additional die.
Hexblade Curse change the modifiers that are applied to some sources of damage that are dealt to a creature.
"+1" in MM is a modifier. A modifier to the damage roll. You apply it to the damage roll, regardless of what creature you are facing.

You are constructing a completely unuseful difference where there is not one.

Empowered Evocation suffers no such "creature" limitation. It simply modifies damage rolls - it works as a modifier on the damage die/ce that you roll. A single damage roll, in the specific, which might or might not include more than one die and affect one or more creatures one or more times. What happens when there's only one damage roll that is applied multiple times? You apply the SAME damage roll (i.e. damage die + modifiers) multiple times. All of the damage dice, all of the modifiers.

The argument is: should roll for each dart or not against a single target, or, more generally, should you roll for each dart at all?
The answer that the spell itself gives is "a dart deals 1d4+1 damage, you create 3".
The answer that the rules for damage give is that you make the damage roll (the damage die + applicable modifiers) and apply the damage to the target. When there's more than one target that is dealt damage at the same time, you roll only once.


Since Empowered Evocation states it may be added to one damage roll, not one rolling for damage, it should not duplicate.

Sorry, what? How do you even reach that it should not "duplicate"? There's nothing you provided to prove that the damage roll is not equvalent to rolling for damage. Even if the two were to be different, you would still to need to make a case as of why they would be different in the case of MM. And even then, you just choose to reach the conclusion "rolling for damage doesn't duplicate", for no reason provided.

You have not provided why MM should end up as 3d4+3+intmod or 1d4+1+intmod,1d4+1,1d4+1 instead of 3x(1d4+1+intmod).

EE adds to a damage roll. And if you only make one damage roll 1d4+1 once and apply it to all darts, you only have one damage roll and the conditions for EE are respected.

If there were to be a spell that tells you to make a single damage roll and apply it multiple times to the same target, you would in fact apply EE multiple times. EE is applied only once, to a single damage roll, and the spell ends up dealing the damage multiple times. A single damage roll, multiple instances of damage.

Again, the damage roll for MM CANNOT be 3d4+3, or 2d4+2 and 1d4+1.
It's either 1d4+1 and 1d4+1 and 1d4+1 or 1d4+1 times the number of missiles striking. In one there are three damage rolls, and we know this is not the case for more than one target. The second is valid for every situation.

If going by simplicity, the second would fit more in the "theme" for 5th edition, don't you agree?

[InspectorG]

Spells that become insane with Sculpt Spells:
...
I like optimizing it as a 2 level splash for a blasting sorcerer.


Ssshhhhh.......

Dont hurt the Wizard's feelings. :smallbiggrin:

[InspectorG]

Or, is Sculpt Spell broken?


I'm probably missing something or not taking something into consideration. But hey, that's why I'm posting this.

Have a grappler in your party? Oh my, the fun you can have. Grapple + Roast.

Shoving matches. Another caster with forced movement spells/effects.

Good times.

[Aimeryan]

Exactly. So why are you rolling the damage multiple times for MM? Because there are three darts? What if each dart dealt the same damage?
Would a dart dealing 1d4+1+int be dealing the same damage as a dart dealing 1d4+1?

That is the logic behind the tweet...[snip]

You misunderstand; I don't care what the tweet says.



The rule is for spells and effects that deal damage to more than one target at the same time...[snip]

Exactly; the rule is for when the spell deals damage to more than one target at the same time. If the spell is not doing this then no dice (well, lots of dice, but you get the point). It is moot, anyway, because throwing a single magic missile out of eleven to another target to invoke the rule would do the job of invoking the rule. I also don't rely on the rule not being invoked for why Empowered Evocation does not affect all damage rolls - see next section.



The damage roll is defined as rolling damage die/ce and adding modifiers. Rolling damage is the act of determining an amount of damage when a damage roll is made - i.e. making a damage roll. You know... english meaning.

Sorry, not [E]nglish meaning. A damage roll is specifically defined in the PHB. Rolling for damage is not a damage roll - it is only part of a damage roll. The rule means that the rolling part of the the damage roll is not done for each target (because it would drag things out too much), however, the modifier part of a damage roll is still done per target. I'll bold the parts of the rule that show this:


If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them.

And the damage roll quote:


You roll the damage die or dice, add any modifiers, and apply the damage to your target.

You don't duplicate the modifiers because the rule does not say you do.

[bid]

Rolling for damage is not a damage roll - it is only part of a damage roll.
I hope you're arguing there's no One True Way, because there's nothing explicitely supporting this (hair) splitting. Occam's razor goes against it.

[Corran]

Descriptions says:

"When you cast an evocation spell that affects other creatures that you can see, you can choose a number of them equal to 1 + the spell's level."

Other creatures means spells that can affect more than a caster, because otherwise there is no point. Also when it says "creatures that you can see" you can chose yourself as per Sage Advice. Mike also confirmed that for Sculpt Spells:

Twitter: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/05/25/you-are-a-creature-can-you-see-yourself/

Mike confirms it: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/02/09/can-sculpt-spell-target-the-wizard/
Here is how I understand it. Them refers to other creatures that you can see. You cannot include yourself to other creatures that you can see. The twit seems fine. Mearls' answer seems off base to me.



As for Dawn vs Spirit Guardians. I think you miss that Dawn has 30 foot radius. That means it covers 60 foot area. If a creature wants to not end up inside Dawn on his turn, it needs to move at least 30 feet away. Most creatures have 30 feet movement. Also you force a creature to either: move away and cause OA from your allies or wasting action for disengage. It's very good trade.
30' radius is not much. That's why I think it's best to use it on enclosed spaces of similar dimensions rather than in open fields. Enemies can just spread out and the consolation OA's is not what I would be hoping to get out of a 5th level concentration spell. If you cannot include yourself safely in the AoE, there is a problem. That's because we'd want to cover as much of the battlefield (ideally all of it if we can) with the AoE, so that there is no place for the enemies to run and avoid the ongoing effect. Furthermore, because if our wizard is in said space, not only do I create further incentive for enemies to get out of the AoE, both to avoid the pain and to hit the wizard. It would be a big benefit, to have even the option of occupying a relatively safe spot inside the AoE, because getting out of it without tempting the enemies to do the same (in which case our contribution to the fight would be diminished) is tricky.


Also it's bonus action to move Dawn, and it has 60 feet radius. With SG (15 feet radius) you need to be in melee range to affect enemies. Not where you want to be as Wizard. On the other hand being 60 feet away and moving as bonus action your Dawn while still using spells with your Action is safer bet for a Wizard.

Both spells serves different purpouse - SG is melee spell, good on heavy armored Clerics, Paladins or Sorcadins. But not really for a Wizards.
I agree that I wouldn't want spirit guardians on a wizard.
Sculpt boosts dawn, in that it makes it (almost, if I understand the rules correctly) party friendly. So we are basically talking about concentration ongoing damage AoE in both cases that don't affect allies, same thing that spirit guardians does. There are some small differences (for example spirit guardians would do slightly better -but not particularly well- in open fields and just as well in very small spaces while dawn would do better at around 60' side rooms or so -preferably with high ceiling and/or a safe place to teleport to). But the similarity is stronger, since we are basically talking about concentration AoE damage. So they work well against the same scenarios, and they work poorly against the same scenarios. Now, spirit guardians has the additional requirement that the caster must be close to melee (ideally engaged in melee most of the time). That's why it's not really working for a wizard. But don't get hung up on if the build is melee or ranged. That just determines which options your build can support and which it cannot support. The purpose of a spell is to solve encounters, not to be taken by this or that build.

[Aimeryan]

I hope you're arguing there's no One True Way, because there's nothing explicitely supporting this (hair) splitting. Occam's razor goes against it.

You'll have to argue against what I wrote, not just say its wrong. I'm not going to repeat it; look at my previous post about the definition of the damage roll and how rolling is only part of it, with the modifiers being separate. Look at the text for page 196 and show me where it says to add modifiers for all too.

[Mitsu]

You'll have to argue against what I wrote, not just say its wrong. I'm not going to repeat it; look at my previous post about the definition of the damage roll and how rolling is only part of it, with the modifiers being separate. Look at the text for page 196 and show me where it says to add modifiers for all too.

You split hairs here to defend your interpretation. I get it, we all do it here on forum. However the spell description is clear as MM can hit multiple targets at the same time, therefore you roll once for all targets, even if it hit only one.

You also focus on wrong part of PHB, the reason why you roll only ONCE for MM is because all dart hit at the same time!

To Quote:

"If a spell or other effect deals damage to more than one target at the same time, roll the damage once for all of them. For example, when a wizard casts fireball or a cleric casts flame strike, the spell’s damage is rolled once for all creatures caught in the blast."

"You create three glowing darts of magical force. Each dart hits a creature of your choice that you can see within range. A dart deals 1d4 + 1 force damage to its target. The darts all strike simultaneously, and you can direct them to hit one creature or several."

That is why it's an odd ball. For example for Eldritch Blast each beam hit one after another as you make one attack roll for each one. Same with Scorching Ray. MM hits simultaneously, all at the same time.

Same like Fireball can deal damage to more than one target but can be placed/aimed to hit only one target. MM can hit more than one target but can hit one target too. Any way- you roll damage once.

[Mitsu]

EDIT: Nevermind- I read it wrong :o, sadly it doesn't work like that.

Btw. even if it's not best race choice for Nuclear Wizard build due to it's stats, it's can get Magic Missiles damage to yet another level.

And that race is... GOBLIN!

Because of:

"Fury of the Small. When you damage a creature with an attack or a spell and the creature's size is larger than yours, you can cause the attack or spell to deal extra damage to the creature. The extra damage equals your level. Once you use this trait, you can't use it again until you finish a short or long rest."

So at level 1/Hexblade/11 Evoker our 18 INT Goblin could deal once per short rest:

7x (1d4 + 1 + 4 + 4 + 12) = 164,5 dmg Magic Missle from 5th level slot.

At level 18 our 1 Hexblade/17 Evoker 20 INT Goblin could deal once per short rest:

11 x (1d4 + 1 + 5 + 6 + 18) = 357,5 dmg from Magic Missle from 9th level slot. That is without Action Surge yet or Sim :)

[Misterwhisper]

Btw. even if it's not best race choice for Nuclear Wizard build due to it's stats, it's can get Magic Missiles damage to yet another level.

And that race is... GOBLIN!

Because of:

"Fury of the Small. When you damage a creature with an attack or a spell and the creature's size is larger than yours, you can cause the attack or spell to deal extra damage to the creature. The extra damage equals your level. Once you use this trait, you can't use it again until you finish a short or long rest."

So at level 1/Hexblade/11 Evoker our 18 INT Goblin could deal once per short rest:

7x (1d4 + 1 + 4 + 4 + 12) = 164,5 dmg Magic Missle from 5th level slot.

At level 18 our 1 Hexblade/17 Evoker 20 INT Goblin could deal once per short rest:

11 x (1d4 + 1 + 5 + 6 + 18) = 357,5 dmg from Magic Missle from 9th level slot. That is without Action Surge yet or Sim :)

It does not work that way, furry of the small does not add to a damage roll, it just adds damage when they are taking damage.

It would just add flat on top.

[Mitsu]

It does not work that way, furry of the small does not add to a damage roll, it just adds damage when they are taking damage.

It would just add flat on top.

Hah, you are correct, I rushed to conclusion too fast, thinking I discovered something new :). Ow, well, as disappointing as it is, sometimes you are just wrong. I totally read it as damage roll, my bad.

[Mitsu]

Interesting to compare it to Sorlock 2 Hexblade/18 Sorcerer. It's kind of easy to miss but Sorlock also benefits from Curse + MM cheese, thought not as much, however, when we compare potential damage:

vs Ancient Red Dragon 546 Hit Points:

Turn 1 for Sorlock = Hexblade's Curse + 9th level Magic Missile = 104.5 damage this round, 104.5 damage total.

Turn 2 for Sorclock = Quickened 8th Level Magic Missile + Eldritch Blast = 95 + 66 = 161 this round, 265.5 damage total.

Turn 3 for Sorlock = Quickened 7th Level Magic Missile + Eldritch Blast = 151.5 damage this round, 417 damage total.

Turn 4 for Sorlock = Quickened 6th Level Magic Missile + Eldritch Blast = 142 damage this round, 559 damage total, dragon is dead.

Of course we have to take into consideration that EB is attack action and even with 20 CHA it can still miss dragon so above numbers do not calculate potential misses, however we can see that even Sorlock can add a nice additional burst thanks to Curse + MM synergy, especially vs high AC enemies.

Of course Sorlock misses Sim until he gets Wish, but once he gets Wish- he also gets access to Sim MM Curse double combo.

Since Sorlock needs 2 levels of Warlock, he can't take 2 Levels of Fighter for Action Surge so Nuclear Wizard would still dish out more damage in first turn on level 20, however it's interesting to see that this combo works very well on Sorlocks too.

Sorry for off-top, I just thought it's interesting :)

[bid]

You'll have to argue against what I wrote, not just say its wrong.
Why should I?
You've only argued using some ambiguities in RAW that this is a possible reading. You haven't shown that it is the One True Way by demonstrating the other readings are invalid.

So, do you consider that SA is also RAW, or believe no other reading than your reading can be valid?

[Mitsu]

So, apart form really strong Hexblade 1/Evocation Wizard build for Magic Missles, I think the other interesting build is Storm Wizard:

2 Tempest Cleric/Evocation Wizard. You can use CD to deal maximum damage with thunder or lighting spell. That gives us quite a nice list of spell that can deal very high AOE damage: https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-class=0&filter-class=8&filter-search=&filter-damage-type=53&filter-damage-type=60&filter-verbal=&filter-somatic=&filter-material=&filter-concentration=&filter-ritual=&filter-sub-class=&sort=level

Just to mention few spells that are really effective with it: Shatter, Lighting bolt, Chain Lightning, Dragon's Breath (guarantee 18 dmg from your familliar in cone? Duh.), Storm Sphere, Illusory Dragon, Chromatic Orb.

For example upcasted from level 5 Lighting bolt can can deal 60 dmg to multiple targers and thanks to Scuplt Spell- exclude your allies from line of fire. Storm Sphere now deals 12 dmg per turn, your familiar breath weapon is now 18 dmg in cone every turn and your Shatter will deal 24 dmg AOE. It's one per short rest but if your party do take short rests you should be able to use it 2-3 times per adventuring day. Chain Lighting is now 80 dmg per target, or 40 on save. A level 2/11 Evocation Wizard will add 5 dmg to those on top.

To boost further your AOE Nova - chose Goblin race, as from what I read RAW - Fury of the Small applies to AOE damage. So you can use that + CD from Tempest Cleric and for example on level 2/11 deal with Chain Lighting - 80 + 5 + 13 = 98 dmg to each target on fail save.

And you can be Goblin Storm Wizard ;)

It's not as strong as Nuclear Wizard build, but Storm Wizard has some nice options to use with it and can be great for people who love lighting magic :).