D&D 5E Wish and the requirement removal

[jaelis]

If a player wants to waste his turn, every turn, trying to locate an invisible creature that is moving, he can go for it. There are much better things to do than hope you get lucky.

Who says you waste your turn? Just ask the DM: "Can I target square A?" "No". "Can I target square B?" "No." "Square C?" "Yes." "Ah there he is."

That is my point, the rules don't say how to resolve it, so that is just as "RAW" as your suggestion. From which I conclude that this is not a place to argue anything from RAW.

 

[Maxperson]

Who says you waste your turn? Just ask the DM: "Can I target square A?" "No". "Can I target square B?" "No." "Square C?" "Yes." "Ah there he is."

LOL No. Targeting is part of casting the spell. The instant you target an empty square, the spell fails or fizzles, DM's call and the spell is done. The spell doesn't just sit there in limbo while you guess spots.

 

[jaelis]

LOL No. Targeting is part of casting the spell. The instant you target an empty square, the spell fails or fizzles, DM's call and the spell is done. The spell doesn't just sit there in limbo while you guess spots.

You just made a clear point that, by RAW, you can't cast the spell by targeting the empty space. If you can't cast the spell, why would you lose the slot and your action? Not that I disagree with that ruling, just that I don't think you're getting it from the rules at all.

 

[Asisreo]

You just made a clear point that, by RAW, you can't cast the spell by targeting the empty space. If you can't cast the spell, why would you lose the slot and your action? Not that I disagree with that ruling, just that I don't think you're getting it from the rules at all.

Just to be clear, you are not targeting an empty space. You are targeting a creature and guessing their location. Firebolt does not allow you to target a point in space, it lets you target creatures and objects.

 

[Fenris-77]

But can I magic missile the darkness?

If you give me a Mountain Dew I may rule in your favor.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I certainly hope it's an academic debate at this point, and DMs are not, in fact, allowing fire bolt and similar spells to detect the presence of creatures, see through illusions, and have other embedded Divination powers due to a badly described targeting system.]

I think Xanathar's Guide may have addressed this topic, but I can't remember exactly what it said (my books are a few thousand miles away from me at the moment).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

From my understanding, they intended on hitting the invisible creature. Otherwise, if they're just trying to cast firebolt at a point and hope it intersects with an invisible creature, it doesn't work because that's not how firebolt works.

Yeah, I think the only logical interpretation is that you can target something you just believe is there. I mean, if a guy goes invisible, and teleports away, and you're trying to Firebolt him, it doesn't auto-fail because he's gone - you're still targeting a creature, he just isn't actually there (in fact, for all you know, he teleported away, fell in a pit trap, died, RIP, and you still there trying to Firebolt squares he was in).

Any other interpretation basically turns target-a-creature spells into creature-detectors.

 

[Maxperson]

You just made a clear point that, by RAW, you can't cast the spell by targeting the empty space. If you can't cast the spell, why would you lose the slot and your action? Not that I disagree with that ruling, just that I don't think you're getting it from the rules at all.

You cannot target until the spell is in the process. You don't target and then cast. So if you fail to target, the spell fizzles.

 

[Asisreo]

I certainly hope it's an academic debate at this point, and DMs are not, in fact, allowing fire bolt and similar spells to detect the presence of creatures, see through illusions, and have other embedded Divination powers due to a badly described targeting system.]

I think Xanathar's Guide may have addressed this topic, but I can't remember exactly what it said (my books are a few thousand miles away from me at the moment).

Xanathar's has addressed this. Invalid targets shoe no perceptible effect occurring to them. If the caster thought the caster was valid, the target would seem to succeed the saving throw. So blindly targeting things until they hit isn't a viable strategy. That said, you still need to target something for the spell to actually cast.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So Xanathar's didn't actually address the specifics it seems.

Really though it comes down to a choice: Do I want these spells to detect the presence and type of creatures, illusions, etc?

If the answer is no, I recommend allowing the caster to target something they think is there or believe to be valid. If the target is in fact not there, or in fact not valid, the spell still goes off (the fire bolt strikes the illusion or flies towards the creature you thought was invisible), it just doesn't have any mechanical effect. If you shoot a ray of frost at an object (not a valid target, because it's a creature only spell), it still strikes the object, it just has negligible effect. Really, Jeremy Crawford ought to put that in Sage Advice.