Bigby's/Arcane Defense Confusion

[Gildren]

Forgive me if if this question has been asked and answered.

In attempting to look at a rebuild that might survive the amazing (and imho unbalanced) power of Bigby's to defeat any tank targeted I've noticed that the spell is listed as an Evocation (wiki) yet referred to as a Conjuration within the text (both wiki and Flailer's 8/7 change log post).
Joran's post (5-21-06) states that Bigby's is a summons within his description as to how the spell is intended to function, implying that the spells have changed over to the conjuration school as well.

Which is it guys? Does Bigby's now fall under Conjuration instead of Evocation (as per bioware original) and is thus amplified/resisted with feats based in Conjuration (aka spell foucs-conjuration, arcane defense-conjuration). Or is it due to Bioware scripting necessary to take those feats in Evocation.

My brain (pickled as often as it is) thinks it makes since that the whole Bigby's line should be a summons and thus under the school of Conjuration (considering the NS4 changes), but before I start selecting feats with a new toon, I'd really like to know if the Wiki listing of the spell under Evocation is in fact an "oops" and the line of spells is now in fact a Conjuration.

(Of course, I have a wizard/conjurer alt that would prefer that as well lol)

[Metis]

It is conjuration, so arcane defense conjuration will give you a +2 to save

[Gildren]

Thank you

[Binkyuk]

is it completely changed to conjuration, or just the spell focus that's changed? i'm wondering whether a rakshasa shape can now be bigbied (has immunity to evocation school).

[Death Dealer1]

its conjuration...

[PeregrineV]

So, similaryly, would a target of the Bigby spell who was focused in Conjuration receive a bonus to thier save against the Bigby?

[Death Dealer1]

technically yes iirc. just remember it is treated as a physical summon that you can't hit now.