Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Do the attacks from the Artillerist’s Eldritch Cannon count as spells for the purpose of Feats such as Spell Sniper, Elemental Adept or War Caster? They’re not described specifically as spells, but you can expend a spell slot to create the Cannon and you make a “ranged spell attack” with the Force Ballistic or provoke a saving throw against your spell save DC for the flamethrower. The PHB doesn’t seem to make it clear: the “What is a Spell?” section doesn’t provide a mechanically useful definition.
The first line of Spell Sniper specifically checks if you are casting a spell, so that's a "no" for the Eldritch Cannon. Now the second line, involving ignoring partial cover, only checks for "ranged spell attacks", so the Force Ballista does qualify. Elemental Adept and War Caster specifically check for casting, so they're both out.
Regarding what makes a spell, specifically, the key component is that you cast the spell, either via expending a spell slot or a feature that specifically includes the word "cast". If neither of these is in play, then whatever you're doing might be magical, but it is not, mechanically speaking, a true spell, and does not interact with features that specifically modify spells.
Addendum: I'm aware cantrips don't actually use a spell slot, but for the purposes of this definition just assume any character has unlimited level 0 slots.
Many thanks. That’s a pity but I thought it might be the case. Ignoring partial cover, if you wanted Spell Sniper anyway, is nice, at least
Just to complicate the analysis, you can summon the Cannon by expending a spell slot (after the once per long rest “free” use of the feature), so I don’t think expenditure of a spell slot is necessarily a defining feature of a Spell. (Does Divine Smite count as a Spell?). In fact, it seems that the only thing that defines an effect as a Spell is that it is presented in the standard format of a Spell. Probably…
As an aside, if you're using the Enhanced Arcane Focus Infusion, that also ignores half cover. That makes spell sniper a little more redundant as you can get more bang for your buck by getting additional cantrips with other feats.
Could argue that the arcane cannon itself is a spell as you can “expend a spell slot to magically create” the cannon you also don’t require any power source to operate the cannon so it’s safe to assume it draws its power from the artificer
remember flavoured text is used when defining the different rules of the artificer since they are not a full caster and operate their spells from mechanical means
I hope it's okay that I'm reviving (revivifying?) a dead post. But I had the same question as OP, as I am currently planing out my Artillerist level 3->4 transition. I'm using the newest 5.5e rules. I've heard lots of takes on this, mostly saying that the cannon cannot benefit from spell sniper because it isn't casting a spell.
My counterpoint is threefold:
I would argue that the cannon is basically an extension of the character, using a bonus action to make an extra spell attack.
Using a spell slot to fuel a feature is not necessarily the same thing as casting a spell, though. Yes, narratively you’re doing something magical, but mechanically you are only casting a spell if, well, you’re using one of the spell entries
Even if it doesn't work with the cannon, Spell Sniper is still a pretty good pick for an Artillerist.
- if you like to use True Strike (with, say, a Repeating Shot weapon), it'll let you use it without issue in melee range (maybe freeing up a cantrip).
- all your attack-roll spells (including True Strike) ignore half and 3/4 cover.
- many of your spells get a range increase (not True Strike, though)
- and of course you can boost INT
It probably beats out Elemental Adept for the best combat feat for Artillerist at level 4.
This is a good argument for a house rule, but the official rules are quite clear on what's a spell and what isn't, and what the cannon is doing isn't. There are lots of things that involve using magic and spell slots that aren't technically casting spells.
pronouns: he/she/they
Fair enough! As usual, it may come down to what my DM allows.
I'll still likely pick up spell sniper anyway, as I intend to stay back as much as possible and do most of my attacks with a repeating crossbow.
But Artificers, and in Artillerist in particular, do not use that kind of Arcane Focus. By Default we use tools (which can't get +x bonuses, and why the All-purpose Tool exists), and the sub-classes expand that with weapons/firearms/armor/etc.
Counter-Counter point, its a not spell... its a creature. It has a stat block, it has a position in initiative (same as yours), it explicitly states it takes the Dodge Action and uses it movement to avoid danger when not instructed otherwise, and it persists for a period after you die...... the vast majority of spells don't do that. And the few that do are so high level, we all agree that games rules are just a suggestion at that point.
I think you're thinking of the Battle Smith's Steel Defender. The Artillerist's little cannon is not a creature, does not have an Initiative count, and cannot take actions.
That said, you're right that it's not a spell, nor is it casting a spell when it fires.
pronouns: he/she/they