Quick question about the interactions of these spells.
Turn 1 cast Spiritual Weapon then attack. Turn 2 cast Invisibility. Can you have your Spiritual Weapon attack without breaking invisibility or would commanding it to attack break it?
I've seen a lot of back and forth on it and was wondering if there was a ruling on this yet?
I would say it does end it because spiritual weapon says “you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon.”. So by that wording I would say it does break invisibility since you are attacking. Hope this helps.
Yup - Invisibility breaks when you make an attack, including a spell attack. Spiritual weapon isn't a separate creature - you are the one making attacks with it.
Yup - Invisibility breaks when you make an attack, including a spell attack. Spiritual weapon isn't a separate creature - you are the one making attacks with it.
agree. it's counter-intuitive, but that's how it reads to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
You're invisible when you roll the attack so you will have advantage (unless it's cancelled by something else), it's only after the attack roll that the invisibility ends; the easy way to think of it is that until you have either hit or missed, no attack has taken place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Sorry I keep forgetting this is about Spiritual Weapon specifically so I should clarify:
Technically in the rules as written it doesn't matter if the weapon is visible but you are not; you are invisible therefore your attacks have advantage, and a Spiritual Weapon is just one of your attacks.
It can seem reasonable to assume that if the weapon is visible and you are not, then the attacker still sees the attack coming (as they would). However, in real swordsmanship you're not watching the weapon, you're watching your opponent, because their stance, a dropped shoulder, a rebalancing of their weight, a moved foot etc. are what give you clues about where they're going to strike next; if you wait until the weapon actually begins to move then your block is more likely to be too late.
Ultimately it's a DM call either way, but in the rules it doesn't matter that the weapon is visible.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Quick question about the interactions of these spells.
Turn 1 cast Spiritual Weapon then attack. Turn 2 cast Invisibility. Can you have your Spiritual Weapon attack without breaking invisibility or would commanding it to attack break it?
I've seen a lot of back and forth on it and was wondering if there was a ruling on this yet?
I would say it does end it because spiritual weapon says “you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon.”. So by that wording I would say it does break invisibility since you are attacking. Hope this helps.
Yup - Invisibility breaks when you make an attack, including a spell attack. Spiritual weapon isn't a separate creature - you are the one making attacks with it.
agree. it's counter-intuitive, but that's how it reads to me.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Thank you, everyone!
so does the weapon get advantage?
You're invisible when you roll the attack so you will have advantage (unless it's cancelled by something else), it's only after the attack roll that the invisibility ends; the easy way to think of it is that until you have either hit or missed, no attack has taken place.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
It was ruled the other day against a player the weapon isn't invisible so the weapons strike wasnt at advantage, that is why i was asking
Sorry I keep forgetting this is about Spiritual Weapon specifically so I should clarify:
Technically in the rules as written it doesn't matter if the weapon is visible but you are not; you are invisible therefore your attacks have advantage, and a Spiritual Weapon is just one of your attacks.
It can seem reasonable to assume that if the weapon is visible and you are not, then the attacker still sees the attack coming (as they would). However, in real swordsmanship you're not watching the weapon, you're watching your opponent, because their stance, a dropped shoulder, a rebalancing of their weight, a moved foot etc. are what give you clues about where they're going to strike next; if you wait until the weapon actually begins to move then your block is more likely to be too late.
Ultimately it's a DM call either way, but in the rules it doesn't matter that the weapon is visible.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.