I play a cleric in a game, and I have a cleric in the game I DM. They pooped out their spiritual weapon in a combat and then ran out of the action zone, effectively wanting their spiritual weapon to attack and move independently of their directive.
I made the call that they could move the weapon closer - since I figure, there'd be some kind of spiritual tether or compass that works in that sense - but that unless they can SEE a target to hit, the spiritual weapon can't just move on its own towards something and hit it. We didn't get to a point where the weapon itself would have hit anyone, but I am sure a follow-up question would be whether the weapon can hit a target that the cleric did not see or know about.
I read the RAW narrowly: "As a Bonus Action on Your Turn, you can move the weapon up to 20 feet and repeat the Attack against a creature within 5 feet of it" as stating that YOU (the cleric) have to direct the movement and direct the attack, since it's the cleric's BA. My PC believes the weapon is more independent than that.
Anyone have insight on this? It's pertinent both for my DMing and also my own cleric-ing! I've played my cleric on the same assumption that I have to see a target to direct a weapon to attack it.
It's still very much the caster making the melee attack -- the target is just a creature within five feet of the spiritual weapon, not within five feet of the caster. As such, all the usual rules for melee attacks apply, and if the caster can't see the target the attack would be at disadvantage, just as if they were averting their eyes from a medusa or swinging away while blinded. Note that the spell explicitly doesn't say you have to be able to see the target to attack it:
When you cast the spell, you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon. On a hit, the target takes force damage equal to 1d8 + your spellcasting ability modifier.
In terms of moving the weapon around, they're free to send it anywhere within range -- but again, sending it into an area the caster can't see and just flailing around with it can have unexpected consequences ("OK, your spiritual weapon follows the henchman around the corner and into the room, but he exited out another door and you just bonked the hostage instead when you attacked.")
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Spiritual Weapon specifies that you are making the attack, and thus it uses your modifiers. Which includes visibility (it can be used to attack a target you cannot see, but has the normal penalties for attacking unseen targets). It can also trigger effects that are based on you making an attack, which has occasionally surprising effects (for example, if someone is standing next to the caster and has the sentinel feat, attacking with the weapon does trigger sentinel).
The weapon cannot hone in on targets on its own, the caster needs to know where a creature is in order to move the spiritual weapon next to it for the purposes of making an attack. Unless the creature has taken the Hide action and successfully hidden from the caster, the caster will know where the creature is.
If using Spiritual Weapon to attack a creature that the caster cannot see (but they know the location of said creature), they can attempt to hit the creature with the Spiritual Weapon with disadvantage on the attack roll.
So in a circumstance where the PC is 1) not on the map, and 2) cannot see anyone who is on the map because they are too far away, the spiritual weapon that they put there on the map can still function AND the cleric can still move it (even though they can't see the map, and so shouldn't know where to move it), and the weapon can still attack BUT it does so at disadvantage because the cleric isn't there.
It depends on how big "the map" is, but essentially, yes.
As long as the cleric is within range of the spell (which is 60 feet), they can direct it to move and attack. However, if they absolutely cannot see what is going on, they would have no idea where to move it to, or where the opponents are. Do keep in mind that the spiritual weapon needs to be within 5 feet of the target, and there is probably nothing preventing the target from walking away. If the cleric is lucky, and there is a target within 5 feet of the weapon, it can attack, altho with disadvantage.
So in a circumstance where the PC is 1) not on the map, and 2) cannot see anyone who is on the map because they are too far away, the spiritual weapon that they put there on the map can still function AND the cleric can still move it (even though they can't see the map, and so shouldn't know where to move it), and the weapon can still attack BUT it does so at disadvantage because the cleric isn't there.
Is this a correct understanding?
Depends on the DM. You are generally assumed to know the position of other combatants in a combat, but the DM can rule otherwise in unusual cases, and 'not actually in the combat' is a legit reason.
So in a circumstance where the PC is 1) not on the map, and 2) cannot see anyone who is on the map because they are too far away, the spiritual weapon that they put there on the map can still function AND the cleric can still move it (even though they can't see the map, and so shouldn't know where to move it), and the weapon can still attack BUT it does so at disadvantage because the cleric isn't there.
Is this a correct understanding?
Generally speaking, if a PC runs off the map during a combat and has no intention of returning, I remove them from the initiative order because they've chosen not to participate -- in which case, they wouldn't be able to attack anyone, using the spiritual weapon or otherwise
But yeah, if you want to rule they're just off the edge of the map and still taking part in the combat, then that would be how the weapon operates
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It depends on how big "the map" is, but essentially, yes.
As long as the cleric is within range of the spell (which is 60 feet), they can direct it to move and attack. However, if they absolutely cannot see what is going on, they would have no idea where to move it to, or where the opponents are. Do keep in mind that the spiritual weapon needs to be within 5 feet of the target, and there is probably nothing preventing the target from walking away. If the cleric is lucky, and there is a target within 5 feet of the weapon, it can attack, altho with disadvantage.
One clarification. The cleric only needs to be within range when the spell is cast. They can place the initial weapon within 60'. After that there are no range restrictions on using the bonus action to move and attack with the weapon.
"You create a floating, spectral weapon within range that lasts for the duration or until you cast this spell again. When you cast the spell, you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon. On a hit, the target takes force damage equal to ld8 + your spellcasting ability modifier. As a bonus action on your turn, you can move the weapon up to 20 feet and repeat the attack against a creature within 5 feet of it."
The bonus action and movement of the spectral weapon have no range constraint. The only range limitation is on initial placement.
As to the OPs question - most folks require the cleric to be able to see the target to move it and attack effectively. However, against a target that is not hidden, then RAW, the cleric knows where it is even if they can't see it and can move the spiritual weapon adjacent to the target and make an attack at disadvantage since they can't see it.
It depends on how big "the map" is, but essentially, yes.
As long as the cleric is within range of the spell (which is 60 feet), they can direct it to move and attack. However, if they absolutely cannot see what is going on, they would have no idea where to move it to, or where the opponents are. Do keep in mind that the spiritual weapon needs to be within 5 feet of the target, and there is probably nothing preventing the target from walking away. If the cleric is lucky, and there is a target within 5 feet of the weapon, it can attack, altho with disadvantage.
As to the OPs question - most folks require the cleric to be able to see the target to move it and attack effectively. However, against a target that is not hidden, then RAW, the cleric knows where it is even if they can't see it and can move the spiritual weapon adjacent to the target and make an attack at disadvantage since they can't see it.
Still seems odd to me that someone would be able to move the spiritual weapon they can no longer see AS IF they know where they can move it. Like right now my car is out on the street - I can't see it, I know where it is and what was around it when I parked, but I don't know if there are kids or other cars around now. So if I were to just say "I move my car up 20 feet" from inside my home, I have no idea what is in the way. Now if I were to say "I move my car towards a specific target to hit them" I actually wouldn't have the information I would need to move the car towards a target. Like I wouldn't know to move north, south, east, west, etc unless I can actually see where a target is to go to, let alone to command an attack.
Seems there's an assumption that the cleric doesn't run away from the fight, but my PCs have adopted the strategy of hit-and-run with baddies. So going forward, I think I'll have to say that the cleric can only move the spiritual weapon in a direction they can see OR move it towards them from wherever it is; if there is a baddie in 5 ft of it that then the spiritual weapon just "knows" to attack it, somehow.
Still seems odd to me that someone would be able to move the spiritual weapon they can no longer see AS IF they know where they can move it.
There are ways you can simulate this and create a 'fog of war' element to using the spiritual weapon -- covering up areas of a physical map or using VTT settings to black out areas of the map a character can't see. Then the cleric would just be sending the weapon into a void without really knowing who or what is in it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Still seems odd to me that someone would be able to move the spiritual weapon they can no longer see AS IF they know where they can move it.
It's an artifact of the assumption that you always know where opponents are. Simply capping the range at which you're assumed to know enemy locations (probably at 60-120', or maybe a multiple of passive perception) makes this pretty pointless (if you're using a VTT that enforces fog of war, you can just blind them and let them pick map squares to attack, for a physical map just send them out of the room and let them play the telephone game to decide where to attack).
As to the OPs question - most folks require the cleric to be able to see the target to move it and attack effectively. However, against a target that is not hidden, then RAW, the cleric knows where it is even if they can't see it and can move the spiritual weapon adjacent to the target and make an attack at disadvantage since they can't see it.
Can you help me identify where this is RAW? I had a quick scan through the Combat chapter and didn't find it.
For the more general case, if the cleric is standing around the corner (or further away, out of line of sight of the fight) then I would definitely not let the cleric move the spiritual weapon with knowledge of where potential enemies are located.
As to the OPs question - most folks require the cleric to be able to see the target to move it and attack effectively. However, against a target that is not hidden, then RAW, the cleric knows where it is even if they can't see it and can move the spiritual weapon adjacent to the target and make an attack at disadvantage since they can't see it.
Can you help me identify where this is RAW? I had a quick scan through the Combat chapter and didn't find it.
For the more general case, if the cleric is standing around the corner (or further away, out of line of sight of the fight) then I would definitely not let the cleric move the spiritual weapon with knowledge of where potential enemies are located.
You can make it as complex as you want, really -- have the cleric make a Perception role to see if they can determine from which direction the muttered spell is coming from so they can send their spiritual weapon after the enemy caster, that sort of thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see.
If you are hidden — both unseen and unheard — when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
The implication is that (a) being audible reveals your location, and (b) attacking is always audible. This is usually simplified as just assuming everyone knows the location of everyone who isn't hidden, though in principle silence should force guessing the location of invisible targets.
This is true whether you're guessing the target's location or you're targeting a creature you can hear but not see.
If you are hidden — both unseen and unheard — when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.
The implication is that (a) being audible reveals your location, and (b) attacking is always audible. This is usually simplified as just assuming everyone knows the location of everyone who isn't hidden, though in principle silence should force guessing the location of invisible targets.
The "simplified" statement can easily be adjudicated not to apply if you're physically not in the room and unable to see where ANY of the combatants are positioned, or where they've moved to. Your first bullet point covers "guessing the target's location".
The "simplified" statement can easily be adjudicated not to apply if you're physically not in the room and unable to see where ANY of the combatants are positioned, or where they've moved to. Your first bullet point covers "guessing the target's location".
Oh, I agree that it's totally legitimate to rule that it doesn't apply at long ranges, or through multiple walls, or in a variety of other complex situations; the intent is mostly that "I pick a square to swing at" shouldn't happen very much in ordinary game play, but attacking through walls, around corners, or at extreme ranges isn't really ordinary game play.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I play a cleric in a game, and I have a cleric in the game I DM. They pooped out their spiritual weapon in a combat and then ran out of the action zone, effectively wanting their spiritual weapon to attack and move independently of their directive.
I made the call that they could move the weapon closer - since I figure, there'd be some kind of spiritual tether or compass that works in that sense - but that unless they can SEE a target to hit, the spiritual weapon can't just move on its own towards something and hit it. We didn't get to a point where the weapon itself would have hit anyone, but I am sure a follow-up question would be whether the weapon can hit a target that the cleric did not see or know about.
I read the RAW narrowly: "As a Bonus Action on Your Turn, you can move the weapon up to 20 feet and repeat the Attack against a creature within 5 feet of it" as stating that YOU (the cleric) have to direct the movement and direct the attack, since it's the cleric's BA. My PC believes the weapon is more independent than that.
Anyone have insight on this? It's pertinent both for my DMing and also my own cleric-ing! I've played my cleric on the same assumption that I have to see a target to direct a weapon to attack it.
It's still very much the caster making the melee attack -- the target is just a creature within five feet of the spiritual weapon, not within five feet of the caster. As such, all the usual rules for melee attacks apply, and if the caster can't see the target the attack would be at disadvantage, just as if they were averting their eyes from a medusa or swinging away while blinded. Note that the spell explicitly doesn't say you have to be able to see the target to attack it:
In terms of moving the weapon around, they're free to send it anywhere within range -- but again, sending it into an area the caster can't see and just flailing around with it can have unexpected consequences ("OK, your spiritual weapon follows the henchman around the corner and into the room, but he exited out another door and you just bonked the hostage instead when you attacked.")
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Spiritual Weapon specifies that you are making the attack, and thus it uses your modifiers. Which includes visibility (it can be used to attack a target you cannot see, but has the normal penalties for attacking unseen targets). It can also trigger effects that are based on you making an attack, which has occasionally surprising effects (for example, if someone is standing next to the caster and has the sentinel feat, attacking with the weapon does trigger sentinel).
The weapon cannot hone in on targets on its own, the caster needs to know where a creature is in order to move the spiritual weapon next to it for the purposes of making an attack. Unless the creature has taken the Hide action and successfully hidden from the caster, the caster will know where the creature is.
If using Spiritual Weapon to attack a creature that the caster cannot see (but they know the location of said creature), they can attempt to hit the creature with the Spiritual Weapon with disadvantage on the attack roll.
So in a circumstance where the PC is 1) not on the map, and 2) cannot see anyone who is on the map because they are too far away, the spiritual weapon that they put there on the map can still function AND the cleric can still move it (even though they can't see the map, and so shouldn't know where to move it), and the weapon can still attack BUT it does so at disadvantage because the cleric isn't there.
Is this a correct understanding?
It depends on how big "the map" is, but essentially, yes.
As long as the cleric is within range of the spell (which is 60 feet), they can direct it to move and attack. However, if they absolutely cannot see what is going on, they would have no idea where to move it to, or where the opponents are. Do keep in mind that the spiritual weapon needs to be within 5 feet of the target, and there is probably nothing preventing the target from walking away.
If the cleric is lucky, and there is a target within 5 feet of the weapon, it can attack, altho with disadvantage.
Depends on the DM. You are generally assumed to know the position of other combatants in a combat, but the DM can rule otherwise in unusual cases, and 'not actually in the combat' is a legit reason.
Generally speaking, if a PC runs off the map during a combat and has no intention of returning, I remove them from the initiative order because they've chosen not to participate -- in which case, they wouldn't be able to attack anyone, using the spiritual weapon or otherwise
But yeah, if you want to rule they're just off the edge of the map and still taking part in the combat, then that would be how the weapon operates
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
One clarification. The cleric only needs to be within range when the spell is cast. They can place the initial weapon within 60'. After that there are no range restrictions on using the bonus action to move and attack with the weapon.
"You create a floating, spectral weapon within range that lasts for the duration or until you cast this spell again. When you cast the spell, you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon. On a hit, the target takes force damage equal to ld8 + your spellcasting ability modifier. As a bonus action on your turn, you can move the weapon up to 20 feet and repeat the attack against a creature within 5 feet of it."
The bonus action and movement of the spectral weapon have no range constraint. The only range limitation is on initial placement.
As to the OPs question - most folks require the cleric to be able to see the target to move it and attack effectively. However, against a target that is not hidden, then RAW, the cleric knows where it is even if they can't see it and can move the spiritual weapon adjacent to the target and make an attack at disadvantage since they can't see it.
Still seems odd to me that someone would be able to move the spiritual weapon they can no longer see AS IF they know where they can move it. Like right now my car is out on the street - I can't see it, I know where it is and what was around it when I parked, but I don't know if there are kids or other cars around now. So if I were to just say "I move my car up 20 feet" from inside my home, I have no idea what is in the way. Now if I were to say "I move my car towards a specific target to hit them" I actually wouldn't have the information I would need to move the car towards a target. Like I wouldn't know to move north, south, east, west, etc unless I can actually see where a target is to go to, let alone to command an attack.
Seems there's an assumption that the cleric doesn't run away from the fight, but my PCs have adopted the strategy of hit-and-run with baddies. So going forward, I think I'll have to say that the cleric can only move the spiritual weapon in a direction they can see OR move it towards them from wherever it is; if there is a baddie in 5 ft of it that then the spiritual weapon just "knows" to attack it, somehow.
There are ways you can simulate this and create a 'fog of war' element to using the spiritual weapon -- covering up areas of a physical map or using VTT settings to black out areas of the map a character can't see. Then the cleric would just be sending the weapon into a void without really knowing who or what is in it
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It's an artifact of the assumption that you always know where opponents are. Simply capping the range at which you're assumed to know enemy locations (probably at 60-120', or maybe a multiple of passive perception) makes this pretty pointless (if you're using a VTT that enforces fog of war, you can just blind them and let them pick map squares to attack, for a physical map just send them out of the room and let them play the telephone game to decide where to attack).
Can you help me identify where this is RAW? I had a quick scan through the Combat chapter and didn't find it.
For the more general case, if the cleric is standing around the corner (or further away, out of line of sight of the fight) then I would definitely not let the cleric move the spiritual weapon with knowledge of where potential enemies are located.
You can make it as complex as you want, really -- have the cleric make a Perception role to see if they can determine from which direction the muttered spell is coming from so they can send their spiritual weapon after the enemy caster, that sort of thing.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
In Unseen Attackers and Targets, two key statements:
The implication is that (a) being audible reveals your location, and (b) attacking is always audible. This is usually simplified as just assuming everyone knows the location of everyone who isn't hidden, though in principle silence should force guessing the location of invisible targets.
The "simplified" statement can easily be adjudicated not to apply if you're physically not in the room and unable to see where ANY of the combatants are positioned, or where they've moved to. Your first bullet point covers "guessing the target's location".
Oh, I agree that it's totally legitimate to rule that it doesn't apply at long ranges, or through multiple walls, or in a variety of other complex situations; the intent is mostly that "I pick a square to swing at" shouldn't happen very much in ordinary game play, but attacking through walls, around corners, or at extreme ranges isn't really ordinary game play.