In chill touch, the spell describes creating a hand, then making an attack, then a hit with that attack resulting in the hand gripping the target for the next round. That’s enough for me to connect the dots that the hand trying to grab the target IS the attack, and I do not see a plausible alternative that would make any sense (like a second undescribed beam or projectile from the caster, that someone mentioned a few pages ago). Do you disagree that that’s the most common sense way to read the spell description?
This is a very poorly worded spell. The spell description tells us that you create the hand in a chosen point in space (the spell's target). As long as that point is not behind total cover, the spell effect resolves without issue. The caster proceeds to make a ranged spell attack without disadvantage as the enemy is not within 5 feet of the caster. I agree with Chicken_Champ.
However, I am very much in doubt about the actual intent of the spell. If my interpretation is correct, it would have been much more accurate to label the spell as a melee spell attack with range of 120 feet, much like Spiritual Weapon.
I’d prefer if it was a melee spell attack too, don’t get me wrong. But close-range-ranged-attacks (like a net) are totally a thing. If you’re in the same space was a tiny or a huge creature, and fire a Fire Bolt, you’re making a 0-range ranged spell attack at your target; distance is not what defines a melee attack or ranged attack, sometimes it really is just an arbitrary label defined by the spell.
I’d prefer if it was a melee spell attack too, don’t get me wrong. But close-range-ranged-attacks (like a net) are totally a thing. If you’re in the same space was a tiny or a huge creature, and fire a Fire Bolt, you’re making a 0-range ranged spell attack at your target; distance is not what defines a melee attack or ranged attack, sometimes it really is just an arbitrary label defined by the spell.
I know close-range-ranged-attacks are a thing, but this spell is described more like a long-range-melee-attack with the opposite mechanics label. It's very rare that I find a single spell so self-contradictory.
As for what the defining factor is for "melee attacks" and "ranged attacks", I'd say it's "optimal range". What do you believe defines them?
Regarding the Net, it has the Special property which in itself constitutes a specific rule. In the case of Chill Touch there is no specific rule that overrides the general rule of disadvantage when using a ranged weapon with an enemy within 5 feet. Not that it matters in this case as the caster is the character, not the skeletal hand.
There, again, is no general rule that a range attack at a target 5 or less feet away has disadvantage. Feel free to point blank an archery target or a blind or incapacitated enemy, no disadvantage. Disadvantage on ranged attacks (against ANY target, even distant ones) will accrue if you make that attack while an enemy is within 5 feet and can see you.
“you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn't incapacitated.”
Paraphrasing can obfuscate rules, and cause you to make assumptions and extrapolations on faulty premises.
The hand is not “you,” it is an unthinking invulnerable magical force. There is no enemy standing next to “you” when the hand attacks a creature in its square while you’re across the room. I’m not cherry picking.
Dimension Door absolutely ignores cover. If you care to read the spell text, you'll find targeting information that specifically overrides the general "clear path to target" rule: "It can be a place you can see, one you can visualize, or one you can describe by stating distance and direction, such as '200 feet straight downward' or 'upward to the northwest at a 45- degree angle, 300 feet.'"
No, the rules you just provided mean you don't need to be able to see the target. Nothing in the rules text, including the part you quoted, lets the spell ignore total cover, which is not a function of sight:
"A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle."
So, yes, of course you can cast Dimension Door and teleport to your location while blinded and deafened. The rules text you just provided says so. But the rules also say Dimension Door can't target a space behind total cover, and nothing in the spell's text overrides this.
Dimension door doesn't target a creature or object therefore the cover rules are not applicable.
The first paragraph of the spell description for Dimension Door specifies the only limitation to Dimension door is that it must be in range and a location that you can see, visualize, or describe with distance/direction. The Cover rule does not apply.
Chill Touch is a ranged spell attack, the Cover rule applies.
The hand is not “you,” it is an unthinking invulnerable magical force. There is no enemy standing next to “you” when the hand attacks a creature in its square while you’re across the room. I’m not cherry picking.
Why are you assuming the hand is making the attack at all? the first two sentences are practically nonsequitur. Only the first and last mention the hand, and only the middle two contain the "traditional" spell mechanical info.
"You create a ghostly, skeletal hand in the space of a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the creature to assail it with the chill of the grave. On a hit, the target takes 1d8 necrotic damage, and it can't regain hit points until the start of your next turn. Until then, the hand clings to the target."
I'd argue that it's already a pretty big reach to assume the hand "makes the attack" as a separate entity. The language just doesn't support it without inferring a lot of extra text that isn't there, as there is no mention of the hand striking, squeezing, or even touching the target prior to the attack mechanics resolving. Contrast to Arcane Hand's conjuring and attack sections:
"You create a Large hand of shimmering, translucent force in an unoccupied space that you can see within range."
"The hand strikes one creature or object within 5 feet of it. Make a melee spell attack for the hand using your game statistics. On a hit, the target takes 4d8 force damage"
The difference is pretty plain. Both involve conjuring a hand using very similar language (excepting how you choose a targeted space), but only one specifically calls out the hand as making the attack and adjudicates how that attack is resolved (using your game stats), and it's not Chill Touch.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
The most valid argument against this process of thought (besides the fact that the description makes the spell seemingly more complicated than what should be the intent), is that the Point of Origin rules are under the Areas of Effect section, and can therefore be argued to be general rules within that category of spells only.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
In the quote you provided JC simply states that ranged spell attacks are subject to cover. This simply means that the cover rules apply. After all if a creature is behind Total Cover you have no LoS and therefore cannot target the square of the enemy.
Are you attacking? If so there is cover between you and the target and it applies, even if only by way of partially blocking your ability to guide the attack.
Is the hand attacking instead? If so, there is no cover but the attacker is within 5' of the enemy.
you need to stop paraphrasing. There is no rule about cover providing bonuses when between “you” and an enemy. It provides bonuses when between an effect/attack and a target.
”A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.”
”You” are your character, in square A. You are attacking from square B, using the hand, to square B. is there cover between B and B? If yes, cover penalty (unlikely), if no, no penalty. Is there an enemy within 5 of A? If yes, disadvantage, if no, no disadvantage.
Were going around in circles, because you are clinging to misunderstandings about how cover works and how ranged attack penalties work. Putting aside Chill Touch, you’ve gotten both of those rules wrong, please read them closer.
The most valid argument against this process of thought (besides the fact that the description makes the spell seemingly more complicated than what should be the intent), is that the Point of Origin rules are under the Areas of Effect section, and can therefore be argued to be general rules within that category of spells only.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
In the quote you provided JC simply states that ranged spell attacks are subject to cover. This simply means that the cover rules apply. After all if a creature is behind Total Cover you have no LoS and therefore cannot target the square of the enemy.
- if total cover between caster and effect poo, poo lands on near side instead
- if total cover between poo and target, no attack/no effect
- if half/three quarter cover between poo and target, AC/save bonuses
WE ARE NOT DISPUTING THAT ALLLLLLLLL OF THAT APPLIES TO CHILL TOUCH. We are simply refusing to recognize an additional unwritten bullet that says “if half/three quarter cover between caster/attacker and target (but NOT between poo and target), still ac/save bonuses.”
That is new unwritten rules you won’t find in the PHB. If you and JCs position is that that’s a real rule, the burden is on you to quote a section that shows it.
The most valid argument against this process of thought (besides the fact that the description makes the spell seemingly more complicated than what should be the intent), is that the Point of Origin rules are under the Areas of Effect section, and can therefore be argued to be general rules within that category of spells only.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
In the quote you provided JC simply states that ranged spell attacks are subject to cover. This simply means that the cover rules apply. After all if a creature is behind Total Cover you have no LoS and therefore cannot target the square of the enemy.
....and they would get cover bonus to AC
+2 for half cover +5 for 3/4 cover
Yes they would get the appropriate cover bonus to AC if there was an obstacle between the PoO and the target. In the case we're discussing, beautifully illustrated above, there is none.
- if total cover between caster and effect poo, poo lands on near side instead
- if total cover between poo and target, no attack/no effect
- if half/three quarter cover between poo and target, AC/save bonuses
WE ARE NOT DISPUTING THAT ALLLLLLLLL OF THAT APPLIES TO CHILL TOUCH. We are simply refusing to recognize an additional unwritten bullet that says “if half/three quarter cover between caster/attacker and target (but NOT between poo and target), still ac/save bonuses.”
That is new unwritten rules you won’t find in the PHB. If you and JCs position is that that’s a real rule, the burden is on you to quote a section that shows it.
Skelly fist comes from you so its ranged attack and if there is cover between you and creature cover applies as stated in the cover rules.
RAW and RAI are clear its supposed to be a ranged attack coming from you so cover applies....thats why JC is confident saying such.
If you want to play the fact that you have to make a ranged attack then you would have to accept it does so at DIS as you are saying the skeleton is doing the ranged attack or you accept the fact it comes from you but has cover...it can't exist either way.
Spiritual weapon is a melee spell attack and thus one would argue that is intended to be ignoring cover potentially.
The most valid argument against this process of thought (besides the fact that the description makes the spell seemingly more complicated than what should be the intent), is that the Point of Origin rules are under the Areas of Effect section, and can therefore be argued to be general rules within that category of spells only.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
In the quote you provided JC simply states that ranged spell attacks are subject to cover. This simply means that the cover rules apply. After all if a creature is behind Total Cover you have no LoS and therefore cannot target the square of the enemy.
....and they would get cover bonus to AC
+2 for half cover +5 for 3/4 cover
Yes they would get the appropriate cover bonus to AC if there was an obstacle between the PoO and the target. In the case we're discussing, beautifully illustrated above, there is none.
Point of origin is you....that is the intent JC is stating. Othewise you are saying the hand is attacking the creature and thus would make the attack at DIS as its within 5ft
Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.
There are three degrees of cover. If a target is behind multiple sources of cover, only the most protective degree of cover applies; the degrees aren't added together. For example, if a target is behind a creature that gives half cover and a tree trunk that gives three-quarters cover, the target has three-quarters cover.
Half Cover
A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend.
Three-Quarters Cover
A target with three-quarters cover has a +5 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk.
Total Cover
A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In chill touch, the spell describes creating a hand, then making an attack, then a hit with that attack resulting in the hand gripping the target for the next round. That’s enough for me to connect the dots that the hand trying to grab the target IS the attack, and I do not see a plausible alternative that would make any sense (like a second undescribed beam or projectile from the caster, that someone mentioned a few pages ago). Do you disagree that that’s the most common sense way to read the spell description?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Neither does fire bolt say the mote of flame you throw is specifically the fire bolt, but it'd be silly to assume otherwise.
The hand is the point of the attack, even though the caster makes the attack, as happens with aoe spells.
What makes you think the hand isn’t the projectile, as with the mote of fire?
The spell description says the hand is created in the creature’s space. There is no projectile action happening.
even if we want to say the hand is fluff... the “chill of the grave” isn’t described as some form of projectile either.
This is a very poorly worded spell.
The spell description tells us that you create the hand in a chosen point in space (the spell's target). As long as that point is not behind total cover, the spell effect resolves without issue. The caster proceeds to make a ranged spell attack without disadvantage as the enemy is not within 5 feet of the caster. I agree with Chicken_Champ.
However, I am very much in doubt about the actual intent of the spell. If my interpretation is correct, it would have been much more accurate to label the spell as a melee spell attack with range of 120 feet, much like Spiritual Weapon.
I’d prefer if it was a melee spell attack too, don’t get me wrong. But close-range-ranged-attacks (like a net) are totally a thing. If you’re in the same space was a tiny or a huge creature, and fire a Fire Bolt, you’re making a 0-range ranged spell attack at your target; distance is not what defines a melee attack or ranged attack, sometimes it really is just an arbitrary label defined by the spell.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I know close-range-ranged-attacks are a thing, but this spell is described more like a long-range-melee-attack with the opposite mechanics label. It's very rare that I find a single spell so self-contradictory.
As for what the defining factor is for "melee attacks" and "ranged attacks", I'd say it's "optimal range". What do you believe defines them?
Regarding the Net, it has the Special property which in itself constitutes a specific rule. In the case of Chill Touch there is no specific rule that overrides the general rule of disadvantage when using a ranged weapon with an enemy within 5 feet. Not that it matters in this case as the caster is the character, not the skeletal hand.
There, again, is no general rule that a range attack at a target 5 or less feet away has disadvantage. Feel free to point blank an archery target or a blind or incapacitated enemy, no disadvantage. Disadvantage on ranged attacks (against ANY target, even distant ones) will accrue if you make that attack while an enemy is within 5 feet and can see you.
“you have disadvantage on the attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature who can see you and who isn't incapacitated.”
Paraphrasing can obfuscate rules, and cause you to make assumptions and extrapolations on faulty premises.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The hand is not “you,” it is an unthinking invulnerable magical force. There is no enemy standing next to “you” when the hand attacks a creature in its square while you’re across the room. I’m not cherry picking.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Dimension door doesn't target a creature or object therefore the cover rules are not applicable.
https://twitter.com/armando_doval/status/915644941811974145
The first paragraph of the spell description for Dimension Door specifies the only limitation to Dimension door is that it must be in range and a location that you can see, visualize, or describe with distance/direction. The Cover rule does not apply.
Chill Touch is a ranged spell attack, the Cover rule applies.
Why are you assuming the hand is making the attack at all? the first two sentences are practically nonsequitur. Only the first and last mention the hand, and only the middle two contain the "traditional" spell mechanical info.
"You create a ghostly, skeletal hand in the space of a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the creature to assail it with the chill of the grave. On a hit, the target takes 1d8 necrotic damage, and it can't regain hit points until the start of your next turn. Until then, the hand clings to the target."
I'd argue that it's already a pretty big reach to assume the hand "makes the attack" as a separate entity. The language just doesn't support it without inferring a lot of extra text that isn't there, as there is no mention of the hand striking, squeezing, or even touching the target prior to the attack mechanics resolving. Contrast to Arcane Hand's conjuring and attack sections:
"You create a Large hand of shimmering, translucent force in an unoccupied space that you can see within range."
"The hand strikes one creature or object within 5 feet of it. Make a melee spell attack for the hand using your game statistics. On a hit, the target takes 4d8 force damage"
The difference is pretty plain. Both involve conjuring a hand using very similar language (excepting how you choose a targeted space), but only one specifically calls out the hand as making the attack and adjudicates how that attack is resolved (using your game stats), and it's not Chill Touch.
JC weighted in and the RAW is cover is intended for ANY ranged spell attack so there we are from a RAW perspective....
DMs can do what you want but I think is a little odd personally to also allow the cantrip to ignore cover...it already has two great riders (No heal and Undead disadvantage attack) and a third would make it a bit too much in my opinion
I made a thing!
The most valid argument against this process of thought (besides the fact that the description makes the spell seemingly more complicated than what should be the intent), is that the Point of Origin rules are under the Areas of Effect section, and can therefore be argued to be general rules within that category of spells only.
In the quote you provided JC simply states that ranged spell attacks are subject to cover. This simply means that the cover rules apply. After all if a creature is behind Total Cover you have no LoS and therefore cannot target the square of the enemy.
you need to stop paraphrasing. There is no rule about cover providing bonuses when between “you” and an enemy. It provides bonuses when between an effect/attack and a target.
”A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.”
”You” are your character, in square A. You are attacking from square B, using the hand, to square B. is there cover between B and B? If yes, cover penalty (unlikely), if no, no penalty. Is there an enemy within 5 of A? If yes, disadvantage, if no, no disadvantage.
Were going around in circles, because you are clinging to misunderstandings about how cover works and how ranged attack penalties work. Putting aside Chill Touch, you’ve gotten both of those rules wrong, please read them closer.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
....and they would get cover bonus to AC
+2 for half cover
+5 for 3/4 cover
The cover rules are:
- if total cover between caster and effect poo, poo lands on near side instead
- if total cover between poo and target, no attack/no effect
- if half/three quarter cover between poo and target, AC/save bonuses
WE ARE NOT DISPUTING THAT ALLLLLLLLL OF THAT APPLIES TO CHILL TOUCH. We are simply refusing to recognize an additional unwritten bullet that says “if half/three quarter cover between caster/attacker and target (but NOT between poo and target), still ac/save bonuses.”
That is new unwritten rules you won’t find in the PHB. If you and JCs position is that that’s a real rule, the burden is on you to quote a section that shows it.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yes they would get the appropriate cover bonus to AC if there was an obstacle between the PoO and the target. In the case we're discussing, beautifully illustrated above, there is none.
Skelly fist comes from you so its ranged attack and if there is cover between you and creature cover applies as stated in the cover rules.
RAW and RAI are clear its supposed to be a ranged attack coming from you so cover applies....thats why JC is confident saying such.
If you want to play the fact that you have to make a ranged attack then you would have to accept it does so at DIS as you are saying the skeleton is doing the ranged attack or you accept the fact it comes from you but has cover...it can't exist either way.
Spiritual weapon is a melee spell attack and thus one would argue that is intended to be ignoring cover potentially.
Point of origin is you....that is the intent JC is stating. Othewise you are saying the hand is attacking the creature and thus would make the attack at DIS as its within 5ft
Cover
Walls, trees, creatures, and other obstacles can provide cover during combat, making a target more difficult to harm. A target can benefit from cover only when an attack or other effect originates on the opposite side of the cover.
There are three degrees of cover. If a target is behind multiple sources of cover, only the most protective degree of cover applies; the degrees aren't added together. For example, if a target is behind a creature that gives half cover and a tree trunk that gives three-quarters cover, the target has three-quarters cover.
Half Cover
A target with half cover has a +2 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be a low wall, a large piece of furniture, a narrow tree trunk, or a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend.
Three-Quarters Cover
A target with three-quarters cover has a +5 bonus to AC and Dexterity saving throws. A target has three-quarters cover if about three-quarters of it is covered by an obstacle. The obstacle might be a portcullis, an arrow slit, or a thick tree trunk.
Total Cover
A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle