I think this is going completely off rails. 😄 The important bit is that spell attacks use the spellcasting ability. So Primal Savagery is designed to give spellcasters a melee range attack without investing heavily in Str or Dex. Of course in this case you don't get a damage bonus either and can't use multiattack because you used your action casting a spell.
It becomes an entirely different kind of spell if it turns your hands into weapons and deals weapon damage when you make a melee weapon attack using a physical ability.
It still says melee SPELL attack though does it not? So while it may not be a named spell it is still a magical attack. Otherwise it would simply have been called a melee attack.
You know how unarmed strikes are considered WEAPON attacks, but are not weapons? Same concept.
It seems like you are correct. I'm also confused, because they are melee weapon attacks but not weapons like you said. Which is a very misleading wording IMO. 😅 But the Smite thing still stands according to Sage Advice.
You know how unarmed strikes are considered WEAPON attacks, but are not weapons? Same concept.
It seems like you are correct. I'm also confused, because they are melee weapon attacks but not weapons like you said. Which is a very misleading wording IMO. 😅 But the Smite thing still stands according to Sage Advice.
Weapon attack and spell attack basically just note if the attack is magic or not. I agree it is needlessly confusing considering weapons and spells are completely separate rules (there are even spells that make weapon attack...).
Next question then, if you multiclass and you gain an extra attack feature within that class can you do the following? Make a melee attack with your weapon, and then on the second attack do the primal savagery attack after on the second attack. Also, does the first attack need to be a melee attack or can it be the primal savagery then a melee weapon attack? Or can you go primal savagery on the first and second attack given that the spell is a cantrip?
I took a look at the spell casting section briefly from the PHB online and it does not say anything aside from being limited to casting 1 spell per round. This only applies with concentration spells, and if you cast another spell then the one you are concentrating on ends. However, I am not sure if this was a house rule from a table I played at but the DM allowed spell casters to cast a cantrip and still maintain their concentration. But, the PHB says Casting another spell that requires concentration. You lose concentration on a spell if you cast another spell that requires concentration. You can't concentrate on two spells at once. So you can cast any spell that is an instantaneous cast from any level by this wording. If the spell has a longer casting time from my perspective then you are concentrating to a small degree to cast the spell with the longer casting time thus interrupting your current concentration spell.
Casting the cantrip takes a full action. You can only make a second attack with the Extra Attack feature if you take the Attack Action. Primal savagery doesn't use the Attack action, so you don't get multiattack.
A few ways to do this:
Bladesinger Extra attack has a special feature that allows you to use a cantrip in place of one of these attacks.
Sorcerer can Quicken the cantrip and cast it as a bonus action, allowing you to use your action for Attack.
A fighter can use Action Surge to get a whole new Action. So you can first use a cantrip and use action surge for an Attack action.
Next question then, if you multiclass and you gain an extra attack feature within that class can you do the following? [Snip]
No. Primal savagery is a spell with a casting time of 1 action. If you use your action to take the attack action (which extra attack requires) then you can't use that action for primal savagery. The exception is bladesinger's extra attack (it is special).
I took a look at the spell casting section briefly from the PHB online and it does not say anything aside from being limited to casting 1 spell per round. This only applies with concentration spells, and if you cast another spell then the one you are concentrating on ends. [Snip]
What is your opinions on this?
I think you are misunderstanding concentration. Concentration is a special property of spell duration that some (but not all) spells that last longer than a moment have. You only have to concentrate to cast non-concentration spells if they have a casting time longer than an action or you are readying them.
Your last sentence is worded a little odd to me. Are you saying that if I have a concentration spell up (fly for example) and I choose to cast a spell that has a casting time of 1 action it disrupts my concentration spell and I fall out of the sky, or if its casting time is 1 action it does not interrupt my concentration spell (fly in this example)?
Your last sentence is worded a little odd to me. Are you saying that if I have a concentration spell up (fly for example) and I choose to cast a spell that has a casting time of 1 action it disrupts my concentration spell and I fall out of the sky, or if its casting time is 1 action it does not interrupt my concentration spell (fly in this example)?
1 action is not longer than 1 action, so no it doesn't use concentration. A spell with a casting time of 1 minute for example requires you to concentrate for that 1 minute.
I think this is going completely off rails. 😄 The important bit is that spell attacks use the spellcasting ability. So Primal Savagery is designed to give spellcasters a melee range attack without investing heavily in Str or Dex. Of course in this case you don't get a damage bonus either and can't use multiattack because you used your action casting a spell.
It becomes an entirely different kind of spell if it turns your hands into weapons and deals weapon damage when you make a melee weapon attack using a physical ability.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
It still says melee SPELL attack though does it not? So while it may not be a named spell it is still a magical attack. Otherwise it would simply have been called a melee attack.
You know how unarmed strikes are considered WEAPON attacks, but are not weapons? Same concept.
Are you sure? I think unarmed strikes are not weapon attacks by default. Which means that you cannot Smite with unarmed attacks.
However, some species have a feature that defines their, for example claws, as Natural Weapons = you can use smite etc.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
It seems like you are correct. I'm also confused, because they are melee weapon attacks but not weapons like you said. Which is a very misleading wording IMO. 😅 But the Smite thing still stands according to Sage Advice.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
Weapon attack and spell attack basically just note if the attack is magic or not. I agree it is needlessly confusing considering weapons and spells are completely separate rules (there are even spells that make weapon attack...).
Next question then, if you multiclass and you gain an extra attack feature within that class can you do the following? Make a melee attack with your weapon, and then on the second attack do the primal savagery attack after on the second attack. Also, does the first attack need to be a melee attack or can it be the primal savagery then a melee weapon attack? Or can you go primal savagery on the first and second attack given that the spell is a cantrip?
I took a look at the spell casting section briefly from the PHB online and it does not say anything aside from being limited to casting 1 spell per round. This only applies with concentration spells, and if you cast another spell then the one you are concentrating on ends. However, I am not sure if this was a house rule from a table I played at but the DM allowed spell casters to cast a cantrip and still maintain their concentration. But, the PHB says Casting another spell that requires concentration. You lose concentration on a spell if you cast another spell that requires concentration. You can't concentrate on two spells at once. So you can cast any spell that is an instantaneous cast from any level by this wording. If the spell has a longer casting time from my perspective then you are concentrating to a small degree to cast the spell with the longer casting time thus interrupting your current concentration spell.
What is your opinions on this?
Casting the cantrip takes a full action. You can only make a second attack with the Extra Attack feature if you take the Attack Action. Primal savagery doesn't use the Attack action, so you don't get multiattack.
A few ways to do this:
Bladesinger Extra attack has a special feature that allows you to use a cantrip in place of one of these attacks.
Sorcerer can Quicken the cantrip and cast it as a bonus action, allowing you to use your action for Attack.
A fighter can use Action Surge to get a whole new Action. So you can first use a cantrip and use action surge for an Attack action.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
No. Primal savagery is a spell with a casting time of 1 action. If you use your action to take the attack action (which extra attack requires) then you can't use that action for primal savagery. The exception is bladesinger's extra attack (it is special).
I think you are misunderstanding concentration. Concentration is a special property of spell duration that some (but not all) spells that last longer than a moment have. You only have to concentrate to cast non-concentration spells if they have a casting time longer than an action or you are readying them.
Your last sentence is worded a little odd to me. Are you saying that if I have a concentration spell up (fly for example) and I choose to cast a spell that has a casting time of 1 action it disrupts my concentration spell and I fall out of the sky, or if its casting time is 1 action it does not interrupt my concentration spell (fly in this example)?
1 action is not longer than 1 action, so no it doesn't use concentration. A spell with a casting time of 1 minute for example requires you to concentrate for that 1 minute.
Which is what I had assumed. Thanks for the response.