Suppose I am fighting a Tempest Cleric. I am standing right next to the Tempest Cleric and use Spiritual Weapon (currently located on the other side of the Tempest Cleric) which hits the cleric. Does the Tempest Cleric get to use the thunderous rebuke against me, even though the damage originated from the Spiritual Weapon?
Awesome question. I guess the answer may be debateable.
I'm tempted to argue no on the basis that "..When you cast the [SW] spell, you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon" which indicates the attack coming from the weapon.
But this is cleric vs cleric or paladin and the Wrath of the Storm feature words it that "... you can thunderously rebuke attackers". Perhaps the feature could work out the true source of the problem. I don't know.
Suppose I am fighting a Tempest Cleric. I am standing right next to the Tempest Cleric and use Spiritual Weapon (currently located on the other side of the Tempest Cleric) which hits the cleric. Does the Tempest Cleric get to use the thunderous rebuke against me, even though the damage originated from the Spiritual Weapon?
Wrath of the Storm would be used againt you since you're within 5 feet of the Cleric and made an attack that hit it.
That is what I initially thought as well, until my player pointed out that his making the melee spell attack actually caused the Spiritual Weapon to hit it.
I could see his point. If I punch someone with my fists, I would say I hit them. If I strike someone with a sword I am wielding, I would say I hit them. But if I command a Spiritual Weapon floating around to hit someone, that is not me hitting them, that is the Weapon hitting him, even though I make the attack roll.
The rules don't specifically define what it means to "hit" someone, so common use of the word would tend to favor his view.
Wrath of the Storm
When a creature within 5 feet of you that you can see hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to cause the creature to make a Dexterity saving throw.
Edit: Ah never mind, you are right. It was under Attack Rolls.
Attack Rolls
When you make an attack, your attack roll determines whether the attack hits or misses. To make an attack roll, roll a d20 and add the appropriate modifiers. If the total of the roll plus modifiers equals or exceeds the target's Armor Class (AC), the attack hits.
Suppose I am fighting a Tempest Cleric. I am standing right next to the Tempest Cleric and use Spiritual Weapon (currently located on the other side of the Tempest Cleric) which hits the cleric. Does the Tempest Cleric get to use the thunderous rebuke against me, even though the damage originated from the Spiritual Weapon?
Awesome question. I guess the answer may be debateable.
I'm tempted to argue no on the basis that "..When you cast the [SW] spell, you can make a melee spell attack against a creature within 5 feet of the weapon" which indicates the attack coming from the weapon.
But this is cleric vs cleric or paladin and the Wrath of the Storm feature words it that "... you can thunderously rebuke attackers". Perhaps the feature could work out the true source of the problem. I don't know.
Wrath of the Storm would be used againt you since you're within 5 feet of the Cleric and made an attack that hit it.
That is what I initially thought as well, until my player pointed out that his making the melee spell attack actually caused the Spiritual Weapon to hit it.
I could see his point. If I punch someone with my fists, I would say I hit them. If I strike someone with a sword I am wielding, I would say I hit them. But if I command a Spiritual Weapon floating around to hit someone, that is not me hitting them, that is the Weapon hitting him, even though I make the attack roll.
The rules don't specifically define what it means to "hit" someone, so common use of the word would tend to favor his view.
Edit: Ah never mind, you are right. It was under Attack Rolls.
Yea, "you" are still the one making the attack so you can get tagged by Wrath of the Storm.