SAC makes clear that an attack with a weapon is a weapon attack.
Is Magic Stone a weapon attack? No.
Nor is Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet. If the feat wanted it to be, like in 2nd bullet, it would have said so. It instead say a an attack with a ranged weapon, which may be different.
No SAC defines the opposite, a ranged weapon attack is an attack with a ranged weapon. Other attack can be as this exemple shows.
Is magic stone an attack? Yes its a ranged spell attack
Is it an attack with a ranged weapon? Yes the magic stone pebble is hurled with a sling.
Bonus question
Is this confirmed by a Dev? Yes "@JeremyECrawford An attack made with magic stone is a spell attack, even if you hurl the stone with a sling. The attack doesn't qualify for anything that requires a weapon attack, but it does work with a feature that requires a ranged weapon if you use a sling."
No since chromatic orb doesn't say it make ranged spell attack with a weapon.
Neither does magic stone. It explicitly says you are making a ranged spell attack with a pebble
If you think adding an unnecessary sling to that process somehow turns the pebble into a legal ranged weapon, then why can't people add a different unnecessary ranged weapon to the process for other spells that make ranged spell attacks?
As written, magic stone is a ranged spell attack hurled with a sling.
It absolutely is not. The text is right there, man
You touch one to three pebbles and imbue them with magic. You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling.
The spell offers you different means for making that ranged spell attack with a pebble, but it unquestionably tells you to make a ranged spell attack with a pebble, and a pebble is not a ranged weapon
If you were making a ranged spell attack with a sling, your skill with a sling would be a factor. It's not. It's completely irrelevant
You say that, and yet your skill with a pebble is also completely irrelevant. That point is moot.
You can make an attack with more than one thing. It's not like anybody has ever made an attack with both a pebble and a sling before. Here, take a look at this proof that I already posted.
This is the pertinent sentence: "You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling."
Let's cut down the irrelevant parts: "a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by hurling it with a sling."
A sling is a weapon. Therefore: "a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by hurling it with a ranged weapon."
Hurling with something is undeniably using said something. Therefore: "a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by using it with a ranged weapon."
"To do x by using y" can be grammatically replaced with "to do x with y." Therefore: "a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles with a ranged weapon."
A ranged spell attack is a ranged attack. Therefore: "a ranged attack with one of the pebbles with a ranged weapon."
A ranged attack with a pebble is undeniably an attack. Therefore: "an attack with a ranged weapon"
An attack with a ranged weapon? That looks familiar. I wonder why...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
No since chromatic orb doesn't say it make ranged spell attack with a weapon.
Neither does magic stone. It explicitly says you are making a ranged spell attack with a pebble
If you think adding an unnecessary sling to that process somehow turns the pebble into a legal ranged weapon, then why can't people add a different unnecessary ranged weapon to the process for other spells that make ranged spell attacks?
As written, magic stone is a ranged spell attack hurled with a sling.
It absolutely is not. The text is right there, man
You touch one to three pebbles and imbue them with magic. You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling.
The spell offers you different means for making that ranged spell attack with a pebble, but it unquestionably tells you to make a ranged spell attack with a pebble, and a pebble is not a ranged weapon
If you were making a ranged spell attack with a sling, your skill with a sling would be a factor. It's not. It's completely irrelevant
You say that, and yet your skill with a pebble is also completely irrelevant. That point is moot.
So then you would agree you can't use Tavern Brawler with magic stone, since the enchanted pebble is also not being used as an improvised weapon
Cool. We're making some progress
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)
No since chromatic orb doesn't say it make ranged spell attack with a weapon.
Neither does magic stone. It explicitly says you are making a ranged spell attack with a pebble
If you think adding an unnecessary sling to that process somehow turns the pebble into a legal ranged weapon, then why can't people add a different unnecessary ranged weapon to the process for other spells that make ranged spell attacks?
As written, magic stone is a ranged spell attack hurled with a sling.
It absolutely is not. The text is right there, man
You touch one to three pebbles and imbue them with magic. You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling.
The spell offers you different means for making that ranged spell attack with a pebble, but it unquestionably tells you to make a ranged spell attack with a pebble, and a pebble is not a ranged weapon
If you were making a ranged spell attack with a sling, your skill with a sling would be a factor. It's not. It's completely irrelevant
You say that, and yet your skill with a pebble is also completely irrelevant. That point is moot.
So then you would agree you can't use Tavern Brawler with magic stone, since the enchanted pebble is also not being used as an improvised weapon
Cool. We're making some progress
I never disagreed with that. Unless you somehow managed to use a pebble as an improvised weapon, which... I don't know how you'd go about that.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Nor is Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet. If the feat wanted it to be, like in 2nd bullet, it would have said so. It instead say a an attack with a ranged weapon, which may be different.
Since an attack with a weapon has been clarified as the same thing as a weapon attack, the pre-requisite for each bullet is the same.
No SAC defines the opposite, a ranged weapon attack is an attack with a ranged weapon. Other attack can be as this exemple shows.
Since one is the other, they are the same thing. You haven't given a counter example of how this isn't true.
Is it an attack with a ranged weapon? Yes the magic stone pebble is hurled with a sling.
Yet it doesn't say the sling makes it a weapon attack or an attack with a weapon. It doesn't say the stone is turned into ammunition for a weapon. it doesn't say the spell modifier replaces the weapon's statistics.
It isn't ranged shilleighly or ranged green flame blade, so stop pretending it is.
So if Magic Stone specifically said it is an attack with a weapon, or was worded like a Fire Arrow, Green Flame Blade, or Shilleighly, or said it created ammunition... then we would have a specific over ruling of the general rule.
But no such thing exists. Magic Stone only does what it says. Using a sling might imply it is an attack "with a weapon," but we now know that this implication cannot be true if its also a spell attack. Not without specific language claiming such a unicorn exists here to overrule the general rules.
Same way Chill Touch not needing sight doesn't mean it can violate the line of sight rules, or "hurling a mote of fire" in Firebolt doesn't mean your character literally grabs the fire with their hand and should take fire damage when using the spell. Spells do what they say, and don't do anything extra without being explicit.
I never disagreed with that. Unless you somehow managed to use a pebble as an improvised weapon, which... I don't know how you'd go about that.
Throwing it with your hand would be the definition of using it as an improvised weapon... but that would be different from using it for the spell attack, which is a different action.
You understand this for why its not an improvised weapon attack, but you move the goal posts for why this can be a weapon attack and a spell attack at the same time.
Magic Stone only does what it says. Using a sling might imply it is an attack "with a weapon," but we now know that this implication cannot be true if its also a spell attack.
The magic stone pebble is a ranged spell attack hurled with a sling and works with Sneak Attack and other features requiring a ranged weapon, not because it's implied but because it directly say so and that the dev confirmed it at more than one occasion.
This thread has "twilight sanctuary and its interaction with sources of light" level vibes. Getting so caught up in the minutiae of a bit of codified language as to ignore the simplest and most logical conclusion.
This is like trying to watch someone argue that the sentence I wrote using a pen was written by me and my hand and not with the pen.
If the magic stone is being launched from the sling then the sling was part of the activity. It's that simple.
This thread has "twilight sanctuary and its interaction with sources of light" level vibes. Getting so caught up in the minutiae of a bit of codified language as to ignore the simplest and most logical conclusion.
This is like trying to watch someone argue that the sentence I wrote using a pen was written by me and my hand and not with the pen.
If the magic stone is being launched from the sling then the sling was part of the activity. It's that simple.
Ah, but you forget about the SAC and its non-equivalent statements that prove magic stone works with Tavern Brawler or something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
If the magic stone is being launched from the sling then the sling was part of the activity. It's that simple.
If the Sharpshooter feat was relevant to the activity, then your proficiency with the sling would matter. It doesn't. It's that simple
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)
If the magic stone is being launched from the sling then the sling was part of the activity. It's that simple.
If the Sharpshooter feat was relevant to the activity, then your proficiency with the sling would matter. It doesn't. It's that simple
Maybe when RAI is concerned, but that kind of logic doesn't really prove much in RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
The dev opinion isnt' RAW, SAC is. And it can't be a spell attack and weapon attack according to those official rulings.
I don't think we are going any further, cause Im just repeating the same explanation for why you're wrong but you keep repeating the same thing.
No one is saying that it’s both a spell attack and a weapon attack. Have you considered that you’re not going any further because you’re arguing with a straw man?
SAC makes clear that an attack with a weapon is a weapon attack.
Is Magic Stone a weapon attack? No.
Such ranged spell attack with a pebble hurled with a sling still qualifies an an attack made with a ranged weapon according to the Dev.
The reason the attack doesn't use your proficiency bonus is because its a spell attack which already factors it.
Nor is Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet. If the feat wanted it to be, like in 2nd bullet, it would have said so. It instead say a an attack with a ranged weapon, which may be different.
No SAC defines the opposite, a ranged weapon attack is an attack with a ranged weapon. Other attack can be as this exemple shows.
Is magic stone an attack? Yes its a ranged spell attack
Is it an attack with a ranged weapon? Yes the magic stone pebble is hurled with a sling.
Bonus question
Is this confirmed by a Dev? Yes "@JeremyECrawford An attack made with magic stone is a spell attack, even if you hurl the stone with a sling. The attack doesn't qualify for anything that requires a weapon attack, but it does work with a feature that requires a ranged weapon if you use a sling."
Specific beats General. This is a ranged spell attack made using a ranged weapon.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You say that, and yet your skill with a pebble is also completely irrelevant. That point is moot.
You can make an attack with more than one thing. It's not like anybody has ever made an attack with both a pebble and a sling before. Here, take a look at this proof that I already posted.
This is the pertinent sentence:
"You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling."
Let's cut down the irrelevant parts:
"a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by hurling it with a sling."
A sling is a weapon. Therefore:
"a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by hurling it with a ranged weapon."
Hurling with something is undeniably using said something. Therefore:
"a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by using it with a ranged weapon."
"To do x by using y" can be grammatically replaced with "to do x with y." Therefore:
"a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles with a ranged weapon."
A ranged spell attack is a ranged attack. Therefore:
"a ranged attack with one of the pebbles with a ranged weapon."
A ranged attack with a pebble is undeniably an attack. Therefore:
"an attack with a ranged weapon"
An attack with a ranged weapon? That looks familiar. I wonder why...
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
So then you would agree you can't use Tavern Brawler with magic stone, since the enchanted pebble is also not being used as an improvised weapon
Cool. We're making some progress
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)
I never disagreed with that. Unless you somehow managed to use a pebble as an improvised weapon, which... I don't know how you'd go about that.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Since an attack with a weapon has been clarified as the same thing as a weapon attack, the pre-requisite for each bullet is the same.
Since one is the other, they are the same thing. You haven't given a counter example of how this isn't true.
Yet it doesn't say the sling makes it a weapon attack or an attack with a weapon. It doesn't say the stone is turned into ammunition for a weapon. it doesn't say the spell modifier replaces the weapon's statistics.
It isn't ranged shilleighly or ranged green flame blade, so stop pretending it is.
Yes, specific does beat general.
So if Magic Stone specifically said it is an attack with a weapon, or was worded like a Fire Arrow, Green Flame Blade, or Shilleighly, or said it created ammunition... then we would have a specific over ruling of the general rule.
But no such thing exists. Magic Stone only does what it says. Using a sling might imply it is an attack "with a weapon," but we now know that this implication cannot be true if its also a spell attack. Not without specific language claiming such a unicorn exists here to overrule the general rules.
Same way Chill Touch not needing sight doesn't mean it can violate the line of sight rules, or "hurling a mote of fire" in Firebolt doesn't mean your character literally grabs the fire with their hand and should take fire damage when using the spell. Spells do what they say, and don't do anything extra without being explicit.
Throwing it with your hand would be the definition of using it as an improvised weapon... but that would be different from using it for the spell attack, which is a different action.
You understand this for why its not an improvised weapon attack, but you move the goal posts for why this can be a weapon attack and a spell attack at the same time.
Whatever you say chief.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The magic stone pebble is a ranged spell attack hurled with a sling and works with Sneak Attack and other features requiring a ranged weapon, not because it's implied but because it directly say so and that the dev confirmed it at more than one occasion.
The dev opinion isnt' RAW, SAC is. And it can't be a spell attack and weapon attack according to those official rulings.
I don't think we are going any further, cause Im just repeating the same explanation for why you're wrong but you keep repeating the same thing.
This thread has "twilight sanctuary and its interaction with sources of light" level vibes. Getting so caught up in the minutiae of a bit of codified language as to ignore the simplest and most logical conclusion.
This is like trying to watch someone argue that the sentence I wrote using a pen was written by me and my hand and not with the pen.
If the magic stone is being launched from the sling then the sling was part of the activity. It's that simple.
Ah, but you forget about the SAC and its non-equivalent statements that prove magic stone works with Tavern Brawler or something.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
If the Sharpshooter feat was relevant to the activity, then your proficiency with the sling would matter. It doesn't. It's that simple
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)
Maybe when RAI is concerned, but that kind of logic doesn't really prove much in RAW.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
No one is saying that it’s both a spell attack and a weapon attack. Have you considered that you’re not going any further because you’re arguing with a straw man?
Several people are trying to ignore that an attack with a weapon is a weapon attack. Pretending SAC says nothing on this is the straw man.
No one is ignoring anything. We just don't agree with your interpretation of the rules.