What does “melee weapon attack” mean: a melee attack with a weapon or an attack with a melee weapon?
It means a melee attack with a weapon.Similarly, “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. Some attacks count as a melee or ranged weapon attack even if a weapon isn’t involved, as specified in the text of those attacks. For example, an unarmed strike counts as a melee weapon attack, even though the attacker’s body isn’t considered a weapon.
Here’s a bit of wording minutia: we would write “melee-weapon attack” (with a hyphen) if we meant an attack with a melee weapon.
An attack with a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon attack.
Magic stone doesn't make an attack with a ranged weapon as defined by the rules, it makes a spell attack and does not say using a sling changes that to a ranged weapon attack. so it doesn't meet the requirement for sharp shooter's addendum requiring an attack with a ranged weapon.
Totally acceptable and not broken to change that at your table, I know I do for fun's sake. Just not RAW, and arguably not even RAI since it was only produced for a free pdf supplement written by people not on the game dev team who didn't need to think about the larger game.
Its official rulings, so RAW. I Guess you can argue its an explanation of what was only RAI before 2020, but after they released it it became RAW.
b. Even if a "ranged weapon attack" is an attack with a ranged weapon, an "attack with a ranged weapon" is not necessarily a ranged weapon attack. That's a logical fallacy.
You'd need to show where the equivalence is ever false. They give room for attacks that make an explicit exception to cover thrown weapons (which are ranged weapon attacks with melee weapons).
But there is no spell attack that claims this exception.
Booming Blade and Green Flame Blade replace the spell attack with a melee weapon attack. Shillelagh replaces the modifier used and damage dice of the weapon for melee weapon attacks.
They are explicit in how they interact with the weapon in its weapon attacks, but Magic Stone makes no claim about being anything but a spell attack.
Sharpshooter is explicit in how each of its components require either a weapon or just ranged attack. The +10 damage for -5 to hit makes no claim about being ONLY available to Weapon Attacks. It IS explicit, that you must be proficient in the ranged weapon with which you make the attack.
You have mastered ranged weapons and can make shots that others find impossible. You gain the following benefits:
Attacking at long range doesn't impose disadvantage on your ranged weapon attack rolls.
Your ranged weapon attacks ignore half and three-quarters cover.
Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a -5 penalty to the attack roll. If that attack hits, you add +10 to the attack's damage.
Each portion requires an attack with a ranged weapon/ranged weapon attack, which are interchangeable.
Magic Stone doesn't make a weapon attack or an attack with a ranged weapon, and so meets none of the requirements to benefit from Sharpshooter.
Not when “ranged weapon attack” and “attack with a ranged weapon” have been clarified as more or less interchangeable.
which isn’t even getting into that making an attack “with a weapon” means using that weapon’s stats, not that the weapon is just present while an attack is made.
Not when “ranged weapon attack” and “attack with a ranged weapon” have been clarified as more or less interchangeable.
You seem to assume more on the MORE side, and Less on the LESS side. This is not a definitive interchangeability as you imply it is.
which isn’t even getting into that making an attack “with a weapon” means using that weapon’s stats, not that the weapon is just present while an attack is made.
Is this specifically stated somewhere? I don't recall seeing this stated somewhere, but I would be glad to be proven wrong that this is specifically stated somewhere.
I do know, and recall, that it specifically states when it uses a weapons stats vs when it does not. Such is present in language very specifically, not an "implied message" like your argument here is based on. EX: Shillelagh specifically states it is melee attacks with that weapon AND that you don't use the weapons stats.
For your argument of "making an attack with a weapon means using that weapons' stats..." I have examples where this is true... HOWEVER it specifically spells it out and states it clearly that this is the case. EX: Booming Blade, green Flame Blade.
Magic Stone is not a magical weapon unless it is "thrown". If Magic Stone is used from a sling, the sling is the weapon, and Magic Stones are the Ammunition that now determine the damage. This would be the same style as "Flame Arrows"
It's a ranged spell attack with a ranged weapon. According to a Dev you can use Sneak Attack for exemple.
@selectstriker2 With Magic Stone can sneak attack be used with the sling even though the spell states that it is a ranged spell attack?
@JeremyECrawford As DM, I'd allow it to work, given how Sneak Attack and magic stone are worded.
@selectstriker2 OK, so if you throw the magic stone its a spell attack but if you use it with a sling then it is a ranged weapon?
@JeremyECrawford It's a spell attack you're making with a sling.
Jeremy’s tweets are irrelevant. It has been said over and over, his tweets are his opinion and are not considered official rules. Wizards themselves announced that. Also;
Attack with a ranged weapon / ranged weapon attack
v’s
ranged spell attack
Notice the slight difference……. One of them is not the same….
The Dev's opinion in this case doesn't go agaisnt RAW because Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet doesn't specify the attack type meaning making an attack with a ranged weapon can be a weapon or spell attack, that's why Sneak Attack can apply when used with a sling. I don't find anything RAW against this regardless of the Dev tweet.
The Dev's opinion in this case doesn't go agaisnt RAW because Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet doesn't specify the attack type meaning making an attack with a ranged weapon can be a weapon or spell attack, that's why Sneak Attack can apply when used with a sling. I don't find anything RAW against this regardless of the Dev tweet.
But the 3rd bullet point does, after Sage Advice clarified that “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. So it does specifically require a ranged weapon attack. The reading that "ranged weapon attack" and "an attack with a ranged weapon" are different things ceased to be valid with the publication of the Sage Advice Compendium, because they clarified its the same thing.
The feat third bullet doesn't say ranged weapon attack so the Sage Advice is not pertinent here since it clarifies what a melee/ranged weapon attack is.
The feat 3rd bullet says an attack with a ranged weapon, not a ranged weapon attack.
You seem to assume more on the MORE side, and Less on the LESS side. This is not a definitive interchangeability as you imply it is.
It actually is, they just leave room for exceptions to that rule for thrown weapons. Theoretically, a spell attack that says it is a spell attack and a weapon attack could explicitly be an exception too, but such a thing doesn't exist.
Is this specifically stated somewhere?
Chapter 9 of the PHB "The ability modifier used for a melee weapon attack is Strength, and the ability modifier used for a ranged weapon attack is Dexterity. Weapons that have the finesse or thrown property break this rule."
SAC reiterates this.
Magic Stone is not a magical weapon unless it is "thrown". If Magic Stone is used from a sling, the sling is the weapon, and Magic Stones are the Ammunition that now determine the damage. This would be the same style as "Flame Arrows"
Magic Stone isn't a magical weapon period, it creates a spell attack. And the description of Magic Stone doesn't say that changes if a sling is used. It doesn't say the magic stones become ammunition either.
Flame arrows is a good example of why magic stone doesn't work this way: it is explicit that the arrows are ammunition used for ranged weapon attacks. Not spell attacks. Its even from the same supplement written by the same authors, so if they wanted magic stone to work this way by RAW or RAI, they were free to word it that way.
This comes back to spells only doing what they say they do and nothing more. It'd be fun to take the fluff in spells like spiritual weapon to say you can wield the weapon it creates, or that Chill Touch can target people through walls because it doesn't require you to see the target. But such things aren't specified by the spells or break existing general rules, so they aren't RAW.
That is not at all true. If a then b does not imply if b then a. SAC establishes that there is room for attacks with melee weapons that are not melee weapon attacks with its bit of word minutia. This makes melee weapon attacks a sub-category of attacks with melee weapons.
What I just cited clarifies that weapon attacks mean attacks with weapons. The terms are interchangeable.
So an attack with a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon attack.
They further spell this out: "For example, if you make a melee weapon attack with a longsword, you add your Strength modifier to the attack and damage rolls of the attack. In contrast, if you make the spell attack of the fire bolt cantrip, you add your spellcasting ability modifier to the attack roll."
If you make the attack "with a weapon" its a weapon attack using that weapon's stats.
Thrown weapons and finesse weapons are exceptions to the rule as mentioned in chapter 9 of the players handbook.
SAC establishes that there is room for attacks with melee weapons that are not melee weapon attacks with its bit of word minutia. This makes melee weapon attacks a sub-category of attacks with melee weapons.
This just isn't true. The general rule is that attacks are ranged weapon attacks, melee weapon attacks, or spell attacks. Then things like unarmed strikes, thrown weapons, etc. are explicit exceptions to the rule.
The whole categorization of attacks into melee weapon attacks with weapons, etc. was the unofficial explanation for things the devs gave before SAC, but they make no reference to such a thing as of SAC forward.
Thread made to end Derailment in a different thread where it's off topic:
Topic: Does Sharpshooter's Damage effect work when used by Magic Stone cantrip stones?
Blank
No.
An attack with a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon attack.
Magic stone doesn't make an attack with a ranged weapon as defined by the rules, it makes a spell attack and does not say using a sling changes that to a ranged weapon attack. so it doesn't meet the requirement for sharp shooter's addendum requiring an attack with a ranged weapon.
Totally acceptable and not broken to change that at your table, I know I do for fun's sake. Just not RAW, and arguably not even RAI since it was only produced for a free pdf supplement written by people not on the game dev team who didn't need to think about the larger game.
Sharpshooter is explicit in how each of its components require either a weapon or just ranged attack. The +10 damage for -5 to hit makes no claim about being ONLY available to Weapon Attacks. It IS explicit, that you must be proficient in the ranged weapon with which you make the attack.
Blank
This isn't true. Lets look at it point by point:
Each portion requires an attack with a ranged weapon/ranged weapon attack, which are interchangeable.
Magic Stone doesn't make a weapon attack or an attack with a ranged weapon, and so meets none of the requirements to benefit from Sharpshooter.
Yes Sharpshooter will work when a magic stone is hurled with a sling since it's a ranged weapon.
It’s hurled with the sling, but is it an attack with a ranged weapon?
It's a ranged spell attack with a ranged weapon. According to a Dev you can use Sneak Attack for exemple.
I respect that if you want to go with it.
I'd still say its not RAW because SAC says it overrides past tweets, and streamlines what constitutes an attack with a weapon to be a weapon attack.
But its certainly the more fun way to play at the table.
RAW would need to say ''Before you make a ranged weapon attack...''
Not when “ranged weapon attack” and “attack with a ranged weapon” have been clarified as more or less interchangeable.
which isn’t even getting into that making an attack “with a weapon” means using that weapon’s stats, not that the weapon is just present while an attack is made.
You seem to assume more on the MORE side, and Less on the LESS side. This is not a definitive interchangeability as you imply it is.
Is this specifically stated somewhere? I don't recall seeing this stated somewhere, but I would be glad to be proven wrong that this is specifically stated somewhere.
I do know, and recall, that it specifically states when it uses a weapons stats vs when it does not. Such is present in language very specifically, not an "implied message" like your argument here is based on. EX: Shillelagh specifically states it is melee attacks with that weapon AND that you don't use the weapons stats.
For your argument of "making an attack with a weapon means using that weapons' stats..." I have examples where this is true... HOWEVER it specifically spells it out and states it clearly that this is the case. EX: Booming Blade, green Flame Blade.
Magic Stone is not a magical weapon unless it is "thrown". If Magic Stone is used from a sling, the sling is the weapon, and Magic Stones are the Ammunition that now determine the damage. This would be the same style as "Flame Arrows"
Blank
Jeremy’s tweets are irrelevant. It has been said over and over, his tweets are his opinion and are not considered official rules. Wizards themselves announced that. Also;
Attack with a ranged weapon / ranged weapon attack
v’s
ranged spell attack
Notice the slight difference……. One of them is not the same….
The Dev's opinion in this case doesn't go agaisnt RAW because Sharpshooter's 3rd bullet doesn't specify the attack type meaning making an attack with a ranged weapon can be a weapon or spell attack, that's why Sneak Attack can apply when used with a sling. I don't find anything RAW against this regardless of the Dev tweet.
But the 3rd bullet point does, after Sage Advice clarified that “ranged weapon attack” means a ranged attack with a weapon. So it does specifically require a ranged weapon attack. The reading that "ranged weapon attack" and "an attack with a ranged weapon" are different things ceased to be valid with the publication of the Sage Advice Compendium, because they clarified its the same thing.
The feat third bullet doesn't say ranged weapon attack so the Sage Advice is not pertinent here since it clarifies what a melee/ranged weapon attack is.
The feat 3rd bullet says an attack with a ranged weapon, not a ranged weapon attack.
It actually is, they just leave room for exceptions to that rule for thrown weapons. Theoretically, a spell attack that says it is a spell attack and a weapon attack could explicitly be an exception too, but such a thing doesn't exist.
Chapter 9 of the PHB
"The ability modifier used for a melee weapon attack is Strength, and the ability modifier used for a ranged weapon attack is Dexterity. Weapons that have the finesse or thrown property break this rule."
SAC reiterates this.
Magic Stone isn't a magical weapon period, it creates a spell attack. And the description of Magic Stone doesn't say that changes if a sling is used. It doesn't say the magic stones become ammunition either.
Flame arrows is a good example of why magic stone doesn't work this way: it is explicit that the arrows are ammunition used for ranged weapon attacks. Not spell attacks. Its even from the same supplement written by the same authors, so if they wanted magic stone to work this way by RAW or RAI, they were free to word it that way.
This comes back to spells only doing what they say they do and nothing more. It'd be fun to take the fluff in spells like spiritual weapon to say you can wield the weapon it creates, or that Chill Touch can target people through walls because it doesn't require you to see the target. But such things aren't specified by the spells or break existing general rules, so they aren't RAW.
That is not at all true. If a then b does not imply if b then a. SAC establishes that there is room for attacks with melee weapons that are not melee weapon attacks with its bit of word minutia. This makes melee weapon attacks a sub-category of attacks with melee weapons.
What I just cited clarifies that weapon attacks mean attacks with weapons. The terms are interchangeable.
So an attack with a ranged weapon is a ranged weapon attack.
They further spell this out: "For example, if you make a melee weapon attack with a longsword, you add your Strength modifier to the attack and damage rolls of the attack. In contrast, if you make the spell attack of the fire bolt cantrip, you add your spellcasting ability modifier to the attack roll."
If you make the attack "with a weapon" its a weapon attack using that weapon's stats.
Thrown weapons and finesse weapons are exceptions to the rule as mentioned in chapter 9 of the players handbook.
This just isn't true. The general rule is that attacks are ranged weapon attacks, melee weapon attacks, or spell attacks. Then things like unarmed strikes, thrown weapons, etc. are explicit exceptions to the rule.
The whole categorization of attacks into melee weapon attacks with weapons, etc. was the unofficial explanation for things the devs gave before SAC, but they make no reference to such a thing as of SAC forward.
You can find this in the Combat section of SAC, while the whole categorization scheme you mention doesn't exist in the rules.
Sage Advice Compendium - Sage Advice Compendium - Sources - D&D Beyond (dndbeyond.com)
nvmBlank