The DMG says explicitly in the description of a +1 Weapon:
"You have a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon."
That would apply to any attack you make with it, Steel Wind Strike is an attack.
Yeah, this doesn't work. There was half an argument for it a few years ago, but it was made clear with the introduction of arcane foci that do give a to hit bonus to spell attacks.
But again, attacks are only "with a weapon" if used in a weapon attack.
Can you give even one other possible antecedent to the consequent? In other words, even one explicit case where an attack with a weapon isn’t a weapon attack?
Yeah, there's a spell called magic stone. Its text explicitly says you can make its attack with a sling but also says that it's a spell attack.
I hope I don’t need to explain why name dropping a category of fallacy isn’t enough to validly accuse someone of using it?
Can you give even one other possible antecedent to the consequent? In other words, even one explicit case where an attack with a weapon isn’t a weapon attack?
You’re right, name dropping it isn’t enough to accuse someone of using a fallacy. The fact that you’re using the fallacy is enough all by itself.
Yes I can. There is exactly one clear cut example of a time when an attack “with” a weapon is not a weapon attack, when hurling a magic stone with a sling. Then it’s “a ranged spell attack made ‘with’ a ranged weapon.” As I and several others have stated many, many, many times. It’s a unique situation, granted, but it exists nonetheless.
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. If thrown, it has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with the pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll. On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier. Hit or miss, the spell then ends on the stone.
Yeah,. no. Not remotely close to the same. GFB/BB explicitly tell you the attack you're making has its normal effect
You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack with it against one creature within 5 feet of you. On a hit, the target suffers the weapon attack’s normal effects
Magic stone does nothing of the sort
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)
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. If thrown, it has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with the pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll. On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier. Hit or miss, the spell then ends on the stone.
Yeah,. no. Not remotely close to the same. GFB/BB explicitly tell you the attack you're making has its normal effect
You brandish the weapon used in the spell’s casting and make a melee attack with it against one creature within 5 feet of you. On a hit, the target suffers the weapon attack’s normal effects
Magic stone does nothing of the sort
Correct, it doesn’t have the normal result. It has the results of a magic missile, except that it uses the sling’s range and counts as an attack “with a sling,” which is a ranged weapon, and therefore qualifies for interaction with Sneak Attack and the one specific bullet point of the Sharpshooter feat that doesn’t require “a ranged weapon attack,” but instead an attack “with a ranged weapon.” It’s a specific special rule, which overrides general rules.
Yeah, this doesn't work. There was half an argument for it a few years ago, but it was made clear with the introduction of arcane foci that do give a to hit bonus to spell attack
It does work. It is in the weapon description.
I get it if you want to homebrew it so it does not work in your game but that is homebrew.
That is circular logic. "This unicorn I say exists does exist because there is at least the unicorn I say exists as an example."
What's absolutely hilarious is the fact that you're saying this to someone with a unicorn icon. What you're doing is saying a unicorn doesn't exist while looking it directly in the face. The only way you can say that what you're looking at isn't a unicorn is by the theorem that unicorns don't exist, which is evidently false because of the fact that you can see one at this very moment. Thanks for creating the perfect analogy.
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)
Alright.... Its been a week and I am still baffled: What does an arcane foci of a spellcaster that is not using a sling and not using the sling to throw magic stones. BUT effects the "to hit" of the magic stones, being hurled through a sling. have to do with the person who is NOT the caster who is a sharpshooter using a sling to throw magic stones.
It is really amazing how many people here are just blindly repeating the idea that the sling's stats do not matter and have not impact, and hence [bunch of logic]. I mean, the stuff claimed after that is wrong also, but it's nonsense to start with, the sling does indeed impact things to a very large extent.
Tell me, if I have a spell attack modifier of +4 and cast Magic Stone, and throw it at someone 40 feet away, what do I roll? Now if I use a sling, what do I roll? And then answer the same questions for 80 feet away.
This idea that the sling is some irrelevant flavor text is utter nonsense. It manifestly is important to how the spell works.
Also, I have to point out, we have absolutely no evidence we _don't_ add a sling proficiency bonus to a Magic Stone attack made with the sling. It's not stated either way, probably because it doesn't matter as we've already added a proficiency bonus via the spell attack and thus can't add it twice, but that doesn't make it doesn't hypothetically exist. You can't use the fact we aren't adding it as proof of anything except 'it cannot be added twice'
Also, I have to point out, we have absolutely no evidence we _don't_ add a sling proficiency bonus to a Magic Stone attack made with the sling. It's not stated either way, probably because it doesn't matter as we've already added a proficiency bonus via the spell attack and thus can't add it twice, but that doesn't make it doesn't hypothetically exist. You can't use the fact we aren't adding it as proof of anything except 'it cannot be added twice'
This is 100% correct!
I will also add that the whole "you don't add proficiency" would be irrelevant even if it was true. Proficiency has nothing to do with Sharpshooter, you don't even need proficiency to get the sharpshooter benefits if you have the feat. You just need to be using a missile weapon .... any missile weapon.
The DMG says explicitly in the description of a +1 Weapon:
"You have a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon."
That would apply to any attack you make with it, Steel Wind Strike is an attack.
Yeah, this doesn't work. There was half an argument for it a few years ago, but it was made clear with the introduction of arcane foci that do give a to hit bonus to spell attacks.
The weapon used in Steel Wind Strike is not a spell focus, it is a material component. There is a difference there.
You can't use a spell focus to cast Steel Wind Strike because the spell has a material component with a cost. If you have your Wand of the Warmage you can not use it as a focus for casting Steel Wind Strike.
In a strict RAW you could still get the bonus from the wand by holding the wand in one hand and holding the required material component (melee weapon) in the other, but you are not using it as a focus in that case. This is not a minor thing because it means you are now holding something in both hands and can't cast spells that have a somatic component but no material component (like Shield, Absorb Elements or Counterspell).
But again, attacks are only "with a weapon" if used in a weapon attack.
That is completely untrue. An attack "with a weapon" is an attack "with a weapon".
Proficiency has nothing to do with Sharpshooter, you don't even need proficiency to get the sharpshooter benefits if you have the feat. You just need to be using a missile weapon .... any missile weapon.
The 3rd benefit of Sharpshooter feat is only used with ranged weapon that you are proficient with;
Sharpshooter: 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.
The weapon used in Steel Wind Strike is not a spell focus, it is a material component. There is a difference there.
If an attack "with a weapon" just requires the weapon's involvement, then it would still apply. But the bonus is specifically for weapon attacks- not spells that could somehow use use a weapon as a component or arcane foci. Hence why +1 arcane focuses say "While holding this item, a creature gains a +1 bonus to spell attack rolls."
It is baked in that a +1 weapon only applies to weapon attacks and a +1 arcane focus only applies to spell attacks. The wording was more vague in 2014 before there were many ways to use weapons as arcane focuses, but has been clarified since.
That is completely untrue. An attack "with a weapon" is an attack "with a weapon".
I mean, I could cite SAC for the hundredth time, but I think its simpler to just ask what in the world an attack with a weapon that isn't a weapon attack is. And I suspect you will point to magic stone as the only instance of such a thing.
Tell me, if I have a spell attack modifier of +4 and cast Magic Stone, and throw it at someone 40 feet away, what do I roll? Now if I use a sling, what do I roll? And then answer the same questions for 80 feet away.
If you use a sling, its still a spell attack and uses your spell attack modifier.
As for attacks at 80 feet, RAW you can't reach that range. Nothing in the spell explicitly says using a sling changes the range. There is just a vague suggestion of it around "if the stone is thrown the range is 60 ft" where maybe the range is different if you use a sling, or maybe throwing means using a sling or tossing by hand.
But spells only do what they explicitly say.
Also, I have to point out, we have absolutely no evidence we _don't_ add a sling proficiency bonus to a Magic Stone attack made with the sling.
Yes there is: its a spell attack. You don't add weapon proficiency to spell attacks.
But the bonus is specifically for weapon attacks- not spells that could somehow use use a weapon as a component or arcane foci.
You are wrong, the opposite is true. The DMG says nothing about a weapon attack. From the DMG page 213 Weapon +1, +2 or +3 - "You have a bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. The bonus is determined by the weapon's rarity"
It says nothing at all about being a weapon attack, and Steel Wind Strike is an attack. This verbiage is consistent for most (all?) magic weapons including Vorpal Weapon, Vicious Weapon etc.
t is baked in that a +1 weapon only applies to weapon attacks and a +1 arcane focus only applies to spell attacks. The wording was more vague in 2014 before there were many ways to use weapons as arcane focuses, but has been clarified since.
Can you provide an example of anywhereof wording in the rules that states or even suggests this?
Further none of the wording has been clarified at all. To my knowlege the wording I posted above has not been error-corected since 2014.
I mean, I could cite SAC for the hundredth time, but I think its simpler to just ask what in the world an attack with a weapon that isn't a weapon attack is. And I suspect you will point to magic stone as the only instance of such a thing.
A spell attack using a weapon is an attack with a weapon but it is not a weapon attack.
Tell me, if I have a spell attack modifier of +4 and cast Magic Stone, and throw it at someone 40 feet away, what do I roll? Now if I use a sling, what do I roll? And then answer the same questions for 80 feet away.
If you use a sling, its still a spell attack and uses your spell attack modifier.
As for attacks at 80 feet, RAW you can't reach that range. Nothing in the spell explicitly says using a sling changes the range.
The spell's range is not 60 feet, the spell's range is "touch". The 60 feet comes from the text which states:
"You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling. If thrown, it has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with the pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll."
Presumably the reason it states "If thrown" is to provide a range if a sling is not being used. I suppose there is an alternative interpretation where there is no range if using a sling, but that would not make a whole lot of sense as it says you "hurl" it.
Yes there is: its a spell attack. You don't add weapon proficiency to spell attacks.
There is no such thing as "weapon proficiency bonus". There is only one proficiency bonus in 5E.
From the PHB page 12:
Proficiency Bonus: The table that apppears in your class description shows your proficiency bonus, which is +2 for a 1st-level character. Your proficiency bonus applies to many of the numbers you'll be recording on your character sheet:
Attack rolls using weapons you are proficient in
Attack rolls with spells you cast
Ability checks you're proficient in
Saving throw DCs for spells you cast ...
... Your proficiency bonus can not be added to a single die roll or other number more than once."
Further on page 205:: "Some spells require the caster to make an attack roll to determine whether the spell effect hits the intended target, your attack bonus with a spell equals your spell casting modifier + your proficiency bonus."
You are wrong, the opposite is true. The DMG says nothing about a weapon attack. From the DMG page 213 Weapon +1, +2 or +3 - "You have a bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. The bonus is determined by the weapon's rarity"
It says nothing at all about being a weapon attack, and Steel Wind Strike is an attack. This verbiage is consistent for most (all?) magic weapons including Vorpal Weapon, Vicious Weapon etc.
Two issues here.
First, the publication of +1 arcane foci clarified that the bonus is only to spells and spell save DCs, demonstrating that weapons lacked the necessary specific language to extend to such.
Second, SAC gave an official ruling that there is no crossover between spell attacks and weapon attacks. You can perform a spell attack, or make a weapon attack. They are totally separate categories. https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
A spell attack using a weapon is an attack with a weapon but it is not a weapon attack.
No such attack exists. There is no such thing as a spell attack using a weapon.
Presumably the reason it states "If thrown" is to provide a range if a sling is not being used. I suppose there is an alternative interpretation where there is no range if using a sling, but that would not make a whole lot of sense as it says you "hurl" it.
Presuming doesn't tell us what RAW is. We know the range for the spell attack and are not given any other alternative if we use a sling.
There is no such thing as "weapon proficiency bonus". There is only one proficiency bonus in 5E.
Ok. I get you're trying to pedantically make a point here, but you just cited the pages of the PHB saying spells apply your proficiency bonus as part of spellcasting. There is no room left over for the non-existent case of a weapon applying the proficiency bonus instead.
You are wrong, the opposite is true. The DMG says nothing about a weapon attack. From the DMG page 213 Weapon +1, +2 or +3 - "You have a bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. The bonus is determined by the weapon's rarity"
It says nothing at all about being a weapon attack, and Steel Wind Strike is an attack. This verbiage is consistent for most (all?) magic weapons including Vorpal Weapon, Vicious Weapon etc.
Two issues here.
First, the publication of +1 arcane foci clarified that the bonus is only to spells and spell save DCs, demonstrating that weapons lacked the necessary specific language to extend to such.
Provide a link or text reference which clarifies that please.
Further I will add that Staff of Magi is a weapon and it specifically states says in the description that it applies the bonus to spell attacks while holding it.
Finally, the bonus to spell attacks for the Wand of warmagw says nothing at all about using it as a focus. If I am a Thief I can attune to it and use it to gain the bonus from any spells I cast from my race or other classes, but I can't use it as a spell Focus for those spells..
Second, SAC gave an official ruling that there is no crossover between spell attacks and weapon attacks. You can perform a spell attack, or make a weapon attack. They are totally separate categories. https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
Yes they are different and the bonus from a magic weapon applies to both, just like your proficiency bonus applies to both (assuming you are proficient with the weapon in question for a weapon attack).
Also you did not bother to read what you actually posted as this very document says exactly what I have been saying. I will quote the text:
"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. ... 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
This totally blows your entire argument out of the water! What this paragraph in the very text you linked states explicitly and unequivocally is that "weapon attack" is NOT the same thing as "attack with a weapon". So when WOTC says "weapon attack" they DO NOT mean "attack with a weapon"
To substitute the relevant weapon - Ranged Weapon (sling) attack is not the same thing as an attack with a Ranged Weapon (sling).
Looking at Sharpshooter - Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon (sling) 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.
GAME-SET-MATCH
A spell attack using a weapon is an attack with a weapon but it is not a weapon attack.
No such attack exists. There is no such thing as a spell attack using a weapon.
Yes there absolutely is. Steel Wind Strike, and Spiritual Weapon are two examples of spells that use a weapon and make a spell attack. Catapult also is a spell attack which uses a weapon, if you catapult a weapon with it.
Finally there is the Sword Bard subclass which states explicitly:
"If you’re proficient with a simple or martial melee weapon, you can use it as a spellcasting focus for your bard spells."
So are you going to say Bards that are using a weapon as a focus are not using the weapon for a spell attack?
Presumably the reason it states "If thrown" is to provide a range if a sling is not being used. I suppose there is an alternative interpretation where there is no range if using a sling, but that would not make a whole lot of sense as it says you "hurl" it.
Presuming doesn't tell us what RAW is. We know the range for the spell attack and are not given any other alternative if we use a sling.
Ok so then if you are using a sling the range is "self"?
How far do you think it can go if you use a sling? RAW there is a range listed for a sling, that is the range used if you use a sling to throw a stone. That is the only RAW range that makes any sense at all.
Don't just sit here and say I am wrong, tell me what the range is if you use a sling and don't throw it and tell me why it is that range.
Ok. I get you're trying to pedantically make a point here, but you just cited the pages of the PHB saying spells apply your proficiency bonus as part of spellcasting. There is no room left over for the non-existent case of a weapon applying the proficiency bonus instead.
No I am not. There is not a separate proficiency bonus for weapons. I am being pendantic when I am the one actually quoting RAW?
You have made claims that were either patently false (example - the range of Magic Stone is 60 feet) or cited things that are supposedly clear but provided no supporting documentation.
Yeah, this doesn't work. There was half an argument for it a few years ago, but it was made clear with the introduction of arcane foci that do give a to hit bonus to spell attacks.
But again, attacks are only "with a weapon" if used in a weapon attack.
Yeah, there's a spell called magic stone. Its text explicitly says you can make its attack with a sling but also says that it's a spell attack.
You’re right, name dropping it isn’t enough to accuse someone of using a fallacy. The fact that you’re using the fallacy is enough all by itself.
Yes I can. There is exactly one clear cut example of a time when an attack “with” a weapon is not a weapon attack, when hurling a magic stone with a sling. Then it’s “a ranged spell attack made ‘with’ a ranged weapon.” As I and several others have stated many, many, many times. It’s a unique situation, granted, but it exists nonetheless.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
That is circular logic. "This unicorn I say exists does exist because there is at least the unicorn I say exists as an example."
I feel like circular logic is far more well known than the affirming the consequent fallacy lol.
But apparently its rare to run into anyone that actually understands either.
Yeah,. no. Not remotely close to the same. GFB/BB explicitly tell you the attack you're making has its normal effect
Magic stone does nothing of the sort
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)
Correct, it doesn’t have the normal result. It has the results of a magic missile, except that it uses the sling’s range and counts as an attack “with a sling,” which is a ranged weapon, and therefore qualifies for interaction with Sneak Attack and the one specific bullet point of the Sharpshooter feat that doesn’t require “a ranged weapon attack,” but instead an attack “with a ranged weapon.” It’s a specific special rule, which overrides general rules.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
It does work. It is in the weapon description.
I get it if you want to homebrew it so it does not work in your game but that is homebrew.
What's absolutely hilarious is the fact that you're saying this to someone with a unicorn icon. What you're doing is saying a unicorn doesn't exist while looking it directly in the face. The only way you can say that what you're looking at isn't a unicorn is by the theorem that unicorns don't exist, which is evidently false because of the fact that you can see one at this very moment. Thanks for creating the perfect analogy.
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)
Alright.... Its been a week and I am still baffled: What does an arcane foci of a spellcaster that is not using a sling and not using the sling to throw magic stones. BUT effects the "to hit" of the magic stones, being hurled through a sling. have to do with the person who is NOT the caster who is a sharpshooter using a sling to throw magic stones.
Blank
It is really amazing how many people here are just blindly repeating the idea that the sling's stats do not matter and have not impact, and hence [bunch of logic]. I mean, the stuff claimed after that is wrong also, but it's nonsense to start with, the sling does indeed impact things to a very large extent.
Tell me, if I have a spell attack modifier of +4 and cast Magic Stone, and throw it at someone 40 feet away, what do I roll? Now if I use a sling, what do I roll? And then answer the same questions for 80 feet away.
This idea that the sling is some irrelevant flavor text is utter nonsense. It manifestly is important to how the spell works.
Also, I have to point out, we have absolutely no evidence we _don't_ add a sling proficiency bonus to a Magic Stone attack made with the sling. It's not stated either way, probably because it doesn't matter as we've already added a proficiency bonus via the spell attack and thus can't add it twice, but that doesn't make it doesn't hypothetically exist. You can't use the fact we aren't adding it as proof of anything except 'it cannot be added twice'
This is 100% correct!
I will also add that the whole "you don't add proficiency" would be irrelevant even if it was true. Proficiency has nothing to do with Sharpshooter, you don't even need proficiency to get the sharpshooter benefits if you have the feat. You just need to be using a missile weapon .... any missile weapon.
The weapon used in Steel Wind Strike is not a spell focus, it is a material component. There is a difference there.
You can't use a spell focus to cast Steel Wind Strike because the spell has a material component with a cost. If you have your Wand of the Warmage you can not use it as a focus for casting Steel Wind Strike.
In a strict RAW you could still get the bonus from the wand by holding the wand in one hand and holding the required material component (melee weapon) in the other, but you are not using it as a focus in that case. This is not a minor thing because it means you are now holding something in both hands and can't cast spells that have a somatic component but no material component (like Shield, Absorb Elements or Counterspell).
That is completely untrue. An attack "with a weapon" is an attack "with a weapon".
The 3rd benefit of Sharpshooter feat is only used with ranged weapon that you are proficient with;
If an attack "with a weapon" just requires the weapon's involvement, then it would still apply. But the bonus is specifically for weapon attacks- not spells that could somehow use use a weapon as a component or arcane foci. Hence why +1 arcane focuses say "While holding this item, a creature gains a +1![]()
bonus to spell attack rolls."
It is baked in that a +1 weapon only applies to weapon attacks and a +1 arcane focus only applies to spell attacks. The wording was more vague in 2014 before there were many ways to use weapons as arcane focuses, but has been clarified since.
I mean, I could cite SAC for the hundredth time, but I think its simpler to just ask what in the world an attack with a weapon that isn't a weapon attack is. And I suspect you will point to magic stone as the only instance of such a thing.
If you use a sling, its still a spell attack and uses your spell attack modifier.
As for attacks at 80 feet, RAW you can't reach that range. Nothing in the spell explicitly says using a sling changes the range. There is just a vague suggestion of it around "if the stone is thrown the range is 60 ft" where maybe the range is different if you use a sling, or maybe throwing means using a sling or tossing by hand.
But spells only do what they explicitly say.
Yes there is: its a spell attack. You don't add weapon proficiency to spell attacks.
You are wrong, the opposite is true. The DMG says nothing about a weapon attack. From the DMG page 213 Weapon +1, +2 or +3 - "You have a bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon. The bonus is determined by the weapon's rarity"
It says nothing at all about being a weapon attack, and Steel Wind Strike is an attack. This verbiage is consistent for most (all?) magic weapons including Vorpal Weapon, Vicious Weapon etc.
Can you provide an example of anywhereof wording in the rules that states or even suggests this?
Further none of the wording has been clarified at all. To my knowlege the wording I posted above has not been error-corected since 2014.
A spell attack using a weapon is an attack with a weapon but it is not a weapon attack.
The spell's range is not 60 feet, the spell's range is "touch". The 60 feet comes from the text which states:
"You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling. If thrown, it has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with the pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll."
Presumably the reason it states "If thrown" is to provide a range if a sling is not being used. I suppose there is an alternative interpretation where there is no range if using a sling, but that would not make a whole lot of sense as it says you "hurl" it.
There is no such thing as "weapon proficiency bonus". There is only one proficiency bonus in 5E.
From the PHB page 12:
Proficiency Bonus: The table that apppears in your class description shows your proficiency bonus, which is +2 for a 1st-level character. Your proficiency bonus applies to many of the numbers you'll be recording on your character sheet:
Attack rolls using weapons you are proficient in
Attack rolls with spells you cast
Ability checks you're proficient in
Saving throw DCs for spells you cast ...
... Your proficiency bonus can not be added to a single die roll or other number more than once."
Further on page 205:: "Some spells require the caster to make an attack roll to determine whether the spell effect hits the intended target, your attack bonus with a spell equals your spell casting modifier + your proficiency bonus."
Two issues here.
First, the publication of +1 arcane foci clarified that the bonus is only to spells and spell save DCs, demonstrating that weapons lacked the necessary specific language to extend to such.
Second, SAC gave an official ruling that there is no crossover between spell attacks and weapon attacks. You can perform a spell attack, or make a weapon attack. They are totally separate categories. https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/SA-Compendium.pdf
No such attack exists. There is no such thing as a spell attack using a weapon.
Presuming doesn't tell us what RAW is. We know the range for the spell attack and are not given any other alternative if we use a sling.
Ok. I get you're trying to pedantically make a point here, but you just cited the pages of the PHB saying spells apply your proficiency bonus as part of spellcasting. There is no room left over for the non-existent case of a weapon applying the proficiency bonus instead.
Provide a link or text reference which clarifies that please.
Further I will add that Staff of Magi is a weapon and it specifically states says in the description that it applies the bonus to spell attacks while holding it.
Finally, the bonus to spell attacks for the Wand of warmagw says nothing at all about using it as a focus. If I am a Thief I can attune to it and use it to gain the bonus from any spells I cast from my race or other classes, but I can't use it as a spell Focus for those spells..
Yes they are different and the bonus from a magic weapon applies to both, just like your proficiency bonus applies to both (assuming you are proficient with the weapon in question for a weapon attack).
Also you did not bother to read what you actually posted as this very document says exactly what I have been saying. I will quote the text:
"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. ... 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
This totally blows your entire argument out of the water! What this paragraph in the very text you linked states explicitly and unequivocally is that "weapon attack" is NOT the same thing as "attack with a weapon". So when WOTC says "weapon attack" they DO NOT mean "attack with a weapon"
To substitute the relevant weapon - Ranged Weapon (sling) attack is not the same thing as an attack with a Ranged Weapon (sling).
Looking at Sharpshooter - Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon (sling) 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.
GAME-SET-MATCH
Yes there absolutely is. Steel Wind Strike, and Spiritual Weapon are two examples of spells that use a weapon and make a spell attack. Catapult also is a spell attack which uses a weapon, if you catapult a weapon with it.
Finally there is the Sword Bard subclass which states explicitly:
"If you’re proficient with a simple or martial melee weapon, you can use it as a spellcasting focus for your bard spells."
So are you going to say Bards that are using a weapon as a focus are not using the weapon for a spell attack?
Ok so then if you are using a sling the range is "self"?
How far do you think it can go if you use a sling? RAW there is a range listed for a sling, that is the range used if you use a sling to throw a stone. That is the only RAW range that makes any sense at all.
Don't just sit here and say I am wrong, tell me what the range is if you use a sling and don't throw it and tell me why it is that range.
No I am not. There is not a separate proficiency bonus for weapons. I am being pendantic when I am the one actually quoting RAW?
You have made claims that were either patently false (example - the range of Magic Stone is 60 feet) or cited things that are supposedly clear but provided no supporting documentation.