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.
The specific ruling for this has been posted for you twice. Twice. From the same SAC you have cited repeatedly.
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.
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.
RAI is the only argument you can make supporting the combo
RAW is very clear you are making the attack with a pebble, not a sling, and basic logic says the skill of the person wielding the sling has no bearing on the result of the attack, so any feat that affects that skill would be equally useless
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.
RAI is the only argument you can make supporting the combo
RAW is very clear you are making the attack with a pebble, not a sling, and basic logic says the skill of the person wielding the sling has no bearing on the result of the attack, so any feat that affects that skill would be equally useless
RAW makes it clear, you CAN use the pebble or CAN use a sling, (which even though its not a weapon attack.. RAW is attacking with a weapon), to make the attack, but that the damage of the attack is the same regardless....
It's a fact in the spell written is the magic stone can be hurled with a sling.
No feature using a weapon specifically states doing so qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." so if we follow your logic, none would work.
Instead, when a game feature say it makes an attack with a weapon, it qualify, hence why the Dev acknowledge it for use with Sneak Attack.
No feature using a weapon specifically states doing so qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." so if we follow your logic, none would work.
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...
There's no comparable statement in magic stone for using a sling. Probably because you're not actually making an attack with the sling
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 feature using a weapon specifically states doing so qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." so if we follow your logic, none would work.
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...
There's no comparable statement in magic stone for using a sling. Probably because you're not actually making an attack with the sling
In GFB and Booming Blade: your weapons damage is still dealt. The spells don’t replace the damage of the weapon. This is not an apples to apples comparison.
Yeah, but neither does Magic Stone spell out that the spell replaces the damage of the weapon. Its not Shilleighly but ranged.
Magic stone does spell out that it replaces the damage of the weapon. A stone in and of itself would be treated as an improvised weapon by if normally thrown. The spell changes the stats used in the attack roll as well as the damage die to be used. 1d4 improvised turns to 1d6 from the spell. Similarly the damage die of the stone would continue to be a 1d6 if a sling were used, though traditional sling bullets/stones would be a 1d4.
The spell text explicitly says that the attack can be made "with a sling." There is no rational way to suggest that the attack is not being made with a sling if you make it with a sling. That is the exact wording used by the text. This is possibly the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards.
The spell text explicitly says that the attack can be made "with a sling." There is no rational way to suggest that the attack is not being made with a sling if you make it with a sling. That is the exact wording used by the text. This is possibly the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards.
It explicitly does not say you make an attack with a sling. It says you make an attack with a pebble. It then gives you two options for delivering the pebble, which don't otherwise impact the results of the spell at all
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 you were "making an attack with a sling", your skill with a sling would matter. It doesn't. Rationally, you are not making an attack with a sling. You are making a spell attack, and the sling is an optional, and purely cosmetic, accessory
Again I go back to my chromatic orb analogy. You can't stick a diamond in the stock of a crossbow, and then say you get Sharpshooter on chromatic orb because you're "making an attack with a ranged weapon you are proficient with". The crossbow isn't material to the spell, and neither is the sling with magic stone
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)
The spell text explicitly says that the attack can be made "with a sling." There is no rational way to suggest that the attack is not being made with a sling if you make it with a sling. That is the exact wording used by the text. This is possibly the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards.
It explicitly does not say you make an attack with a sling. It says you make an attack with a pebble. It then gives you two options for delivering the pebble, which don't otherwise impact the results of the spell at all
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 you were "making an attack with a sling", your skill with a sling would matter. It doesn't. Rationally, you are not making an attack with a sling. You are making a spell attack, and the sling is an optional, and purely cosmetic, accessory
Again I go back to my chromatic orb analogy. You can't stick a diamond in the stock of a crossbow, and then say you get Sharpshooter on chromatic orb because you're "making an attack with a ranged weapon you are proficient with". The crossbow isn't material to the spell, and neither is the sling with magic stone
That’s not true nor is your comparison appropriate.
chromatic orbs spell description would have to mention you using the crossbow to fire the chromatic orb for that to be relevant.
Making up a scenario involving the attachment of a material component to a weapon to somehow boost the spells efficacy or effects is in no way similar to the spell description of magic stone saying you can hurl the magic stone with a sling.
The spell text explicitly says that the attack can be made "with a sling." There is no rational way to suggest that the attack is not being made with a sling if you make it with a sling. That is the exact wording used by the text. This is possibly the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards.
It explicitly does not say you make an attack with a sling.
It absolutely does. If you make a ranged attack with a pebble by hurling it with a sling, you are using a sling to make a ranged spell attack. If you are using a thing to perform an act, you are performing an act with that thing. That is what the word "with" means. This is definitional. Your position has no basis in the language the text is written in.
If you were "making an attack with a sling", your skill with a sling would matter.
I have no idea what you think this means. The words on the page are unambiguous. You are using the sling to make the attack.
It doesn't. Rationally, you are not making an attack with a sling. You are making a spell attack, and the sling is an optional, and purely cosmetic, accessory
I don't think you know what "rationally" means. Your position contradicts basic logic.
Again I go back to my chromatic orb analogy. You can't stick a diamond in the stock of a crossbow, and then say you get Sharpshooter on chromatic orb because you're "making an attack with a ranged weapon you are proficient with". The crossbow isn't material to the spell, and neither is the sling with magic stone
Does the chromatic orb spell say you can use a crossbow to make the attack? No? Then it's not an analogy; it's a non sequitur.
At any rate, the rule is clear to anyone who can read an entire sentence rather than cherry-pick the bit they care about and ignore the rest. I'm not engaging any further with someone who thinks using a sling to make an attack isn't making an attack with a sling.
No feature using a weapon specifically states doing so qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." so if we follow your logic, none would work.
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...
There's no comparable statement in magic stone for using a sling. Probably because you're not actually making an attack with the sling
The word "with a sling" are explicitly in the spell magic stone
None of the spell booming blade and green-flame blade specifically say it "qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." Hence why i say if we use this logic, no feature are that explicit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The specific ruling for this has been posted for you twice. Twice. From the same SAC you have cited repeatedly.
Blank
*claps*
Blank
all this arguing just so that one could pull a gotcha...
Blank
If you did that, you aren’t using the sling to make an attack with a weapon.
Just like Magic Stone
RAI is the only argument you can make supporting the combo
RAW is very clear you are making the attack with a pebble, not a sling, and basic logic says the skill of the person wielding the sling has no bearing on the result of the attack, so any feat that affects that skill would be equally useless
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)
RAW makes it clear, you CAN use the pebble or CAN use a sling, (which even though its not a weapon attack.. RAW is attacking with a weapon), to make the attack, but that the damage of the attack is the same regardless....
Blank
Where does it say this, RAW?
It's written in the spell itself.
It isn't. It states nothing about using a sling for the spell qualifying it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons."
So it must say somewhere else what an attack "with a weapon" is to be applied here.
If it doesn't, this is an argument for RAI, not RAW.
I've pointed out a hundred times that it does and that this is wrong, but Im curious where ya'll would point to to say your opinion is RAW.
It's a fact in the spell written is the magic stone can be hurled with a sling.
No feature using a weapon specifically states doing so qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." so if we follow your logic, none would work.
Instead, when a game feature say it makes an attack with a weapon, it qualify, hence why the Dev acknowledge it for use with Sneak Attack.
booming blade and green-flame blade certainly seem to:
There's no comparable statement in magic stone for using a sling. Probably because you're not actually making an attack with the sling
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)
So all you are saying is that there is a vague suggestion in the text and an unofficial ruling by a game designer. Which is to say, it isn't RAW.
It was possibly RAI, but with official clarification even that is no longer so.
In GFB and Booming Blade: your weapons damage is still dealt. The spells don’t replace the damage of the weapon. This is not an apples to apples comparison.
Blank
Yeah, but neither does Magic Stone spell out that the spell replaces the damage of the weapon. Its not Shilleighly but ranged.
Magic stone does spell out that it replaces the damage of the weapon. A stone in and of itself would be treated as an improvised weapon by if normally thrown. The spell changes the stats used in the attack roll as well as the damage die to be used. 1d4 improvised turns to 1d6 from the spell. Similarly the damage die of the stone would continue to be a 1d6 if a sling were used, though traditional sling bullets/stones would be a 1d4.
The spell text explicitly says that the attack can be made "with a sling." There is no rational way to suggest that the attack is not being made with a sling if you make it with a sling. That is the exact wording used by the text. This is possibly the most insane argument I've ever seen on these boards.
It explicitly does not say you make an attack with a sling. It says you make an attack with a pebble. It then gives you two options for delivering the pebble, which don't otherwise impact the results of the spell at all
If you were "making an attack with a sling", your skill with a sling would matter. It doesn't. Rationally, you are not making an attack with a sling. You are making a spell attack, and the sling is an optional, and purely cosmetic, accessory
Again I go back to my chromatic orb analogy. You can't stick a diamond in the stock of a crossbow, and then say you get Sharpshooter on chromatic orb because you're "making an attack with a ranged weapon you are proficient with". The crossbow isn't material to the spell, and neither is the sling with magic stone
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)
That’s not true nor is your comparison appropriate.
chromatic orbs spell description would have to mention you using the crossbow to fire the chromatic orb for that to be relevant.
Making up a scenario involving the attachment of a material component to a weapon to somehow boost the spells efficacy or effects is in no way similar to the spell description of magic stone saying you can hurl the magic stone with a sling.
It absolutely does. If you make a ranged attack with a pebble by hurling it with a sling, you are using a sling to make a ranged spell attack. If you are using a thing to perform an act, you are performing an act with that thing. That is what the word "with" means. This is definitional. Your position has no basis in the language the text is written in.
I have no idea what you think this means. The words on the page are unambiguous. You are using the sling to make the attack.
I don't think you know what "rationally" means. Your position contradicts basic logic.
Does the chromatic orb spell say you can use a crossbow to make the attack? No? Then it's not an analogy; it's a non sequitur.
At any rate, the rule is clear to anyone who can read an entire sentence rather than cherry-pick the bit they care about and ignore the rest. I'm not engaging any further with someone who thinks using a sling to make an attack isn't making an attack with a sling.
The word "with a sling" are explicitly in the spell magic stone
None of the spell booming blade and green-flame blade specifically say it "qualify it for abilities that are triggered by attacks "with weapons." Hence why i say if we use this logic, no feature are that explicit.