A must-have for every cleric.

So if I understand this like I think I do:

1.) The initial use of the weapon is both casting a spell and making a melee spell attack at once as your bonus action -- so rules for multiple spells in a round apply (only cantrip as the action) just like a touch attack spell, even if it has a 60' range.

2.) subsequent uses of the weapon on other rounds is repeating the same melee spell attack, as a bonus action -- but not casting a spell for that round, right?

3.) the weapon repeats damage at the level it was initially cast at for these subsequent attacks on a hit  -- right?

4.) you can never make opportunity attacks with the weapon as it only ever acts as your bonus action and the weapon has no reactions of its own (it must be commanded). 

5.) For the same reason you cannot Ready subsequent attacks with the weapon as a reaction (commanding the weapon is your Bonus Action taken on your turn) -- though you could hold and then (re)cast it for another spell slot

6.)Big picture you can essentially use the spell to add an attack on every post-casting round as your bonus action regardless of what your action was -- giving a cleric two attacks in a round (action + bonus action similar to dual-wielding) or ability to cast an Action spell + bonus attack...because making the attack isn't casting a spell, right?

This spell seems quite amazing for those without access to extra attacks, with the only real downside being that it has to roll against AC in melee range each time after the first cast, but with your spell attack bonus instead.  Seems like it's a pretty good idea that it only scales with every two spell levels then, since it's not concentration and lasts for a whole turn in duration.

Just looking for some clarification as in the few small one-shots my little group has done so far, I think we have screwed up how it works in every single one of them.  I think we were just using the default damage on the subsequent attacks, giving the cleric opportunity attacks with it if she could see the enemy move away from the hammer, etc.

When first cast, the cleric would need to see the spot and the creature to attack. If the creature moves into an area of darkness (such as under murky water), would the cleric need to still be able to see the target?

For background, I cast this and a couple rounds later the hydra grabbed me and pulled me into murky water. If another player were also underwater, they would have disadvantage on the attack. But would the Spiritual Weapon have disadvantage? Or would it even be able to attack at all?

We use this as Thor's Hammer in my group, because it's cool.  I cast it.  I smash someone within 5 feet.  Then I throw it at someone within 20 ft who it hits as a bonus.  Then it returns.  And next round I smash again and throw it again.  Why?  Because the rules are vague, and again....it makes clerics friggin cool. Overpowered?  Compared to what?

I suspect the answer to this would be “no”, or at least “ask DM”, but would the Spiritual Weapon count as an allied creature for the purpose of the ‘Help’ action?

Could you use your action to ‘help’, giving an allied creature advantage on the next attack on an enemy, then use the bonus action to attack said enemy, so it attacks with advantage? Or would that not count because it’s not technically an “allied creature”.

Yes, you could just attack with your normal weapon as an action, as well as the Spiritual Weapon, but as a frontline Cleric, your STR may not be as high as your WIS, as you often have to choose between STR and CON.

...so, there is no defined size for the spectral weapon, is there? i mean, you could say that since you get to define the form of the weapon, it could be a Huge, or Gargantuan sized weapon, even if it's only for flavor, and lack of moving.

Bonus, since while usually you make the weapon associated with your Deity, and Clerics can worship Ideals, You could play a Knowledge Domain Cleric with a Floating Book, a Dragon-God Serving Warpriest that summons a Spectral Dragon to Bite his opponents, or a narcissist 'Holy Man', who considers himself a Weapon.

From what I've read and done research for, a spiritual weapon can receive advantage only from effects on the target that would give it.

This includes the help action, flanking (if an ally is opposite from it and you use those rules), guiding bolt, etc.

You can't give the spiritual weapon an advantage effect as it is not a creature. (Think like the new spell Silvery Barbs)

The spiritual weapon is not a creature and can also not give another player flanking.

Quote from SquirrellyOtter >>

Quote from Wakarusa >>

Thinking of twinning this spell as a Divine Sorcerer. Having two spiritual weapons. Are there any conflicts with attacking with both because of only one bonus action?

 Yes, since you are limited to one bonus action per turn, you can't attack with two Spiritual Weapons in the same turn.  There is no benefit to casting the spell twice even if you have it as both a cleric and a sorcerer spell, because you can only summon and attack (on cast) OR move and attack (for the next nine turns) one Spiritual Weapon on a given turn.  

In fact, casting again consumes another second-level spell slot, which is a waste considering you already have one on the field.  So you're using another spell slot and only gaining maybe half the benefit (being able to attack one of the two weapons at a time).  Not worth it at all.  

The "At Higher Levels" wording makes it such that you wouldn't be able to stack your cleric and sorcerer levels to achieve higher damage on the spell: you have to be able to access at least 4th level spells in one of your classes (cleric or sorcerer) to benefit from the increased damage.  

 

You may have already learned this by now but just to reiterate for those that don't know. The amount of spell slots you have is determined by your total level and whether or not you took levels into half-casters. Such that a lv 7 cleric/lv 5 sorcerer would only know up to lv 4 spells from cleric spell list and sorcerer only up to lv 3 sorcerer spells BUT would have access to up till 1 6th lv spell slot.

So question,  player is multiclassed cleric/runeknight can they use a rune with on a hit from a Spiritual Weapon? Thanks

Quote from RivkaPetric>>

When first cast, the cleric would need to see the spot and the creature to attack. If the creature moves into an area of darkness (such as under murky water), would the cleric need to still be able to see the target?

For background, I cast this and a couple rounds later the hydra grabbed me and pulled me into murky water. If another player were also underwater, they would have disadvantage on the attack. But would the Spiritual Weapon have disadvantage? Or would it even be able to attack at all?

It would all depend on what the character who cast the spell can see.  All of your attacks with Spiritual Weapon require the user have line of sight to the target, and use a bonus action.  The weapon is not autonomous, sadly.  

Quote from Huskerfan82 >>

So question,  player is multiclassed cleric/runeknight can they use a rune with on a hit from a Spiritual Weapon? Thanks

 So I presume you are thinking of the Fire Rune:

• Fire Rune. This rune's magic channels the masterful craftsmanship of great smiths. While wearing or carrying an object inscribed with this rune, your proficiency bonus is doubled for any ability check you make that uses your proficiency with a tool.
  • In addition, when you hit a creature with an attack using a weapon, you can invoke the rune to summon fiery shackles: the target takes an extra 2d6 fire damage, and it must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be restrained for 1 minute. While restrained by the shackles, the target takes 2d6 fire damage at the start of each of its turns. The target can repeat the saving throw at the end of each of its turns, banishing the shackles on a success. Once you invoke this rune, you can't do so again until you finish a short or long rest.

Unfortunately, The attack for Spiritual Weapon is a spell attack, not a weapon attack.  So RAW would indicate you cannot add the rune effect when the Spiritual Weapon hits. That said, it sounds cool, and I'd probably allow it, as long as it didn't become game breaking.  Rule of Cool and all that.

Would a cleric of Shar automatically cast and get a chakram, or would they be able to choose it's form?

Quote from Kyxileiloughfen >>

Would a cleric of Shar automatically cast and get a chakram, or would they be able to choose it's form?

 Unless your DM rules otherwise you can always choose its form. 

It's not a physical thing so it can be Passed through... So holding a position like a door as a barrier would not be possible, but if you still have your bonus action it could swing at anyone going through the door

This part is so wildly inconsistent with the rest of how spell casting works:

"When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, the damage increases by 1d8 for every two slot levels above 2nd."

Like, just give it to those clerics. Wizard running around casting fireballs like mad men and you have to put this weirdo "for every two slots" clause?  The gods might be crazy.

Because the updraft ends and you have no control over it. What if you did?

Now this is going to sound crazy, and I'm sure someone else has posed this theory before ages ago, BUT! Barbarians can't cast spells or concentrate on them while Raging, but Spiritual Weapon isn't concentration. Could a Barbarian with access to this spell cast it, Rage, and still maintain control of it? I'm thinking of a very wild Barbarian/Cleric character and thought this would be an interesting means of combat, even with 2 full rounds of setup. 

The way I think of it, Barbarians can still benefit from things like Longstrider, Haste, Dragon Breath, etc. spells that are cast on them despite either casting them prior to raging (Longstrider) or having to make conscious actions to use the magic (Dragon Breath) after it's been given to them. 

At the end of the day it's up to DM ruling, but what do you y'all think? I'm curious! Spellcasting Barbs are one of my favorite, albeit poorly optimized, characters to play as lately.

That is so cool

Is there anything in the rules about using Twinned Spell to cast two of these at the same time?

As a refresher- "When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn’t have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell’s level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip)."

This spell doesn't have a range of self, and it only effects one creature. I suppose an argument could be made for not being able to control both at the same time on subsequent turns, but this would be absolutely sick flavor for a War Domain Cleric, and I'd personally allow it as a DM.

Quote from Cowchow65 >>

Is there anything in the rules about using Twinned Spell to cast two of these at the same time?

As a refresher- "When you cast a spell that targets only one creature and doesn’t have a range of self, you can spend a number of sorcery points equal to the spell’s level to target a second creature in range with the same spell (1 sorcery point if the spell is a cantrip)."

 

This spell doesn't have a range of self, and it only effects one creature. I suppose an argument could be made for not being able to control both at the same time on subsequent turns, but this would be absolutely sick flavor for a War Domain Cleric, and I'd personally allow it as a DM.

I would say from a technical standpoint - no, it would not work. Mainly because the spell doesn't target a creature; the spell targets a tile and spawns a spectral weapon which then makes the attack at your command. But I could see the argument for a DM to allow it for flavor.