Conjuration attack bonus modifiers

[mostholy2]

Do attacks from conjurations (such as spiritual weapon) suffer from penalties affecting the caster? Or are they considered independent from the caster and gain attack bonuses/penalties independently from the caster?

ie. Cleric who is sustaining SpW is prone (-2 attacks) and target has concealment (-2 attack) from cleric. Does the sustained SpW attack suffer from the -4 penalty? Or is it independent and make the sustained attack straight.

If the latter, what about the initial attack by the weapon (when first cast)?

 

[Larrin]

Interesting. Concealment would defintiely apply, the attack isn't close or area so it logically has a chance of missing (the cleric is directing the attack, it uses his wisdom, etc, so fluffwise he needs to have a clear view of the attacker if you need to justify it)

Prone...i don't recall, but if prone penalty applies to all attacks or even just ranged ones, then ruleswise, yes it applies. If it only applies to mellee attacks (or in some way NOT ranged attacks), then no, the weapon is ranged as far as your conditions are concerned. I think prone applies to all attacks though, so it would apply and stack. Check to make sure.

Bottom line: if it interferes with a ranged attack, it will interfere with spiritual weapon, because its listed as a ranged power.

 

[mostholy2]

What about cover? It is very possible that the target has cover vs. the cleric, but not to the conjuration (as the conjuration is in the same space as the target).

Or if the cleric is suffering additional penalties because of creature aura?

In both cases the penalties effect the cleric, but do not necessarily affect the conjuration.

 

[Larrin]

With the rules the way they are, if it would affect a clerics ranged attack, it will interfere with spiritual weapon.

Cover is slightly tricky, Sp. Weapon conjures a weapon in the opponents square, thus its kind of impossible to have cover from the weapon. thus if the DM rules that the weapon is 'making the attack' then the target will never have cover against this attack. I don't see anything in the rules to support this, though.

The rules state that 1) its a ranged attack 2)its wisdom vs AC, 1d10 + Wisdom modifier damage. 3) you conjure a weapon in the targets square and allies get combat advantage against the target. It never really says the weapon does the attacking. Now obviously, flavorwise, its the weapon that does the damage (we assume) but just from the rules there is NO reason to directly link the weapon to the damage (the flavor text does imply its the weapon attacking, but its just flavor, no true impact on effect). You could interpret it as divine power damaging the enemy while a ghostly weapon appears and menaces the target but never touches him. The rules support this interpretation as much as if you go with the conventional "weapon smacks them" interpretaion.

Bottom line: The power implies that YOU make the attack, thus if your target has cover against YOU, regardless of where the weapon is, it has a cover bonus to defense.

if you need fluff justification, link it to the cleric needing to see where to direct the weapon clearly when he makes the attacks.

 

[DracoSuave]

Conjurations do not have minds of their own, they must be directed by the caster in order to be effective. The Cleric needs line of sight to properly direct the weapon against the target, and as well needs line of effect in order to properly influence the weapon itself.