mellored
Legend
True for EB.
But there other attack spells that can use it as an arcane focus. Like witchbolt.
That's the part in question.
You are making a (spell) attack roll, with the weapon (as the focus).
D&D 5E XGTE Errata
But there other attack spells that can use it as an arcane focus. Like witchbolt.
You are making a (spell) attack roll, with the weapon (as the focus).
Cognomen's Cassowary
First Post
"the weapon" - noun phrase, subject - What does the weapon do?
"gains" - verb - Okay, the weapon gains what?
"a +1 bonus" - noun phrase, direct object - The weapon gains a +1 bonus to what?
"its" - possessive pronoun - "The weapon" is pretty clearly the antecedent. "The weapon" possesses the coming indirect object.
"to its attack and damage rolls" - prepositional phrase, indirect object - The weapon's attack and damage rolls.
Thus, all together, "The weapon gains a +1 bonus to [the weapon's] attack and damage rolls." Unless you are using the weapon's attack and damage rolls when casting your spells--which is both not supported by the rules ("Attack Rolls," PHB 205) and a huge nerf a large majority of the time--you do not gain this bonus on spells.
If the authors had wanted to say, "While using your pact weapon as an arcane focus, you gain a +1 bonus to your spell attack and damage rolls," they very well could have--and that's exactly the kind of language that they used on, e.g., rod of the pact keeper and wand of the war mage. Instead, they made the +1 bonus to the weapon's attack and damage rolls as linguistically separate from the prior effect as they could, by placing it in a new paragraph and writing a transition which introduces it as a separate effect.
"gains" - verb - Okay, the weapon gains what?
"a +1 bonus" - noun phrase, direct object - The weapon gains a +1 bonus to what?
"its" - possessive pronoun - "The weapon" is pretty clearly the antecedent. "The weapon" possesses the coming indirect object.
"to its attack and damage rolls" - prepositional phrase, indirect object - The weapon's attack and damage rolls.
Thus, all together, "The weapon gains a +1 bonus to [the weapon's] attack and damage rolls." Unless you are using the weapon's attack and damage rolls when casting your spells--which is both not supported by the rules ("Attack Rolls," PHB 205) and a huge nerf a large majority of the time--you do not gain this bonus on spells.
If the authors had wanted to say, "While using your pact weapon as an arcane focus, you gain a +1 bonus to your spell attack and damage rolls," they very well could have--and that's exactly the kind of language that they used on, e.g., rod of the pact keeper and wand of the war mage. Instead, they made the +1 bonus to the weapon's attack and damage rolls as linguistically separate from the prior effect as they could, by placing it in a new paragraph and writing a transition which introduces it as a separate effect.
EvanNave55
Explorer
Deleted:
the person noticed their mistake.
the person noticed their mistake.
Last edited:
Jonathan Bond
First Post
Just done a quick search of this thread, and can't see that it has been mentioned...
Eldritch Smite
Prerequisite: 5th level, Pact of the Blade feature
Once per turn when you hit a creature with your pact weapon, you can expend a warlock spell slot to deal an extra 1d8 force damage to the target, plus another 1d8 per level of the spell slot, and you can knock the target prone if it is Huge or smaller.
The PHB says similar about the Paladin's Divine Smite, but errata later removed the restriction to only Paladin Slots, allowing for Pallocks to smite all day on short rest spell slots.
Should the same not be true here?
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/25/paladin-slot-for-divine-smite/
Eldritch Smite
Prerequisite: 5th level, Pact of the Blade feature
Once per turn when you hit a creature with your pact weapon, you can expend a warlock spell slot to deal an extra 1d8 force damage to the target, plus another 1d8 per level of the spell slot, and you can knock the target prone if it is Huge or smaller.
The PHB says similar about the Paladin's Divine Smite, but errata later removed the restriction to only Paladin Slots, allowing for Pallocks to smite all day on short rest spell slots.
Should the same not be true here?
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/11/25/paladin-slot-for-divine-smite/
CapnZapp
Legend
The reason probably is because this is a thread of actual errata.
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
Jonathan George
First Post
Not allowed outside combat
Just wanted to point out that the wording of the spell is very specific to turns. A creature must start or pass through the spirit each turn to heal 1d6. While we all agree a turn is 6 seconds, turns themselves do not exist outside of combat. Making this a combat cast only, unless specifically allowed by the DM.
Just wanted to point out that the wording of the spell is very specific to turns. A creature must start or pass through the spirit each turn to heal 1d6. While we all agree a turn is 6 seconds, turns themselves do not exist outside of combat. Making this a combat cast only, unless specifically allowed by the DM.
I am not sure i have seen anything that said elements referencing turns implies they can only be used in combat parts of scenes. It certainly is not overtly stated (RAW) but if it is RAI then a reference would be nice.
But i have yet to see a GM or reference (until now perhaps) that would rule you could not cast Healing Word out of combat to heal up members of your team because it requires a bonus action to cast and "You must use a bonus action on your turn..." is in the general rule for bonus actions.
But i am sure you probably have a good reference to support your position.
EDIT Oh and its a ROUND that is 6 seconds not a TURN.
Last edited:
Asgorath
Explorer
Yeah I think the demand was so high that they did the second printing almost immediately, and it might take another round or two for all the errors to be corrected.
Similar Threads
