Search results

I'm following the OP's request to comment on how the language works. I couldn't care less if sorcerer's are given the ability to use True Strike with their class feature by the DM. It's not broken or even over powered.

No I'm not implying it at all. I'm saying straight out that you can. You just need a specific beats general situation like True Strike. It doesn't matter. The weapon isn't part of the spell. It's a component. The attack is not part of the spell, because it's not part of the spell's effect...

5.5e PHB.

"The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry. Those details present exactly what the spell does, which ignores mundane physical laws." Your mundane attack is being modified by the spell which adds guidance based on your force of personality. The spell modifies the attack. The...

Nobody is arguing that it doesn't modify the attack. Modifying the attack, though, is different from the spell being the attack.

Swinging the sword as a specific beats general exception to having to take the attack action. It's like War Caster feat allowing you to cast a spell as your OA. Or the Bladesinger ability to cast a cantrip as part of the attack action. These are exceptions to the rules, but are not magical in...

The attack is not made using the magic of the spell, though. The only magic of the spell is the radiant damage. Per RAW, for something to be part of the spell's effect, it has to break a mundane law of physics and the attack isn't doing that. It's not using the attack action, but neither is...

No it isn't. The spell says to make an attack, but it's not a part of the spell or the spell effect, per RAW which I have quoted. But it has to be part of the spell, which the weapon and attack are not. It is not. If it were, then it would be part of the spell's effect, and by RAW it is not...

The attack with the weapon is not a part of the spell. The spell is the effect and it is explicitly not part of the effect, since effect is defined by the game as only that which ignores mundane physical laws. The spell description tells us that we make that attack, but it is not actually part...

I agree. As I said in my first post in this thread, what I am arguing is how I would rule it based on the wording. However, I can see how someone else might allow it and I wouldn't dream of trying to argue with a DM that did allow it. It's not broken or even over powered to allow it.

Wrong. It also MUST be part OF the spell, which by RAW the sword is not. It is a material component and components are not part of the spell, being only requirements to cast the spell. It also is not part of the spell's effect. At no point is it part OF the spell. Again, wrong. You are...

Here's another nail in the coffin. The sword attack is not part of the spell effect, making it not part of the spell. "The effects of a spell are detailed after its duration entry." So far so good. If it stopped there you guys would be correct. Unfortunately, it does not stop there and goes...

But it doesn't say make it as part of the spell. The spell is modifying the attack, not making the attack as part of the spell. That's why it doesn't say, "Make one melee spell attack." Firebolt says, "Make a ranged spell attack" since the bolt of fire actually is a part of the spell itself...

"Components: S, M (a weapon with which you have proficiency and that is worth l+ CP)." It's just a component. "COMPONENTS A spell's components are physical requirements the spellcaster must meet to cast the spell." Maybe read the rules before you declare what I said not what the rules say.

Regardless, at no point is the weapon part of the spell, because by RAW it's just a listed material component. The attack you make is just modified by the spell you were able to cast because you had the component to do so.

It applies to spell attacks, "melee spell attack" or "ranged spell attack." Only spell attacks are made as part OF the spell. The rest are attacks made that are modified BY the spell. There's a difference.

It does not meet the definition, because look at the spell. "Components: S, M (a weapon with which you have proficiency and that is worth l+ CP)" The sword is just a material component which allows the spell to be cast. That's its part. It does not meet that definition, since for that to...

But the sword is not part of the spell. It has existence outside of it as a component. It does not say, "as part of the spell make an attack..." It says, "make an attack with the weapon used in the casting..." which was used as a component to be able to cast the spell, not as part of the spell.

Incorrect. It says straight out that it's a material component. That makes it a component and not part of the spell, since if you read about components, it says that they are requirements that must be met in order to cast the spell. That means that they are not a part OF the spell.