D&D 5E Sneak Attack with spells?

[aco175]

I would be hesitant to allow sneak attack damage combined with scaling cantrip damage. You can also open up sneak attack with 'weapons' that deal more than the d8 that a rapier does.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

Player handbook page 201 states :

WHAT IS A SPELL?
A spell is a discrete magical effect, a single shaping of the magical energies that suffuse the multiverse into a specific, limited expression. In casting a spell, a character carefully plucks at the invisible strands of raw magic suffusing the world, pins them in place in a particular pattern, sets them vibrating in a specific way, and then releases them to unleash the desired effect-in most cases, all in the span of seconds.
Spells can be versatile tools, weapons, or protective wards. They can deal damage or undo it, impose or remove conditions (see appendix A), drain life energy away, and restore life to the dead.
Uncounted thousands of spells have been created over the course of the multiverse's history, and many of them are long forgotten. Some might yet lie recorded in crumbling spellbooks hidden in ancient ruins or trapped in the minds of dead gods. Or they might someday be reinvented by a character who has amassed enough power and wisdom to do so.

So RAW, spells are weapons, And if it is a ranged spell, meets the requirements for sneak attack

Look, you can play the game any way you like with House Rules. But don't suggest by RAW that ranged spell attacks qualify as a Ranged Weapon. Tell you what. Try to find an AL game and state that is RAW.

You can try to twist the language any way you like. But spells are not treated as weapons. Even Spiritual Weapon says "melee spell attack", and spell attacks != weapon attacks.

Now, if you want to proc Booming Blade, Shadow Blade, and Sneak Attack all into a single attack, that works.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Not a fan of the slowly tightening noose on Rogue options.

As far as I can tell the restrictions are all flavor restrictions, so I allow SA on anything that makes an attack roll.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

Not a fan of the slowly tightening noose on Rogue options.

As far as I can tell the restrictions are all flavor restrictions, so I allow SA on anything that makes an attack roll.

Once again, that is your House Rule, and completely unsupported as RAW by any documentation, including Sage Advice. SA explicitly defines what the word "weapon" means inside the D&D world, and anything that makes an attack roll is NOT how Sage Advice defines a "weapon".

 

[DEFCON 1]

Once again, that is your House Rule, and completely unsupported as RAW by any documentation, including Sage Advice. SA explicitly defines what the word "weapon" means inside the D&D world, and anything that makes an attack roll is NOT how Sage Advice defines a "weapon".

Yeah, so what? Did anyone say they were making a RAW claim, or were they just stating what could be done with no issue?

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

Yeah, so what? Did anyone say they were making a RAW claim, or were they just stating what could be done with no issue?

Actually, yes. In posts #14 and #15 (duplicates), the poster said, and I quote: "So RAW, spells are weapons, And if it is a ranged spell, meets the requirements for sneak attack."

Like I said in my previous posts, if anyone wants to say it is a House Rule, that is their prerogative. Just don't call it RAW.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Once again, that is your House Rule, and completely unsupported as RAW by any documentation, including Sage Advice. SA explicitly defines what the word "weapon" means inside the D&D world, and anything that makes an attack roll is NOT how Sage Advice defines a "weapon".

I... don't care?

I said what I allow and why. Didn't ask for a sermon on RAW.

RAW doesn't mean my standards and expectations, so over the side it goes. Sploosh.

 

[Plaguescarred]

A weapon is anything featuring under the ranged weapon tables, and anything specifically identified as a ranged weapon. Anything else a spell produce is not catogized as a ranged weapon. It was also confirmed by a Dev on Twitter

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

I... don't care?

I said what I allow and why. Didn't ask for a sermon on RAW.

RAW doesn't mean my standards and expectations, so over the side it goes. Sploosh.

If you look at the ttimestamps, this is a 7 year old thread that was necro'ed yesterday by someone claiming that yes, by RAW, spells = weapons. I replied to that very wrong assertion. Look at the OP, from 2014. That was very much a RAW question. I replied in the theme of the original RAW question, specifically to the incorrect assertions in posts 14 and 15.

Now, you then gave your own House Rule opinion, in a RAW based thread.....

 

[Plaguescarred]

You can sneak attack at range with a shadow blade and that is a spell. Also if you get magic stone from a feat or multiclass.

You can only use Sneak Attack with a Magic Stone hurled with a sling, not when thrown by itself.