D&D 5E Spiritual Weapon vs. Fire Shield

[DND_Reborn]

The point of disagreement is whether the cleric hit you or the spiritual weapon and that does very much matter.

Strictly RAW it isn't a point of disagreement...

If you insist on answering that question: the cleric DID hit you with the spiritual weapon as a melee spell attack, which is why the roll is made using the clerics spell attack modifier.

It doesn't matter that the cleric wasn't actually wielding the weapon when the cleric hit you with it.

 

[Incenjucar]

The whole thing would work a lot more cleanly if the weapon was a conjured entity controlled by the caster rather than a melee attack by the caster.

 

[FrogReaver]

Strictly RAW it isn't a point of disagreement...

If you insist on answering that question: the cleric DID hit you with the spiritual weapon as a melee spell attack, which is why the roll is made using the clerics spell attack modifier.

It doesn't matter that the cleric wasn't actually wielding the weapon when the cleric hit you with it.

Foremost, I'm not talking about whether the cleric is wielding the weapon. I don't think that has any impact.

An alternative answer - The Cleric via magic directs the spiritual weapon to attack. The spell directing the cleric to make an attack roll is simply a mechanic used by the game to determine if the spiritual weapon's attack hits.

Note - this view preserves RAW for spiritual weapon and also for Flame Shield while allowing it to function in a sensible manner. IMO, when you have one RAW view that allows abilities to interact sensibly and one that doesn't then one should go with the former over the later.

 

[Mort]

whenever a creature within 5 feet of you hits you with a melee attack, the shield erupts with flame. The attacker takes 2d8 fire damage from a warm shield, or 2d8 cold damage from a cold shield.​

The spell is pretty clear in its meaning. There's not a lot of room for interpretation there.

Except it's perfectly reasonable to rule the spiritual weapon is attacking and it is not the caster nor is it a creature.

And frankly this is one of those situations where the result of not ruling that way is odd enough to make that call regardless.

The rules should not be interpreted so rigidly as to lead to absurd/nonsensical results.

 

[Oofta]

Okay, I haven't done that. The spell says what it says regardless of any ruling someone might make about it.

While I've pointed out why I disagree. There are exceptions to every rule, I think this is one of them.

In every case that I know of other than spiritual weapon the attacker or an object, which is typically a weapon but could be an implement or a hand, needs to physically touch the creature with fire shield.

Since the spiritual weapon is not physically attached to the caster I rule that they are unaffected. Feel free to rule differently.

 

[DND_Reborn]

An alternative answer - The Cleric via magic directs the spiritual weapon to attack. The spell directing the cleric to make an attack roll is simply a mechanic used by the game to determine if the spiritual weapon's attack hits.

And in this process the cleric (the creature which will take the backlash from the fire shield) IS making a melee spell attack:

It doesn't matter if you want to say the cleric is directing it via magic, all that matters for the strict RAW interpretation are:

1. you hit with a melee (spell) attack made via spiritual weapon
2. you are within 5 feet of the creature hit by your spiritual weapon
3. that creature is protected by the fire shield spell.

The rest is fluff which you can say happens however you want.

 

[Clint_L]

I would just go with RAW. I don't see a problem at all, except from trying to logic out an effect which is already completely illogical. The fire shield is a magical effect. If you poke it with a sword from within its range, it doesn't hurt the sword, it hurts the thing using the sword. If you poke it with a spiritual weapon, it doesn't hurt the spiritual weapon, it hurts the thing using the spiritual weapon.

Folks seem to be focused on the idea that if you aren't physically holding the weapon, you aren't connected to it. But you are - you are connected through magic. Which is every bit as real in D&D as physical bodies.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

No one has used fireshield in a 5e game of mine, but here is another scenario where I would house rule: what if the attacker is 10 feet away and using a melee attack (they have range, say a polearm or large size?)

I would damage the attacker if they were attacking with a natural weapon (they get singed) but not if the attack was delivered with a weapon (pole arm, big sword with big arms).

No need to houserule this part as Fire Shield already states that the attacking creature needs to be within 5' of Fire Shield.


Honestly I personally prefer going with RAW in most cases and it seems there's nothing in the rules that would indicate that the caster is not hit.

I find it's not impossible to reason it out. It's magic. The Fire Shield might know who the attacker is and erupt into that direction and not the direction the attack came from.

 

[FrogReaver]

And in this process the cleric (the creature which will take the backlash from the fire shield) IS making a melee spell attack:

View attachment 267831View attachment 267830
It doesn't matter if you want to say the cleric is directing it via magic, all that matters for the strict RAW interpretation are:

1. you hit with a melee (spell) attack made via spiritual weapon
2. you are within 5 feet of the creature hit by your spiritual weapon
3. that creature is protected by the fire shield spell.

The rest is fluff which you can say happens however you want.

Again. 1 is in dispute. I am saying the cleric does not hit with a melee attack made via the spiritual weapon. The spiritual weapon hits via a melee atttack.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Again. 1 is in dispute. I am saying the cleric does not hit with a melee attack made via the spiritual weapon. The spiritual weapon hits via a melee atttack.

Again. 1 is not in dispute. I reference the highlight part of the spell spiritual weapon. The cleric (you) is making the melee spell attack. Without the cleric directing it, the spiritual weapon does nothing.