|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) No, Weapon Specialization benefits are granted by way of their Weapon Group which is part of the "statistics or traits" of a Weapon. My certainty value here is pretty high, I'd say I have 90% confidence in this.
2) Again no, despite the form being that of a Weapon for the purpose of triggers etc. you're not making a Weapon Damage Roll, you're making a Spell Damage Roll. It doesn't say all purposes either, the wording there exists so that you can use things like Shield Block, Resistance, and Nimble Dodge against it, not so that you can apply bonuses to deal more Force Damage. Just as #1 I'm about 90% confident in this.
3) Absolutely yes. 100% without a doubt.
1) No, Weapon Specialization benefits are granted by way of their Weapon Group which is part of the "statistics or traits" of a Weapon. My certainty value here is pretty high, I'd say I have 90% confidence in this.
2) Again no, despite the form being that of a Weapon for the purpose of triggers etc. you're not making a Weapon Damage Roll, you're making a Spell Damage Roll. It doesn't say all purposes either, the wording there exists so that you can use things like Shield Block, Resistance, and Nimble Dodge against it, not so that you can apply bonuses to deal more Force Damage. Just as #1 I'm about 90% confident in this.
3) Absolutely yes. 100% without a doubt.
** spoiler omitted **
On 1) 2) Taking the line "Despite making a spell attack, the spiritual weapon is a weapon for purposes of triggers, resistances, and so forth.". You are making a Strike with a weapon, so I would expect anything that works with weapon strikes to work with the spiritual weapon. That being said, to take your degree of confidence approach, I'd say I'm only 60% confident that it should work.
Spiritual Weapon is only a weapon for purposes of triggers, resistances, and so forth. So it's a weapon for the one taking the blow. Not for the one making it. You apply absolutely nothing to Spiritual Weapon, and as such 1) and 2) are clear nos.
3) Yes, it works, as you are "making a Strike with the Spiritual Weapon".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
SPIRITUAL WEAPONS
The weapon’s Strikes are melee spell attacks.Question:
1. Does the "weapon specialization" work with spiritual weapon? It's not a "feat or a spell", but a class feature.2. Does the "Curse of the Hero’s Burden" Moderate Curse boon to damage apply?
3. Since the spell call for a Strike, does it count for the battle oracle " mechanics "Each time you make a Strike, you can suspend these penalties until the start of your next turn."
Same answer for all three questions, it's not a weapon, it's not a strike, it's a melee spell attack. so No for all three, I would say.
Strike is very specific:
Strike Single Action
Attack
Source Core Rulebook pg. 471 1.1
You attack with a weapon you’re wielding or with an unarmed attack, targeting one creature within your reach (for a melee attack) or within range (for a ranged attack).
SPIRITUAL WEAPONS
The weapon’s Strikes are melee spell attacks.Question:
3. Since the spell call for a Strike, does it count for the battle oracle " mechanics "Each time you make a Strike, you can suspend these penalties until the start of your next turn."Same answer for all three questions, it's not a weapon, it's not a strike, it's a melee spell attack. so No for all three, I would say.
Strike is very specific:
Strike Single Action
Attack
Source Core Rulebook pg. 471 1.1
You attack with a weapon you’re wielding or with an unarmed attack, targeting one creature within your reach (for a melee attack) or within range (for a ranged attack).You most definitely making a Strike with spiritual weapon, that's what the spell says.
So while yes, Strike is a very specific action, the spell says you are making that very specific action.
No, the text in the spell says strike, to be followed by text which says these strikes are Melee spell attacks.
Plus, in the Strike text I added, it specifically mentions that you attack with a weapon you're wielding...
So that's two reasons, as far as I read it, that nr 3 is also a No.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, the text in the spell says strike, to be followed by text which says these strikes are Melee spell attacks.
Plus, in the Strike text I added, it specifically mentions that you attack with a weapon you're wielding...
So that's two reasons, as far as I read it, that nr 3 is also a No.
You make a mistake between the Strike action and Strike.
Look at Haste for an example of Strike actions (as Haste is limited to the Strike action). But in this case, they speak of Strike and it's not the action but any generic Strike.
|
Hey Community,
I came here from This Thread to add the following question:
Q) When an Oracle with the Curse of Meddling Ancestors casts and/or sustains Spiritual Weapon, is the Strike the spell mentions a Subordinate Action to those Cast a Spell and/or Sustain a Spell actions (thus, subject to the "Preferred Action" flat checks)?
Q) Similarly, would the Moderate or Major benefits of the Martial Ancestors add their status bonuses to those Strikes?
The ancestral spirits you commune with haunt you and meddle with your belongings and actions, either out of a well-intentioned (but ultimately detrimental) attempt to assist you, as punishment for your audacity in circumventing the traditional means of achieving divine power, for their own amusement, or a mixture of the above. Your hair, clothing, and belongings constantly shift and stir, seemingly of their own volition.
Minor Curse One of your ancestors becomes predominant in their meddling. The first time you gain this effect each day, roll 1d4 on Table 2–4: Ancestral Influence to determine which type of ancestor becomes predominant. This predominant ancestor guides you to use their preferred type of action. When you try to use one of the types of actions listed for the other ancestors, you must succeed at a DC 4 flat check. On a failure, you spend the action but gain no effect (though you don't lose the spell if you were Casting a Spell). If your action would take 1 minute or longer, it's long enough that you can overcome the meddling, and you don't need to attempt a flat check.
During combat or another tense, round-by-round encounter, other ancestors wrestle for control of your actions. When you roll initiative, and then at the end of each of your turns during the encounter, roll 1d4 and change your predominant ancestor appropriately. Once the encounter ends, you return to the influence of the ancestor you first rolled for the day.
Moderate Curse The flat check DC to use other actions is 6, and you get the moderate curse benefit listed for your predominant ancestor in Table 2–4.
Major Curse The flat check DC is 8, and you get the major curse benefit listed for your predominant ancestor instead of the moderate curse benefit.
...
Table 2–4: Ancestral Influence
1) "Martial": Strikes / Your Strikes gain a +1 status bonus to attack rolls and a +2 status bonus to damage
2) "Skillful": Perception and Skill actions / You gain a +1 status bonus to skill checks and Perception checks
3) "Spellcasting": Cast a Spell / Non-cantrip spells without a duration gain a status bonus to their damage and healing equal to the spell's level
A weapon made of pure magical force materializes and attacks foes you designate within range. This weapon has a ghostly appearance and manifests as a club, a dagger, or your deity's favored weapon.
When you cast the spell, the weapon appears next to a foe you choose within range and makes a Strike against it. Each time you Sustain the Spell, you can move the weapon to a new target within range (if needed) and Strike with it. The spiritual weapon uses and contributes to your multiple attack penalty.
The weapon's Strikes are melee spell attacks. Regardless of its appearance, the weapon deals force damage equal to 1d8 plus your spellcasting ability modifier. You can deal damage of the type normally dealt by the weapon instead of force damage (or any of the available damage types for a versatile weapon). No other statistics or traits of the weapon apply, and even a ranged weapon attacks adjacent creatures only. Despite making a spell attack, the spiritual weapon is a weapon for purposes of triggers, resistances, and so forth.
The weapon doesn't take up space, grant flanking, or have any other attributes a creature would. The weapon can't make any attack other than its Strike, and feats or spells that affect weapons do not apply to it.
Cheers.
Q) When an Oracle with the Curse of Meddling Ancestors casts and/or sustains Spiritual Weapon, is the Strike the spell mentions a Subordinate Action to those Cast a Spell and/or Sustain a Spell actions (thus, subject to the "Preferred Action" flat checks)?
Q) Similarly, would the Moderate or Major benefits of the Martial Ancestors add their status bonuses to those Strikes?
Those Strike actions are certainly subordinate actions to the Cast a Spell and Sustain a Spell actions.
How that interacts with the Oracle curse should follow the same ruling that your table uses for other subordinate actions that the thread you came from is discussing.
|
|
For what it's worth, after reading both threads, the rules seem pretty clear on this one:
1) Spiritual Weapon is a spell
2) The only caster actions for Spiritual Weapon are:
a) Cast a Spell - this action results in a Spell Attack roll against a caster-selected target
b) Sustain a Spell - this action results in a Spell Attack roll against a caster-selected target
There is clarification text that specifies how the Spell Attack is resolved against the target... apparently it takes the form of a force weapon, so it is compared to AC, can be blocked with a shield, and triggers resistances and immunities as if it were a 'real' weapon of the same type as the deity's preferred weapon.Applying the above:
1) It's a Spell Attack in all cases, so caster proficiencies, feats, and item bonuses for weapons do not apply. Those for spellcasting do, e.g. Reach and other metamagic
2) Martial Ancestors and Skillful Ancestors will interfere with the Cast a Spell action (listed for Spellcasting Ancestor) but not with the Sustain a Spell action (not listed for any Ancestor)
3) Spellcasting Ancestors will neither assist nor interfere since Spiritual Weapon has a duration
Q) When an Oracle with the Curse of Meddling Ancestors casts and/or sustains Spiritual Weapon, is the Strike the spell mentions a Subordinate Action to those Cast a Spell and/or Sustain a Spell actions (thus, subject to the "Preferred Action" flat checks)?
Q) Similarly, would the Moderate or Major benefits of the Martial Ancestors add their status bonuses to those Strikes?
Those Strike actions are certainly subordinate actions to the Cast a Spell and Sustain a Spell actions.
How that interacts with the Oracle curse should follow the same ruling that your table uses for other subordinate actions that the thread you came from is discussing.
aka
"Spiritual Weapon is a Spell Attack"
vs
"Spiritual Weapon is a Strike"
...
So which is it?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Q) When an Oracle with the Curse of Meddling Ancestors casts and/or sustains Spiritual Weapon, is the Strike the spell mentions a Subordinate Action to those Cast a Spell and/or Sustain a Spell actions (thus, subject to the "Preferred Action" flat checks)?
Q) Similarly, would the Moderate or Major benefits of the Martial Ancestors add their status bonuses to those Strikes?
Those Strike actions are certainly subordinate actions to the Cast a Spell and Sustain a Spell actions.
How that interacts with the Oracle curse should follow the same ruling that your table uses for other subordinate actions that the thread you came from is discussing.
As I explained in the other thread, you, the caster, are not Striking with Spiritual Weapon.
Arguments in support of the weapon making the Strikes:
-"A weapon made of pure magical force materializes and attacks foes you designate within range."
Clearly, a weapon appears out of nowhere and attacks independent of you. You merely tell it who to attack.
-"When you cast the spell, the weapon appears next to a foe you choose within range and makes a Strike against it."
This clearly states the weapon itself is making a Strike. You are simply Casting a Spell.
-"The spiritual weapon uses and contributes to your multiple attack penalty."
Clarifying that even though it's the weapon making the Strikes, it still contributes to your MAP. If you were making these Strikes this line would not be needed.
-"The weapon's Strikes are melee spell attacks."
Again, clarifying that the Strikes belong to the Weapon, not you. Also clarifying that they are melee Spell Attacks.
-"Despite making a spell attack, the spiritual weapon is a weapon for purposes of triggers, resistances, and so forth."
Again claiming that the weapon is the one making the attacks, and clarifying that even though it's a Spell Attack it counts as a weapon for things the target may have.
-"The weapon doesn't take up space, grant flanking, or have any other attributes a creature would. The weapon can't make any attack other than its Strike, and feats or spells that affect weapons do not apply to it."
Finally, clarifying that while the weapon is making attacks it isn't a creature nor does it provide flanking. It also clarifies that it can only make Strike attacks, again backing up that the Weapon is what's Striking.
Only argument in support of you making the Strikes:
-"Each time you Sustain the Spell, you can move the weapon to a new target within range (if needed) and Strike with it."
Says you Strike with it, but it's simply because saying "...you can move the weapon to a new target within range (if needed) and you can make the weapon Strike" is a bit too wordy.
As we see here, there's overwhelming evidence against the caster being the one to "Strike" with this spell. The only things the caster does is Cast the Spell, and Sustain the Spell. The spell does the rest.
"Spiritual Weapon is a Spell Attack"
vs
"Spiritual Weapon is a Strike"
Spiritual weapon is not an attack, or a spell attack or a strike attack in and of itself.
However it contains an attack which is defined as a spell attack and a strike. This is a subordinate action.
However the Oracle Ancestor Martial will object to the initial casting of the spell as that is not an actual attack. Likewise Ancestor Skillful. The Sustain is not an action any of the curses will object to. Because it includes a Strike it counts for the purposes of relieving the Oracle Battle Curses.
I don't see any point in making the distinction Cordell is about whether your or your weapon is making the strike. In my opinion both are true. That is not a problem. I don't have to ignore any of the rules text so why would I?
|
|
I am of the opinion that there is a divergence between the spirit and the letter of this interaction.
Storywise, it makes sense that your Spellcasting Ancestors would be appeased by casting and sustaining Spiritual Weapon. I think most GMs would run it this way upon being casually polled. But mechanics-wise, I am having a hard time justifying it because it explicitly uses the Strike keyword, compared with other spells that involve spell attacks without using that specific keyword.
If Spiritual Weapon were worded the following way, it would be clear cut:
A weapon made of pure magical force materializes and attacks foes you designate within range. This weapon has a ghostly appearance and manifests as a club, a dagger, or your deity's favored weapon.
When you cast the spell, the weapon appears next to a foe you choose within range and makes a spell attack against it. Each time you Sustain the Spell, you can move the weapon to a new target within range (if needed) and spell attack with it. The spiritual weapon uses and contributes to your multiple attack penalty.
The weapon's spell attacks are melee spell attacks. Regardless of its appearance, the weapon deals force damage equal to 1d8 plus your spellcasting ability modifier. You can deal damage of the type normally dealt by the weapon instead of force damage (or any of the available damage types for a versatile weapon). No other statistics or traits of the weapon apply, and even a ranged weapon attacks adjacent creatures only. Despite making a spell attack, the spiritual weapon is a weapon for purposes of triggers, resistances, and so forth.
The weapon doesn't take up space, grant flanking, or have any other attributes a creature would. The weapon can't make any attack other than its spell attack, and feats or spells that affect weapons do not apply to it.
...
Unfortunately, it is not worded that way... and if it were, would suddenly go from causing problems for the Ancestors Oracle to causing problems for the Battle Oracle!
I am of the opinion that there is a divergence between the spirit and the letter of this interaction.
Storywise, it makes sense that your Spellcasting Ancestors would be appeased by casting and sustaining Spiritual Weapon. I think most GMs would run it this way upon being casually polled. But mechanics-wise, I am having a hard time justifying it because it explicitly uses the Strike keyword, compared with other spells that involve spell attacks without using that specific keyword.
I'm with Cordell Kinter on this one, and I don't have a hard time justifying it. The logic behind the argument is quite simple, really, whether you agree with it or not is another story, as their are arguments against it for sure, however weak I personally think those arguments are.
Basically, the claim is that you are casting a spell. You are rolling spell attack rolls. You are dealing damage via a spell... yeah, it's a spell, and is affected by things that affect spells.
Meanwhile, you are not making a strike [the weapon is], rolling weapon attack rolls, dealing damage via a weapon, etc. So things that affect weapons don't apply except where explicitly mentioned, which is why it goes out of its way to say that it's treated as a weapon attack for the purposes of " triggers, resistances, and so forth", which are related to how it affects the enemy.
The spell you cast may be making a strike, but you are not. Same as if you were to summon a creature that then used the strike action; That would not mean you are striking a creature with that summon's claws. The only thing in the entirety of the spell that I can see which suggests you're making the strike is what the initial poster highlighted "Each time you Sustain the Spell, you can move the weapon to a new target within range (if needed) and Strike with it." But, as others have pointed out, this is in direct conflict with several parts of the spell that say otherwise.
The reason why the word strike is used is just because that's consistent with the wording of the game. It is a strike. That doesn't change the fact that it's a spell, or that you're not doing the strike.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Spiritual Weapon is a Spell Attack"
vs
"Spiritual Weapon is a Strike"Spiritual weapon is not an attack, or a spell attack or a strike attack in and of itself.
However it contains an attack which is defined as a spell attack and a strike. This is a subordinate action.
However the Oracle Ancestor Martial will object to the initial casting of the spell as that is not an actual attack. Likewise Ancestor Skillful. The Sustain is not an action any of the curses will object to. Because it includes a Strike it counts for the purposes of relieving the Oracle Battle Curses.
I don't see any point in making the distinction Cordell is about whether your or your weapon is making the strike. In my opinion both are true. That is not a problem. I don't have to ignore any of the rules text so why would I?
Do you really believe a Martial Ancestor would have issue with you Casting Spiritual Weapon, but be so on board with you Sustaining it that they would help you out? Or that a Spellcasting Ancestor would be just fine with you casting the spell, but then immediately try to inturrupt the spell from doing its thing? Not only does it not make sense mechanically, it doesn't make sense Lore wise either.
It's a spell, stop trying to exploit the Curse for more damage.
Do you really believe a Martial Ancestor would have issue with you Casting Spiritual Weapon, but be so on board with you Sustaining it that they would help you out? Or that a Spellcasting Ancestor would be just fine with you casting the spell, but then immediately try to inturrupt the spell from doing its thing? Not only does it not make sense mechanically, it doesn't make sense Lore wise either.It's a spell, stop trying to exploit the Curse for more damage.
The rules are very clear and specific as to what the Ancestor's do. They object to specific actions. Spiritual Weapon is not an attack its a spell. Sustaining a spell is not something that any ancestor will object to. For sure an attack happens as a consequence of these things. But that is not what the ancestor rules care about.
The appeal to balance is trite. I'm not trying to make it better or worse. BTW I believe this whole restriction is so bad that the Ancestor Oracle is unplayable. It's an egregious infringement on my actions as a player. I will never choose this option.
Why does a property have to be mutually exclusive? A ball can be blue and round at the same time. My wife and myself both individually claim to own the same house. The strike can belong to the weapon and to the spell caster.
There is no problem to solve. You are merely creating one by saying its unbalanced or not intended. Fine. But you are now off into a custom rules space.
Again, this assumes that the mechanics are different from the lore, which I'm really not seeing. There's that one line, yes, but that's it. Everything else indicates it wouldn't matter that the attack the weapon makes is a "strike", whether for an Oracle or a non-Oracle.
For Ancestors, for example, the action YOU are taking is to cast and/or sustain a spell. Casting a spell is the preferred action of the spellcasting ancestor, so no issues if you're under the influence of that ancestor.
And for a similar reason, the action YOU are taking is not a strike. There's one line that's worded slightly differently from the rest of the spell that suggests you make a strike when you sustain the weapon, but it doesn't really fit with the rest of the spell's verbiage, including the description of what happens when you cast the spell. This means you can still do it no matter which ancestor you're under the effects of without penalty (though, if you're casting the spell that turn as opposed to sustaining it, then a couple ancestors might try to intervene), and the moderate curse benefit [Your Strikes gain a +1 status bonus to attack rolls and a +2 status bonus to damage.] is irrelevant, because it's not your strike.
In my mind it's the same as summon spells summoning creatures that you can command to attack by sustaining the spell. I don't know of anyone who'd say that "Your strikes gain X" would affect a summoned creature, so I'm not sure why spiritual weapon would change that. Again, other than one line at the end which flies in the face of the rest of the description of the spell.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
BTW I believe this whole restriction is so bad that the Ancestor Oracle is unplayable. It's an egregious infringement on my actions as a player. I will never choose this option.
I mean, that's the whole point of the Curse. It intentionally hinders you, encouraging you to go along with what your ancestors want for huge benefits. If you do what they want of you, you become very powerful. Ignore them, and they will screw with you in return.
There is no problem to solve. You are merely creating one by saying its unbalanced or not intended. Fine. But you are now off into a custom rules space.
I never mentioned balance, I said this idea that Spiritual Weapon would deal bonus damage from the Martial Ancestor is an intentional attempt to exploit the Curse. It's a spell dealing spell damage, making spell attacks, yet it should gain a bonus from the Martial ancestor, who wants you to smash people over the head with a hammer? It makes no sense!
It's an appeal to logic not an appeal to balance.
Also here's a meme!
