TOPIC: Are All Spells Ranged Attacks, and boostable by "Ranged" boosters?

Daniel White wrote: I do not understand where the idea bardsong only affects side spell to hit and not damage is coming from.

The TDb text on Earcuff of Inspiration, and practical experience:

"E.g., when no special instrument is used, a 4th-level bard’s bardsong would normally grant the party +1 To Hit with both physical attacks & spells requiring an attack slide as well as +1 Damage to physical attacks , but spells which do not require an attack slide are unaffected."

Spells are not physical attacks.

The 4th level Bard's player card says:

Bardsong: While singing +1 to hit (all attack slides) and +1 damage (physical weapons only) for entire party

Spells are not physical weapons.

Matthew Hayward wrote:

Daniel White wrote: I do not understand where the idea bardsong only affects side spell to hit and not damage is coming from.

The TDb text on Earcuff of Inspiration, and practical experience:

"E.g., when no special instrument is used, a 4th-level bard’s bardsong would normally grant the party +1 To Hit with both physical attacks & spells requiring an attack slide as well as +1 Damage to physical attacks , but spells which do not require an attack slide are unaffected."

Spells are not physical attacks.

The 4th level Bard's player card says:

Bardsong: While singing +1 to hit (all attack slides) and +1 damage (physical weapons only) for entire party

Spells are not physical weapons.

OK, I see.

This may seem like a dumb answer, but there is no inconsistency if a slide spell (as opposed to non-slide spells) is considered both a "physical weapon" and a spell. How do we know that's not the case?

Edit: Well, Boots of the West wind TokenDB entry tells us that can't be it:

While wearing these boots, successful physical ranged weapon attacks (including thrown alchemical weapons but not spells or wholly magical effects) deal +3 damage as Shock.

OK. I am sold on there being an inconsistency on whether spell sides get bardsong damage or not.

Matthew Hayward wrote: maybe TBTP could just confirm:

Are Magic Missile, Sonic Dart, Fire Dart, and Searing Light all Ranged Attacks, and thus should get +2 damage from Draco-Lich Claw Charm, which grants "+2 damage to ... any ranged attack"

My prediction? The answer will be no.

Obviously I'm not TPTB, but your sentence contains two orthogonal questions disguised as one question.

tokendb.com/token/draco-lich-claw-charm/ , which is the ultimate authority on the behavior of Draco-Lich Claw Charm, clearly states that Draco-Lich Claw Charm only applies to a successful hit with an attack slide. So the answer to your second question is no.

But that doesn't mean the answer to your first question is no, because this particular TDB entry is not an authoritative generic definition of the keyword "ranged attack"; in fact the description never even uses that phrase.

David Zych wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: maybe TBTP could just confirm:

Are Magic Missile, Sonic Dart, Fire Dart, and Searing Light all Ranged Attacks, and thus should get +2 damage from Draco-Lich Claw Charm, which grants "+2 damage to ... any ranged attack"

My prediction? The answer will be no.

Obviously I'm not TPTB, but your sentence contains two orthogonal questions disguised as one question.

tokendb.com/token/draco-lich-claw-charm/ , which is the ultimate authority on the behavior of Draco-Lich Claw Charm, clearly states that Draco-Lich Claw Charm only applies to a successful hit with an attack slide. So the answer to your second question is no.

But that doesn't mean the answer to your first question is no, because this particular TDB entry is not an authoritative generic definition of the keyword "ranged attack"; in fact the description never even uses that phrase.

I agree I've formed a complex question. Whether or not the components of the question are orthogonal depends on a set of assumptions.

Under one set of assumptions: the detailed rules text in TDb is clarifying that the rules text on the Draco-Lich charm token is incorrect, and it does not provide its bonus to “any ranged attack.” In this case, whether or not Magic Missile is a ranged attack is orthogonal to whether or not it would get a benefit from Draco-Lich Claw charm (as the effect of Draco-Lich has been altered to +2 to damage with melee and physical ranged attacks, as opposed to what it says on the token).

Under another set of assumptions, the detailed rules text in TDb is simply reminder text explaining what a “ranged attack” is. In this case the question of whether Magic Missile is ranged is not separable from whether a token that grants bonuses to "any ranged attack" grants bonuses to Magic Missile.

TDb is authoritative, but it's not infallible, and when it’s wrong it gets updated.

In fact, it’s been wrong about this very topic recently - when Ring of the Drake / Ioun Stone Banshee Prism
were first put into TDb it’s wording indicated it only boosted slid spell damage. Re-reading the old thread, I see we're retreading a lot of the same ground:

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&defaultmenu=141&catid=572&id=250564&start=0


I think there is sufficient cloudiness around this topic to wonder if TDb is wrong about what attacks are boosted by Draco-Lich claw charm (perhaps because designers have changed their mind about what constitutes a ranged attack since that entry was made). The entry for the Draco-Lich claw charm likely predates the most recent edition of the players handbook which defines “nearly all” spells as ranged attacks.


Man... this all seems like a big mess.

I really like your idea that all spells on character cards are ranged attacks.

If there were a standardized list of terms that could appear, what should each of them mean?

Umbrella term for all attacks that are not touch/melee attacks.

Attacks at a distance that slide.

Attacks at a distance excluding all spells.

Spells including slides and non-slides.

Only slide spells.

Only non-slide spells.

Are there other necessary concepts that would need a term for them?

Anthony Barnstable wrote: If there were a standardized list of terms that could appear, what should each of them mean?

Umbrella term for all attacks that are not touch/melee attacks.

Attacks at a distance that slide.

Attacks at a distance excluding all spells.

Spells including slides and non-slides.

Only slide spells.

Only non-slide spells.

Are there other necessary concepts that would need a term for them?

Thanks for clarifying this so nicely Anthony!

I feel for rules reasons we definitely need names for these, as existing tokens and rules draw distinctions:

Umbrella term for all attacks that are not touch/melee attacks. - Propose ranged
Attacks at a distance that slide. - I don't have a good name for this - this is what Bardsong to-hit boosts
Attacks at a distance excluding all spells. - Propose physical ranged
Spells including slides and non-slides. - Propose spells
Only slide spells. - I don't have a good name for this

Another way to view it might be to say:

Each ranged attack has one of two properties:
Slide or no-slide
Spell or physical

Then all attacks could be described like:

i. Ranged attacks (all)
ii. Ranged slide attacks (includes spell and physical)
iii. Ranged no-slide attacks (includes spell and physical)
iv. Ranged spell attacks (includes slide and not)
v. Ranged physical attacks (includes slide and not)
vi. Ranged slide spell attacks
vii. Ranged slide physical attacks
viii. Ranged no-slide spell attacks
ix. Ranged no-slide physical attacks

Of these I don't think we have any rules/tokens scenarios that involve:
ix. - I don't think these exist
v. and vii. Since ix doesn't exist, these are redundant. Remove v.
iii. and viii. - I believe these are identical (e.g. there are no physical no-slide attacks). Remove iii.
viii - There is nothing here that is not covered by iv. Remove viii.

That leaves us with the following descriptions which cover all rules scenarios that I believe exist currently:
i. Ranged attacks (all) - Example - Gloves of the Tempest
ii. Ranged slide attacks (includes spell and physical) - Example Bardsong to-hit bonus
iv. Ranged spell attacks (includes slide and not) - Example - Ring of Focus
vi. Ranged slide spell attacks - Example - Draco-Lich Claw Charm
vii. Ranged slide physical attacks - Example - Bardsong to-damage bonus

Further, I believe Draco-Lich Claw Charm may be the sole reason category vi. needs to be retained as an independent category. If DLC were changed to impact all ranged attacks, we could delete categories vi.

That would leave us with:

Ranged attacks - Blessed Tempest Gloves, Ring off the Drake
Ranged slide attacks - What bardsong to-hit boosts
Ranged spell attacks - Focus items, damage for Earcuff of inspiration (need clarity - are any spells not in this category?)
Ranged slide spell attacks - Only Draco-Lich Charm cares about these - change DLC to delete this category
Ranged slide physical attacks - What bardsong to-damage boosts

And now we add Cranstons hat into the mix.

Hey! A wild Jeff appeared:

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=640&id=251622&start=144#376874

Jeff Martin wrote:

Adam Guay wrote: Does Cranstons hat add damage to all spells? Sliding spells? Or physical ranged only?

In TD lexicon, "Ranged" means spells and missile weapons that require a slide to hit.

So - to wit - Magic Missile would not be a ranged attack under this definition.

(assuming Jeff's statement means "spells that require a slide to hit and missile weapons that require a slide to hit").

Matthew Hayward wrote: Hey! A wild Jeff appeared:

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=640&id=251622&start=144#376874

Jeff Martin wrote:

Adam Guay wrote: Does Cranstons hat add damage to all spells? Sliding spells? Or physical ranged only?

In TD lexicon, "Ranged" means spells and missile weapons that require a slide to hit.

So - to wit - Magic Missile would not be a ranged attack under this definition.

(assuming Jeff's statement means "spells that require a slide to hit and missile weapons that require a slide to hit").

tokendb entry from the Banshee Prism is causing some of the confusion (my comment earlier about a change to the definition was based on this entry)

Remember: “Ranged” is an umbrella term that encompasses both missiles (physical items propelled through the air) and spells (cast magical effects).

Arcanist Kolixela wrote:

Matthew Hayward wrote: Hey! A wild Jeff appeared:

truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&catid=640&id=251622&start=144#376874

Jeff Martin wrote:

Adam Guay wrote: Does Cranstons hat add damage to all spells? Sliding spells? Or physical ranged only?

In TD lexicon, "Ranged" means spells and missile weapons that require a slide to hit.

So - to wit - Magic Missile would not be a ranged attack under this definition.

(assuming Jeff's statement means "spells that require a slide to hit and missile weapons that require a slide to hit").

tokendb entry from the Banshee Prism is causing some of the confusion (my comment earlier about a change to the definition was based on this entry)

Remember: “Ranged” is an umbrella term that encompasses both missiles (physical items propelled through the air) and spells (cast magical effects).

I agree - totally confused.

That statement could mean:

A. “Ranged” is an umbrella term that encompasses both missiles (physical items propelled through the air) and some spells (cast magical effects)

Or it could mean:

B. “Ranged” is an umbrella term that encompasses both missiles (physical items propelled through the air) and all spells (cast magical effects)

And if it means the statement in A, we would need a way of determining which spells are ranged. I believe, based on what Jeff said and various tokens, that the answer is "the ones that require a skill slide."