Slinging and Magic Stones

[Talamare]

So let's see if this makes sense

Let's take a skilled Slinger, 20 dex

He makes his Ranged Attack rolls using a d20+5 for 1d4+5
He has Sharpshooter, so really it's usually d20 for 1d4+15

So this is his baseline ability to use his Sling

Then a Druid comes along and enchants his bullets. They are now Magic Stones!
So the Ammo has been buffed, but his ability to use his Sling should remain unchanged

So it states that the Attacker should add your(the Druid's) Spell Attack Modifier to the Attack Roll and the Bullet now does 1d6+Spell Attack Modifier(the Druid's)

So the new Ranged Attack roll should be d20 + Dex + Druid's Spell Attack Modifier

As well due to the Magic Enchantment the Bullet itself should now deal 1d4+Dexterity + 1d6+Druid's Spell Attack Modifier

This assumption is based on both the ruling for the Shadow Blade by JC Tweet, and how Magic Ammo works in general. Stacking with Magical Bows and such

Assuming Druid is also at 20

d20+5 for 1d6+1d4+20 damage


Then again compared to a Standard Heavy Crossbow... 1d10+15, and can get Crossbow Expert for 3 attacks per turn, while a Slinger can't

[Aett_Thorn]

You touch one to three pebbles and imbue them with magic. You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling. If thrown, a pebble has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with a pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll. On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier. Whether the attack hits or misses, the spell then ends on the stone.

Magic Stone should REPLACE the damage of the normal sling bullet, and add the spellcaster's Wis modifier instead of the normal skill modifier. Not "can" add, but does add.

This means that if you give these stones to a normally skilled slinger, unless your Wis modifier is equal to or better than their Dex modifier, they're probably better off using their own sling bullets.

[Talamare]

Magic Stone should REPLACE the damage of the normal sling bullet, and add the spellcaster's Wis modifier instead of the normal skill modifier. Not "can" add, but does add.

This means that if you give these stones to a normally skilled slinger, unless your Wis modifier is equal to or better than their Dex modifier, they're probably better off using their own sling bullets.

The only thing that mentions being replaced is your Spell Casting Modifier, and even then it very clearly states to the attack roll.

It doesn't mention replacing all the Slinger's abilities.

However, I do potentially agree with the fact that if the Slinger uses his Dexterity to make the Sling, then it's no longer a Ranged Spell Attack. So the Ranged Spell Attack Modifier from the Druid wouldn't come into play.

However on that However, the On Hit Clause is fairly stand alone

So it brings us to
d20+Dex for 1d4+1d6+Slinger Dex+Druid's SCM

[DivisibleByZero]

It doesn't mention replacing all the Slinger's abilities.

Yes, it does. That's what "not the attacker's" means.
Use <this different thing>, not <that normal thing>. Instead of. In place of. Replace your attack modifier with theirs.
Whatever the druid would have rolled for the attack is what you now roll. You do not use your own modifier.
Damage used to be 1d4+Dex, now damage is 1d6+ the Spellcasting mod of the caster.

[Aett_Thorn]

No, you still don't add the damage. Otherwise, it would say that you do normal damage, plus 1d6+caster's Wisdom. The Magic Stone only does 1d6 plus caster's Wisdom damage total. It doesn't add it to the normal damage.

Compare it to the language for something like Green Flame Blade:


On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and green fire leaps from the target to a different creature of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of it.

This same type of language is not in the spell description of Magic Stone. It says exactly what it says that it does.

[Talamare]

No, you still don't add the damage. Otherwise, it would say that you do normal damage, plus 1d6+caster's Wisdom. The Magic Stone only does 1d6 plus caster's Wisdom damage total. It doesn't add it to the normal damage.

Compare it to the language for something like Green Flame Blade:



This same type of language is not in the spell description of Magic Stone. It says exactly what it says that it does.

Compare it to the language for Shadow Blade
"It deals 2d8 damage on hit"

Which isn't much different than
"On hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6+SCM"

Yet, we know to add Strength or Dexterity to Shadow Blade

Then take how Magic Ammunition works in General
If you shoot Magic Ammo from a Magic Bow, you get the effects of both the Magic Ammo and Magic Bow

An Arrow of Slaying shot from an Oathbow would deal 1d8+Dex+6d10+3d6

[Easy_Lee]

Specific beats general. The enhanced ammunition works as though the caster made a ranged spell attack, and deals 1d6+druid's wisdom mod. It's not additive. If it was, the text would say it deals an "additional" X amount of damage.

[Aett_Thorn]

Shadow Blade has the Finesse property, meaning that the player gets to choose to use either Str (normal) or Dex (because of Finesse) to the weapon attack. The spell description of Shadow Blade does not specifically say which you need to use. As such, you use the General rule of "Finesse allows you to choose which one to use" because there is no Specific rule.

Here, however, we have a Specific rule. This attack does 1d6 + Caster Wisdom Mod damage. That's what it does. It does NOT let the slinger choose. It overrides the General rule with a Specific rule.


If someone else attacks with a pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attacker’s, to the attack roll.

There is no room for interpretation there. It says that the slinger attacks with your spellcasting ability modifier, not their own modifier, if they are attacking with one of these stones.

If the sling is magical, with a +1 to Hit, then you'd add that to the Caster's Ability Mod for attack and for damage. But that doesn't mean that you add 1d4+Dex+1d6+Caster's Wis. I have no idea why you think those would stack.

[Mikal]

Compare it to the language for Shadow Blade
"It deals 2d8 damage on hit"

Which isn't much different than
"On hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6+SCM"

Yet, we know to add Strength or Dexterity to Shadow Blade

Then take how Magic Ammunition works in General
If you shoot Magic Ammo from a Magic Bow, you get the effects of both the Magic Ammo and Magic Bow

An Arrow of Slaying shot from an Oathbow would deal 1d8+Dex+6d10+3d6

Let's take a look at the wording again.
"On hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6+SCM"

Equal. Not in addition. Not replace. Equal. This means that the only damage you have with a base magic stone sling is equal to 1d6+SCM.
Other abilities may add to that, but only if those specific abilities say they add their damage to a weapons base damage.

So, RAW, Magic Stone base damage is equal to 1d6+SCM, not 1d6+SCM+Dex+whatever. Otherwise it wouldn't say "equal to", wording which isn't in Shadow Blade, which, as you mentioned, does add Str/Dex to damage.

What about RAI?
Well, while the wording is different on the spell, Magic Stone is obviously the ranged Shillelagh. And with that spell, you don't add your Str/Dex to damage, you replace it with the SCM, and you upstep the damage by 1 damage die on the actual weapon. Why they just didn't use the same wording? Different editors, and three years ago I guess.

Regardless, both RAI and RAW align on this- You don't get both Dex and SCM to the damage.

I wouldn't recommend it as a house rule either. Otherwise you'll make a Hexblade with a pact sling the most dangerous weapon in the world.
1d6+Cha+Cha from levels 1 to 12, 1d6+Cha+Cha+Cha after, which can be enhanced with magic slings, eldritch smite, sharpshooter, hex, etc....

[Talamare]

Shadow Blade has the Finesse property, meaning that the player gets to choose to use either Str (normal) or Dex (because of Finesse) to the weapon attack. The spell description of Shadow Blade does not specifically say which you need to use. As such, you use the General rule of "Finesse allows you to choose which one to use" because there is no Specific rule.

Here, however, we have a Specific rule. This attack does 1d6 + Caster Wisdom Mod damage. That's what it does. It does NOT let the slinger choose. It overrides the General rule with a Specific rule.



There is no room for interpretation there. It says that the slinger attacks with your spellcasting ability modifier, not their own modifier, if they are attacking with one of these stones.

If the sling is magical, with a +1 to Hit, then you'd add that to the Caster's Ability Mod for attack and for damage. But that doesn't mean that you add 1d4+Dex+1d6+Caster's Wis. I have no idea why you think those would stack.

Your own quote is specific to the Attack Roll, not the Damage Roll tho


I wouldn't recommend it as a house rule either. Otherwise you'll make a Hexblade with a pact sling the most dangerous weapon in the world.
1d6+Cha+Cha before level 12, 1d6+Cha+Cha+Cha after, which can be enhanced with magic slings, improved pact weapon, eldritch smite, sharpshooter, hex, etc....

What how?

Pact Blade is very specific about negating your Strength and Dexterity
Besides, it's already 100% legal for Pact Blade to use a 2H weapon + GWM + Eldritch Smite + Hex + Pact Hex, which is significantly more powerful

or to use a Long Bow and SS, ES, Hex, P.Hex which is also significantly stronger... which would also allow you to use Magic Arrows for even more power

[Mikal]

Your own quote is specific to the Attack Roll, not the Damage Roll tho



What how?

Pact Blade is very specific about negating your Strength and Dexterity
Besides, it's already 100% legal for Pact Blade to use a 2H weapon + GWM + Eldritch Smite + Hex + Pact Hex, which is significantly more powerful

or to use a Long Bow and SS, ES, Hex, P.Hex which is also significantly stronger... which would also allow you to use Magic Arrows for even more power

If using your House Rule of allowing Magic Stone to do "attribute+SCM"+1d6 damage, then with Hex Warrior you'll be doing 1d6+Cha (attribute)+Cha (magic stone) since it's a one handed weapon, then 1d6+cha (attribute)+cha (MS)+cha (Lifedrinker) after level 12.

So I can either
a) Use a 1d8/1d10+3 melee weapon for three levels (average of 7.5 or 9.5), then either a 2d6+5 (12) or 1d10+5 (10.5) 10 ft. weapon for 9 more, or a 1d8+5 (9.5) ranged weapon for 9 more, before getting an additional +Cha at level 12.

-or-

b) Use a 1d6+Cha+Cha (average 9.5 to 13.5) from level 1 to level 12, and then 1d6+Cha+Cha+Cha afterwards (average 18.5)

So damage wise, using your house rule, the sling is the obvious weapon of choice for any hexblade vs. any other weapon.

GWM/SS/ES/etc. do not factor in, because you can SS and ES with a sling just as much as you can with a longbow, and SS is of course the ranged GWM.

And technically, even without going pact blade (say you want to do tome, or just dip a single level) the damage with the sling is still better on average than the damage a bladepact can do with a Greatsword or Halberd, only losing out to not being able to use Eldritch Smite. It doesn't need Lifedrinker, Lifedrinker just boosts the damage even further.

Thus, you can go say... Warlock 1/Fighter 11 and you'll be doing three attacks with the weapon plus action surge plus whatever else at the same level the Bladepact Hexblade can do two attacks of equal damage per hit in melee, or lesser damage at range, without the benefit of Action Surge, and costing you two invocations at the least (Lifedrinker and Thirsting Blade).

13.5*3= 40.5 average on Magic Stone House Rule 3 attacks.
17*2= 34 average on Greatsword Pactblade with Thirsting Blade 2 attacks.
15.5*2= 31 average on Halberd Pactblade with Thirsting Blade 2 attacks.
14.5*2= 29 average on Longbow Pactblade with Thirsting Blade 2 attacks.

Hence, not a very good house rule to make magic stone do 1d6+attribute+SCM. House rule of course, because the spell itself specifically says base damage is equal to 1d6+SCM, so you don't add anything else (unless that other damage specifically says it adds itself to weapon damage like SS and the like)

[Aett_Thorn]

Your own quote is specific to the Attack Roll, not the Damage Roll tho

Okay, let's look at exactly what the spell description says about the damage roll:


On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier.

That's it. It specifically tells you EXACTLY how to calculate the damage. Not, IN ADDITION to the weapon's normal damage. Not PLUS the weapon's damage. Just 1d6 + SCM. Now, you may have other abilities or skills that add to that damage (e.g., a magic sling, Hunter's Mark or Hex, etc.), but you don't add the 'normal' sling damage to this. You just do 1d6 + SCM.

[Talamare]

If using your House Rule of allowing Magic Stone to do "attribute+SCM"+1d6 damage, then with Hex Warrior you'll be doing 1d6+Cha (attribute)+Cha (magic stone) since it's a one handed weapon, then 1d6+cha (attribute)+cha (MS)+cha (Lifedrinker) after level 12.

So I can either
a) Use a 1d8/1d10+3 melee weapon for three levels (average of 7.5 or 9.5), then either a 2d6+5 (12) or 1d10+5 (10.5) 10 ft. weapon for 9 more, or a 1d8+5 (9.5) ranged weapon for 9 more, before getting an additional +Cha at level 12.

-or-

b) Use a 1d6+Cha+Cha (average 9.5 to 13.5) from level 1 to level 12, and then 1d6+Cha+Cha+Cha afterwards (average 18.5)

So damage wise, using your house rule, the sling is the obvious weapon of choice for any hexblade vs. any other weapon.

GWM/SS/ES/etc. do not factor in, because you can SS and ES with a sling just as much as you can with a longbow, and SS is of course the ranged GWM.

Hence, not a very good house rule to make magic stone do 1d6+attribute+SCM. House Rule of course, because the spell itself specifically says base damage is equal to 1d6+SCM, so you don't add anything else (unless that other damage specifically says it adds itself to weapon damage like SS and the like)

1d4+1d6+cha+cha, don't forget the 1d4 from the sling weapon itself

Magic Stone
Lv5
So turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 1 stones left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 2 stone left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left

8d4+12d6+16x Cha; 20+42+64 = 126 damage, 31.5 DPR

Heavy Crossbow with Feat
Lv5
Turn 1 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha, used bonus action to hex
Turn 2 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to pact hex
Turn 3 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack
Turn 4 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack

10d10+10d6+10x Cha+24; 55+35+30+24 = 144 damage, 36 DPR

[DivisibleByZero]

1d4+1d6+cha+cha, don't forget the 1d4 from the sling weapon itself

Magic Stone
Lv5
So turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 1 stones left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 2 stone left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left

8d4+12d6+16x Cha; 20+42+64 = 126 damage, 31.5 DPR

Heavy Crossbow with Feat
Lv5
Turn 1 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha, used bonus action to hex
Turn 2 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to pact hex
Turn 3 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack
Turn 4 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack

10d10+10d6+10x Cha+24; 55+35+30+24 = 144 damage, 36 DPR

What feat are you using to attack again with an heavy crossbow?
You can drop two of those attacks from the heavy crossbow calcs, one on each of on turns 3 and 4. You don't have a bonus action attack from a feat.

Damage from Magic Stone is 1d6 + spellcasting mod of the caster, just like it says in the spell's description.
Full stop.

The emboldened portion is literally the only part of that entire post which was correct.

[Mikal]

1d4+1d6+cha+cha, don't forget the 1d4 from the sling weapon itself

Magic Stone
Lv5
So turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 1 stones left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create stones, 2 stone left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left

8d4+12d6+16x Cha; 20+42+64 = 126 damage, 31.5 DPR

Heavy Crossbow with Feat
Lv5
Turn 1 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha, used bonus action to hex
Turn 2 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to pact hex
Turn 3 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack
Turn 4 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+3, used bonus action to Feat Attack

10d10+10d6+10x Cha+24; 55+35+30+24 = 144 damage, 36 DPR

Few incorrect assumptions.
1) You need to cast the magic stone spell during combat. You cast the magic stone spell prior to combat, since they last for a minute. You easily cast it every minute as preparation

2) You didn't add the pact hex to your damage for the slings, despite adding it to crossbows.

So damage is more like...

turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action cast hex, 1 stone left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha used bonus action to create stones, 2 stones left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+3, used bonus action to pact hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+3, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left

8d4+16d6+Cha*16+6= 20+56+64+6= 146, or 36.5 per round, slightly higher than your crossbow.

Even using your math, the damage is still slightly less than 5 per round despite the crossbow user requiring a feat to match while the slinger... just needs to use a cantrip.

[Talamare]

Few incorrect assumptions.
1) You need to cast the magic stone spell during combat. You cast the magic stone spell prior to combat, since they last for a minute. You easily cast it every minute as preparation

2) You didn't add the pact hex to your damage for the slings, despite adding it to crossbows.

So damage is more like...

turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha, used bonus action cast hex, 1 stone left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha used bonus action to create stones, 2 stones left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+3, used bonus action to pact hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+3, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left

8d4+16d6+Cha*16+6= 20+56+64+6= 146, or 36.5 per round, slightly higher than your crossbow.

Even using your math, the damage is still slightly less than 5 per round despite the crossbow user requiring a feat to match while the slinger... just needs to use a cantrip.

Well, I didn't originally add it since most combats are often spur of the moment without time to prepare ahead of time.
I also made it fair by equalizing the Feat, the Crossbow user Cha multiplier was 3, while the Stone was 4.
Tho you could argue that would have the Stone user the +1 advantage when it came to attack rolls; Tho since the Crossbow is making more attacks, one could argue he has a greater chance of critting.

Tho the problem of scaling up does apply to the Stone user, If an ally uses Haste on you, you now basically don't have the bonus actions to use both Hex and Pact Hex (assuming you pre-casted the 1st set of stones)

At level 12, Life Drinker favors the greater number of attacks, and it's enough time to get both to 20 Cha

turn 1, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha, used bonus action cast hex, 1 stone left
turn 2, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha used bonus action to create stones, 2 stones left
turn 3, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to pact hex, 0 stones left
turn 4, 2x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to create new stones, 1 stone left
8d4+16d6+Cha*24+16; 20+56+120+8 = 212

vs
Turn 1 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha+ld cha, used bonus action to hex
Turn 2 2x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to pact hex
Turn 3 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to Feat Attack
Turn 4 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to Feat Attack

10d10+10d6+20x Cha+32; 55+35+100+32 = 222

While Hasted at 12
turn 1, 3x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha, used bonus action cast hex, 0 stone left
turn 2, 3x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha used bonus action to create stones, 0 stones left
turn 3, 3x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha, used bonus action to create stones, 0 stones left
turn 4, 3x 1d4+1d6+1d6+cha+cha+ld cha, used bonus action to create new stones, 0 stone left
12d4+24d6+Cha*36; 30+84+180 = 294

vs
Turn 1 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+ld cha, used bonus action to hex
Turn 2 3x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to pact hex
Turn 3 4x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to Feat Attack
Turn 4 4x 1d10+1d6+Cha+4+ld cha, used bonus action to Feat Attack

14d10+14d6+28x Cha+44; 77+49+140+44 = 310


Okay
This is starting to get a little confusing, but I think we can agree
Hexblade is kinda of an OP subclass

Also, thanks for the replies Mikal. It was fun ^^

[DivisibleByZero]

There. Is. No. Feat. Which. Grants. A. Bonus. Action. Attack. With. An. Heavy. Crossbow.
All of your numbers are wrong.
The MS sling numbers are wrong because you don't stack the damage like you believe.
Your crossbow numbers are wrong because there is no way to get the bonus attack that you have factored in with it.
Literally all of your numbers are wrong.

[Mikal]

There. Is. No. Feat. Which. Grants. A. Bonus. Action. Attack. With. An. Heavy. Crossbow.
All of your numbers are wrong.
The MS sling numbers are wrong because you don't stack the damage like you believe.
Your crossbow numbers are wrong because there is no way to get the bonus attack that you have factored in with it.
Literally all of your numbers are wrong.

I figured he was using a house ruled feat, much like how magic stone damage was obviously house ruled. Just showing why the house rule was unbalanced.
(Yes. I know he's trying to say that's how it's supposed to work. It's not, and I refuse to pretend it does).

[Talamare]

I figured he was using a house ruled feat, much like how magic stone damage was obviously house ruled. Just showing why the house rule was unbalanced.
(Yes. I know he's trying to say that's how it's supposed to work. It's not, and I refuse to pretend it does).

Crossbow Expert, but I admit its been a while since I last looked at it. So that was just an honest error and easy enough to fix.

20d6+10x Cha+24; 70+30+24 = 124
20d6+20x Cha+32; 70+100+32 = 202
28d6+28x Cha+44; 98+140+44 = 282

[Mikal]

Crossbow Expert, but I admit its been a while since I last looked at it. So that was just an honest error and easy enough to fix.

20d6+10x Cha+24; 70+30+24 = 124
20d6+20x Cha+32; 70+100+32 = 202
28d6+28x Cha+44; 98+140+44 = 282

So with a Crossbow and a feat, you're now doing slightly less damage than a sling by itself using your house ruled damage for the sling and magic stone.
Let's give the sling user a feat to balance it out, Sharpshooter.

Now go ahead and add +10 damage to each hit on the sling.
+80 on non haste (2 attacks over four rounds) for 292 damage vs 202
+120 on haste (3 attacks over four rounds) for 414 damage vs 282

So yeah. Still heavily unbalanced, and none of this again, factors in the important math, which is the average damage of each attack.
And your math is if the sling user is going as a hexblade and not MCing.
If they do Hexblade 1/Fighter 11 add an extra attack to each for another bump of damage.

Sorry, your house rule isn't balanced.

[Talamare]

So with a Crossbow and a feat, you're now doing slightly less damage than a sling by itself using your house ruled damage for the sling and magic stone.
Let's give the sling user a feat to balance it out, Sharpshooter.

No go ahead and add +10 damage to each hit on the sling.
+80 on non haste
+120 on haste

So yeah. Still heavily unbalanced, and none of this again, factors in the important math, which is the average damage of each attack.

Sorry, your House Rule isn't balanced.

Not house rules, I'm establishing RAW.

Sharpshooter is easily more powerful than +2 Cha
If you want it to be fair, compare lower Charisma with feat, otherwise it's just disingenuous
Which is what I even did in the first math I established.
"8d4+12d6+16x Cha; 20+42+64 = 126 damage, 31.5 DPR"
16xCha = 64 / 16 = 4

"10d10+10d6+10x Cha+24; 55+35+30+24 = 144 damage, 36 DPR"
10xCha = 30 / 10 = 3

If there was a Slinger Expert feat, it would be included for the Slinger

Compare the wording of Magic Stone and Lightning Arrow
Lightning Arrow states that the target takes 4d8 ~instead~ of the normal weapon's attack
Magic Stone doesn't

[Aett_Thorn]

Compare the wording of Magic Stone and Lightning Arrow
Lightning Arrow states that the target takes 4d8 ~instead~ of the normal weapon's attack
Magic Stone doesn't

And Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade say that it specifically adds to the weapons damage, Magic Stone doesn't.


On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier.

That's it. It does 1d6 + SCM. Not in addition to. It does 1d6 + SCM. There's no way to try to claim that it's in addition to weapon damage. That's RAW.

[Talamare]

And Green Flame Blade and Booming Blade say that it specifically adds to the weapons damage, Magic Stone doesn't.



That's it. It does 1d6 + SCM. Not in addition to. It does 1d6 + SCM. There's no way to try to claim that it's in addition to weapon damage. That's RAW.

The difference there is melee vs ranged

With Ranged Weapons, you always add the effect of both Weapon and the Ammo
Melee Weapons don't have Ammo

If you have a +3 Bow and a +3 Arrow, you're going to deal +6 damage
Magic Stone is making your Ammo amazing
It doesn't tell you ignore your Weapon's damage

[DivisibleByZero]

Not house rules, I'm establishing RAW.

RAW.
Rules As Written.

What is written is:
"You touch one to three pebbles and imbue them with magic. You or someone else can make a ranged spell attack with one of the pebbles by throwing it or hurling it with a sling. If thrown, a pebble has a range of 60 feet. If someone else attacks with a pebble, that attacker adds your spellcasting ability modifier, not the attackers, to the attack roll. On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier. Whether the attack hits or misses, the spell then ends on the stone.
If you cast this spell again, the spell ends on any pebbles still affected by your previous casting."

You can throw it or use a sling.
When you do either, you use the caster's spellcasting modifier (instead of Str or Dex) for the attack roll.
The damage equals 1d6 plus the spellcaster's ability modifier.

That's what the RAW says. Nothing more.

[Aett_Thorn]

The difference there is melee vs ranged

With Ranged Weapons, you always add the effect of both Weapon and the Ammo
Melee Weapons don't have Ammo

If you have a +3 Bow and a +3 Arrow, you're going to deal +6 damage
Magic Stone is making your Ammo amazing
It doesn't tell you ignore your Weapon's damage

Except that you are REPLACING the ammo and the damage calculation. You're not using a normal sling bullet that has been enchanted. You are using the pebble INSTEAD of a normal sling bullet. And this particular ammunition's damage is 1d6 + SCM. The sling has no damage on it's own. It's the ammunition that is dealing the damage. Since you've replaced that, you take the new ammunition's damage instead.

Now, if you were using a Sling +2 with this, then you'd calculate the ToHit as SCM+2, and the damage as 1d6 + SCM + 2. But that still isn't changing the base damage of the ammunition.

[Talamare]

Except that you are REPLACING the ammo and the damage calculation. You're not using a normal sling bullet that has been enchanted. You are using the pebble INSTEAD of a normal sling bullet. And this particular ammunition's damage is 1d6 + SCM. The sling has no damage on it's own. It's the ammunition that is dealing the damage. Since you've replaced that, you take the new ammunition's damage instead.

Now, if you were using a Sling +2 with this, then you'd calculate the ToHit as SCM+2, and the damage as 1d6 + SCM + 2. But that still isn't changing the base damage of the ammunition.
EXACTLY! I'm glad we are finally in agreement!
You are replacing the Ammo Damage in the Damage calculation!

There is no established damage for the Ammo that Arrows, Bolts, and Bullets deal

The Sling is 1d4+Dex, the Ammo is 0
The Bow is 1d8+Dex, the Ammo is 0
etc

Ammo has no established damage, it's literally found under equipment. Not weapons.

So with you changing the ammo of the bullet from 0 to 1d6+SCM
You're now dealing Weapon (Sling - 1d4+Dex) + Ammo (Magic Stone - 1d6+SCM)

[Mikal]

Not house rules, I'm establishing RAW.
No you aren't.
RAW is that the bullets from magic stone are 1d6+SCM. "damage is equal to 1d6..." not "regular damage in addition to 1d6..."
You're adding in 1d4+attribute to 1d6+SCM. Ergo: House Rule.



Sharpshooter is easily more powerful than +2 Cha
Doesn't matter. You gave them equal stats but gave the crossbow user a feat while not giving the sling user. I added one feat to balance it out.
If you give them both an extra feat than the sling user needs something else to compensate for it. And even when you do, the damage is still in favor of the sling user. So you're still requiring an extra feat for the crossbow user to do slightly less damage than the sling user, with your House Rule.

Which means again, the house rule isn't balanced.

[Aett_Thorn]

EXACTLY! I'm glad we are finally in agreement!
You are replacing the Ammo Damage in the Damage calculation!



Yes! Replacing! Not in addition to! Seriously, if you think that a sling does 1d4 damage somehow without ammo, then we've got a more fundamental problem. The sling's AMMUNITION does 1d4 damage when it hits. Magic Stone replaces this with ammunition that does 1d6 + SCM. NOT in addition to. Instead of.

There is literally no language in the spell's description that would lead you to believe that the damage is cumulative with normal ammo damage.

[Mikal]

Yes! Replacing! Not in addition to! Seriously, if you think that a sling does 1d4 damage somehow without ammo, then we've got a more fundamental problem. The sling's AMMUNITION does 1d4 damage when it hits. Magic Stone replaces this with ammunition that does 1d6 + SCM. NOT in addition to. Instead of.

There is literally no language in the spell's description that would lead you to believe that the damage is cumulative with normal ammo damage.

No man you don't get it. He's claiming that the damage for bows and slings doesn't come from the ammo itself, he's saying it comes from the delivery system, i.e. the sling and the bow, not the bullet and the arrow, which he is claiming are both normally 0 damage.

And since Magic Stone makes the target take 1d6+SCM, and magic stone is specifically ammo, that the sling damage is separate from the ammo damage, and thus take both.

In other words, he's twisting the formatting in the PHB since it doesn't talk about "ammo" for the damage.

[DivisibleByZero]

No man you don't get it. He's claiming that the damage for bows and slings doesn't come from the ammo itself, he's saying it comes from the delivery system, i.e. the sling and the bow, not the bullet and the arrow, which he is claiming are both normally 0 damage.

And since Magic Stone makes the target take 1d6+SCM, and magic stone is specifically ammo, that the sling damage is separate from the ammo damage, and thus take both.

In other words, he's twisting the formatting in the PHB since it doesn't talk about "ammo" for the damage.

So then slings normally do zero damage. That's his argument apparently.
Except we all know that this isn't true. So he needs to reevaluate his stance.

[Mikal]

So then slings normally do zero damage. That's his argument apparently.
Except we all know that this isn't true. So he needs to reevaluate his stance.

No, the other way around. Slings do 1d4+dex once they have ammunition or count as improved weapons otherwise. Bullets do 0 regardless... unless you use magic stone, then they do 1d6+SCM in addition to the 1d4+dex


Not house rules, explaining RAW.
Also, Arguing Balance is strawman, it doesn't matter if it's balanced. This is the way RAW is explained. Should it be errata'd because it isn't balanced? Maybe

If you use a bow in melee, by RAW
"if you use a weapon that has ammo property to make a melee attack, it is treated as improvised weapon."

I don't understand why you're starting to become irrational and disingenuous when your initial arguments were quite elegant.

Because I forgot the improvised weapon RAW when it comes to ranged weapons. Deleted that part of my post accordingly.
And... you know. Completely RAW... you do have a point.

[Aett_Thorn]

No man you don't get it. He's claiming that the damage for bows and slings doesn't come from the ammo itself, he's saying it comes from the delivery system, i.e. the sling and the bow, not the rock and the arrow.

And since Magic Stone makes the target take 1d6+SCM, and magic stone is specifically ammo, that the sling damage is separate from the ammo damage, and thus take both.

Oh, I get it. That's just a ridiculous starting position.

Otherwise, you can use any ammo you want in a longbow, and it still does 1d8 damage. Because it's really only the delivery mechanism that matters. So use sling bullets for a longbow and it does 1d4 + 1d8 + Dex!

And using an actual arrow in the longbow does 1d8 + 1d8 + Dex damage! /sarcasm

[Talamare]

No man you don't get it. He's claiming that the damage for bows and slings doesn't come from the ammo itself, he's saying it comes from the delivery system, i.e. the sling and the bow, not the bullet and the arrow, which he is claiming are both normally 0 damage.

And since Magic Stone makes the target take 1d6+SCM, and magic stone is specifically ammo, that the sling damage is separate from the ammo damage, and thus take both.

In other words, he's twisting the formatting in the PHB since it doesn't talk about "ammo" for the damage.

It's absolutely from the delivery system

Short Bow and Long Bow have different damage values despite using the same ammo

As well as it's clearly stated in the PHB that the Short Bow is d6 and the Long Bow is d8

Let's take this mathematically

A + X = 6
B + X = 8

A = 6
B = 8

What does X equal?

or directly from the book
Short Bow deals d6 and has the ammo property to use Arrows
Long Bow deals d8 and has the ammo property to use Arrows

[Mikal]

Oh, I get it. That's just a ridiculous starting position.

Otherwise, you can use any ammo you want in a longbow, and it still does 1d8 damage. Because it's really only the delivery mechanism that matters. So use sling bullets for a longbow and it does 1d4 + 1d8 + Dex!

And using an actual arrow in the longbow does 1d8 + 1d8 + Dex damage! /sarcasm

No, because arrows are damage 0, so your bow still does only 1d8+Dex. That's the other part of the argument. Ammo is inherently damage 0 generally.
Magic Stone specifically provides damage to ammo, thus is an exception, and thus allows 1d4+dex+1d6+SCM.

Plus, as each ammo specifies what type of weapon it's for, one could argue that the right ammo still needs to be used.

[Aett_Thorn]

No, the other way around. Slings do 1d4+dex once they have ammunition or count as improved weapons otherwise. Bullets do 0 regardless... unless you use magic stone, then they do 1d6+SCM in addition to the 1d4+dex



Because I forgot the improvised weapon RAW when it comes to ranged weapons. Deleted that part of my post accordingly.
And... you know. Completely RAW... you do have a point.

No, that's ridiculous. Bullets do 1d4 damage when fired from a sling. Neither one does damage on its own. Magic Stones do 1d6+SCM either when throw or when fired from a sling. That's it. Not 1d4+1d6+SCM. Just 1d6+SCM.

[Mikal]

No, that's ridiculous. Bullets do 1d4 damage when fired from a sling. Neither one does damage on its own. Magic Stones do 1d6+SCM either when throw or when fired from a sling. That's it. Not 1d4+1d6+SCM. Just 1d6+SCM.

But he's saying, purely RAW, that the damage rating comes from the sling, not the bullet. I.E. that bullets have no damage next to them. Slings do. Slings do require ammunition to do the damage. However, from a RAW perspective, the damage dice is the sling's not the ammos. So adding damage to ammo specifically should be inherently additive to the weapons.

Which, from a purely RAW perspective, does make sense. Because the RAW is badly worded.

[Talamare]

No, because arrows are damage 0, so your bow still does only 1d8+Dex. That's the other part of the argument. Ammo is inherently damage 0 generally.
Magic Stone specifically provides damage to ammo, thus is an exception, and thus allows 1d4+dex+1d6+SCM.

Plus, as each ammo specifies what type of weapon it's for, one could argue that the right ammo still needs to be used.

I put a request to delete that post

It might need a slight errata, or an unspoken agreement that the exact RAW for the spell might be slightly inherently broken

Glad I was able to show my point clearly enough tho

[Mikal]

I put a request to delete that post

It might need a slight errata, or an unspoken agreement that the exact RAW for the spell might be slightly inherently broken

Glad I was able to show my point clearly enough tho

You know you can delete your own posts right? Just saying.
But yes, from a purely RAW standpoint, the formatting can be seen that way. Obviously, RAI it isn't meant to. i.e. that damage from ammunition dependent weapons is supposed to be due to the ammo being fired in conjunction with the actual weapon, and thus magic stone is meant to upstep 1d4+dex to 1d6+SCM not 1d4+dex+1d6+SCM

Once you pointed out the specifics there, yes, the argument did make sense, though I'd say nearly any DM (AL or not) would go with the RAI interpretation.

[DivisibleByZero]

I put a request to delete that post

It might need a slight errata, or an unspoken agreement that the exact RAW for the spell might be slightly inherently broken

Glad I was able to show my point clearly enough tho

Just because he understood what you were saying and where it was coming from doesn't mean it needs errata.
You're the only person who though it might be this way, because everyone else understood exactly how the spell works (no errata needed).
It tells you exactly what the damage is. The damage equals X. Not the damage equals X + Y. Not the damage is in addition to anything. The damage equals X.

[Aett_Thorn]

But he's saying, purely RAW, that the damage rating comes from the sling, not the bullet. I.E. that bullets have no damage next to them. Slings do. Slings do require ammunition to do the damage. However, from a RAW perspective, the damage dice is the sling's not the ammos. So adding damage to ammo specifically should be inherently additive to the weapons.

Which, from a purely RAW perspective, does make sense. Because the RAW is badly worded.

I really don't think that it is. A sling bullet deals 1d4 damage when fired from a sling. An arrow does 1d6 damage when fired from a shortbow, and 1d8 when fired from a longbow.

A magic stone specifically states that it does 1d6+SCM damage when fired from a sling. Neither the sling nor the ammo do any damage on their own. Only in combination do they do 1d4 + Dex. Magic Stone replaces that damage combination with 1d6 + SCM.

In other words: A sling without a bullet does 0 damage. It can't, by RAW, fire anything else and do damage. A bullet without a sling similarly doesn't do any damage by RAW. You could make a case that it would count as an improvised thrown weapon and do 1d4+Str damage, but even then, putting it into the sling wouldn't make it do 1d4+1d4+Dex damage.

[Mikal]

I really don't think that it is. A sling bullet deals 1d4 damage when fired from a sling. An arrow does 1d6 damage when fired from a shortbow, and 1d8 when fired from a longbow.

See, that's the problem. There's no difference in the arrow itself. It's just an arrow, but the bows do the different damage, which goes with his technically RAW assertion that the damage comes from the bow, but requires the arrow for the bow to do damage. Ergo, the arrow does 0 in both cases, but it somehow "empowers" the bow to make the attack do either 1d6+dex or 1d8+dex.

Obviously that's not what's intended, but it could be read that way, from a strict RAW reading.
And if the RAW reading does state that, then anything that gives the "ammo" extra damage, RAW, would be in addition to the damage done by the weapon. So, 1d4+dex+1d6+SCM.

Like I said, totally goes against the likely RAI for both, but I do see where such an interpretation can be seen.


A magic stone specifically states that it does 1d6+SCM damage when fired from a sling. Neither the sling nor the ammo do any damage on their own. Only in combination do they do 1d4 + Dex. Magic Stone replaces that damage combination with 1d6 + SCM.

But looking at it RAW using OPs intepretation, Ammo normally does 0, the weapon does the damage, delivered by the Ammo (due to the tables showing the weapons doing the damage, not the arrows). As such, by adding damage to the ammo, it's meant to be combined with the sling.

The reason why it interprets this way is because MS specifically says the bullet now does that much damage when fired, which is then combined with the existing weapon damage.

Sort of like how a longsword does 1d10, but elemental weapon adds 2d4 to it.


Just because he understood what you were saying and where it was coming from doesn't mean it needs errata.
You're the only person who though it might be this way, because everyone else understood exactly how the spell works (no errata needed).
It tells you exactly what the damage is. The damage equals X. Not the damage equals X + Y. Not the damage is in addition to anything. The damage equals X.

RAI, that's how it's supposed to be done. I think OP is specifically pointing out a RAW loophole based on how the PHB presents damage for ranged weapons and how magic stone presents its damage boost.

[Aett_Thorn]

The reason why it interprets this way is because MS specifically says the bullet now does that much damage when fired, which is then combined with the existing weapon damage.

No, it doesn't.


On a hit, the target takes bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your spellcasting ability modifier.

MS specifically does NOT say that you add the weapon damage. It specifically says that the damage is 1d6 + SCM, even when fired from a sling.


Sort of like how a longsword does 1d10, but elemental weapon adds 2d4 to it.

Except that Elemental Weapon says:


A nonmagical weapon you touch becomes a magic weapon. Choose one of the following damage types: acid, cold, fire, lightning, or thunder. For the duration, the weapon has a +1 bonus to attack rolls and deals an extra 1d4 damage of the chosen type when it hits.

Note that Elemental Weapon specifically says that it does an EXTRA 1d4 damage. Magical Stones does not have that language in it.

[Mikal]

No, it doesn't.
MS specifically does NOT say that you add the weapon damage. It specifically says that the damage is 1d6 + SCM, even when fired from a sling.

For the stone itself yes. However, again, OP is stating that sling damage comes from the sling, not the stone. So the stone does X, the sling provides Y. Especially as the stone does the same damage and has the same range whether thrown by hand or thrown by a sling.

From a strict RAW interpretation, I can see an argument being made.

This does bring up an interesting point though-- why bother using a sling?
I guess if you have a magic one so you can get a +x to hit and damage? Otherwise, why not just chuck the dang things.

[DivisibleByZero]

RAI, that's how it's supposed to be done. I think OP is specifically pointing out a RAW loophole based on how the PHB presents damage for ranged weapons and how magic stone presents its damage boost.

There is no damage boost.
Therein lies the problem with that line of reasoning.
It doesn't boost damage, it does the damage that is stated instead of the normal damage.

Normal thrown rock: range 20/60 (usually, but DM dependent as an ImpWeap), 1d20+str/dex attack, 1d4+str/dex damage
Normal sling: range 30/120, 1d20+dex attack, 1d4+dex damage
Magic stone: range 60, 1d20 +scm attack, 1d6+scm damage. If you use a sling, the only thing that changes is the range.

[Aett_Thorn]

For the stone itself yes. However, again, OP is stating that sling damage comes from the sling, not the stone. So the stone does X, the sling provides Y. Especially as the stone does the same damage and has the same range whether thrown by hand or thrown by a sling.

From a strict RAW interpretation, I can see an argument being made.

Okay, let's for a second assume that the ammunition rules are ambiguous. I'm not saying that they are, but let's assume that they are. They would be a general rule for how ammunition works.

However, Specific > General. Meaning that the specific language of the Magic Stones spell would override the ambiguous general ammunition rules and replace them with a specific calculation for damage. Magic Stones says that damage of the stone when fired from a sling is 1d6+SCM. That's a specific overruling a general rule. When you fire a magic stone from a sling, it does 1d6+SCM damage would be the final result, ignoring general ammunition rules.

[Mikal]

There is no damage boost.
Therein lies the problem with that line of reasoning.
It doesn't boost damage, it does the damage that is stated instead of the normal damage.

Normal thrown rock: range 20/60 (usually, but DM dependent as an ImpWeap), 1d20+str/dex attack, 1d4+str/dex damage
Normal sling: range 30/120, 1d20+dex attack, 1d4+dex damage
Magic stone: range 60, 1d20 +scm attack, 1d6+scm damage. If you use a sling, the only thing that changes is the range.

The only issue which the OP pointed out though is that the sling damage is sling damage, while stone damage is specifically the ammunition, which is not seen anywhere else. Even magic ammunition only states a +1-+3 to hit and damage, but no actual damage to the ammo.


Okay, let's for a second assume that the ammunition rules are ambiguous. I'm not saying that they are, but let's assume that they are. They would be a general rule for how ammunition works.

However, Specific > General. Meaning that the specific language of the Magic Stones spell would override the ambiguous general ammunition rules and replace them with a specific calculation for damage. Magic Stones says that damage of the stone when fired from a sling is 1d6+SCM. That's a specific overruling a general rule. When you fire a magic stone from a sling, it does 1d6+SCM damage would be the final result, ignoring general ammunition rules.

And the OP is saying that generally, ammo is 0 (because damage comes from the weapon when it fires the ammo, not the ammo itself as it has no damage rating), so the specific rule being changes is ammo = 0 is now ammo = 1d6+SCM

Which, with a specific interpretation, can be an argument. Which is why in this case RAI matters more. I wouldn't allow it on RAI grounds because of the same reasons you're saying why it doesn't happen.
I'm just saying, with a strict, literal RAW interpretation, based only on what's in the books, there is an argument to be made there.

[Aett_Thorn]

As for why use a sling: longer range. Granted, you're better off throwing the damned thing if you want to hit something up to 60' away, but the sling is the only way to hit something between 60-120' away.

[Talamare]

Okay, let's for a second assume that the ammunition rules are ambiguous. I'm not saying that they are, but let's assume that they are. They would be a general rule for how ammunition works.

However, Specific > General. Meaning that the specific language of the Magic Stones spell would override the ambiguous general ammunition rules and replace them with a specific calculation for damage. Magic Stones says that damage of the stone when fired from a sling is 1d6+SCM. That's a specific overruling a general rule. When you fire a magic stone from a sling, it does 1d6+SCM damage would be the final result, ignoring general ammunition rules.

Doesn't say that
It says that on a hit the magic stone spell deals 1d6+SCM

[Aett_Thorn]

Doesn't say that
It says that on a hit the magic stone spell deals 1d6+SCM

Whether fired from a sling or throw, it does 1d6+SCM damage. Nowhere in the spell description does it state that the damage calculation is different if it is fired from a sling, therefore the statement holds true either way.

Let's take a look at the 'ambiguous' ammunition property rules:


Ammunition. You can use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a ranged attack only if you have ammunition to fire from the weapon. Each time you attack with the weapon, you expend one piece of ammunition. Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon). At the end of the battle, you can recover half your expended ammunition by taking a minute to search the battlefield.

If you use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a melee attack, you treat the weapon as an improvised weapon (see “Improvised Weapons” later in the section). A sling must be loaded to deal any damage when used in this way.

And here is the rule for improvised weapons:


Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.

Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.

An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

Notice how in the Improvised Weapon section, there are no rules for using improvised ammunition. Therefore, one can reasonably conclude that you can't fire improvised ammunition from a normal ranged weapon (although if it were similar enough, most DMs would probably allow it). But based on the two definitions together, you NEED to have the right ammunition before you can fire the ranged weapon. This means that the delivery mechanism does not do any damage by itself. It needs to be in combination with the ammunition. Yes, they put the weapon damage in the table because that was the most logical place for it to go, but that shouldn't mean that they expect the reader to assume that it's the longbow, and not the arrow, that is doing the damage. It is the combination of the two that deals the damage.

Magic Stones changes the damage the sling does, but does not ADD to the damage the sling does. It replaces the sling/sling bullet combination with a sling/magic stone combination. This new combination specifically says that it deals 1d6+SCM damage.

[DivisibleByZero]

The only issue which the OP pointed out though is that the sling damage is sling damage, while stone damage is specifically the ammunition, which is not seen anywhere else. Even magic ammunition only states a +1-+3 to hit and damage, but no actual damage to the ammo.

There is no sling damage.
And yet again, therein lies the problem with this line of reasoning.
Guess what? There is no sling damage because you are not making a weapon attack. You are making a spell attack. That spell attack uses the caster's mod to hit and to damage, just like every other spell attack. That spell attack uses the damage listed in the spell description, just like every other spell attack.
There is no sling involved at all, except to potentially increase the range (with disadvantage) if you so choose. If there were, it would be a weapon attack and all of this nonsense might hold water.
But it isn't. And so it doesn't.

And so I repeat (with a minor edit):

There is no damage boost.
Therein lies the problem with that line of reasoning.
It doesn't boost damage, it does the damage that is stated instead of the normal damage.

Normal thrown rock: weapon attack range 20/60 (usually, but DM dependent as an ImpWeap), 1d20+str/dex attack, 1d4+str/dex damage
Normal sling: weapon attack range 30/120, 1d20+dex attack, 1d4+dex damage
Magic stone: spell attack range 60, 1d20 +scm attack, 1d6+scm damage. If you use a sling, the only thing that changes is the range.

[Mikal]

The ranged spell attack raises a question.
Since this is a ranged spell attack that does damage equal to X, does that mean that no effects apply to it?
Nowhere in the description does the cantrip say anything about weapon attacks or damages, like GFB and Booming Blade.

So if we go that route, that means no other modifiers would occur. So no Sharpshooter, Magic slings don't add any attack/damage bonuses, etc, just sling range

Hex and other effects that work on all attacks would still apply though.

After all, this is now a ranged spell attack, it's not a weapon attack at all per the spell's description.

Do you agree?

[DivisibleByZero]

The ranged spell attack raises a question.
Since this is a ranged spell attack that does damage equal to X, does that mean that no effects apply to it?
Nowhere in the description does the cantrip say anything about weapon attacks or damages, like GFB and Booming Blade.

So if we go that route, that means no other modifiers would occur. So no Sharpshooter, Magic slings don't add any attack/damage bonuses, etc.

Hex and other effects that work on all attacks would still apply though.

After all, this is now a ranged spell attack, it's not a weapon attack at all per the spell's description.

Do you agree?

By RAW, that is correct.
I imagine that many DMs would allow much of that, but by the rules what you have just stated is correct.

[Mikal]

By RAW, that is correct.
I imagine that many DMs would allow much of that, but by the rules what you have just stated is correct.

That's what happens when you miss a portion of the rule... Flip Flopping!

As such yes, I have to agree, it's a ranged spell attack and not a ranged weapon attack, so the damage applied is only that which is noted in the spell description, with any extra damage coming from effects that can affect ranged spell attacks..

Sorry, Talamare. Have to say based on that your argument is invalid since we're talking about a spell attack, not a weapon attack.

[greenstone]

I think of it a different way:

Slings don't do damage. Neither do stones. Neither do arrows, or swords, or anything like that.

Attacks do damage.

The damage die or dice simply depends on the tool or tools (since some tools must be used paired, for example a launcher and its ammo) you use to make an attack and maybe on how you used those tools (with brute force or agility).

Use a long sword and brute power -> damage is 1d8 + STR mod.
Use a short sword and agility (finesse) -> 1d6 + DEX mod.
Use a sling and normal stone -> 1d4 + DEX mod.
Use a sling and a magic stone -> 1d6 + caster's spellcasting mod.

[JackPhoenix]

For the stone itself yes. However, again, OP is stating that sling damage comes from the sling, not the stone. So the stone does X, the sling provides Y. Especially as the stone does the same damage and has the same range whether thrown by hand or thrown by a sling.

From a strict RAW interpretation, I can see an argument being made.

This does bring up an interesting point though-- why bother using a sling?
I guess if you have a magic one so you can get a +x to hit and damage? Otherwise, why not just chuck the dang things.

Better range (sort off. Throwing it by hand has range 60, sling has 30/120. So better range with Sharpshooter (and it is a ranged weapon, so you can use the -5/+10 option, as well as other abilities that key of ranged weapon, like Sneak Attack), and worse range without it.

By the way, per the same interpretation, arrows wouldn't be doing 0 damage, but 1d4 as improvised weapon. You're (presumably) proficient with bow, and you're using bow for attack roll, so being non-proficient with improvised weapon doesn't matter, but as the ammo does 1d4 + Str damage on its own, it should stack through the same logic.

[Talamare]

By the way, per the same interpretation, arrows wouldn't be doing 0 damage, but 1d4 as improvised weapon. You're (presumably) proficient with bow, and you're using bow for attack roll, so being non-proficient with improvised weapon doesn't matter, but as the ammo does 1d4 + Str damage on its own, it should stack through the same logic.

Improvised Weapons don't gain their damage until you're using them as an Improvised Weapon

If you're not using something as an Improvised Weapon, then it doesn't gain the damage of an Improvised Weapon.

Different logic train