I am playing a Ranger with the Extra Attack feature and the Thrown Weapon Fighting fighting style. I have a sack (a homebrew item) that lets me draw and throw a magic stone (flavored as a turnip); the cantrip is cast on the stones. I think I have established that I would have three attacks (2 with my action thanks to Extra Attack, and 1 with my bonus action thanks to Two-Weapon Fighting). Thrown Weapon Fighting lets me draw as part of the attack.

Does the bonus-action attack do 1d6 + Wisdom modifier bludgeoning damage, as usual for magic stone? Or is just 1d6, because of the rules for Two-Weapon Fighting?


2 Answers 2


Two-Weapon Fighting requires light, one-handed, melee weapons, which the stones are not

[...] When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. [...]

Nothing states that the stones are considered light or that they are melee weapons, in fact, they are used to make spell attacks not weapon attacks. Thus, they cannot be used with Two-Weapon Fighting. Even if you got the Dual Wielder feat they would still not work:

[...] You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding aren’t light. [...]

This still requires that you use one-handed melee weapons, which the stones are not (nor is the sling you could use with the stones).

It's unclear whether magic stone uses the Attack action

The spell might require its own unique action to hurl the stones and not the Attack action. I believe this to be the case as it makes a spell attack and does not explicitly mention the Attack action like other features do; for example, the Sun Soul Monk's Radiant Sun Bolt:

You gain a new attack option that you can use with the Attack action. This special attack is a ranged spell attack with a range of 30 feet [...]

Because of this, the spell cannot benefit from Extra Attack as it requires the Attack action:

[...] You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn. [...]

Either way, nothing is going to break

Any GM is perfectly allowed to rule either way and have the stones use the Attack action or not, though that would not change the fact that the stones are not light, melee weapons and cannot be used for TWF. I can't see any problems arising from allowing them to work with Extra Attack, so it would be a fine interpretation/ruling to me.

Personally, I would say magic stone requires its own action, but that's just me. I could easily see it being ruled or interpreted the other way around.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Why can't you attack with magic stones as part of an attack action? At first, I assumed that the attack action was limited to weapon attacks, but checking the rules, it just says "With this action, you make one melee or ranged attack." Obviously, most spell attacks happen as part of some other action (generally casting a spell), which means there's no way for them to be part of an attack action, but as far as I can tell there's nothing inherently forbidding you from making spell attacks as part of an attack action, assuming you have such an attack available. \$\endgroup\$ Nov 27, 2020 at 14:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RyanC.Thompson I mean, nothing forbids it; but the spell isn't worded the same way as the Radiant Sun Bolt. I personally don't believe it uses the Attack action and regardless of whether or not it does, it still won't work with Two-Weapon Fighting \$\endgroup\$ Nov 27, 2020 at 14:56
  • \$\begingroup\$ I agree it won't work with 2WF, but in the absence of any more specific rules, is the attack action the only way to make an attack of any kind? Every spell or feature that I've seen that provides a new action independent from the attack action says something like "you can make an attack as an action" (e.g. Vampiric Touch). \$\endgroup\$ Nov 27, 2020 at 17:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Ryan And every feature I know that grants a new use for the Attack action explicitly states that. I honestly think the spell just has incomplete wording and am unsure what was intended \$\endgroup\$ Nov 27, 2020 at 17:16

You cannot use Two-Weapon fighting with the magic stones

The stones are not light melee weapons. The spell magic stone lets you use them as thrown ranged spell attack, or as ammunition for a sling. You can attack twice with Extra Attack, but you cannot attack with Two-Weapon Fighting.

If you use them with the sling and have Extra Attack, you don't need to have the throwing fighting style to fire more than one a turn due to the ammunition property on the sling.

If you throw them, you will do more damage due to your fighting style, however.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Are they ammunition as defined or something else? \$\endgroup\$
    – NotArch
    Nov 27, 2020 at 14:39
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch in D&D somewhat bizarrely the ammunition property applies strictly to the weapon (sling). This makes anything fired out of a sling ammunition. \$\endgroup\$
    – Nick
    Nov 27, 2020 at 14:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Nick I don’t think that’s so bizarre - that sounds like the kind of definition that a police force might use. In the U.K., if you stab or slash someone with it, it’s a knife for the purposes of the crime. (I think most confiscated “knives” are screwdrivers and similar.). In any case the ammunition property is to note that the weapon requires ammunition to function. \$\endgroup\$
    – Dan W
    Oct 5, 2021 at 22:37

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .