So it's clear that a character can use a weapon without being proficient with it, with a slight accuracy penalty. I'm sure there's the "Common sense" clause from the PHB about weapons and size, so having a rat wield a battleaxe is out of the question. What's interesting, though, is that the rules don't say you need a hand to make a weapon attack, you need 1 or 2 with versatile weapons and obviously 2 with two-handed weapons. You must also have a weapon in 1 hand to gain the ability to do two-weapon fighting and similar stuff. But as far as I see, you could make an attack roll with a dagger in your mouth.
I want you to put aside your opinion about how it should work for how it does, for just a moment.
So my question is: RAW, Could an animal companion wield a dagger/net/flail? They would use whatever ability modifier they'd normally use for the specific weapon without proficiency bonuses but still do the weapon's damage. As far as I know.
Anywhere that says this is incorrect? So long as they can carry the equipment?
RAW I don't see why they couldn't. In reality, if I were the DM, I would not allow it (except perhaps with a monkey, ape, or other creature with developed hands).
No. It's just an animal. An owned dog is not magical, and a stray isn't either. The only difference is that it has formed a bond with you. Most familiars are smarter than an animal companion (6 or higher intelligence). It's not magical. Just a wolf that loves and guards you. So no.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
No. It's just an animal. An owned dog is not magical, and a stray isn't either. The only difference is that it has formed a bond with you. Most familiars are smarter than an animal companion (6 or higher intelligence). It's not magical. Just a wolf that loves and guards you. So no.
It's trained to fight alongside you. It's not just a pet. The bond it formed is magical, and even the attacks are.
Other than that, is a dog with a sword in it's mouth that abrasive to the story? Or do you just think it's too powerful?
Too abrasive to the story. There's a lot of suspension of disbelief involved in these games (leather armor, dual wielding, MAGIC), but that is silly, over the top, and anime-ish to me. It wouldn't have a place in my game.
Exactly. What's the point in rogues when a giant weasel can just pick the door? Or a panther with a greataxe and barbs? It just doesn't work.
A weasel can't pick door because they aren't proficient with thieve's tools and a panther can't use a greataxe because it requires 2-hands.
Besides the first paragraph of the feature says they were trained to fight alongside you. It doesn't make sense that you can dual wield lances on a horse, but you can do it in the game.
Too abrasive to the story. There's a lot of suspension of disbelief involved in these games (leather armor, dual wielding, MAGIC), but that is silly, over the top, and anime-ish to me. It wouldn't have a place in my game.
Is it any more silly than a Halfling riding a pteranodon while dual wielding rapiers and summoning 8 crabs? Because that's what RAW is.
Though, I agree having a snake wield a maul is silly, a dog trained to use a dagger in it's mouth can be somewhat believable in a world where a crab can kill commoners.
@Colin, it sounds like you're not as interested in other peoples' opinions as arguing for validation of your own. I'm not saying there isn't a place for dagger-swinging dogs or any of the silly things you can do in the D&D ruleset. If you enjoy a silly, unrealistic game, more power to you. That kind of game can be fun too. I'm just saying it wouldn't fly in the more classic, Tolkienesque games I like to play.
@Colin, it sounds like you're not as interested in other peoples' opinions as arguing for validation of your own. I'm not saying there isn't a place for dagger-swinging dogs or any of the silly things you can do in the D&D ruleset. If you enjoy a silly, unrealistic game, more power to you. That kind of game can be fun too. I'm just saying it wouldn't fly in the more classic, Tolkienesque games I like to play.
Tbf to me, I did say in this thread to put aside your own opinions.
I was only interested if it's RAW. Since any given game can houserule away anything, like magic or 8-hr long rests, in interest of realism.
No, because being able to move a weapon around and being able to USE a weapon effectively are two different things.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
No. I can pick up a dagger and I can stab you with it, however I am /not/ proficient. I do not know any forms or techniques involved with dagger fighting.
My cat however, can't even pick it up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
No. I can pick up a dagger and I can stab you with it, however I am /not/ proficient. I do not know any forms or techniques involved with dagger fighting.
My cat however, can't even pick it up.
Have you tried magically bonding with them and training them to fight alongside you? That might do it.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't allow my cat to grasp the weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So it's clear that a character can use a weapon without being proficient with it, with a slight accuracy penalty. I'm sure there's the "Common sense" clause from the PHB about weapons and size, so having a rat wield a battleaxe is out of the question. What's interesting, though, is that the rules don't say you need a hand to make a weapon attack, you need 1 or 2 with versatile weapons and obviously 2 with two-handed weapons. You must also have a weapon in 1 hand to gain the ability to do two-weapon fighting and similar stuff. But as far as I see, you could make an attack roll with a dagger in your mouth.
I want you to put aside your opinion about how it should work for how it does, for just a moment.
So my question is: RAW, Could an animal companion wield a dagger/net/flail? They would use whatever ability modifier they'd normally use for the specific weapon without proficiency bonuses but still do the weapon's damage. As far as I know.
Anywhere that says this is incorrect? So long as they can carry the equipment?
RAW I don't see why they couldn't. In reality, if I were the DM, I would not allow it (except perhaps with a monkey, ape, or other creature with developed hands).
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
What Naivara said.
I'd allow an animal companion to hold a torch or other useful item. Pull a rope with their mouths etc.
Is there any reason in particular that you wouldn't allow this in your games as a DM?
It just isn't real world accurate. Sure, companions are special, but there needs to be a limit.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
Okay, I understand that. But hear me out: the companion isn't just any animal, it's a magically enhanced animal.
No. It's just an animal. An owned dog is not magical, and a stray isn't either. The only difference is that it has formed a bond with you. Most familiars are smarter than an animal companion (6 or higher intelligence). It's not magical. Just a wolf that loves and guards you. So no.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
It's trained to fight alongside you. It's not just a pet. The bond it formed is magical, and even the attacks are.
Other than that, is a dog with a sword in it's mouth that abrasive to the story? Or do you just think it's too powerful?
It just doesn't work. And you would have to train them to do so. Money and time...
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
Too abrasive to the story. There's a lot of suspension of disbelief involved in these games (leather armor, dual wielding, MAGIC), but that is silly, over the top, and anime-ish to me. It wouldn't have a place in my game.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Exactly. What's the point in rogues when a giant weasel can just pick the door? Or a panther with a greataxe and barbs? It just doesn't work.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
A weasel can't pick door because they aren't proficient with thieve's tools and a panther can't use a greataxe because it requires 2-hands.
Besides the first paragraph of the feature says they were trained to fight alongside you. It doesn't make sense that you can dual wield lances on a horse, but you can do it in the game.
Is it any more silly than a Halfling riding a pteranodon while dual wielding rapiers and summoning 8 crabs? Because that's what RAW is.
Though, I agree having a snake wield a maul is silly, a dog trained to use a dagger in it's mouth can be somewhat believable in a world where a crab can kill commoners.
@Colin, it sounds like you're not as interested in other peoples' opinions as arguing for validation of your own. I'm not saying there isn't a place for dagger-swinging dogs or any of the silly things you can do in the D&D ruleset. If you enjoy a silly, unrealistic game, more power to you. That kind of game can be fun too. I'm just saying it wouldn't fly in the more classic, Tolkienesque games I like to play.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Tbf to me, I did say in this thread to put aside your own opinions.
I was only interested if it's RAW. Since any given game can houserule away anything, like magic or 8-hr long rests, in interest of realism.
No, because being able to move a weapon around and being able to USE a weapon effectively are two different things.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
That's what proficiency is for.
No. I can pick up a dagger and I can stab you with it, however I am /not/ proficient. I do not know any forms or techniques involved with dagger fighting.
My cat however, can't even pick it up.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Have you tried magically bonding with them and training them to fight alongside you? That might do it.
I'm pretty sure that doesn't allow my cat to grasp the weapon.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha