That has room for interpretation... using a halberd like a pike is not contrary to its design in real life — but the game would apply slashing damage and the cleave property to the attack — which, to me, belies the actual makers of the game'sdesign was that a standard halberd attack is one where the halberd is wielded as a long slashing weapon.
Personally, I would have the player describe how they are trying to wield it and decide whether it resembles another weapon enough that it "functions as that weapon and [therefor] uses that weapon's rules." As per the rules as written, in the Improvised Weapon section.
There's lots of weapons where the D&D mechanics are simplified and abstracted from how they were really used. That is simply the nature of the game. The damage type, etc., are not reduced to one thing because the designers didn't know you could stab with a sword, but because that level of detail is too much for the level of abstraction the game uses. In the six seconds of a combat round, you aren't making a single attack, but a number of strikes, which are abstracted into one attack and damage roll.
You are advocating for a level of detail that the game does not aspire to, and it messes with balance. If one can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property, then it's just the best weapon. There isn't supposed to be a best weapon.
That has room for interpretation... using a halberd like a pike is not contrary to its design in real life — but the game would apply slashing damage and the cleave property to the attack — which, to me, belies the actual makers of the game'sdesign was that a standard halberd attack is one where the halberd is wielded as a long slashing weapon.
Personally, I would have the player describe how they are trying to wield it and decide whether it resembles another weapon enough that it "functions as that weapon and [therefor] uses that weapon's rules." As per the rules as written, in the Improvised Weapon section.
There's lots of weapons where the D&D mechanics are simplified and abstracted from how they were really used. That is simply the nature of the game. The damage type, etc., are not reduced to one thing because the designers didn't know you could stab with a sword, but because that level of detail is too much for the level of abstraction the game uses. In the six seconds of a combat round, you aren't making a single attack, but a number of strikes, which are abstracted into one attack and damage roll.
You are advocating for a level of detail that the game does not aspire to, and it messes with balance. If one can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property, then it's just the best weapon. There isn't supposed to be a best weapon.
I never implied that the designers of the game didn't know that weapons have multiple functions, nor did I advocate for any changes to how the game abstracts combat; I said that the game was designed such that—after abstracting 6 seconds of various strikes—a halberd is assumed to have been wielded like a long slashing weapon. If a player tells me they want to wield their weapon in such a way that would change its damage type, or to achieve some other effect besides the properties it has in the weapons table, they should be able to attempt to do that. And the rules for improvised weapons are great for allowing that level of player freedom.
Of course the game designers knew you could also stab with a sword; that's why they gave you a handy little section for specifically this purpose. So when your dagger-wielding rogue asks to try cutting the rope instead of stabbing it, you can use common sense to change that damage type. Instead of saying, "No, it says right there on your character sheet... piercing damage. If you want to reap the benefits of a slashing weapon, then maybe you should have thought of that before choosing daggers."
That's dumb. Not just because it's unrealistic — because the game tellsyou how to handle inconsistencies like that.
If one can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property, then it's just the best weapon. There isn't supposed to be a best weapon.
The ability to use a weapon's mastery is a quality of the player character, not the weapon itself. That's what makes them a master with it. If you don't have that feature, a halberd is just a halberd. If you don't have the pike weapon mastery, you cannot benefit from the pike mastery property by using a halberd like a pike. The versatility comes from the class features... so there isn't a best weapon, there's only the best class for using weapons. Which fits the sayings in common wisdom: "The best weapon is the one you know how to use," and "A weapon is only as good as the one who wields it."
One can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property... Provided: - They have proficiency with each of them. - They have access to the weapon mastery feature. - They specifically chose other weapons' masteries befitting their resemblance to weapons a halberd could realistically function as. - They invested in a feat that specifically makes one better at improvising weapon-like functions for objects, and even other weapons. - And most importantly.... If the DM decides to allow it.
"If you use an object — such as a table leg, frying pan, or bottle — as a makeshift weapon, see Improvised Weapons in the rules glossary. Also see those rules if you wield a weapon in an unusual way, such as using a Ranged weapon to make a melee attack."
Reminder that those rules say, that "if [it] resembles a Simple or Martial weapon, the DM may say it functions as that weapon".
You are allowed to do this. You are, of course, allowed to not do this as well. You're free to ignore any and all rules anyway; you're the DM. The player isn't trapping you with the magically binding words of "RAW." The designers of the game saw fit to give DM's a way to allow their players more freedom to do more things. Ultimately, D&D is a collaborative role-playing game in which the DM and the players share the mutual goal of having fun. The players aren't trying to pull one over on you when they try to make powerful characters; they're trying to have fun. Your job as DM isn't to prevent players from doing either; it's to ensure that the players' fun doesn't come at the expense of anyone else's fun. And the rules-as-written do an excellent job of creating a strong foundation to allow for a mostly balanced and smooth gaming experience. Though, as you rightly pointed out, the game's rules do not attempt to perfectly simulate every scenario imaginable. So they gave DMs tools that help facilitate player agency without unbalancing the game.
The player is trying to use the versatility of the multiple weapons whose masteries they chose. That is their goal. Their fantasy is to be especially good with halberds, specifically. Rules as written... You can effectively accomplish the same thing they're trying to do by swapping between multiple different weapons. So the game's designers don't seem to have a problem with players juggling weapons, or think that it unbalances the game. My question to you is: what exactly would you be accomplishing by forcing this player to achieve their goal in a way that is mechanically identical to their fantasy, without actually letting them achieve it? Why do you see that as "having their cake and eating it too"?
The answer is no, this is not supported by the rules.
An improvised weapon has two options: it is either close enough to a real weapon that it can be treated as such (like the leg of a table being a club, or a long sharpened stick being a spear), in which case you use the in-game rules for that weapon (for a spear, 1d6 or 1d8 piercing damage (versatile); for a club, 1d4 bludgeoning damage (light)).
Or,
It bares no real resemblance to a in-game weapon and therefore does 1d4 damage (damage type assigned by DM consistent with the improvised weapon).
There are cases where an in-game weapon can become "improvised" when used in a way for which it was not designed/intended; the classic example being hitting someone with your longbow. In that case it follows the second type of improvised weapon (a long-bow is not like a club or any other melee weapon) and so it does 1d4 damage. In this case we are using a ranged weapon for use as a melee weapon, and thus it becomes improvised.
In the case of the Halberd, it is already an in-game weapon, and importantly a melee weapon. So using the halberd as intended is using it for melee attacks. This includes, thrusts, swings, jabs, spins, etc. Whenever you are doing a melee attack with your Halberd, however you flavor it, it is using the weapon as it was designed, and therefore falls under the rules for its use. Saying "I stab with the pointy part" is just flavor.
If your DM allows it, then that's fine I guess, but the rules, with a good faith interpretation, do not support this idea, any more than duct taping a warhammer on the end of a lance with daggers welded to the cross guard allows you to use all three of those weapon types as an "improvised" fashion.
If you can use a bow as a club, then it pretty obviously isn't beyond the intent of the improvised weapons rules to have one weapon fulfil multiple roles.
You can't use a bow as a club.
You can use a bow as an improvised bludgeoning weapon that does 1d4 damage without proficiency. A bow DOES NOT resemble a club enough to trigger the "similar enough to an actual weapon to be treated as such" clause of improvised weapons. A table leg is close enough to a club that you can treat it as a light weapon that (if you have proficiency with Clubs) you can add your proficiency bonus to your attack. This is NOT the case with a bow. It is not close enough to an actual melee weapon, and thus will NOT be treated as Light, and will NOT have your proficiency bonus added to attacks (this all ignores having Tavern Brawler, but Tavern Brawler doesn't allow you to make an improvised weapon the same as an actual weapon, so the argument stands either way).
So in this case the rules do NOT support using one specific weapon (a bow) as another specific weapon (club) simply because you are using it in an improvised fashion. You can use a bow to do bludgeoning damage, but you will not (rules-wise) treat it as a club. This goes for the Halberd as well. It's not "close enough to a spear to be treated like a spear." It is, in fact, a Halberd. And because it is exactly like a Halberd, it will be treated like a Halberd. The "spear" part of the halberd is already incorporated into the halberd.
If a player said they wanted to specifically use the weapon in such a way as to change the damage type, like saying "I'm only going to be stabbing with the pointy bit so that I do piercing damage", I would potentially allow that depending on the circumstances and the reasoning. However allowing different Weapon Properties and different damage dice would absolutely be a "no". A Halberd cannot be similar enough to a Spear to gain Spear Weapon Properties. Spears do not have large bladed portions coming out of them. Same for using the handle as a quarterstaff. Quarterstaffs don't have large non-semetrical blades coming off of them, nor do they have a pointy bit. If it had a pointy bit, it would be a Spear. Saying "I want to hit someone with the handle of my spear instead of the tip so I can do bludgeoning damage instead of piercing damage", probably ok (does the same amount of damage either way). Saying that you want to use a quarterstaffs weapon properties on the handle of your spear? No.
But did you know that historically, if they weren't expecting battle to happen imminently, longbowmen would keep their bows unstrung to preserve their draw weight? Or if there was heavy rain or water hazards, they would hide the string in a pocket or under their hat. Because the stuff that bow strings were made of was especially vulnerable to stretching or rotting if it got wet. As far as their effectiveness in melee... It would honestly depend on the bow. A simple short bow, or recurve bow, is not a very good striking weapon. But an unstrung longbow is like a 6ft staff of solid, strong wood. While it's not particularly good for the health of the bow, it definitely could pack a punch when needed. But that's probably why one is a simple weapon, and the other is a martial weapon. Warbows are much harder to draw, but you get more power and versatility, while a shortbow is easier to pick up and use, but is more suited for skirmishing and mounted combat.
As far as their effectiveness in melee... It would honestly depend on the bow. A simple short bow, or recurve bow, is not a very good striking weapon. But an unstrung longbow is like a 6ft staff of solid, strong wood. While it's not particularly good for the health of the bow, it definitely could pack a punch when needed. But that's probably why one is a simple weapon, and the other is a martial weapon. Warbows are much harder to draw, but you get more power and versatility, while a shortbow is easier to pick up and use, but is more suited for skirmishing and mounted combat.
At my table you can make melee attacks with a bow anytime, it just doesn't function as a Club or Quarterstaff with Light or Versatile Property and Slow or Topple Mastery, instead dealing 1d4 Bludgeoning damage without adding your Proficiency Bonus to attack rolls.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's lots of weapons where the D&D mechanics are simplified and abstracted from how they were really used. That is simply the nature of the game. The damage type, etc., are not reduced to one thing because the designers didn't know you could stab with a sword, but because that level of detail is too much for the level of abstraction the game uses. In the six seconds of a combat round, you aren't making a single attack, but a number of strikes, which are abstracted into one attack and damage roll.
You are advocating for a level of detail that the game does not aspire to, and it messes with balance. If one can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property, then it's just the best weapon. There isn't supposed to be a best weapon.
I never implied that the designers of the game didn't know that weapons have multiple functions, nor did I advocate for any changes to how the game abstracts combat; I said that the game was designed such that—after abstracting 6 seconds of various strikes—a halberd is assumed to have been wielded like a long slashing weapon. If a player tells me they want to wield their weapon in such a way that would change its damage type, or to achieve some other effect besides the properties it has in the weapons table, they should be able to attempt to do that. And the rules for improvised weapons are great for allowing that level of player freedom.
Of course the game designers knew you could also stab with a sword; that's why they gave you a handy little section for specifically this purpose. So when your dagger-wielding rogue asks to try cutting the rope instead of stabbing it, you can use common sense to change that damage type. Instead of saying, "No, it says right there on your character sheet... piercing damage. If you want to reap the benefits of a slashing weapon, then maybe you should have thought of that before choosing daggers."
That's dumb. Not just because it's unrealistic — because the game tells you how to handle inconsistencies like that.
The ability to use a weapon's mastery is a quality of the player character, not the weapon itself. That's what makes them a master with it. If you don't have that feature, a halberd is just a halberd. If you don't have the pike weapon mastery, you cannot benefit from the pike mastery property by using a halberd like a pike. The versatility comes from the class features... so there isn't a best weapon, there's only the best class for using weapons. Which fits the sayings in common wisdom: "The best weapon is the one you know how to use," and "A weapon is only as good as the one who wields it."
One can use the halberd as several different weapons, each with their own mastery property...
Provided:
- They have proficiency with each of them.
- They have access to the weapon mastery feature.
- They specifically chose other weapons' masteries befitting their resemblance to weapons a halberd could realistically function as.
- They invested in a feat that specifically makes one better at improvising weapon-like functions for objects, and even other weapons.
- And most importantly.... If the DM decides to allow it.
"If you use an object — such as a table leg, frying pan, or bottle — as a makeshift weapon, see Improvised Weapons in the rules glossary. Also see those rules if you wield a weapon in an unusual way, such as using a Ranged weapon to make a melee attack."
Reminder that those rules say, that "if [it] resembles a Simple or Martial weapon, the DM may say it functions as that weapon".
You are allowed to do this. You are, of course, allowed to not do this as well.
You're free to ignore any and all rules anyway; you're the DM. The player isn't trapping you with the magically binding words of "RAW."
The designers of the game saw fit to give DM's a way to allow their players more freedom to do more things. Ultimately, D&D is a collaborative role-playing game in which the DM and the players share the mutual goal of having fun. The players aren't trying to pull one over on you when they try to make powerful characters; they're trying to have fun. Your job as DM isn't to prevent players from doing either; it's to ensure that the players' fun doesn't come at the expense of anyone else's fun. And the rules-as-written do an excellent job of creating a strong foundation to allow for a mostly balanced and smooth gaming experience. Though, as you rightly pointed out, the game's rules do not attempt to perfectly simulate every scenario imaginable. So they gave DMs tools that help facilitate player agency without unbalancing the game.
The player is trying to use the versatility of the multiple weapons whose masteries they chose. That is their goal. Their fantasy is to be especially good with halberds, specifically.
Rules as written... You can effectively accomplish the same thing they're trying to do by swapping between multiple different weapons. So the game's designers don't seem to have a problem with players juggling weapons, or think that it unbalances the game. My question to you is: what exactly would you be accomplishing by forcing this player to achieve their goal in a way that is mechanically identical to their fantasy, without actually letting them achieve it? Why do you see that as "having their cake and eating it too"?
The answer is no, this is not supported by the rules.
An improvised weapon has two options: it is either close enough to a real weapon that it can be treated as such (like the leg of a table being a club, or a long sharpened stick being a spear), in which case you use the in-game rules for that weapon (for a spear, 1d6 or 1d8 piercing damage (versatile); for a club, 1d4 bludgeoning damage (light)).
Or,
It bares no real resemblance to a in-game weapon and therefore does 1d4 damage (damage type assigned by DM consistent with the improvised weapon).
There are cases where an in-game weapon can become "improvised" when used in a way for which it was not designed/intended; the classic example being hitting someone with your longbow. In that case it follows the second type of improvised weapon (a long-bow is not like a club or any other melee weapon) and so it does 1d4 damage. In this case we are using a ranged weapon for use as a melee weapon, and thus it becomes improvised.
In the case of the Halberd, it is already an in-game weapon, and importantly a melee weapon. So using the halberd as intended is using it for melee attacks. This includes, thrusts, swings, jabs, spins, etc. Whenever you are doing a melee attack with your Halberd, however you flavor it, it is using the weapon as it was designed, and therefore falls under the rules for its use. Saying "I stab with the pointy part" is just flavor.
If your DM allows it, then that's fine I guess, but the rules, with a good faith interpretation, do not support this idea, any more than duct taping a warhammer on the end of a lance with daggers welded to the cross guard allows you to use all three of those weapon types as an "improvised" fashion.
You can't use a bow as a club.
You can use a bow as an improvised bludgeoning weapon that does 1d4 damage without proficiency. A bow DOES NOT resemble a club enough to trigger the "similar enough to an actual weapon to be treated as such" clause of improvised weapons. A table leg is close enough to a club that you can treat it as a light weapon that (if you have proficiency with Clubs) you can add your proficiency bonus to your attack. This is NOT the case with a bow. It is not close enough to an actual melee weapon, and thus will NOT be treated as Light, and will NOT have your proficiency bonus added to attacks (this all ignores having Tavern Brawler, but Tavern Brawler doesn't allow you to make an improvised weapon the same as an actual weapon, so the argument stands either way).
So in this case the rules do NOT support using one specific weapon (a bow) as another specific weapon (club) simply because you are using it in an improvised fashion. You can use a bow to do bludgeoning damage, but you will not (rules-wise) treat it as a club. This goes for the Halberd as well. It's not "close enough to a spear to be treated like a spear." It is, in fact, a Halberd. And because it is exactly like a Halberd, it will be treated like a Halberd. The "spear" part of the halberd is already incorporated into the halberd.
If a player said they wanted to specifically use the weapon in such a way as to change the damage type, like saying "I'm only going to be stabbing with the pointy bit so that I do piercing damage", I would potentially allow that depending on the circumstances and the reasoning. However allowing different Weapon Properties and different damage dice would absolutely be a "no". A Halberd cannot be similar enough to a Spear to gain Spear Weapon Properties. Spears do not have large bladed portions coming out of them. Same for using the handle as a quarterstaff. Quarterstaffs don't have large non-semetrical blades coming off of them, nor do they have a pointy bit. If it had a pointy bit, it would be a Spear. Saying "I want to hit someone with the handle of my spear instead of the tip so I can do bludgeoning damage instead of piercing damage", probably ok (does the same amount of damage either way). Saying that you want to use a quarterstaffs weapon properties on the handle of your spear? No.
I would rule a bow not ressembling enought to function as a club not nearly as inflexible & thick.
A reasonable decision.
But did you know that historically, if they weren't expecting battle to happen imminently, longbowmen would keep their bows unstrung to preserve their draw weight? Or if there was heavy rain or water hazards, they would hide the string in a pocket or under their hat. Because the stuff that bow strings were made of was especially vulnerable to stretching or rotting if it got wet.
As far as their effectiveness in melee... It would honestly depend on the bow. A simple short bow, or recurve bow, is not a very good striking weapon. But an unstrung longbow is like a 6ft staff of solid, strong wood. While it's not particularly good for the health of the bow, it definitely could pack a punch when needed. But that's probably why one is a simple weapon, and the other is a martial weapon. Warbows are much harder to draw, but you get more power and versatility, while a shortbow is easier to pick up and use, but is more suited for skirmishing and mounted combat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh4jPGE1Mxw&t=655s
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
At my table you can make melee attacks with a bow anytime, it just doesn't function as a Club or Quarterstaff with Light or Versatile Property and Slow or Topple Mastery, instead dealing 1d4 Bludgeoning damage without adding your Proficiency Bonus to attack rolls.