Sorry if I'm wrong, but I think I'm missing your point DxJxC. With Crossbow Expert, you should be able to dual-wield hand crossbows ?
If you have extra attack, you could shoot both bolts from your "main hand", thanks to the feat letting you ignore the Loading trait. Then, because you used the attack action and attacked with a one-handed weapon (the feat doesn't require it to be melee), you can use your bonus action to shoot another bolt (with the other crossbow, or even the same one).
If you have extra attack, I also believe you should be able to attack twice with crossbow without this feat, if you have one in each hand, since the loading trait would apply to each weapon separately. Reloading would be awkward, but there's no rule saying you need a free hand to reload. You wouldn't get a 3rd attack as a bonus action without the feat though.
This is not technically "two-weapon fighting", but it's an emulation of TWF through a feat. Or am I mistaken ?
What part of the Feat text says you CAN'T make an attack with a hand crossbow with one hand and use the bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow in the other hand?
The problem is not the loading property, the problem is the ammunition property. Which says you need a free hand to attack with the hand crossbow. And the feat does not get rid of this restriction.
The only thing that nullifies the ammunition property is the artificer's repeating weapon infusion. And you would need 2 artificers because each can only use the infusion once.
@Greenstone_Walker : wow, thank you ! I never noticed that since that feat wasn't TWF, you were able to add your modifier to the damage of the bonus action. Mind, blown.
@DxJxC I indeed missed this line on the ammunition property, I haven't seen many crossbows at my table yet. Thank you !
The problem is not the loading property, the problem is the ammunition property. Which says you need a free hand to attack with the hand crossbow. And the feat does not get rid of this restriction.
Looks to me like the ammunition rule just says you need a free hand for loading it, not for attacking with it. Unless your point was that this makes it impractical for ongoing use with one in each hand, in which case yeah.
The problem is not the loading property, the problem is the ammunition property. Which says you need a free hand to attack with the hand crossbow. And the feat does not get rid of this restriction.
Looks to me like the ammunition rule just says you need a free hand for loading it, not for attacking with it. Unless your point was that this makes it impractical for ongoing use with one in each hand, in which case yeah.
You are not entirely wrong, but the RAW says:
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).
And makes no mention of pre-loading.
And while it is impractical for an ongoing battle, it is also impractical at the start of battle. You would not store/holster 2 loaded crossbows any more than you would 2 loaded and cocked firearms. So you would have to spend the first action of battle preping your 2 hand crossbows (unless you are ambushing someone, then you can prepare ahead of time).
Also, most martial classes get extra attack. So you use your attack action to fire both crossbows, then you have no hand free to reload for the bonus action attack. So you spend your first turn preparing to lose an attack next turn. Effectively giving up 4 attacks to look cool.
However, I would love to see someone playing a character dedicated to this level of impracticality. I would give them an inspiration point each time they did it.
That's a cute quote but everybody here knows that it isn't RAI.
Your quote merely means that GMs don't have to come up with wonky rules for loading, the loading is already included in the action, not that it can't happen. Otherwise you end up with the ridiculous scene of experienced warriors walking about with unloaded crossbows in a dungeon or with archers with no arrows nocked.
PC: "I nock an arrow and get ready for a fight."
GM: "You gonna shoot something? Because if not, you can't nock an arrow."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"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?"
However, I would love to see someone playing a character dedicated to this level of impracticality. I would give them an inspiration point each time they did it.
It reminds me of the stories of old pirates who would go into battle with half a dozen pre-loaded single-shot pistols stuffed in their belts :)
That's a cute quote but everybody here knows that it isn't RAI.
What isn't RAI ? That you need a free hand to attack ? It seems pretty clear to me that it is.
Maybe there are self-loading hand crossbows created somewhere, but these aren't. You can achieve the result you want with a single crossbow and a feat though, so I fail to see the issue ?
However, I would love to see someone playing a character dedicated to this level of impracticality. I would give them an inspiration point each time they did it.
It reminds me of the stories of old pirates who would go into battle with half a dozen pre-loaded single-shot pistols stuffed in their belts :)
Sorry if I'm wrong, but I think I'm missing your point DxJxC. With Crossbow Expert, you should be able to dual-wield hand crossbows ?
…
This is not technically "two-weapon fighting", but it's an emulation of TWF through a feat. Or am I mistaken ?
It is not the "two-weapon fighting" rule, correct.
Most players use "two-weapon fighting" and "dual-wield" to mean the same thing, so it avids confusion to not use either term when talking about the Bonus Action attack granted by feats like Crossbow Master and Polearm Master.
Note that the Bonus Action attack granted by Crossbow Master (and Polearm Master) does add your ability score modifier to damage.
"Two-Weapon Fighting" is Two-Weapon Fighting. It's a specific thing in 5e, so I take any reference to "Two-Weapon Fighting" to be about the specific action.
There are probably a ton of homebrew hand crossbows out there that are self loading.
I'm sure there are, but there are no official ones. Homebrew is never a valid premise when discussing what you can/cannot do under RAW or RAI. I would've thought that to be obvious. 🤷♂️
Two-Weapon Fighting cannot ever be done with hand crossbows.
Crossbow Expert does not allow continuous dual-wielding of hand crossbows.
You still need a free hand to reload due to the Ammunition property.
Two Artificers using the Repeating Shot infusion would allow continuous dual-wielding.
If you're just interested in maximizing a crossbow build, then the question isn't really even about the Crossbow Expert feat; that's good no matter what for the ability to shoot in melee range. What matters is whether you already have a use for your bonus action from your class.
If you have a good bonus action option like Rogues & Rangers, then stick with a Crossbow, Heavy: more damage, usable more than once per round via Crossbow Expert, leaves your bonus action for Cunning Action, spells, etc.
If you don't already have a good bonus action, go with a single Crossbow, Hand.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Also, speaking of needing multiple single shot guns. There was this thing called a gun sword in the 16-17 hundreds, so you could discharge your shot, and then quickly switch to using the blade, so you wouldn’t die if you missed/if there were multiple attackers.
I'm sure there are, but there are no official ones. Homebrew is never a valid premise when discussing what you can/cannot do under RAW or RAI. I would've thought that to be obvious. 🤷♂️
I
This is the General Discussion Board, not Rules and Mechanics.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"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?"
Sigred mentioned this in passing (I know I've mentioned it before, but not sure if it was this thread). It is a fancy solution if your party has 2 artificers or a generous DM (of course homebrew and house rule has always been an option).
The problem is not the loading property, the problem is the ammunition property. Which says you need a free hand to attack with the hand crossbow. And the feat does not get rid of this restriction.
The only thing that nullifies the ammunition property is the artificer's repeating weapon infusion. And you would need 2 artificers because each can only use the infusion once.
@Greenstone_Walker : wow, thank you ! I never noticed that since that feat wasn't TWF, you were able to add your modifier to the damage of the bonus action. Mind, blown.
@DxJxC I indeed missed this line on the ammunition property, I haven't seen many crossbows at my table yet. Thank you !
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
Looks to me like the ammunition rule just says you need a free hand for loading it, not for attacking with it. Unless your point was that this makes it impractical for ongoing use with one in each hand, in which case yeah.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
You are not entirely wrong, but the RAW says:
And makes no mention of pre-loading.
And while it is impractical for an ongoing battle, it is also impractical at the start of battle. You would not store/holster 2 loaded crossbows any more than you would 2 loaded and cocked firearms. So you would have to spend the first action of battle preping your 2 hand crossbows (unless you are ambushing someone, then you can prepare ahead of time).
Also, most martial classes get extra attack. So you use your attack action to fire both crossbows, then you have no hand free to reload for the bonus action attack. So you spend your first turn preparing to lose an attack next turn. Effectively giving up 4 attacks to look cool.
However, I would love to see someone playing a character dedicated to this level of impracticality. I would give them an inspiration point each time they did it.
That's a cute quote but everybody here knows that it isn't RAI.
Your quote merely means that GMs don't have to come up with wonky rules for loading, the loading is already included in the action, not that it can't happen. Otherwise you end up with the ridiculous scene of experienced warriors walking about with unloaded crossbows in a dungeon or with archers with no arrows nocked.
PC: "I nock an arrow and get ready for a fight."
GM: "You gonna shoot something? Because if not, you can't nock an arrow."
"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
There are probably a ton of homebrew hand crossbows out there that are self loading.
"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
It reminds me of the stories of old pirates who would go into battle with half a dozen pre-loaded single-shot pistols stuffed in their belts :)
"Not all those who wander are lost"
What isn't RAI ? That you need a free hand to attack ? It seems pretty clear to me that it is.
Maybe there are self-loading hand crossbows created somewhere, but these aren't. You can achieve the result you want with a single crossbow and a feat though, so I fail to see the issue ?
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
While this example is not a one-handed crossbow, the discussion makes me think of the repeating crossbow from Van Helsing.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Just like Assassin’s Creed Black Flag
I did NOT eat those hikers.
"Two-Weapon Fighting" is Two-Weapon Fighting. It's a specific thing in 5e, so I take any reference to "Two-Weapon Fighting" to be about the specific action.
I'm sure there are, but there are no official ones. Homebrew is never a valid premise when discussing what you can/cannot do under RAW or RAI. I would've thought that to be obvious. 🤷♂️
If you're just interested in maximizing a crossbow build, then the question isn't really even about the Crossbow Expert feat; that's good no matter what for the ability to shoot in melee range. What matters is whether you already have a use for your bonus action from your class.
If you have a good bonus action option like Rogues & Rangers, then stick with a Crossbow, Heavy: more damage, usable more than once per round via Crossbow Expert, leaves your bonus action for Cunning Action, spells, etc.
If you don't already have a good bonus action, go with a single Crossbow, Hand.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Also, speaking of needing multiple single shot guns. There was this thing called a gun sword in the 16-17 hundreds, so you could discharge your shot, and then quickly switch to using the blade, so you wouldn’t die if you missed/if there were multiple attackers.
I did NOT eat those hikers.
The final fantasy one is just impractical
I did NOT eat those hikers.
Perhaps you would like to meet my friend, the hand crossbow dual-wielding Xorn.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
This is... amazing (could also work for a thri-kreen)
I did NOT eat those hikers.
Hey hey, keep to the topic at hand. This is the dual wield thread, not the triple wield thread.
"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
This is the General Discussion Board, not Rules and Mechanics.
"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
[Tooltip Not Found]
"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
Sigred mentioned this in passing (I know I've mentioned it before, but not sure if it was this thread). It is a fancy solution if your party has 2 artificers or a generous DM (of course homebrew and house rule has always been an option).
What are you trying to say? It's in the general list of magic weapons. There is no restriction in the text.
"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