I'm a little confused how are "definition" and "description" even different things that result in different rulings? Let alone how those rulings are problematic...
Originally, my though was that a sentence saying “a melee weapon is used to... “ tells you how to use a something that you know is a melee weapon, not what a melee is.
But really, as I said, it doesn’t matter all that much. Really, you should be able to use an ability score to add to the attack and damage rolls of attacks with improvised weapons.
Hey, good afternoon/night/day everyone, I hope you can help me, I saw that this forum had doubts similar to mine. In order not to create a new forum, would you think if we continue in this thread?.
What makes me doubt about improvised weapons is their size, since in the case of the character I'm using, I have a barbarian/druid, with the Tavern Brawler feat, which gives me proficiency. By transforming into, for example, a giant scorpion, a giant elk, etc. Technically I could start using medium creatures as projectiles to throw (at 20ft's) but it would still be an improvised weapon in this case.
How could I apply the damage from the makeshift weapon to the enemy I'm throwing as a weapon, as well as the enemy receiving the attack?,
And if I am using an enemy that I have grabbed as an improvised melee weapon, how would I apply the damage in this case?,
As you will see, my main doubt arises due to the size categories of the objects/beings that are being dealt with.
Hola buenas tardes/noches/dias a todos, espero me puedan ayudar, vi que este foro tenia dudas parecidas a las mías.
Para no crear un nuevo foro, ¿te parece si seguimos en este hilo?
Lo que me hace dudar de las armas improvisadas es su tamaño, ya que en el caso del personaje que estoy usando, tengo un bárbaro/druida, con la feat Tavern Brawler, que me da pericia.
Transformándome en, digamos, un escorpión gigante, un alce gigante, etc. Técnicamente podría comenzar a usar criaturas medianas como proyectiles para lanzar (dentro de 20 pies), pero aún sería un arma improvisada en este caso.
¿Cómo podría aplicar el daño del arma improvisada al enemigo que estoy lanzando como arma, así como al enemigo que recibe el ataque?
Y si estoy usando a un enemigo que agarré como arma cuerpo a cuerpo improvisada, cómo aplicaría el daño en este caso?
Como verán, mi principal duda surge de las categorías de tamaño de los objetos/seres que están siendo tratados.
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 DM'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 DM 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.
So at GM discretion, if it closely resembles a weapon (a table leg = a mace) that the player is proficient with, then the player gets a normal attack with mod and proficiency bonus. If not, it's d20 + mod roll only, no proficiency and damage is always 1d4.
Hey, good afternoon/night/day everyone, I hope you can help me, I saw that this forum had doubts similar to mine. In order not to create a new forum, would you think if we continue in this thread?.
What makes me doubt about improvised weapons is their size, since in the case of the character I'm using, I have a barbarian/druid, with the Tavern Brawler feat, which gives me proficiency. By transforming into, for example, a giant scorpion, a giant elk, etc. Technically I could start using medium creatures as projectiles to throw (at 20ft's) but it would still be an improvised weapon in this case.
How could I apply the damage from the makeshift weapon to the enemy I'm throwing as a weapon, as well as the enemy receiving the attack?,
And if I am using an enemy that I have grabbed as an improvised melee weapon, how would I apply the damage in this case?,
As you will see, my main doubt arises due to the size categories of the objects/beings that are being dealt with.
Hola buenas tardes/noches/dias a todos, espero me puedan ayudar, vi que este foro tenia dudas parecidas a las mías.
Para no crear un nuevo foro, ¿te parece si seguimos en este hilo?
Lo que me hace dudar de las armas improvisadas es su tamaño, ya que en el caso del personaje que estoy usando, tengo un bárbaro/druida, con la feat Tavern Brawler, que me da pericia.
Transformándome en, digamos, un escorpión gigante, un alce gigante, etc. Técnicamente podría comenzar a usar criaturas medianas como proyectiles para lanzar (dentro de 20 pies), pero aún sería un arma improvisada en este caso.
¿Cómo podría aplicar el daño del arma improvisada al enemigo que estoy lanzando como arma, así como al enemigo que recibe el ataque?
Y si estoy usando a un enemigo que agarré como arma cuerpo a cuerpo improvisada, cómo aplicaría el daño en este caso?
Como verán, mi principal duda surge de las categorías de tamaño de los objetos/seres que están siendo tratados.
Creatures are not objects, so no, they are not improvised weapons.
* You don't. There is no rule for damaging a creature by throwing a creature at them. Even in terms of an improvised weapon, the weapon does not receive any damage for being used as a weapon. Which is funny because that implies you could eventually destroy just about anything by smacking a pillow into it enough times.
* You don't. You would apply the damage using literally any means that you would apply damage with whatever resources you are using to do that with. This is not a game question, this is entierly depending on what format you're playing the game in.
* I don't actually see at all why size categories even matters in regards to anything you've asked about, because you've just assumed things about being large = throwing medium creatures (no rules on that. You can lift anything regardless of size if you have the strength for it, and in-theory, throw them, but there is no rules on doing so. As such, size is never a factor to begin with).
I mean, I would think it would be fairly obvious in how to hand this situation. Since combat is structured in rounds, lasting roughly 6 seconds, the bonuses applied would be based on how the object was used. If you use your shield as a weapon this round, you lose the AC bonus, and any other bonuses that would require holding a single weapon, but gain the two weapon feat bonus, and any other bonus that would be applied for holding two weapons, until the start of your next round. Once their next round starts all held items would revert to their default types, ie a shield is a shield.
Handling the combat this way allows for players to create situational uses for feats and other skills, or features, but does not allow for un-intended stacking of effects from those feats or skills. It also stays true to many other skills, features, and effects that start during your round/turn, and end at the start of your next round/turn. Your example is easily explained as, since you used your shield as a melee weapon to attack this round, it will be out of it's normal position to offer you protection , and can not be used for any other features, skills, or effects that would require a shield until the start of your next round.
Sometimes you have to just make things really simple, and apply logic to the situation, if it makes sense as being possible, then you allow it, but just because something is allowed, doesn't mean that you can't apply the same logic to the potential drawbacks.
Another example of this for example is that anyone that has seen a real longbow understands that it can most certainly be used as a quarter-staff, a long bow is a 8-10 foot piece of wood, the same as quarter-staff, though not as thick as the staff. Thus using a long bow as a quarter-staff explains why the base weapon damage would be 1d4 instead of a 1d6. With this said there are many descriptions of weapons in DND that don't make sense. A longbow is listed to weigh roughly 2 lbs (same weight as a shortbow), and has the heavy tag, while a quarter-staff weighs 4 lbs and does not.
Before anyone gets on the rant about the toughness of a longbow versus a quarter-staff, anyone that works with wood can tell you, that milled wood is generally a lot tougher than it's un-milled counter parts. Simple, go outside and find a stick roughly the same thickness of the handle of a wooden baseball bat, and most people can easily break that stick over their leg, yet try to the same with the baseball bat, well enjoy your sore leg.
The newest rules for Improvised Weapons still account for ranged weapon to make a melee attack. Also Sage Advice official ruling say attacking with a shield doesn’t deprive you of the shield’s bonus to AC.
Another example of this for example is that anyone that has seen a real longbow understands that it can most certainly be used as a quarter-staff, a long bow is a 8-10 foot piece of wood, the same as quarter-staff, though not as thick as the staff. Thus using a long bow as a quarter-staff explains why the base weapon damage would be 1d4 instead of a 1d6.
I would say that a strung longbow would be an improvised weapon (and thus d4) but an unstrung longbow I would treat as a quarterstaff (and thus d6/d8). And I wouldn't bother checking it for damage unless it is used to hit people for a prolonged time.
With this said there are many descriptions of weapons in DND that don't make sense. A longbow is listed to weigh roughly 2 lbs (same weight as a shortbow), and has the heavy tag, while a quarter-staff weighs 4 lbs and does not.
Actually it does make sense. The Heavy property doesn't just mean that it weighs a lot, it also encompasses its bulk and that is why the only effect of the property is only relevant for small/tiny creatures.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm a little confused how are "definition" and "description" even different things that result in different rulings? Let alone how those rulings are problematic...
Originally, my though was that a sentence saying “a melee weapon is used to... “ tells you how to use a something that you know is a melee weapon, not what a melee is.
But really, as I said, it doesn’t matter all that much. Really, you should be able to use an ability score to add to the attack and damage rolls of attacks with improvised weapons.
Hey, good afternoon/night/day everyone, I hope you can help me, I saw that this forum had doubts similar to mine. In order not to create a new forum, would you think if we continue in this thread?.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hola buenas tardes/noches/dias a todos, espero me puedan ayudar, vi que este foro tenia dudas parecidas a las mías.
Para no crear un nuevo foro, ¿te parece si seguimos en este hilo?
Lo que me hace dudar de las armas improvisadas es su tamaño, ya que en el caso del personaje que estoy usando, tengo un bárbaro/druida, con la feat Tavern Brawler, que me da pericia.
Transformándome en, digamos, un escorpión gigante, un alce gigante, etc. Técnicamente podría comenzar a usar criaturas medianas como proyectiles para lanzar (dentro de 20 pies), pero aún sería un arma improvisada en este caso.
Here you go. Straight from the Basic Rules Section, Chapter 5:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 DM'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 DM 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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So at GM discretion, if it closely resembles a weapon (a table leg = a mace) that the player is proficient with, then the player gets a normal attack with mod and proficiency bonus. If not, it's d20 + mod roll only, no proficiency and damage is always 1d4.
Creatures are not objects, so no, they are not improvised weapons.
* You don't. There is no rule for damaging a creature by throwing a creature at them. Even in terms of an improvised weapon, the weapon does not receive any damage for being used as a weapon. Which is funny because that implies you could eventually destroy just about anything by smacking a pillow into it enough times.
* You don't. You would apply the damage using literally any means that you would apply damage with whatever resources you are using to do that with. This is not a game question, this is entierly depending on what format you're playing the game in.
* I don't actually see at all why size categories even matters in regards to anything you've asked about, because you've just assumed things about being large = throwing medium creatures (no rules on that. You can lift anything regardless of size if you have the strength for it, and in-theory, throw them, but there is no rules on doing so. As such, size is never a factor to begin with).
I mean, I would think it would be fairly obvious in how to hand this situation. Since combat is structured in rounds, lasting roughly 6 seconds, the bonuses applied would be based on how the object was used. If you use your shield as a weapon this round, you lose the AC bonus, and any other bonuses that would require holding a single weapon, but gain the two weapon feat bonus, and any other bonus that would be applied for holding two weapons, until the start of your next round. Once their next round starts all held items would revert to their default types, ie a shield is a shield.
Handling the combat this way allows for players to create situational uses for feats and other skills, or features, but does not allow for un-intended stacking of effects from those feats or skills. It also stays true to many other skills, features, and effects that start during your round/turn, and end at the start of your next round/turn. Your example is easily explained as, since you used your shield as a melee weapon to attack this round, it will be out of it's normal position to offer you protection , and can not be used for any other features, skills, or effects that would require a shield until the start of your next round.
Sometimes you have to just make things really simple, and apply logic to the situation, if it makes sense as being possible, then you allow it, but just because something is allowed, doesn't mean that you can't apply the same logic to the potential drawbacks.
Another example of this for example is that anyone that has seen a real longbow understands that it can most certainly be used as a quarter-staff, a long bow is a 8-10 foot piece of wood, the same as quarter-staff, though not as thick as the staff. Thus using a long bow as a quarter-staff explains why the base weapon damage would be 1d4 instead of a 1d6. With this said there are many descriptions of weapons in DND that don't make sense. A longbow is listed to weigh roughly 2 lbs (same weight as a shortbow), and has the heavy tag, while a quarter-staff weighs 4 lbs and does not.
Before anyone gets on the rant about the toughness of a longbow versus a quarter-staff, anyone that works with wood can tell you, that milled wood is generally a lot tougher than it's un-milled counter parts. Simple, go outside and find a stick roughly the same thickness of the handle of a wooden baseball bat, and most people can easily break that stick over their leg, yet try to the same with the baseball bat, well enjoy your sore leg.
The newest rules for Improvised Weapons still account for ranged weapon to make a melee attack. Also Sage Advice official ruling say attacking with a shield doesn’t deprive you of the shield’s bonus to AC.
I would say that a strung longbow would be an improvised weapon (and thus d4) but an unstrung longbow I would treat as a quarterstaff (and thus d6/d8). And I wouldn't bother checking it for damage unless it is used to hit people for a prolonged time.
Actually it does make sense. The Heavy property doesn't just mean that it weighs a lot, it also encompasses its bulk and that is why the only effect of the property is only relevant for small/tiny creatures.