Yes I understand that this is not a game of realism. But there are still some elements that need to make sense regarding size.
According to description a Bugbear can be 8ft tall and 350 lbs.
It is Long-Limbed - when you make a melee attack on your turn, your reach for it is 5 feet greater than normal.
And it has a Powerful Build You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift.
Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry, which is high enough that most characters don't usually have to worry about it.
Push, Drag, or Lift. You can push, drag, or lift a weight in pounds up to twice your carrying capacity (or 30 times your Strength score). While pushing or dragging weight in excess of your carrying capacity, your speed drops to 5 feet.
Size and Strength. Larger creatures can bear more weight, whereas Tiny creatures can carry less. For each size category above Medium, double the creature's carrying capacity and the amount it can push, drag, or lift. For a Tiny creature, halve these weights.
So if average strength is around 12. It is normal for a Medium humanoid to lift (12 x 15 =) 180lbs Powerful Build doubles this to 360 lbs
Two-Weapon Fighting
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. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
A Scimitar is considered a light weapon and is 3 lbs Would then a Glaive be considered a light weapon at 6lbs (double the weight) for a Bugbear?
A Glaive is not a specially balanced weapon. It is a knife on the end of a pole.
There is NO Rule that says this cannot be done.
The Dual Wielder feat removes the light weapon restriction - You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
This does not add any extra attacks. The bugbear would have the same primary attack action, 1 bonus attack and 1 possible Opportunity or Reaction attack each turn.
Even with Polearm Master, Sentinel, the Cavalier’s 10 level Hold the Line, etc. NO extra attacks are added other than the normal Extra attacks added at certain levels for fighter and Action Surge which has limited use.
The only benefit to this is standard weapon damage. Most light weapons are 1d6. The glaive is 1d10.
Using 1 glaive and considering that I use every attack, bonus attack, reaction/opportunity attack, I still get the same number of attacks and the same damage. But I would look a lot scarier with 2.
If a DM wants to homebrew it - sure. If you are talking rules as written - absolutely not.
"Glaive - Heavy, reach, two-handed"
"Two-Handed. This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it."
Putting a scimitar on a stick is an improvised weapon.
"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."
If the DM considers the improvised weapon to the the same as a glaive then it will have the heavy and two handed properties.
The bottom line is that dual wielding glaives isn't possible RAW. A DM is free to homebrew it if they are interested in doing so. In 5e, a creature size and strength does not affect the properties of the weapons they wield.
Weapon properties are intrinsic to the weapons themselves, and do not change with the wielder’s strength/size/carry capacity. A glaive is still a two-handedheavy weapon no matter who wields it.
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. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Not really relevant here as the weapon you are using is a Two-Handed one. What you want is the Polearm Master Feat to get the Bonus Action attack.
The bottom line is that dual wielding glaives isn't possible RAW.
It is possible for the same reasons as you outlined. Improvised Weapons. Any object can be attacked with as an improvised weapon. A weapon is an object.
No invisible hand comes down from the heavens to prevent you from attacking with a glaive in 1 hand.
By RAW the DM would/could/should engage the improvised weapon rules. If it were me, I'd say that they're attacking with an unwieldy dagger at the end of a stick, have it deal a d4, and they don't get proficiency with it.
That's perfectly RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Based on your statement, I am not sure you completely understand what RAW means. To be RAW it has to be crystal clear and not subject to DM interpretation. RAW glaives are two-handed weapons. A glaive is akin to a sword on the end of a long pole. You use 2 hands and swing to increase the force behind the blow. Makes zero sense to do it one handed.
Improvised weapons are not actual weapons. Now a DM could allow you to wield two glaives but this is homebrew not RAW.
Given the actual RAW that does not shift weapon type on account of wielder's size, carrying two glaives would not make a character look scarier. Rather, many would presume you were the porter, caddy, or valet for whoever actually wielded the glaives. It's a living.
Based on your statement, I am not sure you completely understand what RAW means.
If a rule is written in the rulebook, it is RAW.
To be RAW it has to be crystal clear and not subject to DM interpretation.
Absolutely false. 100% incorrect. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
To be RAW it must be:
Rules. -and- As Written.
That's it!
If the book's rule is that the DM interprets something... DM interpretation is the RAW.
RAW glaives are two-handed weapons. A glaive is akin to a sword on the end of a long pole. You use 2 hands and swing to increase the force behind the blow. Makes zero sense to do it one handed.
I agree. Makes no sense to try to use a glaive one handed if you have the ability to use it two handed instead. But the question isn't should you it was can you. Can you? Yes.
Improvised weapons are not actual weapons. Now a DM could allow you to wield two glaives but this is homebrew not RAW.
Improvised Weapon Rules. They are printed in the PHB, and are RAW. They disagree with you. They disagree with you because you're wrong.
Any object can be wielded as an improvised weapon. Any. If you can hold it and swing it around, you can attack with it as an improvised weapon. That's RAW.
What comes next is that the DM determines a couple of things. Does it count as a weapon? How much damage does it do? What type of damage? But, these are RAW decisions. The Improvised rules, in black and white, tell you that the DM decides them.
Reread the Improvised Weapon rules here:
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).
The DM deciding them isn't homebrew if the book tells you the DM decides them.
Can't picture using it as an improvised weapon in this way?
The battle raging around you as you grab the enemy soldier, grappling them to the ground. Trading blows you see your glaive on the ground nearby, one hand holding his shirt collar and the other scrambling through the mud you grab hold of the discarded weapon just below the sword head and plunge it into your foe's side.
Anything can be used as an improvised weapon. Anything you can hold. By RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If I had a dollar for every time somebody on this forum tried to use size or Powerful Build to affect what weapons they could use, I think I'd buy a new pair of shoes.
It is possible for the same reasons as you outlined. Improvised Weapons. Any object can be attacked with as an improvised weapon. A weapon is an object.
No invisible hand comes down from the heavens to prevent you from attacking with a glaive in 1 hand.
By RAW the DM would/could/should engage the improvised weapon rules. If it were me, I'd say that they're attacking with an unwieldy dagger at the end of a stick, have it deal a d4, and they don't get proficiency with it.
That's perfectly RAW.
While your comment is technically completely true it also completely useless from a practical POW. You might be attacking with an object that looks like a Glaive but you will, rules-wise, be attacking with an improvised weapon. If you want to say that you are dual-wielding Glaives then by all mean do so but, as you noted yourself, you'll be rolling attack rolls without proficiency and D4's for damage. Pretty much nothing of what the OP wanted to get out of dual-wielding Glaives is left in the equation.
It is possible for the same reasons as you outlined. Improvised Weapons. Any object can be attacked with as an improvised weapon. A weapon is an object.
No invisible hand comes down from the heavens to prevent you from attacking with a glaive in 1 hand.
By RAW the DM would/could/should engage the improvised weapon rules. If it were me, I'd say that they're attacking with an unwieldy dagger at the end of a stick, have it deal a d4, and they don't get proficiency with it.
That's perfectly RAW.
While your comment is technically completely true it also completely useless from a practical POW. You might be attacking with an object that looks like a Glaive but you will, rules-wise, be attacking with an improvised weapon. If you want to say that you are dual-wielding Glaives then by all mean do so but, as you noted yourself, you'll be rolling attack rolls without proficiency and D4's for damage. Pretty much nothing of what the OP wanted to get out of dual-wielding Glaives is left in the equation.
Totally true. It'd be dumb to do so, but you can do so.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If you feel there's essentially no great benefit to wielding glaives over wielding scimitars and your primary goal is to look scary, the answer is to actually wield scimitars and flavor them as scary glaives.
You don't alter mechanics to achieve roleplay goals. You can go with the mechanics that are allowed and reflavor from there. Same result without messing with things that could have wide-ranging effects.
Simply put - the weapons rules assume small- or medium-sized humanoid characters (i.e. two arms, two legs).
The "light" tag means "light for a human or gnome". The "two-handed" tag means "two-handed for a dwarf or elf".
Powerful build, long limbed, multiple limbs, tiny creatures, large creatures, etc, all cause strange rules interactions because the rules just weren't written with them in mind. The rules even get a bit strange for small characters (gnomes dual-wielding battleaxes, for example).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yes I understand that this is not a game of realism. But there are still some elements that need to make sense regarding size.
According to description a Bugbear can be 8ft tall and 350 lbs.
It is Long-Limbed - when you make a melee attack on your turn, your reach for it is 5 feet greater than normal.
And it has a Powerful Build You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift.
Carrying Capacity. Your carrying capacity is your Strength score multiplied by 15. This is the weight (in pounds) that you can carry, which is high enough that most characters don't usually have to worry about it.
Push, Drag, or Lift. You can push, drag, or lift a weight in pounds up to twice your carrying capacity (or 30 times your Strength score). While pushing or dragging weight in excess of your carrying capacity, your speed drops to 5 feet.
Size and Strength. Larger creatures can bear more weight, whereas Tiny creatures can carry less. For each size category above Medium, double the creature's carrying capacity and the amount it can push, drag, or lift. For a Tiny creature, halve these weights.
So if average strength is around 12. It is normal for a Medium humanoid to lift (12 x 15 =) 180lbs Powerful Build doubles this to 360 lbs
Two-Weapon Fighting
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. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
A Scimitar is considered a light weapon and is 3 lbs Would then a Glaive be considered a light weapon at 6lbs (double the weight) for a Bugbear?
A Glaive is not a specially balanced weapon. It is a knife on the end of a pole.
There is NO Rule that says this cannot be done.
The Dual Wielder feat removes the light weapon restriction - You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
This does not add any extra attacks. The bugbear would have the same primary attack action, 1 bonus attack and 1 possible Opportunity or Reaction attack each turn.
Even with Polearm Master, Sentinel, the Cavalier’s 10 level Hold the Line, etc. NO extra attacks are added other than the normal Extra attacks added at certain levels for fighter and Action Surge which has limited use.
The only benefit to this is standard weapon damage. Most light weapons are 1d6. The glaive is 1d10.
Using 1 glaive and considering that I use every attack, bonus attack, reaction/opportunity attack, I still get the same number of attacks and the same damage. But I would look a lot scarier with 2.
If a DM wants to homebrew it - sure. If you are talking rules as written - absolutely not.
"Glaive - Heavy, reach, two-handed"
"Two-Handed. This weapon requires two hands when you attack with it."
Putting a scimitar on a stick is an improvised weapon.
"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."
If the DM considers the improvised weapon to the the same as a glaive then it will have the heavy and two handed properties.
The bottom line is that dual wielding glaives isn't possible RAW. A DM is free to homebrew it if they are interested in doing so. In 5e, a creature size and strength does not affect the properties of the weapons they wield.
Weapon properties are intrinsic to the weapons themselves, and do not change with the wielder’s strength/size/carry capacity. A glaive is still a two-handed heavy weapon no matter who wields it.
No. It doesn't have the Light trait and thus will never be a Light weapon unless you get the DM to buy in to your concept.
Not really relevant here as the weapon you are using is a Two-Handed one. What you want is the Polearm Master Feat to get the Bonus Action attack.
Going from a D6 (or a D4 from PM) to a D10 is a HUGE difference tbh. I doubt many DM's would allow that.
Well the rules doesn't work like that though. They tell you what you CAN do, they don't list any or everything you cannot do.
It is possible for the same reasons as you outlined. Improvised Weapons. Any object can be attacked with as an improvised weapon. A weapon is an object.
No invisible hand comes down from the heavens to prevent you from attacking with a glaive in 1 hand.
By RAW the DM would/could/should engage the improvised weapon rules. If it were me, I'd say that they're attacking with an unwieldy dagger at the end of a stick, have it deal a d4, and they don't get proficiency with it.
That's perfectly RAW.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Based on your statement, I am not sure you completely understand what RAW means. To be RAW it has to be crystal clear and not subject to DM interpretation. RAW glaives are two-handed weapons. A glaive is akin to a sword on the end of a long pole. You use 2 hands and swing to increase the force behind the blow. Makes zero sense to do it one handed.
Improvised weapons are not actual weapons. Now a DM could allow you to wield two glaives but this is homebrew not RAW.
Given the actual RAW that does not shift weapon type on account of wielder's size, carrying two glaives would not make a character look scarier. Rather, many would presume you were the porter, caddy, or valet for whoever actually wielded the glaives. It's a living.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
If a rule is written in the rulebook, it is RAW.
Absolutely false. 100% incorrect. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
To be RAW it must be:
Rules. -and- As Written.
That's it!
If the book's rule is that the DM interprets something... DM interpretation is the RAW.
I agree. Makes no sense to try to use a glaive one handed if you have the ability to use it two handed instead. But the question isn't should you it was can you. Can you? Yes.
Improvised Weapon Rules. They are printed in the PHB, and are RAW. They disagree with you. They disagree with you because you're wrong.
Any object can be wielded as an improvised weapon. Any. If you can hold it and swing it around, you can attack with it as an improvised weapon. That's RAW.
What comes next is that the DM determines a couple of things. Does it count as a weapon? How much damage does it do? What type of damage? But, these are RAW decisions. The Improvised rules, in black and white, tell you that the DM decides them.
Reread the Improvised Weapon rules here:
The DM deciding them isn't homebrew if the book tells you the DM decides them.
Can't picture using it as an improvised weapon in this way?
The battle raging around you as you grab the enemy soldier, grappling them to the ground. Trading blows you see your glaive on the ground nearby, one hand holding his shirt collar and the other scrambling through the mud you grab hold of the discarded weapon just below the sword head and plunge it into your foe's side.
Anything can be used as an improvised weapon. Anything you can hold. By RAW.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If I had a dollar for every time somebody on this forum tried to use size or Powerful Build to affect what weapons they could use, I think I'd buy a new pair of shoes.
While your comment is technically completely true it also completely useless from a practical POW. You might be attacking with an object that looks like a Glaive but you will, rules-wise, be attacking with an improvised weapon. If you want to say that you are dual-wielding Glaives then by all mean do so but, as you noted yourself, you'll be rolling attack rolls without proficiency and D4's for damage. Pretty much nothing of what the OP wanted to get out of dual-wielding Glaives is left in the equation.
Totally true. It'd be dumb to do so, but you can do so.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If you feel there's essentially no great benefit to wielding glaives over wielding scimitars and your primary goal is to look scary, the answer is to actually wield scimitars and flavor them as scary glaives.
You don't alter mechanics to achieve roleplay goals. You can go with the mechanics that are allowed and reflavor from there. Same result without messing with things that could have wide-ranging effects.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Simply put - the weapons rules assume small- or medium-sized humanoid characters (i.e. two arms, two legs).
The "light" tag means "light for a human or gnome". The "two-handed" tag means "two-handed for a dwarf or elf".
Powerful build, long limbed, multiple limbs, tiny creatures, large creatures, etc, all cause strange rules interactions because the rules just weren't written with them in mind. The rules even get a bit strange for small characters (gnomes dual-wielding battleaxes, for example).