I would personally rule that if enlarge/reduce is cast on a weapon, then it would gain the same damage bonus (for enlarge) and the same penalty (for reduce) as if it were cast on a creature and that creature's weapons were changed.
I don't think the spell specifies for secnarious outside of 'the target's weapons' but that seems like a fair common sense approach to me. I'm honestly surprised, I thought that it could only be cast on creatures in the first place but going back to check, I see it an indeed be cast on objects.
Yeah that's a good point, the increase in size and weight would make it unwieldy to the normal intended user. Without the wielder also getting the increased size, using it would be unwieldy so I could see maybe treating it as an improvised weapon. And depending on the weight of the final weapon and the user's strength score, maybe require a strength check to attack with it and remove the finesse property if it has it.
A dagger going from 1 lb to 8 lb isn't going to strain your muscles but the extra size and weight may make it no longer suitable for a finesse attack in a non enlarged user's hands. A maul would go from 10 to 80 lbs and that could be an issue to swing around. A heavy crossbow would go from 18 to 144.
Though I'm not sure how often one would cast the spell on a weapon and not a person anyway. You can't cast it on an object being worn or carried, so you'd have to disarm someone of their weapon then cast the spell on the weapon before they pick it back up to do it to an enemy. And it only lasts a minute so yo u'd have to be pretty good on timing to cast it before a fight and not have the spell wear off early. Casting the spell on objects can be useful depending on the situation, there are creative ways to put that to use, but specifically using it on weapons separate from a wielder seems hard to come up with a practical purpose for.
I believe there actually are rules about using weapons of larger size withing the DMG. I'm on my phone right now so I can't check, but here is what I recall.
You are not able to use a weapon if it is for a larger size then you, for each size above medium that a weapon is it gains 2d8 damage of its Type.
I think there was something else too, but I can't remember.
Though I'm not sure how often one would cast the spell on a weapon and not a person anyway. You can't cast it on an object being worn or carried, so you'd have to disarm someone of their weapon then cast the spell on the weapon before they pick it back up to do it to an enemy. And it only lasts a minute so yo u'd have to be pretty good on timing to cast it before a fight and not have the spell wear off early. Casting the spell on objects can be useful depending on the situation, there are creative ways to put that to use, but specifically using it on weapons separate from a wielder seems hard to come up with a practical purpose for.
Sounds like an ideal spell for an NPC to Ready, so that when the cheesy PC momentarily drops their weapon to cast a spell, the NPC can enlarge it, so the PC then uses their "free item interaction" to pick up an enlarged weapon rather than what they were expecting :)
Or indeed, some sort of contingency trap-like spell in the dungeon - any weapon dropped on the floor which becomes unattended automatically becomes enlarged or reduced :)
If you enlarge a person, you also enlarge all their stuff including their weapon. It causes the weapon to deal an additional 1d4, as per the spell description.
If you just enlarge the weapon, I can't see it doing more than that. Rules be damned.
Unless we're about to decide that the 1d4 is meant to be *in addition* to the weapon getting an extra damage die, the way it does for monsters. (Check out the ogre as an example. He's large, which is one step up from medium, and his weapon rolls two dice instead of one. Hill giant is huge, and rolls three.) But if that's right, then what is the 1d4 meant to represent?
Or indeed, some sort of contingency trap-like spell in the dungeon - any weapon dropped on the floor which becomes unattended automatically becomes enlarged or reduced :)
The gods gave you a stat block for an Animated Sword for a reason. >;)
The rules around extra damage dice for oversized weapons are in the Creating a Monster section of the DMG for a reason - they are not meant to apply to PCs. They're not really dealing that damage because of their size, they're dealing it because Large and larger monsters are typically encountered in few numbers and they need to output enough damage to remain a challenge.
If a large longsword was meant to deal double the damage dice, the description of E/R would say that. And if players could wield oversize weapons, those rules would be in the PHB.
Would casting Enlarge/Reduce on a weapon (like a longsword for example) cause the weapon to deal more damage?
A quick search turns up a sage advice (https://www.sageadvice.eu/weapon-one-size-larger/) in which Mike Mearls says he would use, as a house rule at his table, a version of the NPC rules from the DMG that would allow the use of a weapon one size larger at the damage appropriate to that size with disadvantage imposed on attack rolls and a stipulation against being able to gain advantage (which means you're stuck with the disadvantage in all situations). He also reminds the person asking that this is not an official rule.
RAW: The weapon will deal an extra 1d4 of the same type of damage as it normally does. This is clearly stated in the spell description as it applies to any weapons that get enlarged along with the person wielding it when they are affected by the spell. Read the spell.
Also RAW: if the weapon gets enlarged and the wielder does not, then they can no longer wield it as if it were sized for them. Because it isn't. As it is no longer suitable as a proper weapon, it can only be wielded as an improvised weapon with 1d4 damage and the wielder does not add their proficiency bonus to attack rolls unless they are specifically proficient with improvised weapons (such as with the Tavern Brawler feat). Read the weapons rules.
I am personally unaware of any official rules specifically allowing a character to use an oversized weapon "normally." There were rules for this in previous editions (such as the Monkey Grip feat in 3.x, which incidentally has nothing to do with gripping monkeys) and such rules are often exploited in various munchkin power builds. 5e is streamlined to keep things simpler than previous editions, not only to make it easier to learn and faster to play but also to preclude the complexity that can be exploited by finding edge case interactions among the myriad different rules that result in absurdly overpowered and unbalanced builds. So the short answer is "the spell works like it says it works and it does not work in any other way because if it was intended to it would say so."
RAW: The weapon will deal an extra 1d4 of the same type of damage as it normally does. This is clearly stated in the spell description as it applies to any weapons that get enlarged along with the person wielding it when they are affected by the spell. Read the spell.
Of course, it only gets the extra 1d4 if the person wielding it is also enlarged. Enlarging just the weapon won't grant this damage increase otherwise.
So even with a DM deliberately mixing the PC and NPC rules (which many DMs, including me, do), the answer to your question is only "yes" when the longsword started out sized for a wielder exactly 1 size category smaller than the new wielder and the new wielder is Huge or Gargantuan.
"The target's Weapons also grow to match its new size." This is clearly stated in the spell description as its own seperated sentence. "While these Weapons are enlarged, the target's Attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage." I would say that since it separately states that the weapons are considered the same size as the target. I.E. large or larger. That the weapons would deal damage appropriate for their size. And have the extra D4 on top of that.
"The target's Weapons also grow to match its new size." This is clearly stated in the spell description as its own seperated sentence. "While these Weapons are enlarged, the target's Attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage." I would say that since it separately states that the weapons are considered the same size as the target. I.E. large or larger. That the weapons would deal damage appropriate for their size. And have the extra D4 on top of that.
The comma in your quoted sentence indicates that the 1d4 extra damage is due to them being enlarged. It simplifies the rules rather than having to have a complicated scale for 1d6 becomes 1d8, 1d8 becomes 1d10, 1d10 becomes 1d12, etc.
Assuming a PC of Medium size, shouldn't casting enlarge on a weapon (that is normally sized for a MEDIUM creature) make it so that weapon becomes sized for a LARGE creature and therefor get classified as an 'oversized weapon' (DMG, Chapter 9)? If so, would it not add an additional damage die to the weapon damage but can only be used by the (assumed medium-sized) PC at disadvantage?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Would casting Enlarge/Reduce on a weapon (like a longsword for example) cause the weapon to deal more damage?
DruidVSAdventure
Check out my Homebrew Class The Evoker
I would personally rule that if enlarge/reduce is cast on a weapon, then it would gain the same damage bonus (for enlarge) and the same penalty (for reduce) as if it were cast on a creature and that creature's weapons were changed.
I don't think the spell specifies for secnarious outside of 'the target's weapons' but that seems like a fair common sense approach to me. I'm honestly surprised, I thought that it could only be cast on creatures in the first place but going back to check, I see it an indeed be cast on objects.
Enlarge on a longsword might turn it into a greatsword - but the design of the weapon would probably make it unwieldy.
I think it would definitely gain the Two-Handed and Heavy properties and lose the Versatile (since Two-Handed supercedes it).
Yeah that's a good point, the increase in size and weight would make it unwieldy to the normal intended user. Without the wielder also getting the increased size, using it would be unwieldy so I could see maybe treating it as an improvised weapon. And depending on the weight of the final weapon and the user's strength score, maybe require a strength check to attack with it and remove the finesse property if it has it.
A dagger going from 1 lb to 8 lb isn't going to strain your muscles but the extra size and weight may make it no longer suitable for a finesse attack in a non enlarged user's hands. A maul would go from 10 to 80 lbs and that could be an issue to swing around. A heavy crossbow would go from 18 to 144.
Though I'm not sure how often one would cast the spell on a weapon and not a person anyway. You can't cast it on an object being worn or carried, so you'd have to disarm someone of their weapon then cast the spell on the weapon before they pick it back up to do it to an enemy. And it only lasts a minute so yo u'd have to be pretty good on timing to cast it before a fight and not have the spell wear off early. Casting the spell on objects can be useful depending on the situation, there are creative ways to put that to use, but specifically using it on weapons separate from a wielder seems hard to come up with a practical purpose for.
I believe there actually are rules about using weapons of larger size withing the DMG. I'm on my phone right now so I can't check, but here is what I recall.
You are not able to use a weapon if it is for a larger size then you, for each size above medium that a weapon is it gains 2d8 damage of its Type.
I think there was something else too, but I can't remember.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Sounds like an ideal spell for an NPC to Ready, so that when the cheesy PC momentarily drops their weapon to cast a spell, the NPC can enlarge it, so the PC then uses their "free item interaction" to pick up an enlarged weapon rather than what they were expecting :)
Or indeed, some sort of contingency trap-like spell in the dungeon - any weapon dropped on the floor which becomes unattended automatically becomes enlarged or reduced :)
If you enlarge a person, you also enlarge all their stuff including their weapon. It causes the weapon to deal an additional 1d4, as per the spell description.
If you just enlarge the weapon, I can't see it doing more than that. Rules be damned.
Unless we're about to decide that the 1d4 is meant to be *in addition* to the weapon getting an extra damage die, the way it does for monsters. (Check out the ogre as an example. He's large, which is one step up from medium, and his weapon rolls two dice instead of one. Hill giant is huge, and rolls three.) But if that's right, then what is the 1d4 meant to represent?
The gods gave you a stat block for an Animated Sword for a reason. >;)
The rules around extra damage dice for oversized weapons are in the Creating a Monster section of the DMG for a reason - they are not meant to apply to PCs. They're not really dealing that damage because of their size, they're dealing it because Large and larger monsters are typically encountered in few numbers and they need to output enough damage to remain a challenge.
If a large longsword was meant to deal double the damage dice, the description of E/R would say that. And if players could wield oversize weapons, those rules would be in the PHB.
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
A quick search turns up a sage advice (https://www.sageadvice.eu/weapon-one-size-larger/) in which Mike Mearls says he would use, as a house rule at his table, a version of the NPC rules from the DMG that would allow the use of a weapon one size larger at the damage appropriate to that size with disadvantage imposed on attack rolls and a stipulation against being able to gain advantage (which means you're stuck with the disadvantage in all situations). He also reminds the person asking that this is not an official rule.
RAW: The weapon will deal an extra 1d4 of the same type of damage as it normally does. This is clearly stated in the spell description as it applies to any weapons that get enlarged along with the person wielding it when they are affected by the spell. Read the spell.
Also RAW: if the weapon gets enlarged and the wielder does not, then they can no longer wield it as if it were sized for them. Because it isn't. As it is no longer suitable as a proper weapon, it can only be wielded as an improvised weapon with 1d4 damage and the wielder does not add their proficiency bonus to attack rolls unless they are specifically proficient with improvised weapons (such as with the Tavern Brawler feat). Read the weapons rules.
I am personally unaware of any official rules specifically allowing a character to use an oversized weapon "normally." There were rules for this in previous editions (such as the Monkey Grip feat in 3.x, which incidentally has nothing to do with gripping monkeys) and such rules are often exploited in various munchkin power builds. 5e is streamlined to keep things simpler than previous editions, not only to make it easier to learn and faster to play but also to preclude the complexity that can be exploited by finding edge case interactions among the myriad different rules that result in absurdly overpowered and unbalanced builds. So the short answer is "the spell works like it says it works and it does not work in any other way because if it was intended to it would say so."
Of course, it only gets the extra 1d4 if the person wielding it is also enlarged. Enlarging just the weapon won't grant this damage increase otherwise.
That depends on who's wielding it.
An enlarged longsword wielded by a PC will deal the same damage (no increase), but there's a variant rule in the PHB explicitly allowing the DM to rule that the sword is now too large to wield, period.
The DMG has rules for NPCs that could, by DM fiat, be extended to PCs, which would scale the longsword's damage up provided a) the wielder is Huge and the longsword was originally sized for a Large wielder or b) the longsword was originally sized for a Huge wielder and the wielder is Gargantuan.
So even with a DM deliberately mixing the PC and NPC rules (which many DMs, including me, do), the answer to your question is only "yes" when the longsword started out sized for a wielder exactly 1 size category smaller than the new wielder and the new wielder is Huge or Gargantuan.
"The target's Weapons also grow to match its new size." This is clearly stated in the spell description as its own seperated sentence. "While these Weapons are enlarged, the target's Attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage." I would say that since it separately states that the weapons are considered the same size as the target. I.E. large or larger. That the weapons would deal damage appropriate for their size. And have the extra D4 on top of that.
The comma in your quoted sentence indicates that the 1d4 extra damage is due to them being enlarged. It simplifies the rules rather than having to have a complicated scale for 1d6 becomes 1d8, 1d8 becomes 1d10, 1d10 becomes 1d12, etc.
Assuming a PC of Medium size, shouldn't casting enlarge on a weapon (that is normally sized for a MEDIUM creature) make it so that weapon becomes sized for a LARGE creature and therefor get classified as an 'oversized weapon' (DMG, Chapter 9)? If so, would it not add an additional damage die to the weapon damage but can only be used by the (assumed medium-sized) PC at disadvantage?