from the ammunition property rules it makes it an improvised weapon
If you use a weapon that has the Ammunition property to make a melee Attack, you treat the weapon as an Improvised Weapon (see “Improvised Weapons” later in the section). A sling must be loaded to deal any damage when used in this way.
therefore it isnt a ranged weapon when attacking in melee, or a melee weapon, its an improvised one.
If you understand that the tweet by JC is explaining the RAW (https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/933436175649406976) then you can assume that the ranged weapon becomes an improvised weapon (just a long fragile stick) - and so proficiency won't apply since the bow isn't being used in a way that could possibly resemble the use of a bow.
That is why the sentence "If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, " is in the middle of the paragraph dealing with "An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon".
Now I want to see someone put "proficient with formerly ranged sticks" on their character sheet.
The short answer is "no." Because that is easiest.
The long answer starts with "yes, but..." And is working on its second page. The RAW makes it clear that using a ranged weapon to make a melee attack is an improvised weapon. But the rules for improvised weapons are terribly unclear and for all practical purposes completely up to DM interpretation to establish.
Basically the bonuses and penalties can stack if you meet all the requirements set by the 2 feats (which is the semantic part). Any homebrew feat that has a similar "power attack" option could stack as well.
Other than being the kind of cheese that could get someone kicked from a table, how problematic would this combination actually be in practice? A -10 to hit is a pretty extreme penalty, and it seems like it would generally go to waste against level appropriate encounters, and would be overkill for trivial encounters. It would often require a Nat 20 to hit, and then wouldn't really gain any benefit from the bonus crit damage.
Is there any way to make this practical given the drawbacks and resource investments?
Edit: I suppose if you could continue to stack GWM, you'd eventually stop being penalized because it would be Nat 20 or bust. Of course, that means you'd need to survive long enough to make 20 attacks, on average, to maybe one-shot a BBEG, and they would only need to foil that singular hit to reset the probability clock.
first I want to say: I dislike the idea of allowing it to work even if it weren't broken. I follow JC's advice on this one.
Now why its it can be broken: certain magic items, abilities and features can guarantee a hit. clockwork amulet, divination wizard ect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oh! I didn't see that part. Thanks!
Now I want to see someone put "proficient with formerly ranged sticks" on their character sheet.
The short answer is "no." Because that is easiest.
The long answer starts with "yes, but..." And is working on its second page. The RAW makes it clear that using a ranged weapon to make a melee attack is an improvised weapon. But the rules for improvised weapons are terribly unclear and for all practical purposes completely up to DM interpretation to establish.
Basically the bonuses and penalties can stack if you meet all the requirements set by the 2 feats (which is the semantic part). Any homebrew feat that has a similar "power attack" option could stack as well.
first I want to say: I dislike the idea of allowing it to work even if it weren't broken. I follow JC's advice on this one.
Now why its it can be broken: certain magic items, abilities and features can guarantee a hit. clockwork amulet, divination wizard ect.