The Solar is a CR 21 monster with this greatsword attack:
Greatsword. Melee Weapon Attack: +15 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 22 (4d6 + 8) slashing damage plus 27 (6d8) radiant damage.
For comparison, if it was wielding just the regular greatsword, it would only be doing 2d6 + 8, and presumably no radiant damage. It seems like it would be significantly better than any greatsword of any rarity, especially if wielded by PCs who have feats and abilities, even just extra attack. It would be better than just about any legendary weapon in terms of raw damage.
My question is what should happen when a PC uses the disarming attack maneuver and wants to take the greatsword from the monster and use it against him? And what if he wants to keep the greatsword and use it for the rest of the campaign? RAW, I don't see any reason why they couldn't just have a ridiculously overpowered greatsword, which would be problematic, though I can imagine several ways to handle it. Maybe you say that the radiant damage was innate to the celestial, not necessarily the weapon, so any weapon it wielded would have done an extra 6d8 radiant damage. It's a significant improvement over a regular greatsword, but perhaps not game breaking. Maybe the weapon is too large for the players to wield without impossible levels of strength like the Solar has, though I doubt it because the reach of the sword is still only 5 ft. Maybe you say it costs an attunement slot, and you modify the weapon somehow to balance the game by making the extra radiant damage 1-3 times per day or something like that. What are everyone's thoughts on this?
A greatsword doesn't do +6d8 of radiant damage so I don't really see the problem. I think it's quite obvious that the extra damage comes from the solar itself and not the greatsword. Especially since Soalrs aren't listed as having anything but a non-magical greatsword.
It’s not the sword that makes it do that, it’s the wielder: a paladin’s smite doesn’t transfer with the weapon, nor a rogue’s sneak attack In the hands of anyone else, it’s just a greatsword.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
The additional damage comes from the solar's size. Large enemies double the damage dice of any weapon they wield. Presumably this also means that the greatsword is too large for a Medium PC to wield.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Big monsters typically wield oversized weapons that deal extra dice of damage on a hit. Double the weapon dice if the creature is Large, triple the weapon dice if it’s Huge, and quadruple the weapon dice if it’s Gargantuan. For example, a Huge giant wielding an appropriately sized greataxe deals 3d12 slashing damage (plus its Strength bonus), instead of the normal 1d12.
A creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with a weapon that is sized for a larger attacker. You can rule that a weapon sized for an attacker two or more sizes larger is too big for the creature to use at all.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
Not sure if you mean me, but yes, I’d rule just a regular greatsword. Monsters can do things PCs can’t. This falls under that category. What happened in 2e doesn’t really matter too much, anymore. The game is radically different now, precedents don’t transfer across editions. In this edition, the designers typically made it so weapons aren’t necessarily, particularly special in the hands of just anyone who picks them up to avoid PCs getting their hands on powerful items. Unless, of course, the DM wants them to have such items. Then it’s easy enough to say it’s, I dunno, a vorpal greatsword in the hands of a PC, if you like.
Just as a tip, if you hit the “reply” button, no one can tell who you are replying to. It’s a frustrating limitation on this board. You need to use quote, so people know who you’re responding to.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
The additional damage comes from the solar's size. Large enemies double the damage dice of any weapon they wield. Presumably this also means that the greatsword is too large for a Medium PC to wield.
Ahhh, I did not know that. Thanks, this is the kind of ruling I was looking for. And since the stat block accounts for the extra weapon damage due to the size, I think it would also account for extra radiant damage that is specific to the monster, not the weapon. In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
Not sure if you mean me, but yes, I’d rule just a regular greatsword. Monsters can do things PCs can’t. This falls under that category. What happened in 2e doesn’t really matter too much, anymore. The game is radically different now, precedents don’t transfer across editions. In this edition, the designers typically made it so weapons aren’t necessarily, particularly special in the hands of just anyone who picks them up to avoid PCs getting their hands on powerful items. Unless, of course, the DM wants them to have such items. Then it’s easy enough to say it’s, I dunno, a vorpal greatsword in the hands of a PC, if you like.
Just as a tip, if you hit the “reply” button, no one can tell who you are replying to. It’s a frustrating limitation on this board. You need to use quote, so people know who you’re responding to.
Yes, my RAI comment was directed at you and also Lostwhilefishing. I didn't even see Quar1on's post because I didn't refresh the page.
I also agree what you said about 2e, which is why I was searching through 5e for something, but I didn't find anything yet, so yeah looks like they designed the monster stat blocks with those rules in mind to prevent PCs acquiring weapons that deal 10d8 base damage or something like that.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
The additional damage comes from the solar's size. Large enemies double the damage dice of any weapon they wield. Presumably this also means that the greatsword is too large for a Medium PC to wield.
Ahhh, I did not know that. Thanks, this is the kind of ruling I was looking for. And since the stat block accounts for the extra weapon damage due to the size, I think it would also account for extra radiant damage that is specific to the monster, not the weapon. In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
This is the sort of question best posed to your DM. You'll not find an objectively agreed on answer anywhere.
It is the sort of thing that requires a lot of smaller questions to be answered also. Like, if you do weild an oversized sword while large, do you even roll the double dice like monsters do or do you roll like a normal greatsword that was made large when you grew to large, ie a bonus die as per the class feature or spell that let you boost sizes.
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.
Technically, nothing in the rules says that the weapon does more damage because it's bigger, or that PCs deal more damage with larger weapons. Just bigger monsters deal more damage with properly sized weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
Technically, nothing in the rules says that the weapon does more damage because it's bigger, or that PCs deal more damage with larger weapons. Just bigger monsters deal more damage with properly sized weapons.
Big monsters typically wield oversized weapons that deal extra dice of damage on a hit. Double the weapon dice if the creature is Large, triple the weapon dice if it’s Huge, and quadruple the weapon dice if it’s Gargantuan. For example, a Huge giant wielding an appropriately sized greataxe deals 3d12 slashing damage (plus its Strength bonus), instead of the normal 1d12.
A creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with a weapon that is sized for a larger attacker. You can rule that a weapon sized for an attacker two or more sizes larger is too big for the creature to use at all.
In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
Nope. Rules that apply to PCs don't apply to monsters, and vice versa. A Rune Knight gets the benefits of being bigger listed in their subclass, nothing more
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
While it is a safe assumption that the oversized weapon concept was kept in mind when designing monster stat blocks, no rule inherently enforces it on existing monsters, nor does it relay any special property to the weapons of these monsters. Its solely used as one possible suggestion on how to determine damage for homebrew monsters. There are other options as well that can be used to determine damage.
RAW, the solar's greatsword attack does 4d6 simply because that's what is written on the statblock. Outside of the solar, its still just a regular greatsword, and does not have any other special properties, unless the DM wants to decide otherwise.
Technically, nothing in the rules says that the weapon does more damage because it's bigger, or that PCs deal more damage with larger weapons. Just bigger monsters deal more damage with properly sized weapons.
Big monsters typically wield oversized weapons that deal extra dice of damage on a hit. Double the weapon dice if the creature is Large, triple the weapon dice if it’s Huge, and quadruple the weapon dice if it’s Gargantuan. For example, a Huge giant wielding an appropriately sized greataxe deals 3d12 slashing damage (plus its Strength bonus), instead of the normal 1d12.
A creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with a weapon that is sized for a larger attacker. You can rule that a weapon sized for an attacker two or more sizes larger is too big for the creature to use at all.
See👆
Not sure where this talks about PCs? That's all monster rules.
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.
Thanks for everyone responding to the second question about the rune knight and giant weapons. I've read the comments and I can see a case for it. Feel free to disagree, but here's the line of thinking. The monster has a weapon. This weapon is oversized and does an extra hit die of damage. You pick the weapon up after you slay it. The DMG tells the DM how to handle creatures (i.e. players) wielding weapons that are oversized.
The relevant section in the DMG is not a rule of combat that says 'larger weapons do x damage.' It only explains the general rules of thumb around monster creation. Now the monsters in the Monster Manual do appear to abide by these guidelines, as you see large monsters dealing an extra weapon die, huge creatures dealing two extra weapon dice, etc. And it doesn't say that bigger monsters do more damage, it says that bigger monsters have oversized weapons that do more damage. So judging from this, I'd rule that a large monster with the greataxe attack that deals 2d12 + strength slashing damage is wielding an oversized greataxe that does double the weapon dice.
"A creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with a weapon that is sized for a larger attacker. You can rule that a weapon sized for an attacker two or more sizes larger is too big for the creature to use at all." I don't know why this statement is in here if not accounting for the possibility that players might attempt to pick these weapons up off of monsters. When else would this come into play? You would have to be creating a monster that uses weapons that are too big for it, which I can't imagine is all too common.
It does seem as though larger weapons are intended to do more damage in general. Looking at Enlarge / Reduce: "The target's Weapons also grow to match its new size. While these Weapons are enlarged, the target's Attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage." There is a similar 1d4 damage penalty for the Reduce option. The spell specifically states the weapons grow larger and do more damage.
I think I'm going to try it this way, and if it becomes unbalanced, I'll throw it out. I did think the extra 1d6 once per turn was kind of lame.
In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
Nope. Rules that apply to PCs don't apply to monsters, and vice versa. A Rune Knight gets the benefits of being bigger listed in their subclass, nothing more
It's worth noting that Giant's Might doesn't make your weapons grow in size, so it wouldn't need to call that rule out in the subclass feature. It only becomes relevant once you find an oversized weapon. And also, it's not a general rule that oversized weapons do double the weapon die. I'm arguing it comes from the monster stat block, or the Enlarge / Reduce spell in that case. Though it would be nice if the feature said something about being able to use large weapons without disadvantage and huge weapons at disadvantage. What I think clearly happened here was the rule of thumb in the DMG didn't account for large players getting their hands on oversized weapons from large monsters because there were no large player races at the time of writing, and then when Rune Knight was published, this interaction was overlooked.
In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
Nope. Rules that apply to PCs don't apply to monsters, and vice versa. A Rune Knight gets the benefits of being bigger listed in their subclass, nothing more
It's worth noting that Giant's Might doesn't make your weapons grow in size, so it wouldn't need to call that rule out in the subclass feature. It only becomes relevant once you find an oversized weapon. And also, it's not a general rule that oversized weapons do double the weapon die. I'm arguing it comes from the monster stat block, or the Enlarge / Reduce spell in that case. Though it would be nice if the feature said something about being able to use large weapons without disadvantage and huge weapons at disadvantage. What I think clearly happened here was the rule of thumb in the DMG didn't account for large players getting their hands on oversized weapons from large monsters because there were no large player races at the time of writing, and then when Rune Knight was published, this interaction was overlooked.
Everything the PC is wearing also increases in size idk what you mean.
Anyway. Large weapons don't automatically do double dice for PCs. That's only monsters. See Enlarge spell:
"The target's weapons also grow to match its new size. While these weapons are enlarged, the target's attacks with them deal 1d4 extra damage."
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The Solar is a CR 21 monster with this greatsword attack:
Greatsword. Melee Weapon Attack: +15 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 22 (4d6 + 8) slashing damage plus 27 (6d8) radiant damage.
For comparison, if it was wielding just the regular greatsword, it would only be doing 2d6 + 8, and presumably no radiant damage. It seems like it would be significantly better than any greatsword of any rarity, especially if wielded by PCs who have feats and abilities, even just extra attack. It would be better than just about any legendary weapon in terms of raw damage.
My question is what should happen when a PC uses the disarming attack maneuver and wants to take the greatsword from the monster and use it against him? And what if he wants to keep the greatsword and use it for the rest of the campaign? RAW, I don't see any reason why they couldn't just have a ridiculously overpowered greatsword, which would be problematic, though I can imagine several ways to handle it. Maybe you say that the radiant damage was innate to the celestial, not necessarily the weapon, so any weapon it wielded would have done an extra 6d8 radiant damage. It's a significant improvement over a regular greatsword, but perhaps not game breaking. Maybe the weapon is too large for the players to wield without impossible levels of strength like the Solar has, though I doubt it because the reach of the sword is still only 5 ft. Maybe you say it costs an attunement slot, and you modify the weapon somehow to balance the game by making the extra radiant damage 1-3 times per day or something like that. What are everyone's thoughts on this?
A greatsword doesn't do +6d8 of radiant damage so I don't really see the problem. I think it's quite obvious that the extra damage comes from the solar itself and not the greatsword. Especially since Soalrs aren't listed as having anything but a non-magical greatsword.
It’s not the sword that makes it do that, it’s the wielder: a paladin’s smite doesn’t transfer with the weapon, nor a rogue’s sneak attack In the hands of anyone else, it’s just a greatsword.
Even without the radiant damage, it still does an extra 2d6 compared to a regular greatsword, and other monsters have something similar. There's a "sword" that does 3d10 + Strength mod (doesn't say what kind and also has a reach of 10 ft), several other greatswords and maces that do extra fire and radiant damage, etc. Are you arguing that because the weapon name in the stat block says "greatsword", it can be assumed that it's just a regular greatsword and any other damage dice stem from the monster wielding it, not the weapon? Because this actually came up with a warwraith from 2e I believe that had a "Spectral Blade" attack that did higher base weapon damage and additional necrotic damage. The special weapon name makes it less clear that it's just a regular blade, but also less clear that it's even lootable. Was looking for something similar to that from 5e where it seems like there actually is something special about the weapon, and therefore abusable, but I haven't found it yet.
The additional damage comes from the solar's size. Large enemies double the damage dice of any weapon they wield. Presumably this also means that the greatsword is too large for a Medium PC to wield.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I'd probably rule it RAI like you're saying at my table for the record.
It is the RAW answer too tbf. This is from the DMG on creating a monster.
Not sure if you mean me, but yes, I’d rule just a regular greatsword. Monsters can do things PCs can’t. This falls under that category.
What happened in 2e doesn’t really matter too much, anymore. The game is radically different now, precedents don’t transfer across editions. In this edition, the designers typically made it so weapons aren’t necessarily, particularly special in the hands of just anyone who picks them up to avoid PCs getting their hands on powerful items. Unless, of course, the DM wants them to have such items. Then it’s easy enough to say it’s, I dunno, a vorpal greatsword in the hands of a PC, if you like.
Just as a tip, if you hit the “reply” button, no one can tell who you are replying to. It’s a frustrating limitation on this board. You need to use quote, so people know who you’re responding to.
Ahhh, I did not know that. Thanks, this is the kind of ruling I was looking for. And since the stat block accounts for the extra weapon damage due to the size, I think it would also account for extra radiant damage that is specific to the monster, not the weapon. In that case, I have a second question. Could my rune knight abuse this tactic and use giant's might and wield the giant weapon for the extra damage die without disadvantage due to being a large creature?
Yes, my RAI comment was directed at you and also Lostwhilefishing. I didn't even see Quar1on's post because I didn't refresh the page.
I also agree what you said about 2e, which is why I was searching through 5e for something, but I didn't find anything yet, so yeah looks like they designed the monster stat blocks with those rules in mind to prevent PCs acquiring weapons that deal 10d8 base damage or something like that.
This is the sort of question best posed to your DM. You'll not find an objectively agreed on answer anywhere.
It is the sort of thing that requires a lot of smaller questions to be answered also. Like, if you do weild an oversized sword while large, do you even roll the double dice like monsters do or do you roll like a normal greatsword that was made large when you grew to large, ie a bonus die as per the class feature or spell that let you boost sizes.
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.
Technically, nothing in the rules says that the weapon does more damage because it's bigger, or that PCs deal more damage with larger weapons. Just bigger monsters deal more damage with properly sized weapons.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I would let the player loot a pretty sweet-looking, but otherwise normal greatsword though.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That’s not entirely true:
See👆
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Nope. Rules that apply to PCs don't apply to monsters, and vice versa. A Rune Knight gets the benefits of being bigger listed in their subclass, nothing more
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
While it is a safe assumption that the oversized weapon concept was kept in mind when designing monster stat blocks, no rule inherently enforces it on existing monsters, nor does it relay any special property to the weapons of these monsters. Its solely used as one possible suggestion on how to determine damage for homebrew monsters. There are other options as well that can be used to determine damage.
RAW, the solar's greatsword attack does 4d6 simply because that's what is written on the statblock. Outside of the solar, its still just a regular greatsword, and does not have any other special properties, unless the DM wants to decide otherwise.
Not sure where this talks about PCs? That's all monster rules.
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.
Thanks for everyone responding to the second question about the rune knight and giant weapons. I've read the comments and I can see a case for it. Feel free to disagree, but here's the line of thinking. The monster has a weapon. This weapon is oversized and does an extra hit die of damage. You pick the weapon up after you slay it. The DMG tells the DM how to handle creatures (i.e. players) wielding weapons that are oversized.
The relevant section in the DMG is not a rule of combat that says 'larger weapons do x damage.' It only explains the general rules of thumb around monster creation. Now the monsters in the Monster Manual do appear to abide by these guidelines, as you see large monsters dealing an extra weapon die, huge creatures dealing two extra weapon dice, etc. And it doesn't say that bigger monsters do more damage, it says that bigger monsters have oversized weapons that do more damage. So judging from this, I'd rule that a large monster with the greataxe attack that deals 2d12 + strength slashing damage is wielding an oversized greataxe that does double the weapon dice.
"A creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with a weapon that is sized for a larger attacker. You can rule that a weapon sized for an attacker two or more sizes larger is too big for the creature to use at all." I don't know why this statement is in here if not accounting for the possibility that players might attempt to pick these weapons up off of monsters. When else would this come into play? You would have to be creating a monster that uses weapons that are too big for it, which I can't imagine is all too common.
It does seem as though larger weapons are intended to do more damage in general. Looking at Enlarge / Reduce: "The target's Weapons also grow to match its new size. While these Weapons are enlarged, the target's Attack with them deal 1d4 extra damage." There is a similar 1d4 damage penalty for the Reduce option. The spell specifically states the weapons grow larger and do more damage.
I think I'm going to try it this way, and if it becomes unbalanced, I'll throw it out. I did think the extra 1d6 once per turn was kind of lame.
It's worth noting that Giant's Might doesn't make your weapons grow in size, so it wouldn't need to call that rule out in the subclass feature. It only becomes relevant once you find an oversized weapon. And also, it's not a general rule that oversized weapons do double the weapon die. I'm arguing it comes from the monster stat block, or the Enlarge / Reduce spell in that case. Though it would be nice if the feature said something about being able to use large weapons without disadvantage and huge weapons at disadvantage. What I think clearly happened here was the rule of thumb in the DMG didn't account for large players getting their hands on oversized weapons from large monsters because there were no large player races at the time of writing, and then when Rune Knight was published, this interaction was overlooked.
Everything the PC is wearing also increases in size idk what you mean.
Anyway. Large weapons don't automatically do double dice for PCs. That's only monsters. See Enlarge spell:
"The target's weapons also grow to match its new size. While these weapons are enlarged, the target's attacks with them deal 1d4 extra damage."
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.