I suppose yeah if the dev wants to buff damage dice from all intrinsic weapon properties like the Flame Tongue that's totally cool! My main bit is mostly arguing on the behalf of flavor instead of trying to do linguistic gymnastics with the weird wording.
At the end of the day OP, do what you feel is correct. Fighters and other melee lads have to compete with wizards, warlocks, and sorcerers using some of the craziest magic and reality warping powers out there, so I say lean on the side of generosity to help them feel equally monstrous in their melee realms. I think that if it buffs the character's strength or the weapon itself, then have the feat apply properly. Up to you really on whether or not you want other indirect damage spells to apply, but it does make stuff like Divine Smite kinda crazy lol.
My thoughts are that extra damage given from outside-sourcing spells such as Hex or Divine Smite do not apply to the weapon, but effects that make the individual or the weapon deal extra damage do, much like critical hits.
Vicious weapons deal an extra 2d6 damage, and I think it would be strange that an intrinsic property of the weapon is not buffed by the character's mastery of the weapon.
Enlarge as part of Enlarge/Reduce makes you deal an additional 1d4 damage with melee weapon attacks. Given that damage increase reflects an increase in personal strength and does not affect your skill with the weapon, it should apply here. The same goes for the Rune Knight Fighter ability, Giant's Might, that gives an additional 1d6. These skills and spells change only the personal strength of the wielder, and do not mystically provide an outside source of damage like Smite or Hex.
If a magic weapon like the Flame Tongue deals an extra 2d6 fire damage, then Great Weapon Master does not apply. The flames from the weapon burn at the same rate regardless of the wielder's mastery of that sword.
Therefore, I think it's up to interpretation. Does the extra damage come from the sharpness of the blade, the strength of the character, or from an outside source of energy?
If it helps, I left this conversation with the Dev in the next thread:
@Il_Gama Great Weapon Fighting and Battlemaster' Sweeping Attack: may I reroll the 1 and 2 of the superiority die? @JeremyECrawford Great Weapon Fighting works only with the damage dice of the qualifying weapon. @<> What if you’ve got a weird situation like a greatsword flametongue or frostbrand? Still only the 2d6 from the greatsword? @JeremyECrawford Those are weapons. Their dice are affected. @<> Sorry, to clarify just in case. 2d6 slashing +2d6 fire (for example). The 2d6 fire damage dice are re-rollable as they are weapon dice? @JeremyECrawford Yes. The description of the flame tongue (the weapon) even says the sword deals the extra damage.
If we want to follow that ruling, GFW should interact with Vicious Weapon and similar magic weapons.
To go with my previous statement forgot to quote lol
This isn't malice, this is about the proper way to alter published rules. A FAQ (like SAC) merely answers questions where the rules are ambiguous, it does not change the published text. An errata changes the published text. Which one it is published as gives notice as to what the intention is. (And writers of FAQs are also fallible and capable of making mistakes - when they do so, they are just wrong. They do not magically become errata).
You are of course free to play the game however you like. But this, for better or worse, is how the designers have decided to respond to this. They have answered it in the SAC and from what I can surmise they have done so with the thinking that that answer IS a clarification and not a change so I would not expect an errata to be issued.
If you don't agree with that that is fine. If you feel you need to play to your interpretation of the rules instead of the interpretation and intent of the designers then that's also fine. I would not expect any instance of organised play (or many DM's to be fair) to accommodate for that but that is something that you'll have to deal with (or possibly not) if and when you happens upon such a situation.
As I said before, I don't particularly like their way of dealing with this kind of issues but it is what it is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The Sage Advice Compendium collects questions and answers about the rules of Dungeons & Dragons (fifth edition).
. . .
Official Rulings
Official rulings on how to interpret rules are made here in the Sage Advice Compendium.
. . .
RAW
“Rules as written”—that’s what RAW stands for. When we dwell on the RAW interpretation of a rule, we’re studying what the text says in context, without regard to the designers’ intent. The text is forced to stand on its own.
A ruling is not RAW. It is an interpretation of the written rules.
the SAC . . . cannot, by definition, be wrong as it is them stating what the right answer is.
This is not true at all.
The SAC is wrong all the time. Whenever the written text is unambiguous there is a correct interpretation of that text and there are incorrect interpretations. If the SAC incorrectly interprets the text, then their interpretation is wrong by definition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
On April 16, 2025, the article Errata and Sage Advice: What’s Next for the New Core Rules? announced the return of the 2024 Sage Advice.
The release of the updated SAC happened on April 30, 2025.
EDIT: for clarity.
EDIT2: the 2024 PHB was released on September 17, 2024.
I suppose yeah if the dev wants to buff damage dice from all intrinsic weapon properties like the Flame Tongue that's totally cool! My main bit is mostly arguing on the behalf of flavor instead of trying to do linguistic gymnastics with the weird wording.
At the end of the day OP, do what you feel is correct. Fighters and other melee lads have to compete with wizards, warlocks, and sorcerers using some of the craziest magic and reality warping powers out there, so I say lean on the side of generosity to help them feel equally monstrous in their melee realms. I think that if it buffs the character's strength or the weapon itself, then have the feat apply properly. Up to you really on whether or not you want other indirect damage spells to apply, but it does make stuff like Divine Smite kinda crazy lol.
To go with my previous statement forgot to quote lol
You are of course free to play the game however you like. But this, for better or worse, is how the designers have decided to respond to this. They have answered it in the SAC and from what I can surmise they have done so with the thinking that that answer IS a clarification and not a change so I would not expect an errata to be issued.
If you don't agree with that that is fine. If you feel you need to play to your interpretation of the rules instead of the interpretation and intent of the designers then that's also fine. I would not expect any instance of organised play (or many DM's to be fair) to accommodate for that but that is something that you'll have to deal with (or possibly not) if and when you happens upon such a situation.
As I said before, I don't particularly like their way of dealing with this kind of issues but it is what it is. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This is incorrect according to the SAC:
A ruling is not RAW. It is an interpretation of the written rules.
This is not true at all.
The SAC is wrong all the time. Whenever the written text is unambiguous there is a correct interpretation of that text and there are incorrect interpretations. If the SAC incorrectly interprets the text, then their interpretation is wrong by definition.