In the DMG under the "create a monster stat block" it lists larger monsters as being able to weild oversized 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."
It continues to read
"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."
By this reasoning, would a player character with the Powerful Build racial trait, "You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift" be able to wield a weapon proportianal to a creature of a size category larger than itself without the disadvantage normally caused by wielding an oversized weapon?
One of the great things about 5th edition Dungeons & Dragons is that it is (generally) really clear on rules, in that if you can do something, it tells you that you can do it.
In this case, if the racial feature Powerful Build allowed the character to wield larger weapons without disadvantage, then it would state that under the text for the feature.
As you saw, it doesn't state this, which means that it doesn't grant the ability to do that. :)
The rules about whether larger weapons do more damage is entirely different not only from players to monsters, but also among different player options that seem like they would do the same thing. The oversized weapons rules for monsters are not the same as the effects a PC picks up from Enlarge/Reduce, which in turn is not the same that Giant Soul Sorcerer picks up when under the effect of Rage of Fallen Ostoria, and none of those have anything to do with Powerful Build!
If you get stuck thinking about 5e as a simulation system, it becomes very difficult to understand why Big Monsters are different from Big Players, or why a PC can't pick up a giant's sword to do the same damage, albeit with disadvantage. But when you instead think about 5e as a game system instead, where these are entirely different features with entirely different applications and balance considerations, it becomes an easier pill to swallow.
In the DMG under the "create a monster stat block" it lists larger monsters as being able to weild oversized 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."
Basing the damage of a monster's attack on the damage die of a weapon is an option for monster designer that they can use or ignore. There is no general rule that says greataxes for huge creatures deal 3d12 damage.
By this reasoning, would a player character with the Powerful Build racial trait, "You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift" be able to wield a weapon proportianal to a creature of a size category larger than itself without the disadvantage normally caused by wielding an oversized weapon?
No, because like the others said whether a weapon is appropriately-sized for you has nothing to do with your carrying capacity or how much you can drag, pull or carry. For example, a 20th level Halfling Barbarian with 24 Strength still has disadvantage on attack rolls with Heavy weapons.
In the DMG under the "create a monster stat block" it lists larger monsters as being able to weild oversized 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."
It continues to read
"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."
By this reasoning, would a player character with the Powerful Build racial trait, "You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift" be able to wield a weapon proportianal to a creature of a size category larger than itself without the disadvantage normally caused by wielding an oversized weapon?
The Powerful Build trait does not say anything about overriding the rule concerning oversized weapons, it only deals with what it says it does. Wielding an oversized weapon isn't just about the weight, its larger size is also a factor. It'd be like a Halfling trying to fight with one of those big Scottish Claymores. Even if the Halfling had a Belt Of Giant Strength, he's still a 3ft dude trying to swing a sword nearly 5ft long. It's going to be awkward :)
The rules about whether larger weapons do more damage is entirely different not only from players to monsters, but also among different player options that seem like they would do the same thing. The oversized weapons rules for monsters are not the same as the effects a PC picks up from Enlarge/Reduce, which in turn is not the same that Giant Soul Sorcerer picks up when under the effect of Rage of Fallen Ostoria, and none of those have anything to do with Powerful Build!
If you get stuck thinking about 5e as a simulation system, it becomes very difficult to understand why Big Monsters are different from Big Players, or why a PC can't pick up a giant's sword to do the same damage, albeit with disadvantage. But when you instead think about 5e as a game system instead, where these are entirely different features with entirely different applications and balance considerations, it becomes an easier pill to swallow.
I know this is an old post but I wanted to rectify skme of your points.
Oversized weapons are the same for both PCs and monster and thus deals an extra die of damage for PC's as well. They even go as far as to say that if the weapon has the oversized property, you attack with disadvantage with it and you cannot attack with it if it is 2 size larger. They say this because if your battlemaster disarm a Ogre, as part of it's movement he can now pick up the oversized greatclub and it will deal 2d8 die at the expense of attacking with disadvantage. You can compare it to a halfling that is undersized for a weapon with the heavy property.
Now, about enlarge/reduce, it clearly states it's ruling in the spell own wording and thus changes the rules as written in the DMG about oversized weapon. It clearly states that your weapon deals an extra 1d4. Thus it override the general rule that a larger sized weapon deals an extra die of damage. You can compare it to the alter self spell wich create and exception to your your natural weapons being unarmed strike that your are proficient with and thus, as cannbe found on sage advice if you look into it, you could flurry of blow with alterself because the spells create an exception to the general rules that allow for fhis exception(flurry of blow with natural weapons)
My last example is take the shortsword and the greatsword.
Short sword is light and deal 1d6, great sword is heavy and thus deal an extra 1d6(2d6) and is thus the oversized version of the shortsword. You can then see the scaling that went here.
But, as a last thing to consider, you can also look at the hand axe 1d6 vs the great Axe 1d12 and notice that the oversize weapon rules is not mandatory but a good place to start to determine weapon damage. In the end they still doubled the base hit die instead of doubling the number of hit die. And as always, it is always at the DM discretion, which is why this rule is in the DMG.
Have a good day and wish you the best of the best adventures
Monster Manual Bugbears deal an extra damage die with weapons.
PC Bugbears, as presented in Volo's Guide To Monsters do not. I think this is consistent with not giving PCs an extra damage die for wielding an oversized weapon.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Monster Manual Bugbears deal an extra damage die with weapons.
PC Bugbears, as presented in Volo's Guide To Monsters do not. I think this is consistent with not giving PCs an extra damage die for wielding an oversized weapon.
That's a fair point and I can totally see it as a reason why a DM would not apply the DMG rule.
However, I'd say that there is a need to swing with both hand, thus there can't ben shield wich mean less AC. Plus swinging with disadvantage is about the equivalent of -5 to to hit and you got twice the opportunity to crit fail.
There is feats doing flat 10 damage for a -5 to hit and 10 damage and flat 10 is about the average of a d20 die.
Swinging with a oversized weapon, let's say a halbert with extra D10 is doing an extra 5,5 in average, it is still less impressive than the feats and is thus not that impressive in my humble opinion.
You got to factor that these tre not sold in normal stores, a normal blacksmith would'nt have the normal equipment to to build one and thus it ias to be purchased from a monster or a special NPC or it it has to be looted.
You also got to factor that the PC smith tools are probly not enaugh to build metalic weapons that are oversized and thus they are more likely to carry a a oversize great club that deals 2d8 wich is not that impressive compared to a greatsword.
It weight 4 times more and if one really is concerned about it he could look at the carrying capacity of the PC. A caracter that is using an oversized weapon will never swing it with advantage wich is a huge dealbreaker.
I would totally agree to a PC wanting to use one, but to be honest, other than lookjng cool, I don't understamd why he hould want to do that since the benefits are so Meh.
What if the character is a Goliath and a Rune Knight / Giant Soul Sorcerer? It uses Rune Knight Giant's Might and the Giant Soul Sorcerer Enlarge spell it gets at 3rd level.
The character is now Huge and is Gargantuan with regard to what it can push, drag or lift. With an enlarge potion, it becomes Gargantuan in size.
Could it use a Huge or Gargantuan weapon without disadvantage? Could it wield two great axes at the same time? As a Gargantuan creature, a great axe would be like a pick axe. I imagine a Gargantuan character with duel wielder feat wielding two telephone pole sized staffs.
Would the weapon do the damage of oversized weapons? If not, what are the benefits other than being able to reach things better, carry more, etc?
Hard to imagine that a gargantuan character wielding a 30' pole, sword, club, axe, or whatever wouldn't do more damage than a normal sized weapon. This is a fantasy game. But, we want as much realism we can get. RAF, RAW, RAI?
The DM, and to a lesser extent the players, get to decide what happens when the Rule Of Fun is invoked.
The general rules are not overridden unless an ability specifically says so. None of the abilities mentioned would give you the ability to use oversized weapons in any way. If you take one and use it, it does the same damage as the smaller scale version. No more, no less. This is admittedly somewhat silly, but that's why the game has a DM.
Okay, so, out of curiosity, say a player character somehow ends up growing to the size of a Frost Giant, with all their weapons and gear scaling with them. What would happen to that player?
That player is me. I was playing an itty bitty 2'8'' Kobold Monk at LVL 8. Now I've received a blessing that is growing me a foot an hour until I'm going 21 ft tall, with 23 STR, 7700lbs, and all my gear is scaled with me, including a Quarterstaff, a Rapier, seven different daggers (five specifically for throwing) a scimitar, and the Monk's Martial Arts dice, currently at a d6 for every monk weapon and unarmed strike. I'm also using the UA subclass, Way of the Ascendant Dragon......
So I'm basically going to be a Dragon that can use weapons and stands on two feet.....
Okay, so, out of curiosity, say a player character somehow ends up growing to the size of a Frost Giant, with all their weapons and gear scaling with them. What would happen to that player?
That player is me. I was playing an itty bitty 2'8'' Kobold Monk at LVL 8. Now I've received a blessing that is growing me a foot an hour until I'm going 21 ft tall, with 23 STR, 7700lbs, and all my gear is scaled with me, including a Quarterstaff, a Rapier, seven different daggers (five specifically for throwing) a scimitar, and the Monk's Martial Arts dice, currently at a d6 for every monk weapon and unarmed strike. I'm also using the UA subclass, Way of the Ascendant Dragon......
So I'm basically going to be a Dragon that can use weapons and stands on two feet.....
Help.
I have no idea how your UA subclass works, but the rest I can handle:
Quarterstaff, Rapier, Dagger, Scimitar: DMG p278. While you're large, double the damage dice. Triple while Huge, quadruple while Gargantuan.
Unarmed Strikes: No such rule applies; not only does your base damage only change from 1 per DM fiat, your class rules completely fail to account for size. There's no actual RAW on your strike changing from 1, in other words, and even if it did, your class rules would remain static, ignoring the larger base damage of your monk weapons. You could use the rules for manufactured weapons (use 2, 3, or 4 times as many dice) and it would definitionally simply scale appropriately to your Size, but it's a DM call.
Reach: Just to be clear, there's also no rule modifying your reach with your unarmed strikes or melee weapons. Frost Giants themselves have 10 foot reach on their greataxes, but WOTC has given DMs absolutely zero guidance on how to adjudicate a Frost Giant wielding a different weapon; in fact, RAW, a Frost Giant's kicks are reach 5 feet (which matters for OAs), simply because there's no rule saying otherwise. You're completely in DM fiat territory when it comes to your reach, but I suggest ruling your Quarsterstaff, at a minimum, is reach 10 feet, assuming it's sized for a Frost Giant. FWIW, Cloud Giants are also 10 feet with their morningstars and with their optional Fling rule from SKT, so I personally think the implication is that giants are supposed to just have 10 foot reach unless they have extra long limbs (Stone Giants have extra reach).
Yeesh. There really isn't any framework for this eventuality, is there? Anyway, thank you for the advice! I'll pass it on to my DM, see what he thinks about this.
"Plus swinging with disadvantage is about the equivalent of -5 to to hit and you got twice the opportunity to crit fail."
There are no critical failures on attack rolls in 5e.
The impact of disadvantage is wildly variable depending on the base chance to hit and whether there is another circumstance that would grant advantage. For example, consider a barbarian who routinely uses Reckless Attack. They have advantage from that and disadvantage from their oversized greataxe (dmg 2d12). It's a wash. So in that instance the question is not whether it is worth it to accept disadvantage but rather whether it is worthwhile to forgo advantage. And often it would be.
Say, for example, you are a 5th-level barbarian with 18 Str and a +1 weapon. Your attack bonus is +8. You are fighting a lone ogre (AC 11). You need a 3 to hit, so you have a 90% chance to hit. With advantage, that becomes a 99% chance, but that's only an additional 9%. So with a normal greataxe (ignoring crits for simplicity), a strike would do about 11.5 dmg, 13.5 if raging. BUT with an oversized greataxe (no advantage or disadvantage on the role) you'd do 18/20 x .9 = 16.2 or 18 on average. Advantage: oversized weapon.
Another thing to consider is that in 5e, once circumstances causing advantage and disadvantage on an attack role are present, it's a straight roll, no matter how many of each you have. Consider two creatures fighting in darkness and effectively blind. They have advantage (target can't see them) and disadvantage (they cannot see target) so it's a wash. Now give one of them an oversized weapon. Now they have two circumstances that cause disadvantage and one causing advantage. Still a wash. In that case, using an oversized weapon causes no penalty at all.
That's interesting bc I consider a critical failure or critical hit/success to imply a mechanism by which something happens other than just a miss or a hit.
In 5e a natural 20 is both an automatic hit and (usually) a critical hit, but those two effects are distinct. You can have something that would be a critical hit but misses, for example via rolling a 19 if you are a Champion or have some other effect that expands your crit range. Similarly, effects which negate critical hits, like adamantine armor, do not negate the fact that a natural 20 is an automatic hit.
In the DMG under the "create a monster stat block" it lists larger monsters as being able to weild oversized 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."
It continues to read
"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."
By this reasoning, would a player character with the Powerful Build racial trait, "You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift" be able to wield a weapon proportianal to a creature of a size category larger than itself without the disadvantage normally caused by wielding an oversized weapon?
Based on this all creatures can wield oversized weapons with disadvantage, no one can wield 2x over their size, and monsters get extra damage dice. With Waterdeep: Dragon Heist we meet Ziraj the Hunter, who specifically has an oversized bow:
"Treasure. Ziraj wears +2 leather armor and carries an oversized longbow. This unique weapon can be used only by a Medium or larger creature that has a Strength of 18 or higher. The bow shoots oversized arrows that deal piercing damage equal to 2d6 + the wielder’s Strength modifier. Its range is the same as an ordinary longbow."
If you pick up an oversized weapon it does what it says, this one gives you modified damage, all others like Solar's greatsword say when wielded by a Solar. Its like they have infinite uses of smite and you don't
Ah, late to the conversation, but if you took tavern brawler at level 4 as a feat, then theoretically you can use improvised weapons, which I imagine a 30' pole would fall into the category of. Though, this is a DM ruling, given I'm playing a Goliath 8 Barb/10 Bard/2 Paladin Bardbardian that can use enlarge/reduce to grapple dragons.
Unarmed Strikes: No such rule applies; not only does your base damage only change from 1 per DM fiat, your class rules completely fail to account for size. There's no actual RAW on your strike changing from 1, in other words, and even if it did, your class rules would remain static, ignoring the larger base damage of your monk weapons. You could use the rules for manufactured weapons (use 2, 3, or 4 times as many dice) and it would definitionally simply scale appropriately to your Size, but it's a DM call.
• You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your Unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
In the DMG under the "create a monster stat block" it lists larger monsters as being able to weild oversized 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."
It continues to read
"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."
By this reasoning, would a player character with the Powerful Build racial trait, "You count as one size larger when determining your carrying capacity and the weight you can push, drag, or lift" be able to wield a weapon proportianal to a creature of a size category larger than itself without the disadvantage normally caused by wielding an oversized weapon?
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersOne of the great things about 5th edition Dungeons & Dragons is that it is (generally) really clear on rules, in that if you can do something, it tells you that you can do it.
In this case, if the racial feature Powerful Build allowed the character to wield larger weapons without disadvantage, then it would state that under the text for the feature.
As you saw, it doesn't state this, which means that it doesn't grant the ability to do that. :)
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The rules about whether larger weapons do more damage is entirely different not only from players to monsters, but also among different player options that seem like they would do the same thing. The oversized weapons rules for monsters are not the same as the effects a PC picks up from Enlarge/Reduce, which in turn is not the same that Giant Soul Sorcerer picks up when under the effect of Rage of Fallen Ostoria, and none of those have anything to do with Powerful Build!
If you get stuck thinking about 5e as a simulation system, it becomes very difficult to understand why Big Monsters are different from Big Players, or why a PC can't pick up a giant's sword to do the same damage, albeit with disadvantage. But when you instead think about 5e as a game system instead, where these are entirely different features with entirely different applications and balance considerations, it becomes an easier pill to swallow.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Basing the damage of a monster's attack on the damage die of a weapon is an option for monster designer that they can use or ignore. There is no general rule that says greataxes for huge creatures deal 3d12 damage.
No, because like the others said whether a weapon is appropriately-sized for you has nothing to do with your carrying capacity or how much you can drag, pull or carry. For example, a 20th level Halfling Barbarian with 24 Strength still has disadvantage on attack rolls with Heavy weapons.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
The Powerful Build trait does not say anything about overriding the rule concerning oversized weapons, it only deals with what it says it does. Wielding an oversized weapon isn't just about the weight, its larger size is also a factor. It'd be like a Halfling trying to fight with one of those big Scottish Claymores. Even if the Halfling had a Belt Of Giant Strength, he's still a 3ft dude trying to swing a sword nearly 5ft long. It's going to be awkward :)
I know this is an old post but I wanted to rectify skme of your points.
Oversized weapons are the same for both PCs and monster and thus deals an extra die of damage for PC's as well. They even go as far as to say that if the weapon has the oversized property, you attack with disadvantage with it and you cannot attack with it if it is 2 size larger. They say this because if your battlemaster disarm a Ogre, as part of it's movement he can now pick up the oversized greatclub and it will deal 2d8 die at the expense of attacking with disadvantage. You can compare it to a halfling that is undersized for a weapon with the heavy property.
Now, about enlarge/reduce, it clearly states it's ruling in the spell own wording and thus changes the rules as written in the DMG about oversized weapon. It clearly states that your weapon deals an extra 1d4. Thus it override the general rule that a larger sized weapon deals an extra die of damage. You can compare it to the alter self spell wich create and exception to your your natural weapons being unarmed strike that your are proficient with and thus, as cannbe found on sage advice if you look into it, you could flurry of blow with alterself because the spells create an exception to the general rules that allow for fhis exception(flurry of blow with natural weapons)
My last example is take the shortsword and the greatsword.
Short sword is light and deal 1d6, great sword is heavy and thus deal an extra 1d6(2d6) and is thus the oversized version of the shortsword. You can then see the scaling that went here.
But, as a last thing to consider, you can also look at the hand axe 1d6 vs the great Axe 1d12 and notice that the oversize weapon rules is not mandatory but a good place to start to determine weapon damage. In the end they still doubled the base hit die instead of doubling the number of hit die. And as always, it is always at the DM discretion, which is why this rule is in the DMG.
Have a good day and wish you the best of the best adventures
Monster Manual Bugbears deal an extra damage die with weapons.
PC Bugbears, as presented in Volo's Guide To Monsters do not. I think this is consistent with not giving PCs an extra damage die for wielding an oversized weapon.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
That's a fair point and I can totally see it as a reason why a DM would not apply the DMG rule.
However, I'd say that there is a need to swing with both hand, thus there can't ben shield wich mean less AC. Plus swinging with disadvantage is about the equivalent of -5 to to hit and you got twice the opportunity to crit fail.
There is feats doing flat 10 damage for a -5 to hit and 10 damage and flat 10 is about the average of a d20 die.
Swinging with a oversized weapon, let's say a halbert with extra D10 is doing an extra 5,5 in average, it is still less impressive than the feats and is thus not that impressive in my humble opinion.
You got to factor that these tre not sold in normal stores, a normal blacksmith would'nt have the normal equipment to to build one and thus it ias to be purchased from a monster or a special NPC or it it has to be looted.
You also got to factor that the PC smith tools are probly not enaugh to build metalic weapons that are oversized and thus they are more likely to carry a a oversize great club that deals 2d8 wich is not that impressive compared to a greatsword.
It weight 4 times more and if one really is concerned about it he could look at the carrying capacity of the PC. A caracter that is using an oversized weapon will never swing it with advantage wich is a huge dealbreaker.
I would totally agree to a PC wanting to use one, but to be honest, other than lookjng cool, I don't understamd why he hould want to do that since the benefits are so Meh.
What if the character is a Goliath and a Rune Knight / Giant Soul Sorcerer? It uses Rune Knight Giant's Might and the Giant Soul Sorcerer Enlarge spell it gets at 3rd level.
The character is now Huge and is Gargantuan with regard to what it can push, drag or lift. With an enlarge potion, it becomes Gargantuan in size.
Could it use a Huge or Gargantuan weapon without disadvantage? Could it wield two great axes at the same time? As a Gargantuan creature, a great axe would be like a pick axe. I imagine a Gargantuan character with duel wielder feat wielding two telephone pole sized staffs.
Would the weapon do the damage of oversized weapons? If not, what are the benefits other than being able to reach things better, carry more, etc?
Hard to imagine that a gargantuan character wielding a 30' pole, sword, club, axe, or whatever wouldn't do more damage than a normal sized weapon. This is a fantasy game. But, we want as much realism we can get. RAF, RAW, RAI?
The DM, and to a lesser extent the players, get to decide what happens when the Rule Of Fun is invoked.
The general rules are not overridden unless an ability specifically says so. None of the abilities mentioned would give you the ability to use oversized weapons in any way. If you take one and use it, it does the same damage as the smaller scale version. No more, no less. This is admittedly somewhat silly, but that's why the game has a DM.
<Insert clever signature here>
Okay, so, out of curiosity, say a player character somehow ends up growing to the size of a Frost Giant, with all their weapons and gear scaling with them. What would happen to that player?
That player is me. I was playing an itty bitty 2'8'' Kobold Monk at LVL 8. Now I've received a blessing that is growing me a foot an hour until I'm going 21 ft tall, with 23 STR, 7700lbs, and all my gear is scaled with me, including a Quarterstaff, a Rapier, seven different daggers (five specifically for throwing) a scimitar, and the Monk's Martial Arts dice, currently at a d6 for every monk weapon and unarmed strike. I'm also using the UA subclass, Way of the Ascendant Dragon......
So I'm basically going to be a Dragon that can use weapons and stands on two feet.....
Help.
I have no idea how your UA subclass works, but the rest I can handle:
Quarterstaff, Rapier, Dagger, Scimitar: DMG p278. While you're large, double the damage dice. Triple while Huge, quadruple while Gargantuan.
Unarmed Strikes: No such rule applies; not only does your base damage only change from 1 per DM fiat, your class rules completely fail to account for size. There's no actual RAW on your strike changing from 1, in other words, and even if it did, your class rules would remain static, ignoring the larger base damage of your monk weapons. You could use the rules for manufactured weapons (use 2, 3, or 4 times as many dice) and it would definitionally simply scale appropriately to your Size, but it's a DM call.
Reach: Just to be clear, there's also no rule modifying your reach with your unarmed strikes or melee weapons. Frost Giants themselves have 10 foot reach on their greataxes, but WOTC has given DMs absolutely zero guidance on how to adjudicate a Frost Giant wielding a different weapon; in fact, RAW, a Frost Giant's kicks are reach 5 feet (which matters for OAs), simply because there's no rule saying otherwise. You're completely in DM fiat territory when it comes to your reach, but I suggest ruling your Quarsterstaff, at a minimum, is reach 10 feet, assuming it's sized for a Frost Giant. FWIW, Cloud Giants are also 10 feet with their morningstars and with their optional Fling rule from SKT, so I personally think the implication is that giants are supposed to just have 10 foot reach unless they have extra long limbs (Stone Giants have extra reach).
Yeesh. There really isn't any framework for this eventuality, is there? Anyway, thank you for the advice! I'll pass it on to my DM, see what he thinks about this.
"Plus swinging with disadvantage is about the equivalent of -5 to to hit and you got twice the opportunity to crit fail."
There are no critical failures on attack rolls in 5e.
The impact of disadvantage is wildly variable depending on the base chance to hit and whether there is another circumstance that would grant advantage. For example, consider a barbarian who routinely uses Reckless Attack. They have advantage from that and disadvantage from their oversized greataxe (dmg 2d12). It's a wash. So in that instance the question is not whether it is worth it to accept disadvantage but rather whether it is worthwhile to forgo advantage. And often it would be.
Say, for example, you are a 5th-level barbarian with 18 Str and a +1 weapon. Your attack bonus is +8. You are fighting a lone ogre (AC 11). You need a 3 to hit, so you have a 90% chance to hit. With advantage, that becomes a 99% chance, but that's only an additional 9%. So with a normal greataxe (ignoring crits for simplicity), a strike would do about 11.5 dmg, 13.5 if raging. BUT with an oversized greataxe (no advantage or disadvantage on the role) you'd do 18/20 x .9 = 16.2 or 18 on average. Advantage: oversized weapon.
A "1" is an automatic miss and most people call that a critical fail because there is no other sort of critical fail in the rules.
Another thing to consider is that in 5e, once circumstances causing advantage and disadvantage on an attack role are present, it's a straight roll, no matter how many of each you have. Consider two creatures fighting in darkness and effectively blind. They have advantage (target can't see them) and disadvantage (they cannot see target) so it's a wash. Now give one of them an oversized weapon. Now they have two circumstances that cause disadvantage and one causing advantage. Still a wash. In that case, using an oversized weapon causes no penalty at all.
That's interesting bc I consider a critical failure or critical hit/success to imply a mechanism by which something happens other than just a miss or a hit.
In 5e a natural 20 is both an automatic hit and (usually) a critical hit, but those two effects are distinct. You can have something that would be a critical hit but misses, for example via rolling a 19 if you are a Champion or have some other effect that expands your crit range. Similarly, effects which negate critical hits, like adamantine armor, do not negate the fact that a natural 20 is an automatic hit.
Based on this all creatures can wield oversized weapons with disadvantage, no one can wield 2x over their size, and monsters get extra damage dice. With Waterdeep: Dragon Heist we meet Ziraj the Hunter, who specifically has an oversized bow:
"Treasure. Ziraj wears +2 leather armor and carries an oversized longbow. This unique weapon can be used only by a Medium or larger creature that has a Strength of 18 or higher. The bow shoots oversized arrows that deal piercing damage equal to 2d6 + the wielder’s Strength modifier. Its range is the same as an ordinary longbow."
If you pick up an oversized weapon it does what it says, this one gives you modified damage, all others like Solar's greatsword say when wielded by a Solar. Its like they have infinite uses of smite and you don't
Ah, late to the conversation, but if you took tavern brawler at level 4 as a feat, then theoretically you can use improvised weapons, which I imagine a 30' pole would fall into the category of. Though, this is a DM ruling, given I'm playing a Goliath 8 Barb/10 Bard/2 Paladin Bardbardian that can use enlarge/reduce to grapple dragons.
I was surprised this went by without discussion, but am I reading monk rules wrong?
https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Monk#content
• You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the Attack and Damage Rolls of your Unarmed strikes and monk Weapons.
• You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your Unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table.