Bonus action attacks don't normally omit their damage modifiers. All weapon attacks add their ability modifiers to damage, the normal two weapon fighting rules is a specific exception to this rule.
What Saga & DxJxC said: The bonus action attack you get from this weapon is not Two-Weapon Fighting. TWF omitting the ability modifier for damage on the bonus action is the exception; nearly everything else doesn't behave that way.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
So looking over the two weapons it seems the RDBS is missing the text about the special bonus attack you can make with a regular DBS. Does this mean the RDBS doesn’t benefit from this special property? Or was it unintentionally omitted?
So looking over the two weapons it seems the RDBS is missing the text about the special bonus attack you can make with a regular DBS. Does this mean the RDBS doesn’t benefit from this special property? Or was it unintentionally omitted?
As far as the actual rules are concerned, there is no such thing as a Revenant Double-bladed Scimitar. That item is a hack that D&D Beyond had to do to implement the effects of the feat (which apply to any double-bladed scimitar), because D&D Beyond's architecture isn't great.
So, there's not actually any such thing as a RDBS. Any description text DDB put on that item is irrelevant. The actual item a character is wielding is just a normal double-bladed scimitar, with all the rules that weapon entails.
The double bladed scimitar and the Revenant Blade feat seem to just needlessly complicate things to me. You can already dual-wield scimitars. If you want to pretend they're connected by a stick, more power to you.
The double bladed scimitar and the Revenant Blade feat seem to just needlessly complicate things to me. You can already dual-wield scimitars. If you want to pretend they're connected by a stick, more power to you.
There is a huge difference between two weapons and one two-handed weapon. When you're using a single two-handed weapon, you have the freedom to use your off-hand as needed. You only need to have both hands on the weapon when attacking. That is not true with two discrete weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
So, I just DM'd for the first time and one of the team (A Half-Elf) had a DBS as a result of his backstory...which is under 'review' at this time. I understand how it's used, but they wanted to use the primary attack on one NPC and the second attack on a separate, but also engaged NPC. Is that possible?
I ruled that both attacks had to be on the single target since they weren't rolling to hit on the second bonus attack.
So, I just DM'd for the first time and one of the team (A Half-Elf) had a DBS as a result of his backstory...which is under 'review' at this time. I understand how it's used, but they wanted to use the primary attack on one NPC and the second attack on a separate, but also engaged NPC. Is that possible?
I ruled that both attacks had to be on the single target since they weren't rolling to hit on the second bonus attack.
Thoughts?
It doesn't have any text requiring the attack be on the same target. You could even move in between attacks if you wanted.
Also, why weren't they rolling to hit on the second attack? The text says to make an attack, not to just do damage.
Also, why weren't they rolling to hit on the second attack? The text says to make an attack, not to just do damage.
Simply because I was unfamiliar with the weapon and still learning how bonus attacks work. Justified it in my head as the weapon is still a single weapon and attacking within the same round. Now that I know, I know...but it seems super OP to be able to attack two separate targets as a non-Elf at level 1. Maybe I'm overthinking it? I mean, I'm still getting over that half-orcs no longer have negatives to their Charisma. I leave from 3.5 and all hell breaks loose in the game.
Also, why weren't they rolling to hit on the second attack? The text says to make an attack, not to just do damage.
Simply because I was unfamiliar with the weapon and still learning how bonus attacks work. Justified it in my head as the weapon is still a single weapon and attacking within the same round. Now that I know, I know...but it seems super OP to be able to attack two separate targets as a non-Elf at level 1. Maybe I'm overthinking it? I mean, I'm still getting over that half-orcs no longer have negatives to their Charisma. I leave from 3.5 and all hell breaks loose in the game.
Literally anyone can attack two separate targets at 1st level by wielding two light weapons.
Literally anyone can attack two separate targets at 1st level by wielding two light weapons.
That was never a consideration as no one so far has referred to the DBS as a dual wield mechanic. While literally anyone can attack two separate targets at 1st level by wielding two light weapons...that's not this. My decision at the time was made with what I knew...Like I said, its my first time DM-ing and there's a lot to learn.
Bonus action attacks don't normally omit their damage modifiers. All weapon attacks add their ability modifiers to damage, the normal two weapon fighting rules is a specific exception to this rule.
What Saga & DxJxC said: The bonus action attack you get from this weapon is not Two-Weapon Fighting. TWF omitting the ability modifier for damage on the bonus action is the exception; nearly everything else doesn't behave that way.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Would this be why it won't let me use my artificers infusion on it?
Question? Do I need to have the Revenant Blade Feat in order to use a Revenant DBS?
If I just use the Revenant DBS do I get the text on it? Revenant Double-Bladed Scimitar Do I gain the finesse property, and gain +1 AC
If I use both Feat and DBS do I gain +2 AC?
You only gain the finesse property and get the +1 AC when using the feat. You don't get any ac boost from the blade itself
And yes you need the feat to use the Revenant Blade
So looking over the two weapons it seems the RDBS is missing the text about the special bonus attack you can make with a regular DBS. Does this mean the RDBS doesn’t benefit from this special property? Or was it unintentionally omitted?
As far as the actual rules are concerned, there is no such thing as a Revenant Double-bladed Scimitar. That item is a hack that D&D Beyond had to do to implement the effects of the feat (which apply to any double-bladed scimitar), because D&D Beyond's architecture isn't great.
So, there's not actually any such thing as a RDBS. Any description text DDB put on that item is irrelevant. The actual item a character is wielding is just a normal double-bladed scimitar, with all the rules that weapon entails.
Thanks for the clarification!!
I'm new with this edition (used to play 2nd), but is allowed to use a shield with this weapon?
No. It has the Two-handed property, so it requires both hands to use.
The double bladed scimitar and the Revenant Blade feat seem to just needlessly complicate things to me. You can already dual-wield scimitars. If you want to pretend they're connected by a stick, more power to you.
There is a huge difference between two weapons and one two-handed weapon. When you're using a single two-handed weapon, you have the freedom to use your off-hand as needed. You only need to have both hands on the weapon when attacking. That is not true with two discrete weapons.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Why not just fix the feat so it actually functions properly
WoTC haven't made any errata since 2021.
So, I just DM'd for the first time and one of the team (A Half-Elf) had a DBS as a result of his backstory...which is under 'review' at this time. I understand how it's used, but they wanted to use the primary attack on one NPC and the second attack on a separate, but also engaged NPC. Is that possible?
I ruled that both attacks had to be on the single target since they weren't rolling to hit on the second bonus attack.
Thoughts?
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
It doesn't have any text requiring the attack be on the same target. You could even move in between attacks if you wanted.
Also, why weren't they rolling to hit on the second attack? The text says to make an attack, not to just do damage.
Simply because I was unfamiliar with the weapon and still learning how bonus attacks work. Justified it in my head as the weapon is still a single weapon and attacking within the same round. Now that I know, I know...but it seems super OP to be able to attack two separate targets as a non-Elf at level 1. Maybe I'm overthinking it? I mean, I'm still getting over that half-orcs no longer have negatives to their Charisma. I leave from 3.5 and all hell breaks loose in the game.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam
Literally anyone can attack two separate targets at 1st level by wielding two light weapons.
That was never a consideration as no one so far has referred to the DBS as a dual wield mechanic. While literally anyone can attack two separate targets at 1st level by wielding two light weapons...that's not this. My decision at the time was made with what I knew...Like I said, its my first time DM-ing and there's a lot to learn.
Aut viam inveniam aut faciam