I still maintain from the other thread that the improvised weapon rules are clear that the damage of an improvised weapon is 1d4 with no damage modifier added and that the video interview discussion about improvised weapons with Jeremy Crawford reinforces that and then goes on to describe why it is the case.
As for the flowchart, the biggest glaring mistake I see is the yellow "Can't Use It" bubble.
And I still maintain that the rules don't say not to apply modifiers to improvised weapons (unless you can find something I missed). Normal weapons are only described by their base damage the same as improvised weapons (damage modifiers are in the attack rules, not weapon rules). In the interview JC never said not to apply modifiers, he never mentions damage modifiers at all even when talking about regular weapons. And JC has confirmed that improvised weapons add damage modifiers in a tweet (not that he hasn't contradicted himself before, but this time at least he hasn't).
Same opinion about the chart, "can't use it" should be "DEX"
Someone taps you lightly with a chair vs someone strong hits you full force with a chair and officially it makes no difference? That does not even make sense from any play balance perspective.
Way too many rulings come across as 'Well we should have been clearer but since we did not say what makes common sense, we'll pretend what we actually published is both intended and well thought out.'
Everyone else seems to have ignored this since the specific of the discussion have changed in the 18 months since I posted that. But since you called me out specifically:
It absolutely does make a difference if someone is making an attack with intent to harm vs not attacking without intent to harm. Where in the rules does it say that every physical contact needs to be an attack? Where in my comment did I imply that was the case? And why are you bringing up such an irrelevant idea in a discussion of whether attacks you make add your ability modifiers to damage you deal?
Ranged weapon attack (=ranged attack with a weapon) use Dexterity. So throwing a melee weapon to make a range attack with it should not use STR unless it has the finesse property.
Correction: unless it has the thrown property. Most improvised weapons are thrown, so the question is whether being thrown implies the thrown property (I would note that rocks are a traditional improvised weapon, and every rock-throwing monster I can find use strength).
1. Correction, in this case if it has either thrown or finesse it will be able to use STR. 2. The question is more complicated than that, and it was also already stated earlier. 3.Drawing connections between monsters and PC's is not helpful.
Of course! I was referring to improvised weapon attack. If a melee weapon has the thrown property it was specifically designed to make ranged attack with it and therefore it would not be improvised at all.
I agree with TheSast monsters statblocks are not good rule references. Any discrepencies to the rule can be attributed to Specific vs General.
I tried to revise it based on your reply I did it in a hurry so send feedback for this one too.
If you're going to include Battle Ready, you also need to include Armor Model, for using Int.
You're leaving out other exotic use-cases, like how a Dhampir Bite uses Constitution.
I recommend solving both of the above issues by not naming the special rules in question, and just generically referring to special rules that change the ability modifier.
You assume you always only add 1 modifier. This can be explicitly false, as with a Devotion Paladin/Hexblade Bladepact Warlock with the Lifedrinker invocation and their Channel Divinity up (which will result in adding CHA twice to both attack and damage; without Hexblade, it's STR+CHA to both attack and damage), or a fine question highly subject to DM rulings, as with Magic Stone.
Speaking of which, it is not a "settled" question what happens when you fire a Magic Stone from a sling, which is another one of those weird situations like the ones chicken_champ was alluding to, where we don't have one single consensus ruling the world over. A magic stone fired from a sling satisfies the definition of a ranged weapon attack and a ranged spell attack simultaneously, and there's no actual rule saying it can't be both - even though the rules are written to assume it can't be both.
This might be the biggest one: you just assume a thrown longsword uses Dex, but the PHB on page 14 says you use Str. Most DMs agree it is Dex, I think, but your spreadsheet implies it's unambiguous, and it is not.
1. I forgot about Armor Model, I added it now. 2. I left out UA (Is it UA? I don't remember anymore) 3. I Ignored abilities that added an ability mod only to attack rolls or only to damage rolls, also the lifedrinker invocation deals damage by itself, you don't add it to the damage roll (eg. you can't crit with it) 4. The PHB at the "Choose Equipment" section does say that but also says the ability mods are tied to the type of attack "Modifiers to the Roll"
3. You can't ever crit with ability mod damage, since it's a flat number, not a die, but also you're incorrect - Lifedrinker uses the word "extra", which is the magic word necessary. This does matter for resistance - Lifedrinker's damage adds to the total before resistance is applied, as opposed to being resisted separately, because of the word "extra".
4. Yes, exactly my point. A DM has to pick which rule to obey.
Improvised thrown weapon is 1d4, not 1d4+strength unless you have tavern brawler feat giving you profiencey in improvised weapons then gives the plus strength.
Improvised thrown weapon is 1d4, not 1d4+strength unless you have tavern brawler feat giving you profiencey in improvised weapons then gives the plus strength.
That’s not true at all. Proficiency only lets you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll. Your strength bonus is always added to the damage of a melee weapon attack, unless a rule says otherwise (like Two Weapon Fighting).
[EDIT] I wasn’t really paying attention to the thrown bit, just assume whichever ability score is relevant to the situation!!
Improvised thrown weapon is 1d4, not 1d4+strength.
You are correct that the improvised weapon rule never actually says you include your strength modifier when throwing an improvised weapon. However, because it also never contradicts the general rule that you add your strength modifier to the damage roll when making a melee weapon attack (as Saga says), then it implicitly follows the rule.
Improvised thrown weapon is 1d4, not 1d4+strength unless you have tavern brawler feat giving you profiencey in improvised weapons then gives the plus strength.
An improvised throwing weapon will be 1d4+dexterity assuming your DM follows the rule in the PHB that's also in the SAC about basing the ability modifier on the attack. If your DM follows the rule in the PHB about basing the ability modifier on the weapon, then and only then you're correct and the weapon won't get a modifier at all, but so far as I know 0 DMs actually do this.
In the case of a player: "I, in a game in which a necromancer wore two shrunken heads by the ends of their manes, gave them life, and launched them like biting balls. I missed the launch and ran out of heads"
My decision as a Dungeon Master
would be an improvised weapon then if they hit, the bite damage would be applied, or abilities that have if they stick to the body, etc etc In those cases you have to shape the rules and take them to the context. In this case it would be the rules of the improvised weapon plus whatever those heads have...
In that case the dexterity modifier would be added to the attack and the proficiency modifier would only be applied if proficient with a weapon such as the Bolas.
Capito, grazie mille (Undertood, thank you a bunch)
True but somewhat irrelevant as there aren't any weapons capable of making a ranged weapon attack that have finesse and lack thrown.
Everyone else seems to have ignored this since the specific of the discussion have changed in the 18 months since I posted that. But since you called me out specifically:
It absolutely does make a difference if someone is making an attack with intent to harm vs not attacking without intent to harm. Where in the rules does it say that every physical contact needs to be an attack? Where in my comment did I imply that was the case? And why are you bringing up such an irrelevant idea in a discussion of whether attacks you make add your ability modifiers to damage you deal?
Of course! I was referring to improvised weapon attack. If a melee weapon has the thrown property it was specifically designed to make ranged attack with it and therefore it would not be improvised at all.
I agree with TheSast monsters statblocks are not good rule references. Any discrepencies to the rule can be attributed to Specific vs General.
3. You can't ever crit with ability mod damage, since it's a flat number, not a die, but also you're incorrect - Lifedrinker uses the word "extra", which is the magic word necessary. This does matter for resistance - Lifedrinker's damage adds to the total before resistance is applied, as opposed to being resisted separately, because of the word "extra".
4. Yes, exactly my point. A DM has to pick which rule to obey.
Improvised thrown weapon is 1d4, not 1d4+strength unless you have tavern brawler feat giving you profiencey in improvised weapons then gives the plus strength.
That’s not true at all. Proficiency only lets you add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll. Your strength bonus is always added to the damage of a melee weapon attack, unless a rule says otherwise (like Two Weapon Fighting).
[EDIT] I wasn’t really paying attention to the thrown bit, just assume whichever ability score is relevant to the situation!!
You are correct that the improvised weapon rule never actually says you include your strength modifier when throwing an improvised weapon. However, because it also never contradicts the general rule that you add your strength modifier to the damage roll when making a melee weapon attack (as Saga says), then it implicitly follows the rule.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
True that. My bad.
An improvised throwing weapon will be 1d4+dexterity assuming your DM follows the rule in the PHB that's also in the SAC about basing the ability modifier on the attack. If your DM follows the rule in the PHB about basing the ability modifier on the weapon, then and only then you're correct and the weapon won't get a modifier at all, but so far as I know 0 DMs actually do this.
My decision as a Dungeon MasterREFERENCE:
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/phb/equipment#ImprovisedWeapons
An improvised weapon doesn’t need thrown tag to be thrown. That’s the only thing that doesn’t quite work here