Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
I handle repeating weapons by having my players track the number of shots before it requires reloading, and I never ignore it. I have been o own to remind a player they can’t shoot because they didn’t reload
Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
This is an overly strict and (in my opinion) impractical reading of the wording. The ammunition property provides for firing the weapon without having to use a separate action to load the weapon. It does not require they happen together. RAI backs up the position that loading a weapon with the ammunition property as part of firing it is inclusive, not exclusive. After all, if it required a free hand in all circumstances, then the repeating crossbow would fail at its primary reason for existence as you so accurately point out.
Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
This is an overly strict and (in my opinion) impractical reading of the wording. The ammunition property provides for firing the weapon without having to use a separate action to load the weapon. It does not require they happen together. RAI backs up the position that loading a weapon with the ammunition property as part of firing it is inclusive, not exclusive. After all, if it required a free hand in all circumstances, then the repeating crossbow would fail at its primary reason for existence as you so accurately point out.
I disagree on that point, it's primary reason for existence is rate of fire, not freeing up a hand. It's also entirely reasonable to require a free hand to draw the crossbow as well, even if you don't have to load it. I was merely pointing out that if you don't bring it up, no one is likely to care and if someone else brings it up it wouldn't be surprising to get the DM to change it for you.
I disagree on that point, it's primary reason for existence is rate of fire, not freeing up a hand. It's also entirely reasonable to require a free hand to draw the crossbow as well, even if you don't have to load it. I was merely pointing out that if you don't bring it up, no one is likely to care and if someone else brings it up it wouldn't be surprising to get the DM to change it for you.
Reloading? I thought hand crossbows were disposable. Why else would I have a bandolier of 6 of these things pre-loaded?
Oooo, let's see how quickly those bow strings lose power if you are carrying around permanently cocked crossbows.
Or your first failed DEX saving throw, when you accidentally catch the triggers and shoot yourself six times with bolts at point-blank range.
Sounds like you haven't see the latest and greatest in gnomish artifice! May I introduce you to the Ravin R18 vertical cam system!
Using only the finest mithral cabling, and a forward locking bow, your crossbow can sit ready to use indefinitely, while being easy to conceal on your person!
Repeating Weapon ignores the loading property as well.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
Right. I meant that in response to post #45 from Beardsinger, mentioning the Crossbow Expert feat ignoring the loading property.
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand.
Repeating shot says "If you load no ammunition in the weapon, it produces its own..." You clearly have the option to not load it, and if you don't load it the fact that you need a free hand to load it is not relevant.
I disagree on that point, it's primary reason for existence is rate of fire, not freeing up a hand. It's also entirely reasonable to require a free hand to draw the crossbow as well, even if you don't have to load it.
Considering the name of the infusion and the removal of the Loading property, I find that quite unreasonable. The most straightforward interpretation is that the infusion is resetting the mechanism on the weapon for you. I don't see how you can justify the quick rate of fire and absence of Loading if you're still going to require the character to go through the entire loading procedure.
Reloading? I thought hand crossbows were disposable. Why else would I have a bandolier of 6 of these things pre-loaded?
Oooo, let's see how quickly those bow strings lose power if you are carrying around permanently cocked crossbows.
Or your first failed DEX saving throw, when you accidentally catch the triggers and shoot yourself six times with bolts at point-blank range.
Sounds like you haven't see the latest and greatest in gnomish artifice! May I introduce you to the Ravin R18 vertical cam system!
Using only the finest mithral cabling, and a forward locking bow, your crossbow can sit ready to use indefinitely, while being easy to conceal on your person!
GnomeLock: Making Murder Fun!
That weapon is just over 2 foot long and nearly 5 inches wide, still way too big to fit practically in any sort of bandolier.
You have a surprising lack of imagination for someone posting on a forum defined by fantasy.
Reloading? I thought hand crossbows were disposable. Why else would I have a bandolier of 6 of these things pre-loaded?
Oooo, let's see how quickly those bow strings lose power if you are carrying around permanently cocked crossbows.
Or your first failed DEX saving throw, when you accidentally catch the triggers and shoot yourself six times with bolts at point-blank range.
Sounds like you haven't see the latest and greatest in gnomish artifice! May I introduce you to the Ravin R18 vertical cam system!
Using only the finest mithral cabling, and a forward locking bow, your crossbow can sit ready to use indefinitely, while being easy to conceal on your person!
GnomeLock: Making Murder Fun!
That weapon is just over 2 foot long and nearly 5 inches wide, still way too big to fit practically in any sort of bandolier.
You have a surprising lack of imagination for someone posting on a forum defined by fantasy.
I have massive imagination. The solution I normally go with is repeating crossbows with folding bows. But with those, you would need no more than two.
And frankly I would like to see the person with that pistol bandolier actually draw and fire their pistols in combat. Looking cool does not in and of itself prove functionality.
Having a massive imagination means seeing flaws in ideas too.
What your "massive imagination" seems to be missing is the entire joke. Why would crossbows ever be "disposable"? A bandolier of crossbows was never meant to be taken seriously.
If you don't understand the image reference, it's from the would-be movie trilogy, The Boondock Saints.
Reloading? I thought hand crossbows were disposable. Why else would I have a bandolier of 6 of these things pre-loaded?
Oooo, let's see how quickly those bow strings lose power if you are carrying around permanently cocked crossbows.
Or your first failed DEX saving throw, when you accidentally catch the triggers and shoot yourself six times with bolts at point-blank range.
Sounds like you haven't see the latest and greatest in gnomish artifice! May I introduce you to the Ravin R18 vertical cam system!
Using only the finest mithral cabling, and a forward locking bow, your crossbow can sit ready to use indefinitely, while being easy to conceal on your person!
GnomeLock: Making Murder Fun!
"Expand vertically?" So every time you fire you risk getting one of the arms smack into your nose? ;-)
you only get the +2AC (ie: as far as I can tell there are not +1/+2/+3 variants), but my read is that would do what you want ... it just pops up to block in coming attacks. The down side is it takes up an attunement slot.
Late to the show, but I always use the "Rule of History" when thinking about weapon designs.
You see how there are very few examples of "Sword guns or "shield guns"? That's because they were not useful (either practically or logistacally). If they were there would've been a LOT more of them that existed. There are a couple examples of when it was useful and wide spread. For example, polish musket axes (axe guns) or the tried and true bayonet (spear guns). Shield guns? Not so much. One could argue that it might be because a shield is just dead weight if you're facing a pike and shot square, but I digress haha.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Reloading? I thought hand crossbows were disposable. Why else would I have a bandolier of 6 of these things pre-loaded?
Strictly speaking, repeating weapon only allows you to ignore loading, it doesn't allow you to ignore ammunition. It can create it's own ammunition, but since it still has the ammunition property, you technically still have to load it with a free hand. Granted, it probably wouldn't take much effort to get a DM to ignore that (and if you don't mention it, they will probably not even realize in the first place).
I handle repeating weapons by having my players track the number of shots before it requires reloading, and I never ignore it. I have been o own to remind a player they can’t shoot because they didn’t reload
This is an overly strict and (in my opinion) impractical reading of the wording. The ammunition property provides for firing the weapon without having to use a separate action to load the weapon. It does not require they happen together. RAI backs up the position that loading a weapon with the ammunition property as part of firing it is inclusive, not exclusive. After all, if it required a free hand in all circumstances, then the repeating crossbow would fail at its primary reason for existence as you so accurately point out.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I disagree on that point, it's primary reason for existence is rate of fire, not freeing up a hand. It's also entirely reasonable to require a free hand to draw the crossbow as well, even if you don't have to load it. I was merely pointing out that if you don't bring it up, no one is likely to care and if someone else brings it up it wouldn't be surprising to get the DM to change it for you.
Oooo, let's see how quickly those bow strings lose power if you are carrying around permanently cocked crossbows.
Or your first failed DEX saving throw, when you accidentally catch the triggers and shoot yourself six times with bolts at point-blank range.
Fair enough. We see things differently.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Sounds like you haven't see the latest and greatest in gnomish artifice! May I introduce you to the Ravin R18 vertical cam system!
Using only the finest mithral cabling, and a forward locking bow, your crossbow can sit ready to use indefinitely, while being easy to conceal on your person!
GnomeLock: Making Murder Fun!
Right. I meant that in response to post #45 from Beardsinger, mentioning the Crossbow Expert feat ignoring the loading property.
Repeating shot says "If you load no ammunition in the weapon, it produces its own..." You clearly have the option to not load it, and if you don't load it the fact that you need a free hand to load it is not relevant.
Considering the name of the infusion and the removal of the Loading property, I find that quite unreasonable. The most straightforward interpretation is that the infusion is resetting the mechanism on the weapon for you. I don't see how you can justify the quick rate of fire and absence of Loading if you're still going to require the character to go through the entire loading procedure.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
You have a surprising lack of imagination for someone posting on a forum defined by fantasy.
What your "massive imagination" seems to be missing is the entire joke. Why would crossbows ever be "disposable"? A bandolier of crossbows was never meant to be taken seriously.
If you don't understand the image reference, it's from the would-be movie trilogy, The Boondock Saints.
"Expand vertically?" So every time you fire you risk getting one of the arms smack into your nose? ;-)
Animated Shield
you only get the +2AC (ie: as far as I can tell there are not +1/+2/+3 variants), but my read is that would do what you want ... it just pops up to block in coming attacks. The down side is it takes up an attunement slot.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/4571-animated-shield
Late to the show, but I always use the "Rule of History" when thinking about weapon designs.
You see how there are very few examples of "Sword guns or "shield guns"? That's because they were not useful (either practically or logistacally). If they were there would've been a LOT more of them that existed. There are a couple examples of when it was useful and wide spread. For example, polish musket axes (axe guns) or the tried and true bayonet (spear guns). Shield guns? Not so much. One could argue that it might be because a shield is just dead weight if you're facing a pike and shot square, but I digress haha.