D&D 5E An issue with the Tavern Brawler feat

[ad_hoc]

Regarding your earlier wizard example: you would treat the wooden pillar was a greatclub if the character was proficient with a greatclub. Since the wizard is not proficient, it's treated as an improvised weapon, i.e., it does 1d4 damage, even after you whittle it's handle down. In a sense, Tavern Brawler does provide proficiency with all weapons in that the Brawler can swing or throw any of them, with proficiency and for 1d4 damage.

As for why one would use weapons rather unarmed strike, you can't do piercing, slashing, or fire damage with unarmed strike.

So you are facing a tavern brawler in a tavern. They break a bottle and are now attacking you with the pointy end of a broken bottle. You are not scared because it is the same as using their fists.

The only benefit they get is that they can throw it at you. But then you're in a tavern so that isn't going to happen anyway.

Also, they later pick up a table and hit you with it. Whatever, it's only 1d4 damage, the same as their fist.

Another example, a giant hits you with a rock for 4d10 damage. You enlarge yourself and throw the rock back. But darn, it's an improvised weapon so it only does 1d4 damage.

 

[CapnZapp]

I must be completely failing to communicate here.

I specifically do not want the Tavern Brawler feat to effectively grant proficiency with all weapons, because that is overpowered and (I am certain) entirely unintended.

However, the rules explicitly state that:
1) Any object that strongly resembles an actual weapon can, if wielded as an improvised weapon, be treated as the actual weapon
2) Tavern Brawlers are proficient with improvised weapons.

Therefore, if a Tavern Brawler picks up something that (the DM decides) resembles a greatsword and wields it as an improvised weapon, they get proficiency with it and treat it as a greatsword to do 2d6 damage. If this is accepted, then it is absurd to say that something that looks like a greatsword can be used with proficiency but an actual greatsword can not. That is the problem.

I prefer to rule point 1) above the way it reads, because that makes more sense to me. Because I prefer that ruling, point 2) above catches me out and opens the door to a side effect where the TB feat is too broad.

My solution to this <snip>

Again, I am baffled. Why interpret the rules in a way that creates a problem you don't want, requiring you to start adding houserules?

I specifically do not want the Tavern Brawler feat to effectively grant proficiency with all weapons

Then I have good news! It doesn't.

See - problem solved!

Okay, okay, so let me point out where you had bad luck thinking about this...

You seem to operate under the assumption the rules entitle players to use "objects that strongly resemble greatswords" as actual greatswords, and then go on concluding Tavern Brawlers then must be given proficiency with actual greatswords, or they'll get the bizarre proficiency "with stuff looking like greatswords but not, well, greatswords".

But what if you as the DM were to try this: do not hand out items that resemble greatswords that strongly?

Think about it.

 

[CapnZapp]

All right, I see where you're coming from. Because the language of the rule specifies that, if the DM rules an object sufficiently similar to a weapon to be used as such, you add your proficiency modifier, but does not explicitly add "if you are proficient with that weapon," you take that to mean that it provides the bonus regardless.

To me, it is clearly intended not to, but I can see why you would rule otherwise.

What I can't see is why you would do so even when you see the exploit that it creates. If you are really concerned about it, all you have to do is rule the other way.

First off: while I think you aren't on the same planet as ccookie, Rune; I know I'm not on either of those two planets...?

What is "clearly not intended" here?

I fail to see why this is even a thing. How difficult can it be? (And the answer is "very" )

Of course, if a Wizard finds a not-Greatsword that the DM says is a Greatsword, he is still not proficient with the weapon.

Unless he's a tavern brawler, which makes him proficient in all improvised weapons! Woohoo!

But no - the thing is that being proficient with improvised weaponry should pretty naturally not extend your normal range of proficiencies!

What the feat gets you is the bog-standard improvised weapon (the d4 weapon described in the PHB).

If the DM then plays nice, you could get to use that piece of dwarven machinery as a Longsword.

But it goes without saying that you only want this if you're proficient with the Longsword!

Any other interpretation indeed leads to absurdity and headache. So the easiest solution is to not interpret the rules that way.

Remember, you're not entitled to not-Longswords. There's nothing in the feat that says you get more than the d4 weapon. You only get not-Longswords if the DM gives them to you. And so you don't give them to people that lack proficiency.

 

[BryonD]

However, the rules explicitly state that:
1) Any object that strongly resembles an actual weapon can, if wielded as an improvised weapon, be treated as the actual weapon

These words do not appear in the rules.

The rules state that if an improvised weapon adequately resembles an actual weapon, it may be wielded as that weapon. This is completely different than treating it as that weapon WHILE wielding it as an improvised weapon.

One of them is a correct reading of the words as written.

The other is your modification of what is written.

so, again, the bottom line is: if an item adequately resembles a greatclub then any given character may choose to wield it as a great club, in all ways OR they may choose to wield it as an improvised weapon in all ways.

 

[CapnZapp]

But what if you as the DM were to try this: do not hand out items that resemble greatswords that strongly?

Think about it.

I thought about it more myself

...and I think I see what your problem is.

As a DM you need to run the game this way:

Only those tavern brawlers that are proficient with greatswords can and will see those "strong resemblances" in their misshapen lumps of scrap to "actual greatswords". And then only when you the DM are in a generous mood.

You don't have Tavern Brawler? Then you don't see the resemblance.

You have Tavern Brawler but don't know how to use a greatsword? Then you don't see the resemblance either.

This all comes to the word "can" in the PHB rules text.

It means you, the DM, is in control. No player can or should feel entitled to spot the resemblance themselves.

Remember, the feat does not mean the character gets to use not-Greatswords in every bar brawl. Only sometimes. Or even just that once!

And if you don't know how to handle a real Greatsword, chances are you won't spot things that could work just like Greatswords either. You would instead go "well, it looks like a shortsword, but it's far too large, so it's probably unusable..."

This way, we're still completely rules-legit. And no house rules needed.

 

[CapnZapp]

These words do not appear in the rules.

The rules state that if an improvised weapon adequately resembles an actual weapon, it may be wielded as that weapon. This is completely different than treating it as that weapon WHILE wielding it as an improvised weapon.

One of them is a correct reading of the words as written.

The other is your modification of what is written.

so, again, the bottom line is: if an item adequately resembles a greatclub then any given character may choose to wield it as a great club, in all ways OR they may choose to wield it as an improvised weapon in all ways.

I appreciate your help, but I feel you're coming up short too.

Your argument takes us back to square one, where Tavern Brawling is worthless: where you only need the Improvised Weapons rules section.

The desired end result is this:

If the DM is cool with it, and you have proficiency, and you're a tavern brawler, then you can use dead goblins as greatclubs in all respects (proficiency, greatclub damage, greatclub weapon properties).

If the DM isn't cool with it then your dead goblin is just a sad sack of d4 damage. The DM should generally not be cool with it if: you don't have proficiency with greatclubs or you don't have the Tavern Brawler feat.

At least let's see if we all can agree this is what we WANT the rules to say. Then what's left is squint hard enough to make it possible to read the PHB this way...

 

[Fanaelialae]

I must be completely failing to communicate here.

I specifically do not want the Tavern Brawler feat to effectively grant proficiency with all weapons, because that is overpowered and (I am certain) entirely unintended.

However, the rules explicitly state that:
1) Any object that strongly resembles an actual weapon can, if wielded as an improvised weapon, be treated as the actual weapon
2) Tavern Brawlers are proficient with improvised weapons.

Therefore, if a Tavern Brawler picks up something that (the DM decides) resembles a greatsword and wields it as an improvised weapon, they get proficiency with it and treat it as a greatsword to do 2d6 damage. If this is accepted, then it is absurd to say that something that looks like a greatsword can be used with proficiency but an actual greatsword can not. That is the problem.

I prefer to rule point 1) above the way it reads, because that makes more sense to me. Because I prefer that ruling, point 2) above catches me out and opens the door to a side effect where the TB feat is too broad.

My solution to this (which I came to after starting this thread) is to rule that the TB feat allows you to use the simplest melee or thrown use of any weapon you are not proficient with. You can't use the finesse or reach properties of a weapon (if you do, you lose your proficiency bonus because you are not trained with that weapon) and if it's a versatile weapon you can only use it two handed (because grabbing something in two hands and waving it at people seems (to me) to be less of a trained thing that successfully fighting with shield and boathook long-term)

While I can see how it might be read that way, I think you're misinterpreting what the rules are saying. What you seem to be reading is that if using an improvised weapon that closely resembles a weapon, you can use it as that weapon AND ALSO as an improvised weapon.

The way I read it (and believe it was intended) is that if you are using an improvised weapon that closely resembles a weapon, you can use it as that weapon OR ELSE as an improvised weapon.

You don't get to cherry pick what applies. Otherwise, you get into ridiculous situations such as Tavern Brawlers who can suddenly hurl "Greatsword-like" objects up to 60 ft for 2d6 damage, which was clearly never intended.

 

[BryonD]

I appreciate your help, but I feel you're coming up short too.

Sorry, wasn't reading your posts, so I wasn't trying to "help". You are welcome for the happenstance.

Your argument takes us back to square one, where Tavern Brawling is worthless: where you only need the Improvised Weapons rules section.

The desired end result is this:

If the DM is cool with it, and you have proficiency, and you're a tavern brawler, then you can use dead goblins as greatclubs in all respects (proficiency, greatclub damage, greatclub weapon properties).

If the DM isn't cool with it then your dead goblin is just a sad sack of d4 damage. The DM should generally not be cool with it if: you don't have proficiency with greatclubs or you don't have the Tavern Brawler feat.

At least let's see if we all can agree this is what we WANT the rules to say. Then what's left is squint hard enough to make it possible to read the PHB this way...

The improvised weapons section says nothing about being proficient with improvised weapons.
Tavern brawler says that you are.
The improvised weapons section simply says to skip the part about them being "improvised" at all IF they are close enough to a weapon you are proficient with. But that is only "if".

I see no problem.

 

[CapnZapp]

The improvised weapons section says nothing about being proficient with improvised weapons.
Tavern brawler says that you are.
The improvised weapons section simply says to skip the part about them being "improvised" at all IF they are close enough to a weapon you are proficient with. But that is only "if".

I see no problem.

Since you don't follow through with the specific language, allow me to expand.

Do you, as the DM, allow, if you judge a thing to be "close enough", just about anyone to use that thing exactly like a weapon (such as the greatclub) including proficiency bonus if proficient?

Because if so, that is the problem.

If, on the other hand, you still don't allow the proficiency bonus even when you rule the thing is close enough to the real weapon, unless the person is a tavern brawler and has the proficiency, then we're good.

 

[Rune]

What is "clearly not intended" here?

Here we go again. As I've said a few times, the language of the improvised weapon rules strongly implies (to me) that an object that is used as a weapon does not automatically grant proficiency in it (even though they do not explicitly say so).

Specifically, the text reads that such an object "can be treated as" the weapon. If that weapon is one that the weilder is not proficient in, the logical inferrence is that the improvised weapon (and, yes, the rules still imply that such an object still is) is not intended to grant a proficiency bonus to someone who isn't proficient with the weapon being resembled.

This is really the crux of the entire issue. All of the other arguments going on in this thread are incidental, because, if the improv weapons rules do not grant automatic proficiency, their mechanical significance goes away.

Even if (in my head at least) it makes no narrative sense that a greatsword could be used as a greatclub (because physics), the mechanics of the game don't care, because the character isn't getting any free bonuses; the only thing gained is the ability to effectively not be without a weapon with which s/he is proficient.

Tavern brawler doesn't care because it resets the damage to 1d4, even if a weapon is being improvised as another weapon (specific beats general). Sure you're proficient at everything. At 1d4.