D&D 5E Shield Attacks and AC Bonus

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
Wrong. The rules are not being ignored. They are being extended based on a reasonable reading and interpretation of exosting rules and using personal judgement on how it might be reflected at a game table mechanically. Clearly the reading that has been proposed by myself and others is reasonable since multiple people have demonstrated that it is a fair interpretation of the rules, just as your interpretation has been judged by others to be reasonable and fair. However, the claim that a reading that is not in agreement to your reading, to use your own words, outlandish.

Besides, who are you to say any of us are wrong? Last I checked, you didn't design or build this system. You have no right to state what is right or wrong or fair or not. You can do that for your own table and play experience, but not assume so over other players or groups.

Words have meaning. Saying an improvised weapon that doesn’t resemble a weapon does 1d4 means exactly what it says. There’s no way around that. An apple seed doesn’t resemble a weapon and so will do 1d4 damage. Ruling otherwise is a house rule. I’m all for that house rule but let’s call things what thy are.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Words have meaning. Saying an improvised weapon that doesn’t resemble a weapon does 1d4 means exactly what it says. There’s no way around that. An apple seed doesn’t resemble a weapon and so will do 1d4 damage. Ruling otherwise is a house rule. I’m all for that house rule but let’s call things what thy are.

I think there may be a question as to whether you can wield an apple seed.
 

Hawk Diesel

Adventurer
Words have meaning. Saying an improvised weapon that doesn’t resemble a weapon does 1d4 means exactly what it says. There’s no way around that. An apple seed doesn’t resemble a weapon and so will do 1d4 damage. Ruling otherwise is a house rule. I’m all for that house rule but let’s call things what thy are.

So an apple seed is just as deadly as a dagger? Is that what you're saying? Man, I really hope you don't get cornered in an alley and feel safe because you have an appleseed and some lint in your pocket to protect you.

Get outta here man. I'm done.

What about a chainsaw? Does a chainsaw resemble a weapon? Would that only deal a d4? What about a wrecking ball? Lets be a bit more liberal on that one and say its kinda like a flail and give it a d8.

You are making it really hard for me to maintain civility.
 
Last edited:

Dausuul

Legend
Improvised weapons are defined in the first paragraph. Please refer there for what qualifies. Hint it doesn’t say dms decision.

What it does say: "Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin."

An object that cannot be wielded in one or two hands does not qualify as an improvised weapon. That leaves it up to the DM to decide what can be "wielded," which is more than enough gray area to justify a ruling of "You cannot 'wield' an apple seed. What the hell would that even mean?"
 

Hawk Diesel

Adventurer
Ya know what? Let's take it a bit further. A boulder would be an improvised weapon. So I guess if a giant throws that it would only deal 1d4 damage since it doesn't resemble a weapon. Wait, lets be generous. 2d4, since its a bigger creature. That boulder will instantly crush a person dead, but it's only mildly concerning for anyone over level 2. Sure. That makes sense.
 

Hriston

Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
[MENTION=6798760]Strider1973[/MENTION], I just wanted to add a few things to what I already posted in reply to you, to clarify some of my thinking. Since you're already going outside the rules to allow a shield to qualify as a light weapon for the purpose of two weapon fighting and to give the character a bonus action for, I presume, an extra 2 average damage, I think you're on the right track to impose a penalty in exchange. Taking away the shield's bonus to AC makes sense in that regard, but it seems like too stiff a penalty without getting at least a bonus attack made with proficiency that does 4 average damage. So I'd recommend either a lighter penalty (maybe -1 to AC) or a more robust bonus attack.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
So an apple seed is just as deadly as a dagger? Is that what you're saying? Man, I really hope you don't get cornered in an alley and feel safe because you have an appleseed and some lint in your pocket to protect you.

Get outta here man. I'm done.

What about a chainsaw? Does a chainsaw resemble a weapon? Would that only deal a d4? What about a wrecking ball? Lets be a bit more liberal on that one and say its kinda like a flail and give it a d8.

You are making it really hard for me to maintain civility.

I’m just saying what the rules say. Maybe it’s the rules you dislike. Me I’m fine hiuseruling all those things because I like house rules.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
What it does say: "Sometimes characters don't have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin."

An object that cannot be wielded in one or two hands does not qualify as an improvised weapon. That leaves it up to the DM to decide what can be "wielded," which is more than enough gray area to justify a ruling of "You cannot 'wield' an apple seed. What the hell would that even mean?"

I can wield an apple seed in one hand. That bit of sophistry doesn’t resolve the seemingly poorly thought out 5e improvised weapon rules.
 



Remove ads

Top