Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 7513186" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>The second paragraph spells out the first two levels. You treat it as the weapon damage if it's "similar". And then "At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object [at proficiency bonus]". </p><p></p><p>To me, the DMs option is saying "DM decides - is it so similar that it's 'as if it were that weapon' (the language of the rule)?" If yes, may use proficiency. If on the other hand it's not <strong>that</strong> high level of similar but still similar, than don't use proficiency. Regardless, use the weapon damage die for all levels of similarity.</p><p></p><p>Third paragraph is the third category - "An object that bears no resemblance". </p><p></p><p>5e uses natural language in the rules, and intentional DM flexibility for judgement calls in those rules. The natural language of "bears no resemblance" is to me "it's nothing at all like". And the natural language of "as if it were that weapon" is to me "it's almost the same." And, obviously there is something between "it's nothing at all like" and "it's almost the same" and the rules offer a suggestion on how to rule that middle ground - with a DM's call on whether or not you can use your proficiency bonus. </p><p></p><p>That's how I read this rule. And I don't think it's at all a stretch (in fact I have no dog in this fight - this hasn't come up at my table that I can recall). This is how I read a lot of 5e rules, and based on reactions I see here and at reddit and on how the authors explained their thinking on various rules like stealth, I think this is how the authors intended rules like this to be used...with a flexible range of how to handle things and a lot of DM judgement calls as to where something falls withing that range. It's pretty rare that the rules give you only an on or off resolution. Where it can be done, the authors usually provided more than just those two types of rulings for the DM to make. And that's what I think they did with this set of rules.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 7513186, member: 2525"] The second paragraph spells out the first two levels. You treat it as the weapon damage if it's "similar". And then "At the DM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object [at proficiency bonus]". To me, the DMs option is saying "DM decides - is it so similar that it's 'as if it were that weapon' (the language of the rule)?" If yes, may use proficiency. If on the other hand it's not [B]that[/B] high level of similar but still similar, than don't use proficiency. Regardless, use the weapon damage die for all levels of similarity. Third paragraph is the third category - "An object that bears no resemblance". 5e uses natural language in the rules, and intentional DM flexibility for judgement calls in those rules. The natural language of "bears no resemblance" is to me "it's nothing at all like". And the natural language of "as if it were that weapon" is to me "it's almost the same." And, obviously there is something between "it's nothing at all like" and "it's almost the same" and the rules offer a suggestion on how to rule that middle ground - with a DM's call on whether or not you can use your proficiency bonus. That's how I read this rule. And I don't think it's at all a stretch (in fact I have no dog in this fight - this hasn't come up at my table that I can recall). This is how I read a lot of 5e rules, and based on reactions I see here and at reddit and on how the authors explained their thinking on various rules like stealth, I think this is how the authors intended rules like this to be used...with a flexible range of how to handle things and a lot of DM judgement calls as to where something falls withing that range. It's pretty rare that the rules give you only an on or off resolution. Where it can be done, the authors usually provided more than just those two types of rulings for the DM to make. And that's what I think they did with this set of rules. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Shield Attacks and AC Bonus
Top