It would be easier if they just called it 'melee attack' rather than 'melee WEAPON attack'
Then you would have "melee attacks" and "weapon attacks", which have some overlap but are different things.
D&D 5E Errata Unarmed Strike
- Thread starter maritimo80
- Start date
It would be easier if they just called it 'melee attack' rather than 'melee WEAPON attack'
Then you would have "melee attacks" and "weapon attacks", which have some overlap but are different things.
DJCupboard
Explorer
Awesome! Now to release errata for the errata.
Inconnunom
Explorer
Yea that should have been an actual errata fix. Instead of lumping everything under the sun into "melee weapon attack".
epithet
Explorer
"Melee attack" would include a melee spell attack, which is (I suspect) the most important distinction. They don't want the buffs and abilities that can enhance melee weapon attacks to apply to, for example, shocking grasp.
Inconnunom
Explorer
Or Melee spell attack could be changed to Spell Melee Attack? hahaha English.
evilbob
Explorer
Yeah the confusion is the difference between "weapon" and "weapon attack." They contain the same word but are specifically different for the purposes of the game.
Thus, a monk's unarmed strike isn't a "weapon."
But it IS a "weapon attack." (Of the melee variety.)
Thus, things that apply to "weapons" - like magic weapon - can't apply to an unarmed strike. But things that apply to weapon attacks - like stunning strike (in this case specifically a melee weapon attack) - can.
In a meta-sense, it makes no sense: how can something make a weapon attack when it's not a weapon? But that is how unarmed strike works for the purposes of the game.
Thus, a monk's unarmed strike isn't a "weapon."
But it IS a "weapon attack." (Of the melee variety.)
Thus, things that apply to "weapons" - like magic weapon - can't apply to an unarmed strike. But things that apply to weapon attacks - like stunning strike (in this case specifically a melee weapon attack) - can.
In a meta-sense, it makes no sense: how can something make a weapon attack when it's not a weapon? But that is how unarmed strike works for the purposes of the game.
Or just define a 'melee spell attack' as a 'melee attack' but not a 'weapon attack' (Falling into the same category as the monk's unarmed strike). After all, they are sort of similar is that you are using a body part to inflict harm, in one case a punching fist, in the other a light finger touch.
Just to clarify:
Melee attack = any attack where one creature touches another creature, either directly or with a weapon, generally adjacent to the target (but there may be exceptions to this in the rules somewhere).
Weapon attack = any attack where the attacker uses a weapon to strike their target.
Ranged attack etc.
Spell attack etc.
Now you have a system that sort of fits their current thinking.
Melee attack = any attack where one creature touches another creature, either directly or with a weapon, generally adjacent to the target (but there may be exceptions to this in the rules somewhere).
Weapon attack = any attack where the attacker uses a weapon to strike their target.
Ranged attack etc.
Spell attack etc.
Now you have a system that sort of fits their current thinking.
Fralex
Explorer
Wait, what makes natural weapons different from regular weapons or unarmed strikes?
Inconnunom
Explorer
Just different. They are not finesse, light, two-handed etc. You can't be disarmed. You can't use it for unarmed strike nor sneak attack.
I don't know if you can enchant them with spells like Shillelagh or Magic Weapon. I would be surprised if you could. Anyone have rulings cited?
Last edited:
Similar Threads
- Poll
AD6_gamerati_skyscraper
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
April 16 2024 -
May 31 2024 -
June 3 2024 -
June 4 2024 -
June 18 2024 -
July 16 2024 -
September 17 2024 -
October 1 2024 -
November 12 2024 -
February 18 2025
