D&D 5E Sharpshooter

Colder said:

You make a fine point, but what little research I've done on the matter leads me to believe that the historical basis for D&D's darts have more in common with javelins than the bar game. I can live with that.

Click to expand...

D&D darts IRL are small javelins used off horseback.


Handcrossbows are a modern weapon. They could have been built earlier but there was no point to them.

Zardnaar said:

D&D darts IRL are small javelins used off horseback.


Handcrossbows are a modern weapon. They could have been built earlier but there was no point to them.

Click to expand...

They were somewhat popular.

You can't climb with no hands.

And you can assassinate someone through open window if you climb up the wall.

On battlefield they were utter rubish but they could have found work in urban area. Easier to put under cloak, light,

Jester David said:

I disagree.
The table is just their for organisation's sake.

Click to expand...

And I believe that organization serves a useful (and interesting) purpose.

Jester David said:

They couldn't have two entries for dagger.

Click to expand...

I disagree. They could have easily have made two entries for dagger, or any of the other thrown weapons, if they wanted to. It would have been wasteful, mind. They could have also easily made a third category for weapons considered to be both melee weapons and ranged weapons, that would have been less wasteful and more supportive of the way you view things.

Jester David said:

Daggers and darts are almost mechanically identical. There's no strong reason why you can use Sharpshooter with one and not the other.

Click to expand...

If throwing a dagger causes said dagger to become a ranged weapon, then there's no reason why you can't use Sharpshooter with them. The thrown property doesn't change a melee weapon into a ranged weapon, though. In a similar sense, a monk could not stab someone with a dart and then use their Martial Arts granted bonus action unarmed strike.

Jester David said:

I like how you say "any table playing under default 5e rules" like there's some kind of magic table where DMs never have to make rulings or judgement calls on rules. Like there's a theoretical table where DMs has to abide by the strict lawyer reading of the rules.

Click to expand...

There is such a theoretical table. Everyone (with perhaps the exception of really dedicated playtesters or obsessively strict rule adherers) deviates from the rules of such a table. That the game is flexible enough to handle any number of changes from the rules of this theoretical table is a strength of the game. The fact that almost no one plays by these rules in practice is irrelevant when it comes to telling someone what those rules actually say.

Sage Advice has already clarified that there are functional rules differences between melee weapons and ranged weapons, and that one does not become the other no matter how it's used. A thrown axe may make a ranged attack, but it's still a melee weapon by category, not a ranged weapon. Rules that refer to "ranged attacks" apply to it, but rules that refer to "ranged weapons" do not.

You are, of course, welcome to ignore that if you're the DM at your table, but if you're looking for an official RAW/RAI answer, that's it.

Mouseferatu said:

Sage Advice has already clarified that there are functional rules differences between melee weapons and ranged weapons, and that one does not become the other no matter how it's used. A thrown axe may make a ranged attack, but it's still a melee weapon by category, not a ranged weapon. Rules that refer to "ranged attacks" apply to it, but rules that refer to "ranged weapons" do not.

Click to expand...

Thanks for all the feedback.
I guess it boils down to whether for Sharpshooter the first paragraph (You have mastered ranged weapons and can make shots that others find impossible.) over-rides the interpretation of the benefits outlined below this paragraph.

If the first paragraph does not over-ride the benefits then I agree with using the first 2 bullet points with any weapon that you make a ranged weapon attack with and that the 3rd bullet point is only usable with those classified (by the weapons tables) as ranged weapons.

If the first paragraph does over-ride the bullet points, then the bullet points only apply to ranged weapons (according to the weapons tables).

So ... the question is ... Does the first paragraph over-ride the bullet points?

VAPygott said:

Thanks for all the feedback.
I guess it boils down to whether for Sharpshooter the first paragraph (You have mastered ranged weapons and can make shots that others find impossible.) over-rides the interpretation of the benefits outlined below this paragraph.

If the first paragraph does not over-ride the benefits then I agree with using the first 2 bullet points with any weapon that you make a ranged weapon attack with and that the 3rd bullet point is only usable with those classified (by the weapons tables) as ranged weapons.

If the first paragraph does over-ride the bullet points, then the bullet points only apply to ranged weapons (according to the weapons tables).

So ... the question is ... Does the first paragraph over-ride the bullet points?

Click to expand...

No. The first paragraph is flavour text and has no actual rules-mechanical content.

I would allow it as throwing is cool and both under supported and underpowered

The first paragraph does not, in this case, override the bullet points.

Now, moving away from what the rules say for a moment...

In my opinion, that first paragraph is the effective cause for a given character being able to now do what the feats allows for in the bullet points. Which is to say, because a given character- through training, practical experience, magic, etc- has managed to master ranged weapons to the point that they can make shots other find impossible, they gained the ability to:

-Strike targets at any range they can effectively hit without the difficulties normal people would have due to distance.

-Strike targets at any range they can effectively hit without the difficulties normal people would have due to protective obstructions.

-Using weapons designed specifically to be used at ranged, strike targets at any range they can effectively hit to much greater effect than others, albeit at a significant decrease in accuracy.

Cap'n Kobold said:

Eh. Its what the actual rules say.

Click to expand...

Aye, I was trying to compliment him not only for being correct, but also precise, while showing his reasoning. And while being called a rules lawyer might seems like an insult, I also gave his post XP to counter that perception. Though I guess I could've also added a to make the compliment clearer.

VAPygott said:

So ... the question is ... Does the first paragraph over-ride the bullet points?

Click to expand...

What [MENTION=6803170]FarBeyondC[/MENTION] said