D&D 5E Dual hand crossbows, poison and hex warlock

[CapnZapp]

No it wouldn't, it'd be a blank list [emoji14]
Mechanically dual crossbows is inferior to a single one in every way.
Thematically...

As to the "realism": there's a reason there exists a "101 ways to reload a crossbow without a hand free" thread.

Perhaps you two are discussing something different than what I am discussing?

Otherwise get back to me.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Le me be clear: The Sage says

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/sageadvice_feats

It doesn't talk about two hand crossbows here, just the one.

And if shooting nine (9) times in the space of six seconds with one the same hand crossbow doesn't qualify as "semiautomatic", I don't know what will.

I don't like that anybody gets 9 attacks in 6 seconds, particularly in the incremental turn-based rounds of the game. I think it's too much period. I understand why, from a balance standpoint, they've opted to go that route, but it's just not my thing. So I've changed that for all such attacks.

Not sure why you bring up the loading and/or ammunition keywords. Nothing about them change the fact that shooting one and a half bolt per second on average is completely RAW.

Because I think part of the confusion comes from the fact that the feat allows you to ignore the "loading" property, but you still need two hands to load a crossbow. Maybe it's just me.

---

You don't mention anything re: how it at first blush appears Crossbow Expert allows you to wield a scimitar, say, in one hand and a hand crossbow in the other, much like this:

View attachment 87425

Only it doesn't support this at all.

You can shoot your hand crossbow once, but then you have no free hand to reload it.

Exactly, that's how it does support it. There's nothing in that picture that says they will take more than one shot with the hand crossbow. As I've said, crossbows are actually slower loading in my campaign, because my expectation is that for any type of crossbow, if you're closing for melee, then you'll shoot the crossbow, drop it, and engage in melee.

(It's the same with twin hand crossbows, but unlike some other postsres, you don't seem to like it, so let's not bring it up here)

I don't have any problem with twin hand crossbows, just the idea that you can load them while you're holding both of them.

The only sustainable way to use Crossbow Expert (meaning round after round with no object interaction shenanigans) is if the weapon you're using for your main Attack(s) is the same hand crossbow you're then using for the bonus action attack granted by the feat.

How is that not bad?

By the same token, you could say that two-weapon fighting is bad, since it forces you to use your off-hand for the second attack, so you can't use a shield. Well, duh.

Because it's not bad or good. It just is. To load a crossbow, of any sort, requires a free hand. You're not a "Crossbow and Scimitar Expert," you're a "Crossbow Expert.

So here's the problem. You're looking at a "cool" character design - oh look, somebody wielding a sword and a hand-crossbow - and assuming the rules are (or should be) designed to support that.

Guess what? The rules don't support this either: http://imgur.com/8XALNZQ You just can't wield two greatswords, as cool (or absurd) as it looks.

To me, I look at the rules, and see the designers looking at a real weapon - a crossbow - and writing rules that work with that weapon. They modified the rate of fire to balance it with other weapons, and to keep things simple (I'm sure they didn't want to get into multiple-round loading, and even requiring a bonus action to reload is more than is needed to keep them simple).

You insist that they aren't crossbows, except the rules treat them like they are. That they require you to cock the bow and load the ammunition. If they were intending to design the rules to support that character, or one wielding two hand crossbows, they would have designed the rules differently.

I don't know what to say to "If you follow the rules, it does not usurp two-weapon fighting at all, nor remove the reasons for melee, etc., etc."

I have clearly and on multiple occasions demonstrated that the character with a single hand crossbow and the SS and CE feats work perfectly well in melee (he is NOT inconvienienced in the slightest by either being in melee himself or shooting into melee).

OK, and I have some issues with this, and altered the rules accordingly.

Furthermore this combo does two-weapon fighting BETTER than actual two-weapon fighting!

Except that you're not using two weapons. I think that's where you lose me. If you're saying that these together allow you to use a single weapon and get an extra attack using a bonus action that's better than the extra attack using a bonus action with two weapons, OK. But that's not doing two-weapon fighting better, that's doing better with one weapon than the two-weapon fighter is with two.

Here's the complete list of advantages for Drizzt the TWF:er.
- gets to make one opportunity attack per round when people leave his reach
- gets to use d8 weapons instead of d6 weapons
- has one feat slot open

Here's a partial list of advantages for the guy wielding a single hand crossbow.
- effective "reach" of 120 ft
- can attack the guy next to you just as well as the guy a hundred feet away (even if he's partially hidden behind a rock - you ignore cover bonuses). This saves you a tonne of movement, and pretty much ensures you will always have a foe to shoot at. (Drizzt, like all melee builds, always risks having the next foe be "too far away).
- you get to pick the best fighting style in the game: +2 to all attacks from Archery!
- you still get to enjoy the benefits of Two Weapon Fighting even though you never take that fighting style: CE grants you your Dex modifier to damage on the bonus action attack!
- you can use this with -5/+10 (from SS). Drizzt can never combine two-weapon fighting with greatweapon mastery!

AND I am following all the rules!

How does this not usurp two-weapon fighting, Ilbranteloth?!

And how does this not "remove the reasons for melee" - you get to do melee with no drawbacks AND you still got great range AND you can do TWF:ing better than Drizzt AND you can even combine it with "greatweapon mastery"!!!

Except you're doing it with one weapon, right? Because that's where I think you lost me in the last post.

Not sure what I can say.

The specific thing on twin hand crossbows - yes, I agree with that other poster that it would be cool if it was allowed.

But that's an incredibly minor point.

I'm not sure even what you're trying to say here. It vaguely sounds like you're defending the status quo but I will let you read my arguments (above) and you can get back to me if you now still don't agree there's something monumentally wrong with Crossbow Expert in every level concievable.

I was confused about your statement that fighting with hand crossbows does "two-weapon fighting" better than "two-weapon fighting" when we seemed to agree, that RAW, you can't use two hand crossbows for more than one round.

But you were comparing the capabilities of using one hand crossbow against two-weapon fighting. So now it makes sense.