D&D 5E Hs anyone else noticed this shifter wrinkle?

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
If the DM starts rocking attacks from 31ft in a case like this he's probably a terrible person and he should feel bad. It's bad enough when players get gamey like that, but it's worse when DMs do it. I am categorically not saying that monsters shouldn't have tactics and strategy, because they should, but targeting a character as described above is crap DMin IMO.. If a DM felt that strongly about the rule he should just disallowed it, not engage in petty revenge.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


overgeeked

B/X Known World
If the DM starts rocking attacks from 31ft in a case like this he's probably a terrible person and he should feel bad. It's bad enough when players get gamey like that, but it's worse when DMs do it. I am categorically not saying that monsters shouldn't have tactics and strategy, because they should, but targeting a character as described above is crap DMin IMO.. If a DM felt that strongly about the rule he should just disallowed it, not engage in petty revenge.

I will never understand that thinking. The players will literally spend hundreds of dollars to get access to all the books to find every loophole to exploit it to the Nth degree, with entire forums dedicated to character and strategic optimisation...and that’s a perfectly valid and reasonable and good way to play. But the DM avoids a melee powerhouse and attacks from range and he’s a naughty word DM? naughty word.
 

Fenris-77

Small God of the Dozens
Supporter
@overgeeked - Avoiding the melee powerhouse and attacking at range is a very different thing than specifically messing with the 30' range of a character ability. You might have noticed I specifically mentioned that I'm all for monsters having tactics and whatnot right?

I'd also argue that pairing two abilities that work with advantage isn't really exploiting the rules to the Nth degree. You don't need white room stats to make that connection. What constitutes loophole exploitation is probably an entirely separate conversation though.
 


I am almost positive that Jeremy Crawford did a sage advice where smites do not apply to unarmed and natural attacks, but only weapons.
The smite spells require a weapon. The smite ability requires a melee weapon attack, and unarmed strikes count as a melee weapon attacks (as opposed to "an attack with a melee weapon"). So RAW you can smite (or use battlemaster abilities etc) with the bite.
 


The smite spells require a weapon. The smite ability requires a melee weapon attack, and unarmed strikes count as a melee weapon attacks (as opposed to "an attack with a melee weapon"). So RAW you can smite (or use battlemaster abilities etc) with the bite.

Yes. I wasn't even aware that it was in question, honestly. The text says, "instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike." A bite is an unarmed strike, an unarmed strike counts explicitly as a melee weapon attack, and the smite feature keys off of melee weapon attacks. I just glanced at a smite spell and even it says "weapon attack" instead of actually requiring a weapon.
 

Given that you have to expend resources and ditch two bonus actions to do this I suspect it won't be much a problem in practice. An awful lot of fights are over in in under five rounds in 5E. So you'd need to judge well the time to do this. Still, nice synergy.
 


Remove ads

Top