D&D 5E [MERGED] Various crossbow/dual-wielding threads

[maritimo80]

With the Crossbow expert feat and Dual wielder I think you can us both crossbows in both hands. I

I would say yes to having a crossbow in one hand and in a sheld in the other but I would also say you could only get one shot off and thus drop the shield to load the Crossbow.

Yes you can use a Short sword and crossbow in each hand. If you have the Deul Wielder Feat.

If your carrying another weapon in one hand I would say no to reloading.

I think you want to refer to the Crossbow expert feat.

C r o s s b o w E x p e r t
Thanks to extensive practice with the crossbow, you
gain the following benefits:
• You ignore the loading quality o f crossbows with
which you are proficient.
• Being within 5 feet o f a hostile creature doesn’t
impose disadvantage on your ranged attack rolls.
• When you use the Attack action and attack with a onehanded
w eapon, you can use a bonus action to attack
with a loaded hand crossbow you are holding.

Duel Wielder:
You master fighting with two weapons, gaining the
following benefits:
• You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a
separate melee weapon in each hand.
• You can use two-weapon fighting even when the onehanded
melee w eapons you are wielding aren’t light.
• You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when
you w ould normally b e able to draw or stow only one.

Hope that helps


Scott

That his explanation left me with even more questions.
A character without the feat Crossbow Expert, you can:
1 Using a crossbow in one hand and a shield in the other?
2 It can recharge the beast with one hand, or need both hands?

Already a character with the feat Crossbow Expert, you can:
3 Shoot with Bous action not charged with a crossbow? (In feat he speaks clearly: "When you use the Attack action and attack with a onehanded
weapon, you can use the bonus action to attack with a loaded crossbow hand you are holding.)
4 It can recharge the beast with one hand, or need both hands?
5-He can use a hand crossbow in each hand? How would reload them?

In my opnion the Duel Wielder feat would not help in this particular case, because it serves to use light weapons are not in two weapon fighting.

 

[Plaguescarred]

That his explanation left me with even more questions.
A character without the feat Crossbow Expert, you can:
1 Using a crossbow in one hand and a shield in the other?
2 It can recharge the beast with one hand, or need both hands?


Already a character with the feat Crossbow Expert, you can:
3 Shoot with Bous action not charged with a crossbow? (In feat he speaks clearly: "When you use the Attack action and attack with a onehanded
weapon, you can use the bonus action to attack with a loaded crossbow hand you are holding.)
4 It can recharge the beast with one hand, or need both hands?
5-He can use a hand crossbow in each hand? How would reload them?


In my opnion the Duel Wielder feat would not help in this particular case, because it serves to use light weapons are not in two weapon fighting.

The rules don't say you need a free hand to recharge a crossbow like 4E did. So unless your DM say otherwise, even without Crossbow Expert feat you should be able to recharge a hand crossbow while your other hand wield a weapon or shield.

1. Yes, if its a hand crossbow only though as other crossbows require two hands to use.
2. One hand, presumably the hand using the hand crossbow.
3. The feat says the crossbow must be loaded.
4. One hand, presumably the hand using the hand crossbow.
5. Yes, since hand crossbow are one handed weapons.

 

[Henrix]

Under ammunition, drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack.

So if you only use one hand to attack with the weapon, then you reload the weapon with the same hand as part of attacking with it.

I expect to see a youtube clip up soon where you demonstrate how that is supposed to be done.


Even without the feat you ought to be able to show the principle.

 

[Xodis]

Seems easy enough to think that regardless what your non-crossbow hand is holding, you can spare a finger or two to assist in the reloading operation, and if duel wielding Hand Crossbows switch them both to one hand, put a finger in each loop to charge it, load your bolts and pop it over back to the original hand. Overall I think the "looser" design of allowing it makes crossbows a weapon worth taking finally. Those who want to break it down into mechanics or argue about the nature of ambiguous rules are literally doing the opposite of what the designers intended. They created this game so you can just play the way you want to play, not get bogged down in all the crunch.

 

[Paraxis]

I expect to see a youtube clip up soon where you demonstrate how that is supposed to be done.


Even without the feat you ought to be able to show the principle.

So now we are supposed to provide youtube clips demonstrating things in a fantasy game?

The game doesn't have to make sense at all ever, it just has to follow the rules.

So it doesn't matter if a halfling monk that is 2'10'' tall and has a 6 strength can push a dragon 15' feet away from him, or a dagger can damage a giant meaningfully, it is a game. I highly doubt someone in the real world could shoot a medieval crossbow 5 times in 6 seconds while moving 30 feet and aiming at 5 different targets, but you can in D&D(level 20 fighter with feat and using action surge).

There are rules, follow them, when they don't make sense to you just say "rule of cool" or "magic" like when people make movies and tv shows, it is not about real life but entertainment.

 

[Piratecat]

I think to many people give the designers to much credit for leaving things vague intentionally, I think it is just a sad excuse for not designing a solid mechanically balanced game. People should not be praised for doing no work, leaving things vague is just a side effect of them not caring about the math and balance.

I'll solidly disagree on this one, both in general (as a DM, I vastly prefer being trusted to use my judgment on this sort of thing) and in specific (they very much care about the math and balance; you perhaps not liking the results doesn't make that not true.)

That's probably a separate thread, though. And it's definitely a different philosophy of game design, with more specific rules arriving in 3e.

 

[Henrix]

The game doesn't have to make sense at all ever, it just has to follow the rules.

Or perhaps the rules have to make sense.

 

[Piratecat]

Or perhaps the rules have to make sense.

It's the old question of simulation vs emulation, right? Torchbearer is probably as close to a simulation as you'll find in a RPG; you track every arrow, every ration, every torch. D&D is unabashedly an emulation. You're making swords and sorcery, and the game doesn't care how you describe things so long as they're fun, they work, and they make sense in context -- and then it leaves that latter part up to the DM to decide.

 

[Leatherhead]

The entire point of the Crossbow master feat is to allow the character to get multiple attacks with a crossbow per turn. It is also intended to let you use two weapons at the same time, if one of those weapons is a hand crossbow.

It defeats the purpose of the feat if you don't let them reload a hand crossbow while their other hand is occupied.

If you are having that much trouble with the verisimilitude, consider the feat representing them being skilled enough to hold a crossbow bolt and a weapon in the same hand for the second, or fraction thereof, while they reload. Or perhaps the character is just really good at juggling.

As for me, I wouldn't even require a hand, that just limits character concepts needlessly.


Oh, and that crossbow-hand thing is a warforged component called the Armbow.

 

[Li Shenron]

The rules don't say you need a free hand to recharge a crossbow like 4E did. So unless your DM say otherwise, even without Crossbow Expert feat you should be able to recharge a hand crossbow while your other hand wield a weapon or shield.

Once again, this is your adjudication.

I can say the opposite, that since the rules don't say so then you shouldn't be able to. Just to say, the rules also don't say you need legs in order to jump, so if your legs are bound or cut off, you should be able to jump at no penalty? The rules don't say you specifically need eyes to see, just technically you need not be blinded, and since AFAIK the blinded condition doesn't mention plucking someone's eyes out, then doing so doesn't make you "blinded" and you can see at no penalties? The rules don't say you need your head to be alive, so if a trap chops your head off but doesn't specify how many HP damage, then technically you're at full HP and keep going?

If you don't want to bother about keeping track of how many hands are busy/free, it's ok, but that's not a universal or "correct" answer to this problem.

Anyway it should be clear to everyone by now that there are people who care about the RAW first, others who care about gamist dynamics, and others who care about some narrative sense, and they'll never agree with each other about HOW to do it, if they don't agree about WHAT is the purpose to achieve.