Sage Advice (18 May 2015)

I can't believe they went that way with hand crossbows.

 

[Obryn]

So just to see if I get this right - you can cast a spell requiring a free hand for somatic components while holding weapon+shield or a 2-handed weapon. But you can't load a hand crossbow.

And the only non-controversial part of the feat - rapier+xbow - is now verboten, while single hand crossbow is now fine. And double hand crossbow, despite being mechanically identical (or even weaker if you have a magic xbow) is out.

 

[Jester David]

Yes!

I dunno; maybe my table likes over-the-top stuff (we really do), so we've never questioned the idea of dual-wielding hand crossbows, even if, in reality, it wouldn't work. Why? Because it's awesome. And that pretty much sums up the entirety of my table and gaming philosophy. If I think it's awesome, I'm probably going to allow it.

Which is great. I hope you enjoy your game. I really do. But over-the-top makes for a poor baseline. And if the baseline is more restrained, it allows you to bend the rules to make things feel more awesome.

 

[El Mahdi]

It doesn't actually bother me that the hand crossbow is weaker than other weapons.

I don't think this is the case though. It has the same damage as a hand-axe, a javelin, quarterstaff, and scimitar and short sword. That's not bad for a little bitty piece of wood.

That Ruling makes the Hand-Crossbow advantage useless. Also the only advantage the Hand-Crossbow has to his bigger Cousins is that it is one-handed, which is moot if you need two hands to operate.

No it doesn't, it just makes it useless for those hoping to get an advantage over and above other weapons. You can still shoot with dual-wielded crossbows, it's just that you can only reload one of them and fire again in the same round. That means a potential three-attacks per round with a hand-crossbow. You can't do that with its bigger cousins.

This ruling simply keeps it from vastly overshadowing two-weapon fighting and other rules of the game. Now something like a self-loading hand crossbow means something again, or it opens things up for a player to devise a clever device that reloads and recocks without using a free-hand (just the hand holding the crossbow).

Realistic AND Cool! The Best of Both Worlds!

 

[El Mahdi]

So just to see if I get this right - you can cast a spell requiring a free hand for somatic components while holding weapon+shield or a 2-handed weapon. But you can't load a hand crossbow.

And the only non-controversial part of the feat - rapier+xbow - is now verboten, while single hand crossbow is now fine. And double hand crossbow, despite being mechanically identical (or even weaker if you have a magic xbow) is out.

No, I don't think that's right.

First, this sage advice column said nothing about not being able to load if you're holding a shield or another weapon.

As DM in my games, I have no problem envisioning someone pulling a little hand crossbow bolt out of its quiver or pouch with a couple of fingers, and even placing it in the crossbow and cocking it. That's what the crossbow expert feat means, you are Expert at loading very quickly and very agilely.

It's also certainly not outside the realm of reality for a player to have their extra ammunition stored on the inside of their shield.

Ruling not Rules, but I think the clarifications earlier about somatic components opens this up to the same ruling.

The same as being able to load, I don't believe this makes rapier+xbow verboten.

And dual-wielding is not out either. What's out is re-shooting both hand-crossbows in the same round, and repeating round after round. You can potentially get three-attacks in one round: shoot your loaded right-hand hand-crossbow with an attack, shoot your loaded left-hand hand-crossbow with an extra-attack, reload one of them using your Crossbow Expert Feat and shoot again using a bonus action.

Next round, however, all you're going to be able to do is shoot twice with one of them, simply because you need that hand (whether holding a shield or weapon, or not) to do your Expertly Fast reload. And you can still attack with that rapier.

 

[Coredump]

Then by RAW the MC "spell slots" rule would allow your Wizard/Sorcerer MC character to use the Cleric spell they gained from the feat in other slots. But only if they MC, a pure Wizard or pure Sorcerer couldn't.

Nope, because the MC Wiz/Sorc still doesn't have a rule that says "You can use your spell slots for cleric spells".

The only way you can use MI for cleric spells and use it in you spell slots, is to have at least 1 level of cleric.

 

[Obryn]

No it doesn't, it just makes it useless for those hoping to get an advantage over and above other weapons. You can still shoot with dual-wielded crossbows, it's just that you can only reload one of them and fire again in the same round. That means a potential three-attacks per round with a hand-crossbow. You can't do that with its bigger cousins.

This ruling simply keeps it from vastly overshadowing two-weapon fighting and other rules of the game. Now something like a self-loading hand crossbow means something again, or it opens things up for a player to devise a clever device that reloads and recocks without using a free-hand (just the hand holding the crossbow).

Realistic AND Cool! The Best of Both Worlds!

Where are you getting that? Per this ruling, a single hand crossbow gets the same number of attacks as folks were thinking dual hand crossbows did. The offensive power of the feat has not been reduced at all.

 

[Oldtimer]

Not quite following the Lucky bit with disadvatnage - are they saying you can pick between any of the three d20s, effectively turning disadvantage into advantage? Or picking between the lowest of the first two and the new roll?

I had to read it several times, but my conclusion is that they left out one important word "and then decide which two of the three dice to use." Then the disadvantage will eat the highest of those two.

 

[Coredump]

No, I don't think that's right.

First, this sage advice column said nothing about not being able to load if you're holding a shield or another weapon.

As DM in my games, I have no problem envisioning someone pulling a little hand crossbow bolt out of its quiver or pouch with a couple of fingers, and even placing it in the crossbow and cocking it. That's what the crossbow expert feat means, you are Expert at loading very quickly and very agilely.

No.. the feat means what the feat says it means. You can't just add new meanings because you think it 'sounds right'.
Yes, you are the DM, you can 'rule' that Polearm master means you are really good with polearms and thus always attack with advantage. But you can't say that is part of the feat in the book.

He says you need a *free* hand. A hand holding a shield is not a 'free hand'. A hand holding another handbow is not a 'free hand'. A hand holding a rapier is not a 'free hand'.

 

[El Mahdi]

Where are you getting that? Per this ruling, a single hand crossbow gets the same number of attacks as folks were thinking dual hand crossbows did. The offensive power of the feat has not been reduced at all.

Not quite.

Folks were saying that they could dual-wield two hand crossbows, shoot both of them each round, and reload and re-shoot each of them each round (using extra attacks and a bonus attack) for a possible four shots each and every round.

In reality, they can get three-shots in one round with pre-loaded hand-crossbows, and then two per round thereafter.

 

[Coredump]

I had to read it several times, but my conclusion is that they left out one important word "and then decide which two of the three dice to use." Then the disadvantage will eat the highest of those two.

Sorry but.... this clarification matches what he has said on twitter, and matches the RAW of the rules in the book. I think its a simple RAW ruling.