Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Pauper" data-source="post: 7695072" data-attributes="member: 17607">What seems to be happening is that Crawford is highlighting that the phrase 'melee attack' and 'ranged attack' by themselves are not game terms -- a character does not make a 'melee attack'. A character makes a melee weapon attack (with a melee weapon, a ranged weapon via the Improvised Weapon rules*, or with an unarmed strike -- which isn't a weapon), or a melee spell attack (with a spell). The presumption is thus that the type of attack determines which statistic you use for the attack and damage rolls, unless some other specific rule (such as finesse or two-weapon fighting) says otherwise.* - This is why it's significant that Crawford notes that you add your proficiency bonus with a weapon with which you are proficient for melee weapon attacks and ranged weapon attacks. Most characters aren't proficient with improvised weapons, and thus some melee weapon attacks and ranged weapon attacks won't get the benefit of proficiency when made with an improvised weapon.Based on the chart and the rules in the SRD, therefore, it's reasonable to rule that a character throwing a mace (a melee weapon without the Thrown property) would use Dexterity on the attack roll (since the attack is a ranged weapon attack), would not add proficiency (unless that character is proficient with improvised weapons), and would add Dexterity to the 1d4 damage roll (since the chart says you add your Dexterity modifier to the damage rolls of ranged weapon attacks).Read 'ranged weapon attack' as 'ranged non-spell attack', and it might make more sense.--Pauper</blockquote>

Verification