Rogue and Longsword

[MThurston]

If rogues can't use sneak attack with Longsword, why are they able to use them?

Don't say for the sunblade.

[Mikal]

Fine. For the Moonblade. :smallwink:
It has the ability to be a finesse weapon after all.

[Morty]

My guess is that no one thought about the weapon proficiencies and lists very long or at all. Though they weren't proficient with them in 3E, so the usual reason of "that's what people are used to" doesn't apply. Maybe it's a holdover from some earlier playtest version of the rules.

[GlenSmash!]

It's a legacy Proficiency. In my game I'd let a Rogue take Whip instead of Longsword.

[Misterwhisper]

If rogues can't use sneak attack with Longsword, why are they able to use them?

Don't say for the sunblade.

Sunblades can also be used as a shortsword, so even that point does not really work.

To put a long rant short, because they did nothing but throw the weapon and proficiency section together and moved on without a second though.

For weapons it was more of: "We don't want them to do 'X' anymore so lets cut that out"
For just about everything else it was: "Ok, we want to add the ability to do 'x' so let's throw that in".

[BobZan]

Why should rogues be able to use only weapons that can be used with sneak attack?

[Misterwhisper]

Why should rogues be able to use only weapons that can be used with sneak attack?

You could give them proficiency with all martial weapons it wouldn't matter, if they can't use it for their own class abilities why would they ever use it.

Why they are not proficient with longbows or whips is what I find odd.

[Lalliman]

Why should rogues be able to use only weapons that can be used with sneak attack?
Because if that was the rationale, they would be proficient with all martial weapons. But the developers went out of their way to give longsword proficiency as the only non-finesse martial weapon. That's weird.

[stoutstien]

I turn it into one Martial weapon of choice. my guess is that they originally had longswords finessed but realized the problems with it and just forgot to change it.

[Tanarii]

Tradition. Rogues being able to use magic longswords in classic & ad&d was a huge thing. Mearls was harking back that far with a lot of things in 5e. He's that old school.

[Knaight]

Because if that was the rationale, they would be proficient with all martial weapons. But the developers went out of their way to give longsword proficiency as the only non-finesse martial weapon. That's weird.

The Grey Mouser could use a longsword. Sure, he probably could use a lot of the other weapons as well, but the typical depiction is longsword, daggers, sling. It's much the same way that the development of the ranger class can be pretty much explained with "because Aragorn" or "because Drizzt" depending on which edition you're looking at, or the Barbarian class can be explained with "because Conan".

[Arkhios]

Why should rogues be able to use only weapons that can be used with sneak attack?

This. Also, Longsword is easily reflavored as a katana, making a ninja fairly plausible option at only face value as an assassin for example. Katana is hardly a sneak attack weapon anyway. Finesse is also debatable.


That said, I see absolutely no problems with letting rogues treat a longsword as a finesse instead of versatile weapon. Only difference compared to rapier would be weight and damage type. Imho, nothing to be worried about.

[LudicSavant]

It’s a legacy proficiency. Which is a nice way of saying “they probably didn’t think about it much.”

[Arkhios]

It’s a legacy proficiency. Which is a nice way of saying “they probably didn’t think about it much.”

In all honesty, I agree with BobZan. There's absolutely no reason why rogues should have proficiency only with weapons that can be used with Sneak Attack. While Sneak Attack is the "backbone" of a rogue's damage potential, you shouldn't confine a class into their mechanical implications.

For example a paladin, while clearly many od their features indirectly imply a strength focus over dexterity (for example heavy armor proficiency and multiclass requirements), nothing stops you from focusing on dexterity instead.

[Misterwhisper]

In all honesty, I agree with BobZan. There's absolutely no reason why rogues should have proficiency only with weapons that can be used with Sneak Attack. While Sneak Attack is the "backbone" of a rogue's damage potential, you shouldn't confine a class into their mechanical implications.

For example a paladin, while clearly many od their features indirectly imply a strength focus over dexterity (for example heavy armor proficiency and multiclass requirements), nothing stops you from focusing on dexterity instead.

Something does stop the rogue, they can’t sneak attack with non-finesse melee weapons.

[Morty]

It is true that the question is ultimately academic because the only real difference between using a longsword and a rapier is the possibility of wielding the former two-handed for a d10 damage dice.

[Sigreid]

Could be handy for fitting in to polite society to demonstrate proficiency with the nobels' side arm of choice.

[JackPhoenix]

Something does stop the rogue, they can’t sneak attack with non-finesse melee weapons.

You can't sneak attack without a buddy or a source of advantage either, and without shield, you may as well go for the 1d10 option.

[Misterwhisper]

You can't sneak attack without a buddy or a source of advantage either, and without shield, you may as well go for the 1d10 option.

You can sneak attack while wielding a shield, nothing against that other than they are not proficient.

Cunning Action is there to give you better chance for sneak attack, or as a swashbuckler just be the only guy in range, but still won’t help you with that long sword.

Rogues only keep up on damage if they can sneak attack every round, and even then it does not keep up very well due to their damage being an all or nothing one attack, it makes up for it if you crit, which having advantage helps with, elven accuracy even more so.

If someone is planning to use a long sword they should not be playing a rogue.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Something does stop the rogue, they can’t sneak attack with non-finesse melee weapons.

"Can't use" and "Can't sneak attack with" are not the same thing.

[Misterwhisper]

"Can't use" and "Can't sneak attack with" are not the same thing.

That would be like saying that the wizard does not have to cast spells.

The example used was paladins using dex weapons even though they can wear plate. It is not even close to the same thing, a rogue with a long sword can not use their main class feature.

That is keeping you from using one, sure you can swing it if you want but you are borderline pointless to combat at that point. Literally every class can outfight you.

A more accurate comparison would be if a paladin lost all spell slots if they were not on plate.

[JackPhoenix]

That would be like saying that the wizard does not have to cast spells.

The example used was paladins using dex weapons even though they can wear plate. It is not even close to the same thing, a rogue with a long sword can not use their main class feature.

That is keeping you from using one, sure you can swing it if you want but you are borderline pointless to combat at that point. Literally every class can outfight you.

A more accurate comparison would be if a paladin lost all spell slots if they were not on plate.

Paladin or barbarians can't use their class features... smite or rage... with ranged weapons, that doesn't stop them from using a longbow if they need to hit something out of their reach.

And for many wizards, using a crossbow or longbow is better than cantrips for the first 4 levels.

For a rogue, using a longsword is better than any other weapon they have if they have sufficient strength (Strogues are a thing, though mostly multiclassed) and can't use sneak attack for some reason.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm going to come down on both sides of this. In favor of rogues having longsword proficiency include:

Not everything available to XYZ are required to be optimized. Elves also get longswords, yet have a Dex bonus.
It is iconic. For those of us who played oD&D w/ Greyhawk, or 1e, or 2e (or B, B/X or BECMI if you count the 'sword' as equivalent to the 5e 'longsword'), having rogues with longswords is iconic.
Not just iconic, it is a callback. Kind of like having a Red Mage in a modern Final Fantasy game, or somesuch.
5e was designed to bring old and new players to the same game
Rogues are the infiltrator class. Being able to not completely embarrass oneself with one of the most common sidearms in medieval society aids in any kind of fake identity.
Strogues exist, and there could be occasions where it might be the right tactical choice (you weren't going to get your SA dice anyways, etc.)
Using one isn't a permanent choice or expenditure (or even like a spell chosen by bard or sorcerer, etc., where it can be rechosen next level but is a semi-permanent choice). You literally just drop the longsword and pick up your trusty rapier or hand crossbow. It's there if you find a use for it, and not when you don't.

On the other hand...

But having a Str high enough that you would ever really consider doing so is a long-term choice--one a rogue would probably not choose to do if not multiclassing (excluding campaigns without multiclassing, but you won't see many Strogues in those).
The designers could have figured something vaguely different to do with longswords if they had wanted to see lots of longsword-wielding rogues around, and chose not to.
Most rogues who find that they aren't getting to SA most rounds tend to spend effort figuring out how to do so, rather than putting up with being a mobile-but-low-damage combatant (not sure if the designers realized how much this would be the case).
Clerics are no longer using slings and maces. Longsword, Composite Longbow and Two Handed Sword are no longer the only weapons worth having (if you have the option to get them). A lot has changed since oD&D/AD&D.


So I kinda am okay with it, but I also think they could have found a way for it to work with the rogue class features better (in which case I'd actually rather have SA not be such a class-dominating class feature for rogues, but there's a completely different topic...).

[Misterwhisper]

I'm going to come down on both sides of this. In favor of rogues having longsword proficiency include:

Not everything available to XYZ are required to be optimized. Elves also get longswords, yet have a Dex bonus.
It is iconic. For those of us who played oD&D w/ Greyhawk, or 1e, or 2e (or B, B/X or BECMI if you count the 'sword' as equivalent to the 5e 'longsword'), having rogues with longswords is iconic.
Not just iconic, it is a callback. Kind of like having a Red Mage in a modern Final Fantasy game, or somesuch.
5e was designed to bring old and new players to the same game
Rogues are the infiltrator class. Being able to not completely embarrass oneself with one of the most common sidearms in medieval society aids in any kind of fake identity.
Strogues exist, and there could be occasions where it might be the right tactical choice (you weren't going to get your SA dice anyways, etc.)
Using one isn't a permanent choice or expenditure (or even like a spell chosen by bard or sorcerer, etc., where it can be rechosen next level but is a semi-permanent choice). You literally just drop the longsword and pick up your trusty rapier or hand crossbow. It's there if you find a use for it, and not when you don't.

On the other hand...

But having a Str high enough that you would ever really consider doing so is a long-term choice--one a rogue would probably not choose to do if not multiclassing (excluding campaigns without multiclassing, but you won't see many Strogues in those).
The designers could have figured something vaguely different to do with longswords if they had wanted to see lots of longsword-wielding rogues around, and chose not to.
Most rogues who find that they aren't getting to SA most rounds tend to spend effort figuring out how to do so, rather than putting up with being a mobile-but-low-damage combatant (not sure if the designers realized how much this would be the case).
Clerics are no longer using slings and maces. Longsword, Composite Longbow and Two Handed Sword are no longer the only weapons worth having (if you have the option to get them). A lot has changed since oD&D/AD&D.


So I kinda am okay with it, but I also think they could have found a way for it to work with the rogue class features better (in which case I'd actually rather have SA not be such a class-dominating class feature for rogues, but there's a completely different topic...).

The complete lack of any subclass that gives a fighting style or second attack I find a much bigger issue, and the fact that Bard got a subclass with both, the whole time MM calling it "swashbuckler" through playtest because he knew he was just ripping off a rogue subclass, did not help.

Even wizards have a better melee subclass.

[Arkhios]

Something does stop the rogue, they can’t sneak attack with non-finesse melee weapons.

It doesn't stop the rogue. It only stops a player with a mindset similar to yours. You clearly can't see yourself playing a character in a way that is suboptimal even the slightest. But that's fine.
In other words, I'm not saying it's #badwrongfun. Just that our personal preferences ≠ RAI. We can't possibly know what they had in mind (a.k.a. Rules As Intended) unless they have explicitly spelled it out. Until then, we have the RAW to go by and make our decisions based on them. If you decide not to wield a longsword as a rogue, then don't. The End.

[MThurston]

In all honesty, I agree with BobZan. There's absolutely no reason why rogues should have proficiency only with weapons that can be used with Sneak Attack. While Sneak Attack is the "backbone" of a rogue's damage potential, you shouldn't confine a class into their mechanical implications.

For example a paladin, while clearly many od their features indirectly imply a strength focus over dexterity (for example heavy armor proficiency and multiclass requirements), nothing stops you from focusing on dexterity instead.

I find this to be unplayable.

Flavor all you want. A rogue with a Longsword and nothing else is a waste of a character. Unless of course the Longsword has finesse.

[MThurston]

It doesn't stop the rogue. It only stops a player with a mindset similar to yours. You clearly can't see yourself playing a character in a way that is suboptimal even the slightest. But that's fine.
In other words, I'm not saying it's #badwrongfun. Just that our personal preferences ≠ RAI. We can't possibly know what they had in mind (a.k.a. Rules As Intended) unless they have explicitly spelled it out. Until then, we have the RAW to go by and make our decisions based on them. If you decide not to wield a longsword as a rogue, then don't. The End.

SMH.

So you believe that one should play a wizard that never casts spells. Just for the roleplay purposes?

Yes the rogues of old used Longsword but they were also able to S.A. with it.

Limiting S.A. to finesse weapons was a bad move. A better rule would have been non heavy weapons or versatile weapons besides the longsword.

[Morty]

It doesn't stop the rogue. It only stops a player with a mindset similar to yours. You clearly can't see yourself playing a character in a way that is suboptimal even the slightest. But that's fine.
In other words, I'm not saying it's #badwrongfun. Just that our personal preferences ≠ RAI. We can't possibly know what they had in mind (a.k.a. Rules As Intended) unless they have explicitly spelled it out. Until then, we have the RAW to go by and make our decisions based on them. If you decide not to wield a longsword as a rogue, then don't. The End.

It's not "suboptimal in the slightest". It's willingly depriving yourself of the rogue's central combat feature. It's like playing a fighter who never makes more than one attack per round.

Even if a rogue uses strength, a longsword doesn't give them anything that using a rapier and declining to use the finesse tag wouldn't. It's just sloppy.

[Sigreid]

This isn't really any different than my wizard having proficiency in crossbow. It's definately not optimal for him to use one, but that doesn't mean it isn't good to have an option for a rare circumstance such as in an anti magic or silence zone.

[Arkhios]

I find this to be unplayable.

Flavor all you want. A rogue with a Longsword and nothing else is a waste of a character. Unless of course the Longsword has finesse.

It's no less playable than a cleric using a longsword. One attack, deals 1d8 or 1d10 + your strength of slashing damage. Just because Longsword doesn't have finesse, it doesn't make rogue with a longsword unplayable. May I suggest you to double-check the meanings of the words before you use them?


SMH.

So you believe that one should play a wizard that never casts spells. Just for the roleplay purposes?

Yes the rogues of old used Longsword but they were also able to S.A. with it.

Limiting S.A. to finesse weapons was a bad move. A better rule would have been non heavy weapons or versatile weapons besides the longsword.

Did I say that? No. I did not say you should play a wizard that never casts spells. Likewise, I did not say that you should play a rogue that always uses a weapon that doesn't qualify for sneak attack. Never did. Never won't. Just because you choose to have a sub-optimal weapon and use it occasionally doesn't mean your character will suddenly explode and thus become unplayeable.

Why be so black-and-white with this issue? If you don't like the idea of using a longsword as a rogue, then don't use it. Or, if you absolutely want to and still benefit from S.A., you could petition your DM to allow to treat the longsword as a finesse weapon instead of versatile (if it was both, it would be a bit too much, balance-wise).

[BobZan]

If you guys dislike a Rogue using a Longsword, use another weapon. It's very easy.

I never used a dart as a Wizard and have no idea how it could synergize with his abilities and didn't made a great deal about it anyway.

I guess that when the game was designed they didn't look how optimal and great is every feature combined with all other things.

Don't use the Longsword, give it to the Paladin.

[Arkhios]

It's not "suboptimal in the slightest". It's willingly depriving yourself of the rogue's central combat feature. It's like playing a fighter who never makes more than one attack per round.

Even if a rogue uses strength, a longsword doesn't give them anything that using a rapier and declining to use the finesse tag wouldn't. It's just sloppy.

It's not sloppy. Comparing rapier and longsword, the other is finesse and the other is versatile. In other words, regarding what I said earlier, if longsword was both finesse and versatile, it would be far stronger than any other weapon of its relative size and purpose. Besides, longsword isn't the only weapon rogue is proficient with that doesn't qualify for sneak attack: Rogue is proficient with all simple weapons:

Simple melee weapons without finesse property: Club (Light), Greatclub (Two-handed), Handaxe (Light, thrown), Javelin (Thrown), Light Hammer (Light, thrown), Mace (—), Quarterstaff (Versatile), Sickle (Light), Spear (Thrown, versatile).

Simple ranged weapons (all qualify, because they are ranged weapons, but anyway): Crossbow, Dart, Shortbow, Sling.

Why Longsword is a problem, when almost all simple melee weapons (dagger being the only exception) rogues are proficient with as well are disqualified for Sneak Attack?

[MThurston]

It's not sloppy. Comparing rapier and longsword, the other is finesse and the other is versatile. In other words, regarding what I said earlier, if longsword was both finesse and versatile, it would be far stronger than any other weapon of its relative size and purpose. Besides, longsword isn't the only weapon rogue is proficient with that doesn't qualify for sneak attack: Rogue is proficient with all simple weapons:

Simple melee weapons without finesse property: Club (Light), Greatclub (Two-handed), Handaxe (Light, thrown), Javelin (Thrown), Light Hammer (Light, thrown), Mace (—), Quarterstaff (Versatile), Sickle (Light), Spear (Thrown, versatile).

Simple ranged weapons (all qualify, because they are ranged weapons, but anyway): Crossbow, Dart, Shortbow, Sling.

Why Longsword is a problem, when almost all simple melee weapons (dagger being the only exception) rogues are proficient with as well are disqualified for Sneak Attack?

I want to use 2 clubs as a rogue. Don't get S.A. with them. Sucks!

[Arkhios]

I want to use 2 clubs as a rogue. Don't get S.A. with them. Sucks!

For what it's worth, I agree it's silly that light weapons don't qualify for S.A. but that's besides the point I was trying to make. Longsword isn't 'special' in that it doesn't qualify for S.A. It's just the only martial weapon rogues are proficient with that doesn't.

In fact, I do agree that Finesse property being the key factor to qualify for sneak attack in melee was a bad move, but that's something we can't change if we decide to play by the book. If we make changes to what the books say, we're making houserules and at that point, why not go nuts and change more than just that. :smallbiggrin:

[BobZan]

I want to Smite with a longbow as paladin. Sucks.

There are plenty of stuff one can't do on DnD, that's normal when you're playing a game limited by rules.

Else you could just make a list of your houserules and play that way. It's normal.

To solve your problem, my suggestion: Add Finesse to Longsword and withdraw Versatile.

[MThurston]

For what it's worth, I agree it's silly that light weapons don't qualify for S.A. but that's besides the point I was trying to make. Longsword isn't 'special' in that it doesn't qualify for S.A. It's just the only martial weapon rogues are proficient with that doesn't.

So the only reasons for a rogue to use a Longsword.

1. I has finese

2. It has ###### slaying

3. You don't have another weapon

4. You throw it from hiding because ranged weapons get S.A..

[Misterwhisper]

So the only reasons for a rogue to use a Longsword.

1. I has finese

2. It has ###### slaying

3. You don't have another weapon

4. You throw it from hiding because ranged weapons get S.A..

Throwing it doesn’t work, it is still a melee weapon.

You would literally be better off throwing a rock.

[Arkhios]

So the only reasons for a rogue to use a Longsword.

1. I has finese

2. It has ###### slaying

3. You don't have another weapon

4. You throw it from hiding because ranged weapons get S.A..

Throwing it doesn’t work, it is still a melee weapon.

Indeed. Thrown property isn't same as being a ranged weapon. Plus, Longsword doesn't have the Thrown Property so it would be an improvised weapon if you threw it, and in that situation it would lose any characteristics of a longsword as a weapon.

Take a look at Dart, for example. It's categorized as a ranged weapon, yet it still has explicit mention of being a Thrown weapon (with Finesse property as well, funnily enough).


To solve your problem, my suggestion: Add Finesse to Longsword and withdraw Versatile.

Agreed.

[Willie the Duck]

Agreed. Re-emphasis on my two points "Not everything available to XYZ are required to be optimized," and, "Using one isn't a permanent choice or expenditure." Rogues get lots of things that they aren't going to use except when nothing else is available. In other news: Maces, Tridents, and Padded, Ringmail, Chainmail and
Splint armors exist at all.

Nothing about this debate surprises me. The rules of 5e have absolutely, definitely been set up with positive role and iconic image reinforcement for the rogue (and the druid with the nonmetal armor), even while finally killing the sacred cow of a wizard not being able to cast in armor (if they can find proficiency, through some means). That they went one way with rogues and the other with wizards is a little puzzling.

Heh, I guess I will go into my rant and SA. When 3e rolled out Sneak Attack to replace backstab, it became clear that the rogue class was going to be a dedicated skirmish striker/glass cannon, moving away from the occasional attacking of an unsuspecting target to the guy who spent combat dodging about, looking for a way to strike a distracted foe. A reasonable choice, and with 3e's straightforward way of making them an overall more moderate combatant (lower BAB progression, and thus slower multi-attack progression), but with a greater damage potential when they did Sneak Attacked, it was intuitive. 5e chose to differentiate moderate combatant status differently (either making a class always doing 'merely' 1Dx+stat, like a valor bard, or in the rogue/cleric model only getting one attack), which really put an onus on one to always get that boosted attack. While overall it works fine for rogues -- they are one of the most solid classes in the game-- it does kind of require you get into the 'rogue role' lane and not get out of it. A barbarian doesn't have much reason to dip into rogue 1-3 for a small amount of sneak attack, nor can you build a rogue around many odd concepts ('he wields two handaxes instead of two shortswords, because that's the traditional weapon of his people.').

All of this is a roundabout way of saying that, no, I don't have a problem with rogues having proficiency in weapons they will rarely use, but it is odd how much 5e seems designed to protect the iconic rogue imaging, while working the other direction for other classes and races and such.

[JellyPooga]

I find this to be unplayable.

Flavor all you want. A rogue with a Longsword and nothing else is a waste of a character. Unless of course the Longsword has finesse.

A Rogue that appears to have a longsword and nothing else is probably hiding something...:smallamused:

...and that something is likely the Dual Wielder feat. Whilst not an optimal choice, longsword and dagger has a fine tradition and a Rogue pulls it off better than most, being able to get Sneak Attack with the dagger and without shield proficiency, the +1 AC the feat grants while wielding an off-hand weapon is a decent enough substitute.

[Morty]

It's not sloppy. Comparing rapier and longsword, the other is finesse and the other is versatile. In other words, regarding what I said earlier, if longsword was both finesse and versatile, it would be far stronger than any other weapon of its relative size and purpose. Besides, longsword isn't the only weapon rogue is proficient with that doesn't qualify for sneak attack: Rogue is proficient with all simple weapons:

Simple melee weapons without finesse property: Club (Light), Greatclub (Two-handed), Handaxe (Light, thrown), Javelin (Thrown), Light Hammer (Light, thrown), Mace (—), Quarterstaff (Versatile), Sickle (Light), Spear (Thrown, versatile).

Simple ranged weapons (all qualify, because they are ranged weapons, but anyway): Crossbow, Dart, Shortbow, Sling.

Why Longsword is a problem, when almost all simple melee weapons (dagger being the only exception) rogues are proficient with as well are disqualified for Sneak Attack?

Longswords stand out because they're singled out as a weapon rogues are proficient with, besides "all simple weapons" which is just a generic grab-bag. They're singled out despite rogues not being meant to use them. It shows that someone didn't read and edit that list properly.



To solve your problem, my suggestion: Add Finesse to Longsword and withdraw Versatile.

At which point you end up with the exact replica of a rapier. Funny how that works.

[Pex]

Paladin or barbarians can't use their class features... smite or rage... with ranged weapons, that doesn't stop them from using a longbow if they need to hit something out of their reach.

And for many wizards, using a crossbow or longbow is better than cantrips for the first 4 levels.

For a rogue, using a longsword is better than any other weapon they have if they have sufficient strength (Strogues are a thing, though mostly multiclassed) and can't use sneak attack for some reason.

True, but if a rogue will be in melee to use a long sword why isn't he using a finesse weapon for the sneak attack? When a paladin or barbarian use a bow they have to or they move into melee if they can. A rogue doesn't have to use a long sword.

[Arkhios]

Longswords stand out because they're singled out as a weapon rogues are proficient with, besides "all simple weapons" which is just a generic grab-bag. They're singled out despite rogues not being meant to use them. It shows that someone didn't read and edit that list properly.

I wouldn't say it shows explicitly, without question, 'that someone didn't read and edit that list properly'. There are, and definitely is allowed to be, reasons to decide against being optimal, and only optimal.


At which point you end up with the exact replica of a rapier. Funny how that works.
Except rapier deals piercing and longsword deals slashing. Funny how that works. :smallamused:


True, but if a rogue will be in melee to use a long sword why isn't he using a finesse weapon for the sneak attack? When a paladin or barbarian use a bow they have to or they move into melee if they can. A rogue doesn't have to use a long sword.

Unless the rogue has, for example, either their unarmed strikes or a longsword (there are many possible reasons why this could be the case; use your imagination and you'll understand). I'd choose a Longsword any day over unarmed strikes.

[JackPhoenix]

True, but if a rogue will be in melee to use a long sword why isn't he using a finesse weapon for the sneak attack? When a paladin or barbarian use a bow they have to or they move into melee if they can. A rogue doesn't have to use a long sword.

Because he may not be able to get sneak attack anyway? No ally in melee, no source of advantage, or a disadvantage (even negated) stops you from using SA, and 1d10>1d8. It's not like it wasn't already mentioned ITT multiple times.

[DanyBallon]

The real problem here is not rogue having access to longsword, but rogue having sneak attack which change the role of the rogue from a skill monkey to a skirmisher combatant*

*should be in blue but couldn’t do it on my phone :P

[BaconAwesome]

On a related point, I've always thought the main reason for the waning of the elven empires is that a dex race decided they should all learn how to use the longsword instead of the rapier or at least the shortsword.

[MThurston]

Throwing anything makes it a ranged attack.

Just only saying it's a melee weapon doesn't change the fact you are attacking from range.

[NaughtyTiger]

For a rogue, using a longsword is better than any other weapon they have if they have sufficient strength (Strogues are a thing, though mostly multiclassed) and can't use sneak attack for some reason.

For a rogue, using a longsword is better than any other melee, non-finesse weapon they have if they have sufficient strength and can't use sneak attack for some reason.

That is a a very specific situation: str > dex AND no chance for sneak attack AND no daggers.
Str rogue is a great thing, he still carries 1 short sword, and 2 daggers.

[MThurston]

A thrown Longsword does 1d4 damage and is 20/60 for range.

You would get your S.A. while it's thrown.

I rogue could also throw a pike that does 1d4 damage with a range of 20/60 And get SA.

That evwr can be used to attack withnis used for the thrown part. So light and finesse would use Dex and others Str.

[NaughtyTiger]

5e is different from previous versions.


Throwing anything makes it a ranged attack.
Just only saying it's a melee weapon doesn't change the fact you are attacking from range.


it does become a ranged attack, but it does NOT become a ranged weapon.


The Attack must use a Finesse or a ranged weapon




A thrown Longsword does 1d4 damage and is 20/60 for range.
You would get your S.A. while it's thrown.
I rogue could also throw a pike that does 1d4 damage with a range of 20/60 And get SA.
The awesomeness is they get Dex + Prof to hit.

Throwing a melee weapon is an improvised attack. Without tavern brawler, you do not get +Prof to hit, just +Dex. And as discussed above, does not get sneak attack

[Willie the Duck]

I wouldn't say it shows explicitly, without question, 'that someone didn't read and edit that list properly'. There are, and definitely is allowed to be, reasons to decide against being optimal, and only optimal.

Agreed. Accusations of incompetence should only be treated seriously if they provide support to back them up.


Except rapier deals piercing and longsword deals slashing. Funny how that works. :smallamused:

And it frankly fits a perfectly reasonable sword type not presented in 5e (which is also the iconic thief/rogue "longsword"). Here's another conflating factor: In oD&D/AD&D, where the thief (now rogue) got their iconic image of wielding a "longsword," the longsword in question was what really would be an Arming Sword (very readily wielded one handed, not really made to be wielded two handed). What is historically* referred to as a Long Sword was rolled up into a separate Bastard Sword* entry.
* I know, it's more complicated than that. Short primer for the curious (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nb2Cvd_amEc).

Now, 5e is using Longsword where Bastard Sword used to be. I get why that one can't also be finesse as well (although rejiggering SA to not care about finesse is absolutely something that could have happened), but then why don't they have an arming sword entry?

[MThurston]

Anything with a range, is a ranged weapon.

If you throw a Longsword as an improvised weapon with a range of 20/60, it becomes a ranged attack.

Ranged attacks get S.A..

Them is the rules.


Range
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.


Improvised weapon
An object that bears no resemblance to a weapon deals 1d4 damage (the GM assigns a damage type appropriate to the object). If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee Attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also deals 1d4 damage. An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

[NaughtyTiger]

Anything with a range, is a ranged weapon.
Them is the rules.

No, this is not in the rules.
The additional stuff you posted about Ranged Attacks and Improvised attacks do not say that a weapon gains the RANGED property. The phrase "ranged weapon" is specific.
Any thrown weapon can be used to make a ranged attack, but not necessarily a ranged weapon attack

[Willie the Duck]

No, this is not in the rules.
The additional stuff you posted about Ranged Attacks and Improvised attacks do not say that a weapon gains the RANGED property. The phrase "ranged weapon" is specific.
Any thrown weapon can be used to make a ranged attack, but not necessarily a ranged weapon attack

Trying not to do the moderator's job, while still reminding (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?572749-how-would-you-fix-dragonborns-breath-weapon/page5) you how seriously you need to take this individual deliberately misconstruing rules.

[Morty]

I wouldn't say it shows explicitly, without question, 'that someone didn't read and edit that list properly'. There are, and definitely is allowed to be, reasons to decide against being optimal, and only optimal.

If someone wants to be suboptimal in the name of aesthetics, or the GM wants to force players to use inferior weapons for some purpose, there are many more ways to do that, which don't necessitate an odd weapon out on the proficiency list. The player might use a shortsword without dual-wielding. Or a dagger. Or a weapon they're not proficient with in the first place. Or the GM might declare that the sword they've picked up after being disarmed is rusty and blunt, so it attacks at a disadvantage or deals a smaller die of damage.

You're trying to turn it into some big deal about how optimization isn't the only way to play, but it's not. It's just a weird but ultimately minor inconsistency in the rules, that results from 5E holding on too much to "iconic" imagery and the way things were in previous editions.


Except rapier deals piercing and longsword deals slashing. Funny how that works. :smallamused:

Something to keep in mind when you run into an ochre jelly or flame skull, perhaps. Not too important otherwise. I guess it's hard to tell if it's more or less likely to happen than a situation where a rogue has access to a longsword, but not a rapier, shortsword, dagger or a ranged weapon.


The real problem here is not rogue having access to longsword, but rogue having sneak attack which change the role of the rogue from a skill monkey to a skirmisher combatant*

*should be in blue but couldn’t do it on my phone :P

Sneak Attack is a pretty poorly-designed feature but that's a whole other thing.

[MThurston]

It clearly does. Range of 20/60.

Does it have a Range? Yes

Is it a ranged attack? Yes

Do rogues get S.A. with ranged attacks? Yes

Sorry if you don't like it but a rock allows you to get a S.A..

[MThurston]

No, this is not in the rules.
The additional stuff you posted about Ranged Attacks and Improvised attacks do not say that a weapon gains the RANGED property. The phrase "ranged weapon" is specific.
Any thrown weapon can be used to make a ranged attack, but not necessarily a ranged weapon attack

The rule in black and white says using melee weapons as thrown improvised weapons do 1d4 damage and have a range of 20/60.

The range rules clearly say that to be ranged you have two numbers. The first being short range and the last being max range. Anything over short and to max has disadvantage.

Improvised thrown weapons have 20/60. This makes them a ranged weapon and qualifies as a range weapon.

[Arkhios]

It clearly does. Range of 20/60.

Does it have a Range? Yes

Is it a ranged attack? Yes

Do rogues get S.A. with ranged attacks? Yes

Sorry if you don't like it but a rock allows you to get a S.A..

Ranged Attack, in the rules, is a different thing than Ranged Weapon.

Ranged Weapon is a weapon category. Not a Weapon Property (like Finesse)

RAW, improvised weapon is NOT listed NOR mentioned otherwise as a Ranged Weapon. Therefore, it is not a Ranged Weapon. Period.

Sneak Attack requires an attack with a *Ranged Weapon* or a *melee weapon with the Finesse Property*.

Ranged Attack is a type of attack.

Also, Attack ≠ Weapon.

Read what you write.
Different words have Different meanings.





...Honestly, am I the only one, or does it smell like a Troll in here?

[samcifer]

Honestly, I'd recommend a one-level dip into fighter for a fighting style, take Dueling for the +2 damage with a one-handed weapon, and use a rapier. You'll get the same amount of damage (in fact on average, your damage will be a bit higher as you're guanteed at least 3 damage + your DEX mod + SA damage if it can be applied and in the end), and you'll only be down half a SA die (a full one if you MC more).

The main thing that still bothers me is how they still haven't added in any other kinds of basic weapons. Were are Falchions? Where are Singing Sticks? What about Wrist Razors, Spiked Gauntlets, and most importantly, Bastard swords?

I'm very saddened that such weapons have yet to be added into the game and there is no sign of them ever being added outside of homebrewed content. :(

[n00b]

...Honestly, am I the only one, or does it smell like a Troll in here?

I had a long reply trying to explain the differences but you did it much better than I could.

As to whether he's baiting everyone? I'm still trying to decide if he just doesn't understand or deliberately misconstrues the rules. There's a fine line there and I think he's all over it. Either way, I usually follow his posts just for the comedy value.

[Willie the Duck]

It's just a weird but ultimately minor inconsistency in the rules, that results from 5E holding on too much to "iconic" imagery and the way things were in previous editions.

No disagreement on the meat of the statement. As to the opinion piece/what-ought-to-be, completely disagree*. 5e failed by only hanging onto the iconic imagery, but not actually thinking through what you might do with it. Druids have scimitar proficiency, but would never make a Strength build since shillelagh (and shape-changing) are things. Elves have longswords and Dex bonus. Rogues have longsword and a class feature which has gradually morphed into their entire combat role that precludes their use. 5e was deliberately made not to be just another attempt at what 3e and 4e attempted to do because the designers were trying to grab those of us who wanted some combination of the feel of the Fafrhd/Grey Mouser/Conan/Dying Earth stories we read to get into the game, or the feel of whichever red box set we personally started with (along with new blood of course). If the game was not supposed to bring TSR-era players in, why have a longsword in the rogue list in the first place? But if you're going to do so, why not figure out a ruleset that would make you ever actively choose to do so?
*Everything hereafter is expression of personal opinion, and deliberately so.

[MThurston]

Sneak Attack
Beginning at 1st level, you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an Attack if you have advantage on the Attack roll. The Attack must use a Finesse or a ranged weapon.

Range Weapons
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.

Improvised Thrown Weapon
An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

RAW or RAI

Sneak Attack clearly says ranged weapons.

Ranged Weapons has range parentheses.

Improved Thrown Weapons have parentheses.

RAW: Ranged Weapons have parentheses.

There for Improvised Thrown Weapons also have parenthesis.

Now if you are strictly saying that weapons must be on a weapon chart then sneak attack would have to say (only ranged weapons on the weapon chart.) It does not, it only says ranged weapons and clearly improvised weapons have a range. 20/60 and they have a damage, 1d4.

So all improved weapons are treated as daggers.

[NaughtyTiger]

Range Weapons
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.
...
RAW or RAI


RAI - no, crawford has clarified that throwing a weapon doesn't make it a ranged weapon
https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/968364391669338112

RAW
The quoted section "Ranged Weapons" is out of context.



Weapon Properties
Many Weapons have special properties related to their use, as shown in the Weapons table.
Ammunition
Finesse
Heavy
Light
Loading
Range
...


This specifically refers to the "Ranged" property on the weapons table.

[Willie the Duck]

Ranged Weapons has range parentheses.
Improved Thrown Weapons have parentheses.
RAW: Ranged Weapons have parentheses.
There for Improvised Thrown Weapons also have parenthesis.
...
So all improved weapons are treated as daggers.

NaughtyTiger, he's not even trying at this point, why are you continuing to take the bait?

[NaughtyTiger]

NaughtyTiger, he's not even trying at this point, why are you continuing to take the bait?

I am a mouse, and the cheese smells good? Seriously, I can't help myself. I have to hope that people are being sincere.

[Arkhios]

I am a mouse, and the cheese smells good? Seriously, I can't help myself. I have to hope that people are being sincere.

Likewise. In general I try to have no presumptions towards people around here and argue in good faith, but at times like these, when I get a feeling that I might just be pulled, I find it's pointless to continue, and instead add the person whose posts and actions I find suspicious to my ignore list. You can probably guess who got the questionable honor this time.

[MThurston]

I throw my Longsword.

I monster has an ability to add +4 to its A.C. from ranged attacks.

What is your ruling?

[clash]

Sneak Attack
Beginning at 1st level, you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe's distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an Attack if you have advantage on the Attack roll. The Attack must use a Finesse or a ranged weapon.

Range Weapons
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.

Improvised Thrown Weapon
An improvised thrown weapon has a normal range of 20 feet and a long range of 60 feet.

RAW or RAI

Sneak Attack clearly says ranged weapons.

Ranged Weapons has range parentheses.

Improved Thrown Weapons have parentheses.

RAW: Ranged Weapons have parentheses.

There for Improvised Thrown Weapons also have parenthesis.

Now if you are strictly saying that weapons must be on a weapon chart then sneak attack would have to say (only ranged weapons on the weapon chart.) It does not, it only says ranged weapons and clearly improvised weapons have a range. 20/60 and they have a damage, 1d4.

So all improved weapons are treated as daggers.


This is a misunderstanding/misuse of the way logic works.

Your argument:

Ranged weapons have range parenthesis
Improvised weapons have range parenthesis
Therefore improvised weapons are ranged weapons

Is logically equivalent to:

cats have teeth
dogs have teeth
Therefore dogs are cats

[JackPhoenix]

You know, I actually have a rogue who uses non-finesse weapon in my game. Not especially often, and not longsword anymore since fighter multiclass gave the character proficiency with all martial weapons (meaning it's usually glaive or greatsword). The character got Str and Dex 14 and magical weapon that can change to any other weapon type as a BA, as a result, any time she can't get off sneak attack, the player will change it from rapier to something more effective as needed. Last game it went from rapier to longbow to glaive to greatsword during the boss battle as the combat situation changed.

It was also sneak attacking warhammer in one fight, because everyone agreed that poking animated armor with rapier for extra damage is stupid.


I throw my Longsword.

I monster has an ability to add +4 to its A.C. from ranged attacks.

What is your ruling?

It gets +4 AC against ranged ATTACK. However, the rogue still wouldn't be able to sneak attack with it, as it's not a ranged WEAPON.

[stoutstien]

RAI - no, crawford has clarified that throwing a weapon doesn't make it a ranged weapon
https://twitter.com/jeremyecrawford/status/968364391669338112

RAW
The quoted section "Ranged Weapons" is out of context.



This specifically refers to the "Ranged" property on the weapons table.

Good new here is you can smite with a thrown melee weapon.

[MThurston]

This is a misunderstanding/misuse of the way logic works.

Your argument:

Ranged weapons have range parenthesis
Improvised weapons have range parenthesis
Therefore improvised weapons are ranged weapons

Is logically equivalent to:

cats have teeth
dogs have teeth
Therefore dogs are cats

SMH.

Not even close to your example.

Dagger 20/60
Improved Thrown weapon 20/60
Both do 1d4 damage.

[JackPhoenix]

Good new here is you can smite with a thrown melee weapon.

You can't. Divine Smite requires melee weapon attack, not attack with melee weapon. There's a difference. Unarmed attacks are also melee weapon attacks, despite not being weapons.

[LudicSavant]

Good new here is you can smite with a thrown melee weapon

“Melee weapon attack” means “a weapon attack in melee” not “an attack with a melee weapon.” This has been clarified numerous times by WotC.

Ninja’d

[stoutstien]

You can't. Divine Smite requires melee weapon attack, not attack with melee weapon. There's a difference. Unarmed attacks are also melee weapon attacks, despite not being weapons.


Now they are contradicting their own rulings.
Only four types of attack rolls listed: melee, ranged and the spell attack counter parts.

But a melee attack isn't a melee weapon attack unless it is a Melee attack?
Simple language was the goal for 5e?

[JackPhoenix]

Now they are contradicting their own rulings.
Only four types of attack rolls listed: melee, ranged and the spell attack counter parts.

But a melee attack isn't a melee weapon attack unless it is a Melee attack?
Simple language was the goal for 5e?

What?

If melee attack isn't melee weapon attack, it's melee spell attack. No contradiction there.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Now they are contradicting their own rulings.
Only four types of attack rolls listed: melee, ranged and the spell attack counter parts.

But a melee attack isn't a melee weapon attack unless it is a Melee attack?
Simple language was the goal for 5e?

It's written plain as day that the Thrown property allows you to make a Ranged attack using the weapon. This isn't rocket science. If your Melee Weapon has the Thrown property, you can throw it and make a ranged attack. It's important to note that Darts are Ranged Weapons given the Thrown property. Having the Thrown property does nothing to affect the weapon type.

You cannot by RAW smite with a thrown weapon and you're not intended to be able to.

This bolded part also doesn't make sense to me, can you explain what you mean?

[stoutstien]

What?

If melee attack isn't melee weapon attack, it's melee spell attack. No contradiction there.
Don't want to derail. I'll start a new thread but that was my point a Melee attack is an attack with a Melee weapon or an improvised attack with a ranged weapon.

[Misterwhisper]

Don't want to derail. I'll start a new thread but that was my point a Melee attack is an attack with a Melee weapon or an improvised attack with a ranged weapon.

There is no such thing as an improvised ranged weapon, only improvised melee weapons that are thrown.

[NaughtyTiger]

There is no such thing as an improvised ranged weapon, only improvised melee weapons that are thrown.




Often, an Improvised Weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such.

if a player ties weights to the corners of a bedsheet, the DM can rule that is close enough to a net.
if a player grabs a narrow heavy pointed barb, the DM can rule that is close enough to a dart.
if a player blows a poisoned needle through a metal pipe, the DM can rules that is close enough to a blowgun.

[stoutstien]

It's written plain as day that the Thrown property allows you to make a Ranged attack using the weapon. This isn't rocket science. If your Melee Weapon has the Thrown property, you can throw it and make a ranged attack. It's important to note that Darts are Ranged Weapons given the Thrown property. Having the Thrown property does nothing to affect the weapon type.

You cannot by RAW smite with a thrown weapon and you're not intended to be able to.

This bolded part also doesn't make sense to me, can you explain what you mean?

My point is even if you throw an hand axe and make a ranged attack it is still a melee weapon.
I guess it just see it as unnecessary word play.

[JackPhoenix]

Don't want to derail. I'll start a new thread but that was my point a Melee attack is an attack with a Melee weapon or an improvised attack with a ranged weapon.

Melee attack is an attack in melee. It may be melee spell attack or melee weapon attack. The later may be done with unarmed strike, natural weapon, melee weapon or improvised weapon. The former two aren't weapons for the purpose of abilities that require weapons (like Booming Blade or Green Flame Blade), and the last one lacks any properties (meaning you can't use them to make sneak attack, because that requires weapon with finesse properties).

You can make ranged spell attack or ranged weapon attack, the later can be done with ranged weapon, melee weapon with thrown property, or improvised weapon. As sneak attack requires ranged weapon or a weapon with finesse property, you can't use it with improvised weapons (which are neither) or melee weapons that have thrown property but not the finesse property (anything except dagger).

[NaughtyTiger]

Simple language was the goal for 5e?

a copy editor/proofreader would have helped... but no, simple language goal failed..

[ProsecutorGodot]

My point is even if you throw an hand axe and make a ranged attack it is still a melee weapon.
I guess it just see it as unnecessary word play.

It's not unnecessary because the distinction was important for features that require a type of weapon attack (Divine Smite) and those that require a type of weapon (Sneak Attack).

[stoutstien]

Melee attack is an attack in melee. It may be melee spell attack or melee weapon attack. The later may be done with unarmed strike, natural weapon, melee weapon or improvised weapon. The former two aren't weapons for the purpose of abilities that require weapons (like Booming Blade or Green Flame Blade), and the last one lacks any properties (meaning you can't use them to make sneak attack, because that requires weapon with finesse properties).

You can make ranged spell attack or ranged weapon attack, the later can be done with ranged weapon, melee weapon with thrown property, or improvised weapon. As sneak attack requires ranged weapon or a weapon with finesse property, you can't use it with improvised weapons (which are neither) or melee weapons that have thrown property but not the finesse property (anything except dagger).

The melee cantrips specifically calls out (a weapon) in spell material requirements. I've read that as it needs to be on the weapon table.
I house ruled unarmed strikes way back when by just giving them a special property:
Unarmed strikes are not considered weapons for the purpose of fulfilling requirements for spells or fighting styles.

It's funny how clean the sneak attack languages to me but how muddled Divine strike is. Why don't they just word divine strike like they did the dueling fighting style?

[GlenSmash!]

The melee cantrips specifically calls out (a weapon) in spell material requirements. I've read that as it needs to be on the weapon table.
I house ruled unarmed strikes way back when by just giving them a special property:
Unarmed strikes are not considered weapons for the purpose of fulfilling requirements for spells or fighting styles.

It's funny how clean the sneak attack languages to me but how muddled Divine strike is. Why don't they just word divine strike like they did the dueling fighting style?

Unarmed Strikes were errata'd out of the weapons table anyway. For exactly the reason you have that houserule I think.

[MThurston]

You know, I actually have a rogue who uses non-finesse weapon in my game. Not especially often, and not longsword anymore since fighter multiclass gave the character proficiency with all martial weapons (meaning it's usually glaive or greatsword). The character got Str and Dex 14 and magical weapon that can change to any other weapon type as a BA, as a result, any time she can't get off sneak attack, the player will change it from rapier to something more effective as needed. Last game it went from rapier to longbow to glaive to greatsword during the boss battle as the combat situation changed.

It was also sneak attacking warhammer in one fight, because everyone agreed that poking animated armor with rapier for extra damage is stupid.



It gets +4 AC against ranged ATTACK. However, the rogue still wouldn't be able to sneak attack with it, as it's not a ranged WEAPON.

It is a ranged weapon if it has parentheses, which it has. 20/60

[JackPhoenix]

It is a ranged weapon if it has parentheses, which it has. 20/60

Thrown weapons have those too, and those are (with two exceptions) melee weapons, and stay melee weapons even if you throw them. Improvised weapons are neither ranged nor melee weapons, they are their own category.

[n00b]

It is a ranged weapon if it has parentheses, which it has. 20/60

But it does not have the Ranged property, so by rule it does not qualify for sneak attack. If you want to run it that way at your table that's fine, it doesn't hurt anything. But by RAW it does not get sneak attack. There is no other way to put it.

[dejarnjc]

Not going to quibble on the language but does it hurt the game in any way if rogues are allowed to sneak attack with improvised weapons?

I'd allow it in my games. Hell, I'd also allow sneak attack with most any weapon too, though I would put STR requirements on 2handed weapons (and probably not allow it on reach weapons) if someone wanted to go down this path.

[n00b]

Not going to quibble on the language but does it hurt the game in any way if rogues are allowed to sneak attack with improvised weapons?

I don't think it hurts anything at all. I think even Mearls indicated that he thought Rogues should always get sneak attack. But by the rules they aren't, and that's what the OP is trying to pass off. I think that's what everyone has the issue with.

[Knaight]

Throwing anything makes it a ranged attack.

Just only saying it's a melee weapon doesn't change the fact you are attacking from range.
There's a distinction made between a ranged attack and a ranged weapon attack - it's terrible notation, but it's consistently used.


It is a ranged weapon if it has parentheses, which it has. 20/60

If it's an apple it's a fruit. That doesn't mean that if it's a fruit it's an apple. Nowhere does it says that range parentheses mean ranged weapons, only that ranged weapons means range parentheses.

[JackPhoenix]

Not going to quibble on the language but does it hurt the game in any way if rogues are allowed to sneak attack with improvised weapons?

I'd allow it in my games. Hell, I'd also allow sneak attack with most any weapon too, though I would put STR requirements on 2handed weapons (and probably not allow it on reach weapons) if someone wanted to go down this path.

I'd do it the same way as bladesinger: as long as you aren't holding the weapon in two hands, you're fine. With the exception for ranged weapons. That means you're limited to 1d8 weapon damage as an upper limit (like now), and no GWFS shennanigans.

[NaughtyTiger]

I'd do it the same way as bladesinger: as long as you aren't holding the weapon in two hands, you're fine. With the exception for ranged weapons. That means you're limited to 1d8 weapon damage as an upper limit (like now), and no GWFS shennanigans.

I just want to use SA with a sap... the iconic mob brute weapon. (1d4 bludgeoning)

[Morty]

The main thing that still bothers me is how they still haven't added in any other kinds of basic weapons. Were are Falchions? Where are Singing Sticks? What about Wrist Razors, Spiked Gauntlets, and most importantly, Bastard swords?

I'm very saddened that such weapons have yet to be added into the game and there is no sign of them ever being added outside of homebrewed content. :(

There's not a lot of room for new weapons in 5E. What few rules to differentiate them existed in older editions are gone. The core weapon list is already too long for its purposes.


No disagreement on the meat of the statement. As to the opinion piece/what-ought-to-be, completely disagree*. 5e failed by only hanging onto the iconic imagery, but not actually thinking through what you might do with it. Druids have scimitar proficiency, but would never make a Strength build since shillelagh (and shape-changing) are things. Elves have longswords and Dex bonus. Rogues have longsword and a class feature which has gradually morphed into their entire combat role that precludes their use. 5e was deliberately made not to be just another attempt at what 3e and 4e attempted to do because the designers were trying to grab those of us who wanted some combination of the feel of the Fafrhd/Grey Mouser/Conan/Dying Earth stories we read to get into the game, or the feel of whichever red box set we personally started with (along with new blood of course). If the game was not supposed to bring TSR-era players in, why have a longsword in the rogue list in the first place? But if you're going to do so, why not figure out a ruleset that would make you ever actively choose to do so?
*Everything hereafter is expression of personal opinion, and deliberately so.

My only contact with older editions were Infinity Engine games, and I don't really have any desire to explore them further. So I look at the 5E weapon rules as they are. And you're certainly right that they perfunctorily resemble older editions and/or genre inspirations without any follow-up. It's putting form over function.


I'd do it the same way as bladesinger: as long as you aren't holding the weapon in two hands, you're fine. With the exception for ranged weapons. That means you're limited to 1d8 weapon damage as an upper limit (like now), and no GWFS shennanigans.

Yeah, a lot of this could be avoided if you replaced "finesse" with "one-handed" in the description of Sneak Attack. The rogue's expected damage remains exactly the same but they can describe their weapons a lot more freely. My dwarf rogue had a hatchet that worked mechanically as a rapier and the game somehow didn't break.

[samcifer]

[QUOTE=Morty;23505492]There's not a lot of room for new weapons in 5E. What few rules to differentiate them existed in older editions are gone. The core weapon list is already too long for its purposes.

It's more for variety than play mechanics. Having a larger variety of weapons allows for a bit more flavor to a character and doesn't need to work completely differently from all other weapons that already exist.

[Arkhios]

I just want to use SA with a sap... the iconic mob brute weapon. (1d4 bludgeoning)

That reminds me... I've been planning to homebrew a roguish archetype (Thug) around the idea that you could – much like Kensei – learn to treat certain weapons as if they had the Finesse Property. Basically light melee weapons, but you'd be able to choose only a few of them, not all. Club is quite close to a sap, for example.

[dgnslyr]

That reminds me... I've been planning to homebrew a roguish archetype (Thug) around the idea that you could – much like Kensei – learn to treat certain weapons as if they had the Finesse Property. Basically light melee weapons, but you'd be able to choose only a few of them, not all. Club is quite close to a sap, for example.

Expanding it to "Anything not two-handed" is honestly probably fine, since that's at most +1 damage even if you do decide to two-hand a longsword or battleaxe, and it also opens the door for more versatile Rogue builds that dip for armor and/or shield proficiency. In 3.5 Sneak Attack wasn't limited by weapon type, and Dark Souls for example shows how even fully-armored knights with oversized greatclubs can have convincing sneak attack animations, so at least to me sneak attacking with a two-hand gripped longsword isn't really a stretch.

So if anything I'd go a step further and allow sneak attacks with any ranged weapon and any melee weapon without the two-handed property for a rogue of any archetype; it's not like +1 damage is going to break the game.

[Xetheral]

Melee attack is an attack in melee. It may be melee spell attack or melee weapon attack. The later may be done with unarmed strike, natural weapon, melee weapon or improvised weapon. The former two aren't weapons for the purpose of abilities that require weapons (like Booming Blade or Green Flame Blade), and the last one lacks any properties (meaning you can't use them to make sneak attack, because that requires weapon with finesse properties).

(Emphasis added.) The italic part isn't always true... according to the PHB, if the DM decides that an improvised weapon is close enough to an existing weapon, it can be used as if it were that weapon. For example, if the DM determines that a sharpened screwdriver is sufficiently similar to a dagger, the screwdriver would gain the finesse property when attacking with it as a dagger, while keeping the improvised property. This permits, for example, a rogue to Sneak Attack with an improvised dagger and then activate Tavern Brawler's bonus action grapple.

[MThurston]

So if my rogue who is untrained in trident throws it, does he get S.A. when he has advantage?

[Tanarii]

The main thing that still bothers me is how they still haven't added in any other kinds of basic weapons. Were are Falchions?Battle Axes.


Where are Singing Sticks? What about Wrist Razors, Spiked Gauntlets,So by basic, you mean exotic? :p


and most importantly, Bastard swords? Longsword.

Also Cutlass & Saber? Scimitar.

Also that cool looking ghurka backward blade thing the PHB druid is carrying, I forget the IRL name? Sickle.

[Misterwhisper]

So if my rogue who is untrained in trident throws it, does he get S.A. when he has advantage?

No, you don’t get sneak attack.

Trained does not matter either, you can’t sneak attack with a spear or hand axe either.

[Mith]

For Rogue sneak attack, I would say no SA with Heavy Weapons. You can get Surprise for Advantage, but those are Mass Trauma sort of things. The only way I can see SA with a Great Sword is with half swording and Mordhau.

[Knaight]

Also that cool looking ghurka backward blade thing the PHB druid is carrying, I forget the IRL name? Sickle.

It's a khopesh.

D&D also occupies a bit of an awkward middle ground. On the one hand, yeah, it's not a complete list by any means - there's no cutlass, hangar, tulwar, backsword, smallsword, or messer, sticking just to European swords. On the other hand they also don't just have a nice, vague "one handed sword" category, instead splitting that up into the short sword, long sword, scimitar, and rapier. After all it's not like D&D particularly models the differences between different swords; there's nothing for weapon speed, reach is so coarse grained that a dagger and spear have the same reach, and while there's some mechanical differentiation it's pretty arbitrary. The level of mechanical abstraction used for how weapons are statted lends itself well to somewhat less specific weapons.

After all, do we really have to distinguish between a hammer, a morningstar, and a mace? Sure, they have different stats, but to some extent those very differences introduce some pretty ridiculous models (starting with the morningstar being a martial weapon while the mace is simple, because they're apparently used so differently). Similarly the glaive and halberd have literally identical stats, including cost and weight. Just make a "polearm" category, specify both of those as examples, and call it a day.

[JackPhoenix]

(Emphasis added.) The italic part isn't always true... according to the PHB, if the DM decides that an improvised weapon is close enough to an existing weapon, it can be used as if it were that weapon. For example, if the DM determines that a sharpened screwdriver is sufficiently similar to a dagger, the screwdriver would gain the finesse property when attacking with it as a dagger, while keeping the improvised property. This permits, for example, a rogue to Sneak Attack with an improvised dagger and then activate Tavern Brawler's bonus action grapple.

Improvised weapon is a category of its own. If you count it as a dagger, it's a dagger for all intents and purposes... proficiency, properties, whatever else... and doesn't count as improvised weapon anymore, so no BA grapple with that.


It's a khopesh.

Kukri. Khopesh is Egyptian. And lot bigger with a different use. Battleaxe by D&D terms.

[MThurston]

No, you don’t get sneak attack.

Trained does not matter either, you can’t sneak attack with a spear or hand axe either.

SMH. Anything with parenthases is a ranged weapon.

[n00b]

SMH. Anything with parenthases is a ranged weapon.

But it does not have the ranged property. Therefore no sneak attack. At this point you're just being deliberately obtuse. Reporting this post.

[Tanarii]

It's a khopesh.
it goes the wrong way for that.

Kukri is what I was thinking of.

Edit: maybe youre thinking of the staff/fetish in her left hand?

[Xetheral]

Improvised weapon is a category of its own. If you count it as a dagger, it's a dagger for all intents and purposes... proficiency, properties, whatever else... and doesn't count as improvised weapon anymore, so no BA grapple with that.

I disagree. I don't see anything in the rules that says that an improvised dagger stops being an improvised weapon when you attack with it as if it were a dagger. To the contrary, if an improvised dagger loses the improvised weapon property when used as a dagger it would lose the ability to be used as a dagger.

[Knaight]

it goes the wrong way for that.

Kukri is what I was thinking of.

Edit: maybe youre thinking of the staff/fetish in her left hand?

I'll be honest, I didn't double check the art.

[MThurston]

Rogues get S.A. with non proficient weapons like the blow gun and trident.

Why not an improvised thrown weapon?

The rules clearly state that improvised thrown weapons have a range. And that improved weapons are a weapon.

Is the issue that on the weapon list they are not listed there!

By all accounts everyone here should understand that throwing a weapon is a ranged attack.

A rock thrown at the back of the head can kill just as easily as a dagger being thrown. Yet because rock is not listed on the weapon table a hidden rogue doesn't get S.A.?

Someone is hating on rogues. I can throw a trident that I am not even proficient in and get a S.A. attack. But oh, a rock is just out of the question.

[JackPhoenix]

I disagree. I don't see anything in the rules that says that an improvised dagger stops being an improvised weapon when you attack with it as if it were a dagger. To the contrary, if an improvised dagger loses the improvised weapon property when used as a dagger it would lose the ability to be used as a dagger.

That would make improvised dagger better than actual dagger: you'll get full function of a dagger, and the ability to use Tavern Brawler's BA on top. I'm not sure why would "improvised dagger lose the ability to be used as a dagger if it loses the improvised weapon property". It's either a dagger, or a improvised weapon, it's not both at the same time.

[MThurston]

Rogue S.A. works on the following

Dagger 20/60
Hand Axe 20/60
Javelin 30/120
Light Hammer 20/60
Spear 20/60
Dart 20/60
Trident 20/60

Not allowed
Rock 20/60

[n00b]

Rogue S.A. works on the following

Dagger 20/60
Hand Axe 20/60
Javelin 30/120
Light Hammer 20/60
Spear 20/60
Dart 20/60
Trident 20/60

Not allowed
Rock 20/60

Just because a weapon has a range doesn't make it ranged. Ranged is a category and/or property. Range is just a distance to let you know how far it can be thrown. I can throw a chair a certain distance. But that doesn't make it a ranged weapon. It has to have the ranged property, not just a set of parenthesis.

[JackPhoenix]

Just because a weapon has a range doesn't make it ranged. Ranged is a category and/or property. Range is just a distance to let you know how far it can be thrown. I can throw a chair a certain distance. But that doesn't make it a ranged weapon. It has to have the ranged property, not just a set of parenthesis.

Don't feed the troll. We've explained it to him multiple times, he's doing it on purpose.

[n00b]

Don't feed the troll. We've explained it to him multiple times, he's doing it on purpose.

Yeah, I think I'm done here. He's just embarrassing himself at this point.

[MThurston]

So it's a ranged attack but not ranged attack.

Clear as mud.

[Keltest]

So it's a ranged attack but not ranged attack.

Clear as mud.

Deliberately conflating game terms with dictionary definitions will naturally lead to confusion. So why are you doing it to yourself?

[jdolch]

Wow. You are still discussing this? I am impressed.

[Willie the Duck]

Wow. You are still discussing this? I am impressed.

The amazing thing is that he started the thread, and the initial question/premise was actually quite good/a reasonable discussion. So he's genuinely (albeit figuratively) pooping in his own nest. To each their own I guess.

[NaughtyTiger]

So he's genuinely (albeit figuratively) pooping in his own nest.

This is true. The how to make humans thread (despite the spiteful origin) spawned interesting discussion when bypassing the OP.

[Xetheral]

That would make improvised dagger better than actual dagger: you'll get full function of a dagger, and the ability to use Tavern Brawler's BA on top.

It only makes an improvised dagger better than an actual dagger if you take the Tavern Brawler feat. That seems entirely in line with a feat focused on fighting with improvised weapons.


I'm not sure why would "improvised dagger lose the ability to be used as a dagger if it loses the improvised weapon property". It's either a dagger, or a improvised weapon, it's not both at the same time.

A (e.g.) sharpened screwdriver is never a dagger. As a function of the improvised weapon property, a sharpened screwdriver can be used as if it were dagger if the DM decides it is similar. If it loses the improvised weapon property it necessarily loses that ability and is just a sharpened screwdriver.

Secondly, all objects (edit: that can be held in one or two hands) that aren't already weapons have the improvised property. I don't see any situation where such an object can lose that property. (One could potentially be remade into a weapon, but then it would be a different object.)

[Arkhios]

Agreed. I have to wonder, what does the OP hope to achieve by appearing simple-minded (when it's fairly clear he's not that simple).

It's obvious by now that he has understood what we have said (multiple times), but chooses to refuse acknowledging this, and instead tries to ridicule the rule, probably because he doesn't like it(?)

To OP, if you're actually reading anything I'm saying, here's some news to you: the only thing you've achieved to ridicule is yourself with this act of yours.

.
.
.

Controversially, I kinda have to thank you as well, because you brought up the idea I had before, to make another homebrewed rogue sub-class (the other one, Inquisitor, you can find from my signature).

If anyone is interested, please, have a look at Thug (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?573852-PEACH-Roguish-Archetype-Thug&p=23507060).

[JackPhoenix]

A (e.g.) sharpened screwdriver is never a dagger. As a function of the improvised weapon property, a sharpened screwdriver can be used as if it were dagger if the DM decides it is similar. If it loses the improvised weapon property it necessarily loses that ability and is just a sharpened screwdriver.

Why? That doesn't make any sense. Thrown longsword is improvised weapon, but if it's used as a proper longsword, with all the properties of a longsword, it's not improvised weapon.

If an object works as a dagger in all respects, it is a dagger for all purposes. It doesn't matter it's actually a sharpened screwdiver... "dagger" covers wide enough variety of weapons already. If it's similar enough to work as a dagger, it is a dagger.

Edit: the rule even says it can be used as if it were dagger, not "as if it had the properties and damage of a dagger". Dagger doesn't allow you to make the BA grapple with Tavern Brawler if you use it as intended, you *can* use it as improvised weapon, but it will lose all properties dagger normaly has for that attack. It's either one or the other.

[Keltest]

Why? That doesn't make any sense. Thrown longsword is improvised weapon, but if it's used as a proper longsword, with all the properties of a longsword, it's not improvised weapon.

If an object works as a dagger in all respects, it is a dagger for all purposes. It doesn't matter it's actually a sharpened screwdiver... "dagger" covers wide enough variety of weapons already. If it's similar enough to work as a dagger, it is a dagger.

Doesn't the fact that its improvised indicate that it doesn't function as a dagger in all respects? If it did, it would just be a dagger.

[MThurston]

Someone else wanted to talk about S.A. and ranged attacks.

I'd give a rock in the hands of a rogue their SA.

The weapon section list all weapons with improved as part of them.

Simplistic thinking as was stated, would mean that if a weapon has parentheses then it is a ranged weapon. Unless it's improvised with makes it a ranged attack but ranged attack for SA.

Which I have issue with.

[JackPhoenix]

Doesn't the fact that its improvised indicate that it doesn't function as a dagger in all respects? If it did, it would just be a dagger.

Not necessarily. Planeshift: Amonkhet presents us with Khopesh. It is a weapon of its own, with its own weapon proficiencies, but when it's mentioned in the text, it's followed by "treat as longsword". Not "uses the stats of a longsword" or "sickle-shaped longsword called khopesh". Not actually an official material, but there's also "A rusted iron bar that can be used as a club" and "A flint shard that can be used as a dagger" from OotA and I think there are more examples of "not-actually-a-[weapon]" that serves as a [weapon] in other adventures.

[Xetheral]

Why? That doesn't make any sense. Thrown longsword is improvised weapon, but if it's used as a proper longsword, with all the properties of a longsword, it's not improvised weapon.

Because it is the text of the Improvised property that lets a sufficiently-similar object be used as if it were a weapon. If an object loses a property, it can't benefit from the special rules that property enables.

Using an existing weapon in a non-standard way makes it an improvised weapon. If you then switch back to using it properly, it does indeed lose the improvised weapon property. I overlooked that possibility when I claimed that an object could never lose the improvised weapon property, so I was wrong there. That doesn't affect my claims regarding objects that aren't already weapons, however.


If an object works as a dagger in all respects, it is a dagger for all purposes. It doesn't matter it's actually a sharpened screwdiver... "dagger" covers wide enough variety of weapons already. If it's similar enough to work as a dagger, it is a dagger.

The special rules of the Improvised property don't turn a sufficiently-similar object into an existing weapon. Instead, they let you use the object "as if" it were that weapon.

Your point about "dagger" covering a wide variety of weapons is a good one. An object that the DM determines can function as a dagger (via the special rules in the text of the Improvised weapon property) would indeed be a dagger, albeit one with the improvised weapon property. An object that the DM determines to be a dagger in the first place (via the general authority of the DM) would just be a regular dagger and the Improvised weapon property would be irrelevant.

[NaughtyTiger]

Not necessarily. Planeshift: Amonkhet presents us with Khopesh. It is a weapon of its own, with its own weapon proficiencies, but when it's mentioned in the text, it's followed by "treat as longsword". Not "uses the stats of a longsword" or "sickle-shaped longsword called khopesh". Not actually an official material, but there's also "A rusted iron bar that can be used as a club" and "A flint shard that can be used as a dagger" from OotA and I think there are more examples of "not-actually-a-[weapon]" that serves as a [weapon] in other adventures.

These are adventures not core rulebooks. Is it more likely that the authors were tying to add flavor inline with the basic rules, rather than considering the improvised weapon rules and interactions with tavern brawler?

[Keltest]

These are adventures not core rulebooks. Is it more likely that the authors were tying to add flavor inline with the basic rules, rather than considering the improvised weapon rules and interactions with tavern brawler?

Agreed. The authors were almost certainly intending to just make the base items there, and flavored them for the adventure instead of carefully considering the rules minutia of using an iron bar as a club. Imagine they had said "its a club that happens to look identical to an ordinary iron bar" if it helps.

[n00b]

Someone else wanted to talk about S.A. and ranged attacks.

I'd give a rock in the hands of a rogue their SA.

The weapon section list all weapons with improved as part of them.

Simplistic thinking as was stated, would mean that if a weapon has parentheses then it is a ranged weapon. Unless it's improvised with makes it a ranged attack but ranged attack for SA.

Which I have issue with.

I have no issue with what you would do or actually do at your own table. But you're trying to say that in the rules those items are usable for sneak attack. They're just not, there's no other way to put it. But that's by RAW. Again if you want to use it how you want at your table it's fine. Make your own rules for how you want to play and how you have fun. That's what the game is all about.

[MThurston]

Rules as Written support my argument.
Rules as Intended on the other hand do not.

Rules clearly state that rogues get S.A. with Ranged weapons.

Rules clearly say that weapons with parentheses are ranges weapons.

Rules clearly give Improvised weapons parentheses.

The only conclusion by RAW is that anything having parentheses is a ranged weapon.

And it functions in game play exactly like a ranged weapon.

Now on a side note. I would give a rogue their sneak attack lobbing a scimitar at someone. I wouldn't however give it to a chair. I'd even allow them to use dex for throwing that scimitar.

[n00b]

Rules as Written support my argument.
Rules as Intended on the other hand do not.

Rules clearly state that rogues get S.A. with Ranged weapons.

Rules clearly say that weapons with parentheses are ranges weapons.

Rules clearly give Improvised weapons parentheses.

The only conclusion by RAW is that anything having parentheses is a ranged weapon.

And it functions in game play exactly like a ranged weapon.

Now on a side note. I would give a rogue their sneak attack lobbing a scimitar at someone. I wouldn't however give it to a chair. I'd even allow them to use dex for throwing that scimitar.

I give up. You clearly don't understand the rules as they're written. That's been evidenced in other threads as well. I'm done.

[Mith]

My gut check for an improvised weapon is this: Could I see it being used in a Jackie Chan comedic fight scene such as a ladder? If so, it works like an improvised weapon.

As far as getting SA with an improvis3d weapon, it will probably depend. The idea of a Sneak Attack is that you hit the vital areas, or precise backstab. I won't call hitting someone with a ladder from hiding a Sneak Attack, but if you have an ally distracting an opponent in a bar fight, and you pick up a bar stool and smash his ribs? That can be Sneak Attack with a Greatclub.

Yes it's probably against RAW, and runs a risk of being inconsistent, but if I can get players invested enough in a fight to set up this of thing, I'll take it as mission accomplished.

[Misterwhisper]

Rules as Written support my argument.
Rules as Intended on the other hand do not.

Rules clearly state that rogues get S.A. with Ranged weapons.

Rules clearly say that weapons with parentheses are ranges weapons.

Rules clearly give Improvised weapons parentheses.

The only conclusion by RAW is that anything having parentheses is a ranged weapon.

And it functions in game play exactly like a ranged weapon.

Now on a side note. I would give a rogue their sneak attack lobbing a scimitar at someone. I wouldn't however give it to a chair. I'd even allow them to use dex for throwing that scimitar.

Bolded/underlined/italicized part is completely and utterly wrong.
You know this, it has been pointed out to you multiple times.
JC has said it in tweets which have been provided.

I will even provide it again: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/04/27/so-when-you-throw-a-dagger-it-becomes-a-ranged-weapon/
NOTE: Making a ranged attack by throwing a melee weapon, does NOT make it a ranged weapon.

LIST OF PHB WEAPONS THAT A ROGUE IS PROFICIENT WITH AND CAN SNEAK ATTACK WITH:

SIMPLE MELEE:
Dagger: Because it has the finesse trait. No matter if melee or thrown.

SIMPLE RANGED: All of them because of they are ranged weapons.
Dart: It is a ranged weapon, and it has finesse.
Light Crossbow: Ranged Weapon
Sling: Ranged Weapon
Shortbow: Ranged Weapon

Martial Melee Weapons:
Rapier: It has the finesse trait.
Shortsword: It has the finesse trait.

Martial Ranged Weapons:
Hand Crossbow: It is a ranged weapon.

LIST OF WEAPONS A ROGUE CAN SNEAK ATTACK WITH, BUT ARE NOT PROFICIENT WITH:

Scimitar: It is a finesse weapon, but you are not proficient.
Whip: Finesse weapon but also not normally proficient.
Longbow: Ranged weapon, but not proficient
Heavy Crossbow: Same thing, ranged weapon but not proficient
Blowgun: Ranged but not proficient.

The two oddballs are:

Net: A ranged weapon, but because it does not do any damage you can not sneak attack with it.
Longsword: You specifically gain proficiency with it even though you do not get most martial weapons, but you can't sneak attack with it.

You have been told what the rules are, you have been linked to where you have been proven wrong multiple times, if you continue to argue against the printed words of the book and the clarification of the head designer I will continue to report your posts as trolling.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Rules clearly say that weapons with parentheses are ranges weapons.
No they don't. What it clearly states is that weapons with the option to make ranged attacks have that range in parentheses.

Being able to make a ranged attack does not make the weapon a ranged weapon. "Ranged Weapon" is a separate category on the equipment chart. If your weapon is not in the simple or martial category of ranged weapons, it is not a ranged weapon no matter what*.

The rules do not support your argument as they are written and they are not intended to support this argument. They were very deliberately written in such a way that this distinction is important.
*Unless you are or have a DM that says otherwise, your table your rules. Just don't try to say that they're the rules as written.

[MThurston]

Range
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.

This is the first part of the rule. This indicates that a dagger, light hammer, trident, throwing axes can be used as range attacks and are ranges weapons.

If that is not intended then it should have been written better.

This really is the only rule needes. This is under Weapons and this is in the Range section.

SA says ranged weapons.

It is not a leap of any kind.

If the rules said that only thrown weapons with finesse, then it would say that. They left it as a general term.

If you wanted to limit S.A. for ranged weapons them only ammunition would work. A dagger would not give it to you thrown.

[Misterwhisper]

Range
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.

This is the first part of the rule. This indicates that a dagger, light hammer, trident, throwing axes can be used as range attacks and are ranges weapons.

If that is not intended then it should have been written better.

This really is the only rule needes. This is under Weapons and this is in the Range section.

SA says ranged weapons.

It is not a leap of any kind.

If the rules said that only thrown weapons with finesse, then it would say that. They left it as a general term.

If you wanted to limit S.A. for ranged weapons them only ammunition would work. A dagger would not give it to you thrown.

Reported for trolling.

Please continue.

[Keltest]

Range
A weapon that can be used to make a ranged Attack has a range in parentheses after the Ammunition or thrown property. The range lists two numbers. The first is the weapon’s normal range in feet, and the second indicates the weapon’s long range. When attacking a target beyond normal range, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll. You can’t Attack a target beyond the weapon’s long range.

This is the first part of the rule. This indicates that a dagger, light hammer, trident, throwing axes can be used as range attacks and are ranges weapons.

If that is not intended then it should have been written better.

This really is the only rule needes. This is under Weapons and this is in the Range section.

SA says ranged weapons.

It is not a leap of any kind.

If the rules said that only thrown weapons with finesse, then it would say that. They left it as a general term.

If you wanted to limit S.A. for ranged weapons them only ammunition would work. A dagger would not give it to you thrown.

Being able to make a ranged attack with a weapon does not make it a ranged weapon. Ranged weapon is a game term with a specific meaning in the context of rules discussions.

[MThurston]

So under the Weapon Rules.

It lists Melee, does that not describe melee weapons?

So under Range, does that not describe range weapons?

[MThurston]

I apologize. I just seen my mistake.

I'm argueing weapon type and that is not what it is. It's weapon property.

What I have listed is a range property but not a range weapon.

My fault, I thought that the weapon rules was talking different weapon types.

Again, sorry.

[n00b]

I apologize. I just seen my mistake.

I'm argueing weapon type and that is not what it is. It's weapon property.

What I have listed is a range property but not a range weapon.

My fault, I thought that the weapon rules was talking different weapon types.

Again, sorry.

No problem! Glad we all got it worked out.