Great Weapon Master Bonus Attack after a Thrown Weapon Crit

[Jelkan]

During a game today, our barbarian with GWM threw a javelin and crit an enemy. At that moment a silly thought crossed my mind. A javelin is a simple melee weapon with the thrown property, and the first benefit of GWM reads:

"On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon or reduce a creature to 0 hit points with one, you can make one melee weapon attack as a bonus action."

As far as I can tell, a javelin would qualify for this part of the feat, regardless of whether it is used in melee or thrown. Either way, it is an attack made with a melee weapon (and the feat does not specify it has to be a melee weapon attack - the wording is very important here).

Now, I believe the idea that GWM would affect a thrown weapon attack is a bit silly. I believe many DMs would shoot this down immediately (even I would probably shoot it down). But still, is there a strictly RAW reason this would not work?

[LudicSavant]

During a game today, our barbarian with GWM threw a javelin and crit an enemy. At that moment a silly thought crossed my mind. A javelin is a simple melee weapon with the thrown property, and the first benefit of GWM reads:

"On your turn, when you score a critical hit with a melee weapon or reduce a creature to 0 hit points with one, you can make one melee weapon attack as a bonus action."

As far as I can tell, a javelin would qualify for this part of the feat, regardless of whether it is used in melee or thrown. Either way, it is an attack made with a melee weapon (and the feat does not specify it has to be a melee weapon attack - the wording is very important here).

Now, I believe the idea that GWM would affect a thrown weapon attack is a bit silly. I believe many DMs would shoot this down immediately (even I would probably shoot it down). But still, is there a strictly RAW reason this would not work?

This is exactly how it is supposed to work. The Duelist fighting style is supposed to work with javelins, too.

Why would you shoot this down as a DM? That seems rather arbitrary. At best it seems like missing the point of the way 5e is designed.

For instance, here's a quote from the devs on why Crossbow Expert makes you better at casting spells:


When designing a feat with a narrow use, we consider adding at least one element that can benefit a character more broadly—a bit of mastery that your character brings from one situation to another. [...] shows that some of the character’s expertise with one type of thing—crossbows, in this case—transfers to other things.

[Keravath]

It is the same situation as the clause in crossbow expert that allows any ranged attack with an opponent adjacent to be made without disadvantage .. and that includes any ranged weapon or spell attacks .. not just crossbows.

The clause in GWM is similar allowing for a bonus action attack after a crit or kill .. it doesn’t need to be a “great weapon”

[Malifice]

It works, but the bonus action attack must be a 'melee weapon attack' meaning it cant be with another thrown javelin (it has to be a melee attack).

[JoeJ]

It works, but the bonus action attack must be a 'melee weapon attack' meaning it cant be with another thrown javelin (it has to be a melee attack).

But it doesn't say the bonus action attack occurs immediately following the crit, so you can move and/or use your object interaction to draw another weapon first.

[Jelkan]

In regards to feat creation, I'm certainly in support of feats granting both a general benefit and a specific one. Clearly the first benefit is intended to be a general boost for any melee weapon, but my initial thoughts were that thrown melee weapons were an oversight in regards to GWM. Perhaps I was wrong.

I feel there is a degree of enmity in some of the responses. If offense was taken, I apologize. I'm relatively new to the boards and am not trying to piss any of you off. Despite my join date in 2017, I've not visited the site often and have posted less than a dozen times.

[stoutstien]

In regards to feat creation, I'm certainly in support of feats granting both a general benefit and a specific one. Clearly the first benefit is intended to be a general boost for any melee weapon, but my initial thoughts were that thrown melee weapons were an oversight in regards to GWM. Perhaps I was wrong.

I feel there is a degree of enmity in some of the responses. If offense was taken, I apologize. I'm relatively new to the boards and am not trying to piss any of you off. Despite my join date in 2017, I've not visited the site often and have posted less than a dozen times.
It's hard to judge RAI with the game being written by a a plethora of writers and editors. Personally I believe half of sage advice has been, "crap didn't see that rule interaction but this is how i would rule it."

Thrown weapons has such little support in this edition that i always rule on the side of being more liberal with rulings regarding them.
I remember a very in depth thread about if the duelist style applied to thrown weapon based on the while wielding part of the style.