Flame Blade (Druid) Two Weapon Fighting?

[Wuzza]

I use a Scimitar as a Druid (didn't take shillelagh at lvl 1, just picked it up at lvl 4, but not yet procured a club)

Looking at Flame Blade (lvl 2), it uses a melee spell attack action.

If I attack with my normal scimitar, would you rule I can then use Flame Blade as a bonus action, as per the weapon fighting rule? Or the other way around?

"When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative"

I probably think not, although it would be cool, am I missing anything?

[Frozenstep]

You have to take the attack action to trigger two weapon fighting, and flame blade simply allows you to make a melee spell attack, it is not an attack action and doesn't qualify, sadly.

[Wuzza]

I get that way around, but what about attacking with the normal scimitar, would you class Flame Blade as counting as another scimitar, granting a second attack? (a normal one would allow the second attack)

[stoutstien]

I get that way around, but what about attacking with the normal scimitar, would you class Flame Blade as counting as another scimitar, granting a second attack? (a normal one would allow the second attack)

Raw no but hardly OP. Ask your DM.

[NaughtyTiger]

Last month, there was a RAW argument for flame blade as an actual light scimitar... (as an improvised weapon). Almost convinced me.

That said, as a DM i have allowed it, as a player, (half?) DMs have allowed it.

Given the existence of shadow blade, i think it is perfectly reasonable

[Damon_Tor]

Raw no but hardly OP. Ask your DM.

Nonsense. By RAW the scimitar clearly qualifies as an object similar enough to a scimitar to be treated as one when using it as an improvised weapon. It would only deal standard scimitar damage, but it's absolutely usable for this.

[Kane0]

Given the existence of shadow blade, i think it is perfectly reasonable

This. 10char.

[Trickery]

I'd just create a new version of Flame Blade based on Shadow Blade. 2d8 fire damage, light, finesse, thrown (20/60), advantage versus targets that are ignitable.

[stoutstien]

Nonsense. By RAW the scimitar clearly qualifies as an object similar enough to a scimitar to be treated as one when using it as an improvised weapon. It would only deal standard scimitar damage, but it's absolutely usable for this.
. My reasoning is that the flame blade has very specific rules vs the general rules of twf and weapons. The list of actions that are available to the player using the flame blade are listed in the spell.
Compared to stone shapes that called out it can be a weapon for all accounts.

As I said, I would allow it if asked.

[Zhorn]

Last month, there was a RAW argument for flame blade as an actual light scimitar...
Close, the argument was about using the fiery blade created by the Flame Blade spell in an attack action by using the precise wording of RAW and the conditions the spell causes.
My forehead still hurts from hitting against that brick wall. Abandoned that thread mostly because it's hard to have discussion about RAW exploits when people constantly insert RAI and interpretations instead of sticking to the exact wording used.

[BarneyBent]

Nonsense. By RAW the scimitar clearly qualifies as an object similar enough to a scimitar to be treated as one when using it as an improvised weapon. It would only deal standard scimitar damage, but it's absolutely usable for this.

It is not clear, RAW clearly puts this at the DM’s discretion. Which means it’s just as valid, RAW, for a DM to rule that this works as that it doesn’t. A DM could easily say that the Flame Blade is a scimitar-shaped flame, insubstantial, and therefore not an object (or at least, not close enough to a real scimitar to qualify). Flame Blade itself leaves this ambiguous, so it’s entirely up to the DM.

Honestly, if one of my players had this spell I’d houserule it to use similar language to Magic Stone - you can choose to make melee spell attacks with the Flame Blade. That would qualify it for the Attack action (which interestingly never specifies weapon attack, just an attack - it’s just that it’s very rare you can make a spell attack without also using the Cast A Spell action), allowing Extra Attack, etc.

[Tanarii]

Definitely not. It is used as its own action as a melee spell attack, so it doesn't qualify.

But it was written a while ago, and as others have said now there's Shadow Blade to compare to. Asking your DM to do a house rule rewrite along those lines wouldn't be unreasonable, if she's open to house rules.

[Kyutaru]

One might think the weapon is too dangerous to be handled carelessly. Druids seem to love using replacement elemental weapons. Magic Stone for ranged (earth), Flame Blade for melee (fire), Call Lightning for AOE (air), Control Water for crowd control (water).

These aren't fire and forget burst spells like wizards use. They have durations and are meant to be repeated attacks that use up future actions. Giving someone the ability to suddenly use Flame Blade while dual wielding might step on the toes of the other powers. Should I give someone the ability to dual wield a Scimitar and a Lightning bolt?


About Shadow Blade, it was designed for Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters. They have class aspects that make having it be a melee weapon important. Druids lack these and aren't as martially inclined. Once we start comparing spells we'll quickly realize Wizards have better ones than Clerics...

[Vogie]

I wouldn't mind it. Mostly because it won't turn on really quick.

First turn Flame blade as a bonus action. Second Turn Shillelagh as a bonus action. Third turn, yay you get to attack as a bonus action... and they're probably already dead.

Flame Blade only has a duration of 10 minutes, and Shillelagh has a duration of 1 minute, so unless you're hitting the DIYDungeon Vending Machine, Flame Blade won't last between encounters.

[Wuzza]

Thanks for the replies peoples.:smallsmile:

I kinda knew in my heart that it probably wasn't RAW, but was interested in everyones thoughts. It was as much for cool factor as DPR. I have been getting into melee if I want to save wildshape. took x1 lvl in Sorc, which gives me 15 AC with no armour currently, and have shield (spell) as well, which means I can hang with the big boys for a couple of rounds. Was picturing him as a wardancer type.

I can always fall back on my +2 scimitar and shillelagh. :smallcool:

[greenstone]

Nonsense. By RAW the scimitar clearly qualifies as an object similar enough to a scimitar to be treated as one when using it as an improvised weapon. It would only deal standard scimitar damage, but it's absolutely usable for this.

I point to that other (long) thread as evidence that this is (1) not nonsense, and (2) not clear, :-)