Hoopak... martial?

[LibraryOgre]

Why is a hoopak a martial weapon? It is a staff, maybe a spear, that can be used as a staff-sling.

[Saelethil]

Why is a hoopak a martial weapon? It is a staff, maybe a spear, that can be used as a staff-sling.

What source is it from? I’m not familiar with it.

[stoutstien]

Why is a hoopak a martial weapon? It is a staff, maybe a spear, that can be used as a staff-sling.

There's kind of a hidden formula they use and because it is two hand and finesse it's going to be gated. Sad that monks can't use weapons wth tags...easy fix though.

[LibraryOgre]

What source is it from? I’m not familiar with it.

Shadow of the Dragon Queen. it is the traditional weapon of the kender, which means if your kender can't use martial weapons, they can't competently use a hoopak.

[Dork_Forge]

My guess is because it's both finesse and special and tbh feels appropriate. It's potentially a surprisingly potent weapon and it's more complicated because of its hybrid nature.

Though, if this bothers you, you could always rule (or ask the DM) for Kender to have racial proficiency with them.

Looking at it I think I'd end up using it as something like a Battle Smith or Hexblade. A +1 enchantment should apply to both melee and ranged attacks, letting you switch hit effectively without needing to rely on multiple magic weapons.

[Psyren]

In OneD&D, rogues have proficiency with any finesse weapon, so that's likely how they envisioned Tasslehoff-style Kender gaining that proficiency. A Kender Wizard meanwhile (shudder) wouldn't be wielding a hoopak.

[Dork_Forge]

In OneD&D, rogues have proficiency with any finesse weapon, so that's likely how they envisioned Tasslehoff-style Kender gaining that proficiency. A Kender Wizard meanwhile (shudder) wouldn't be wielding a hoopak.

Whilst I'm sure there's actual grounding to this logic, I can't stand developing for the next edition in 5e's official products. Paid playtesting at the cost of the integrity of the edition that really made them.

[KorvinStarmast]

Why is a hoopak a martial weapon? Because someone at WotC is putting a certain kind of mushrooms on their pizze.
It is a staff, maybe a spear, that can be used as a staff-sling. Indeed. There is no need for that weapon in the 5e game. The deliberate decision to simplify the weapons table was a good one (with oddball items like Trident considered).
Quarterstaff. Done.

[Psyren]

Whilst I'm sure there's actual grounding to this logic, I can't stand developing for the next edition in 5e's official products. Paid playtesting at the cost of the integrity of the edition that really made them.

Without debating the merits/demerits of forward-edition testing - purely for my own education, do we know of non-rogue/non-martial Kender that canonically use hoopaks?


Because someone at WotC is putting a certain kind of mushrooms on their pizze. Indeed. There is no need for that weapon in the 5e game. The deliberate decision to simplify the weapons table was a good one (with oddball items like Trident considered).
Quarterstaff. Done.

A quarterstaff doesn't have a ranged attack though unless you have a really good throwing arm

[Joe the Rat]

I'm a little surprised they don't have "kender know how to swing a hoopak" or "kender rogues get it" spelled out somewhere. Or even "Instrument proficiency (hoopak) counts as weapon proficiency (hoopak)."

I just want to know where my flute/handaxe/slingshot got to.


A quarterstaff doesn't have a ranged attack though unless you have a really good throwing arm
That's why the spear is superior!

Reckless attack really ought to apply to ranged (thrown) weapon attacks.

[Dr.Samurai]

I'm a little surprised they don't have "kender know how to swing a hoopak" or "kender rogues get it" spelled out somewhere. Or even "Instrument proficiency (hoopak) counts as weapon proficiency (hoopak)."

I just want to know where my flute/handaxe/slingshot got to.
Yeah, I have found it weird how many races in D&D have almost a strictly martial angle to their culture and yet don't start with weapon proficiencies.

And I suppose if everyone is a warrior of some kind, the assumption is they'll have it anyways. So why do dwarves and elves get them?


Reckless attack really ought to apply to ranged (thrown) weapon attacks.
One improvement in 1D&D is that this is the case.

[JadedDM]

In previous editions, kender just had proficiency (or the equivalent of) to any and all kender weapons automatically, whether they be hoopaks, sithaks, chapaks or whatever. I'd just house rule that to be so in this version, as well.

[Psyren]

I'm a little surprised they don't have "kender know how to swing a hoopak" or "kender rogues get it" spelled out somewhere.


Reckless Attack really ought to apply to ranged (thrown) weapon attacks.

Not to re-incense anyone, but OneD&D is fixing both of these :smallsmile:

[Chronos]

Because exotic weapons aren't a thing in 5e? I'm pretty sure that staff-slings were exotic, in 3rd.

[Keltest]

Not to re-incense anyone, but OneD&D is fixing both of these :smallsmile:

Ignoring for the moment the dubiousness of D&Done even realistically applying to 5e stuff, its still years out, so thats not a particularly comforting claim.

[Psyren]

Ignoring for the moment the dubiousness of D&Done even realistically applying to 5e stuff, its still years out, so thats not a particularly comforting claim.

It's 1 year (and some change) at most. And even if your group doesn't switch, you can still point to how Reckless Attack and Rogue proficiencies work over there when asking your DM for a buff.

[stoutstien]

Because exotic weapons aren't a thing in 5e? I'm pretty sure that staff-slings were exotic, in 3rd.
They have never model sling and sling staffs well IMO.

[Damon_Tor]

I wouldn't have listed the hoopak as its own weapon type. I would have listed it under "adventuring gear" with the description "the hoopak can be used as either a spear or a sling." Done.