| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
In the rules for improvised weapons, it says:
"To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match. An improvised weapon scores a threat on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit."
So a beer bottle might be comparable to a club, a chair to a greatclub, a shovel to a shortspear, etc.
But is it possible to use an actual weapon as an improvised weapon?
For example, suppose a level 1 monk takes the feat Catch Off-Guard (that removes the penalty for using an improvised weapon) and smacks someone over the head with a greatsword. Would that be an improvised weapon that does 2d6 damage (with a 20/x2 critical)?
Suppose the same monk uses a Large dwarven waraxe instead. Would that be an improvised weapon that does 2d8 damaqe (with a 20/x2 critical)?
On the one hand, it seems odd to me to treat Catch Off-Guard as a sort of Weapon Proficiency (everything). But on the other hand, it seems odd to treat a big chair as a greatclub, but not treat a greatclub as a greatclub.
Any thoughts?
I've thought about this too. If the character is using an actual weapon that he/she isn't proficient with they'd still take the -4 penalty (or whatever the minus is) because they don't how to use it correctly. When I DM though and someone does something like this I would probably reduce the penalty a little bit to show the characters skill with improvisation.
EDIT: on the arrows issue, I don't think it says anything about them breaking but I know all improvised weapons break on a natural 1 (or at least they used to, I still use this rule). I don't think I'd do 50% break chance, maybe 25.
Personally, I'd allow it as long as the damage it does is less than it would be if you were proficient with it. After all, you're not using the greatsword as a greatsword, you're using it as a big metal club that happens to be sharp on the sides. (Yes it makes less sense for actual big metal clubs, but the point stands.)
In other words, it should be fine as long as the damage is based on how big/hard the weapon is and not how much damage the weapon actually does. (Longswords do 1d6 damage and rapiers do 1d4, that sort of thing.) Besides, this only makes it worth it to use the really big weapons since they'd still do more damage than your punches.
Similar to what Davi suggests, my house rule would probably be something like "for a Medium-sized character, all light improvised weapons do 1d4, one-handed ones do 1d6, and two-handed ones do 1d8". But that would clearly be a deviation from the actual rules.
Seems to me that is just another way to get around the rules. Non-proficiency with weapons is already covered and I think that that is what should be enforced.
That's one possible interpretation. But it seems strange that a character would be more accurate attacking with something that's sort-of-but-not-quite like an axe than with an actual axe.
I think Davi has the right idea. A monk with Catch Off-Guard can utilize a greatsword as an improvised weapon, but he's not trained to use the weapon as it was designed; technique is something that can't necessarily be imitated easily, and the ability to use a weapon as intended is part of what weapon proficiencies provide.
A monk would likely be swinging the greatsword wildly, and a greatclub is a good approximation of how such a character would use the weapon. I think that combined with the size and weight of the sword are enough reason to substitute a greatclub's stats under the statement "compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match".
If you'd like to throw an added twist into things, add a house rule that a greatsword used by such a character acts as a greatclub that inflicts slashing damage X percent of the time.
Oh, I forgot the other thing I was thinking about.
Suppose our improvised weapon expert picks up a Large morningstar and bashes away with it. Would the weapon size penalties miraculously vanish since it's an improvised weapon?
(Again, my gut reaction would be to say it does 1d8 damage with no size penalty.)
Well if you think about it, having "non-proficiency" negative overrule "not-a-weapon" negative because the item is ACTUALLY a weapon is rather silly.
"Hi, I'm a monk. I can't use a waraxe as a weapon as effectively as I can use a piece of wood with a nail sticking out of it."
Once you get into it, it's a vicious circle where NOTHING makes sense.
And speaking of "oversized" weapons. A 10' pole is a Large Quarterstaff. Saying it's a large quarterstaff invokes size penalties, saying it is a 10' pole invokes improvised weapon penalties. Catch-off-guard allows you to negate the latter. So what is a 10' pole?
Any more thoughts on this?
Personally I'm looking to arm a bard spy/ninja. Now, he'll probably have a short sword but a few of the feats that have taken my fancy are Catch of Gaurd, Throw Anything and Improvised Weapon Master (along with Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Grapple.)
This also seems to be a fitting place to ask all about the pros and cons of such a build/focus.
For one thing, have to creatively make use of the things that you find, jedi womble style, certainly appeals - you'll also not cry so hard when your favourite weapon is eaten/mulched.
..and being able to walk into the local castle unarmed and defend yourself if things turn nasty is always nice.
improvised weapons deal non-lethal damage and always have a 20/x2 crit range.
For example: a gnomish alchemist has the "throw anything" feat. He gracefully convinces the dumb human barbarian to drop his earth-breaker and let the gnome have a go at it. The Gnome alchemist chucks the earth-breaker at an unsuspecting goblin 20ft away: 2d6 nonleathal damage w/ -1 for distance and -2 for being a medium sized weapon.
After all that work it's not that big of a pay off.
You're better off using "never caught off guard" with a bluff check to catch them flat footed, or better yet, swing a loaded bear trap at their head.
improvised weapons deal non-lethal damage and always have a 20/x2 crit range.
For example: a gnomish alchemist has the "throw anything" feat. He gracefully convinces the dumb human barbarian to drop his earth-breaker and let the gnome have a go at it. The Gnome alchemist chucks the earth-breaker at an unsuspecting goblin 20ft away: 2d6 nonleathal damage w/ -1 for distance and -2 for being a medium sized weapon.
After all that work it's not that big of a pay off.
You're better off using "never caught off guard" with a bluff check to catch them flat footed, or better yet, swing a loaded bear trap at their head.
Ah I see, thank you for the heads up!
Tho.. non-lethal damage can still be useful -- batter them unconscious then coup de grace...
Hmm... so with Arcane Strike -- it'd still be non-lethal damage?
Still, I'll need a rethink - thanks again!
improvised weapons deal non-lethal damage and always have a 20/x2 crit range.
Hm? I believe that improvised weapons do lethal damage, ordinarily. You might be able to make an exception for something like a pillow, I suppose.
i would allow this but the weapon would always be a lower damage die then its normal one. For instance, someone wielding a longsword as an improvised weapon would be dealing 1d6 damage instead of 1d8, and from a flavor perspective they wouldnt be wielding it normally. For instance someone might be holding the blade end of a sword in a gauntleted hand and bashing the enemy with the pomell.
|
This is actually occurring in a game I'm DMing right now. The way I ruled it was that they could use it one of the two following ways:
(A) Treat as improvised weapon, getting none of the weapon's special properties (except reach for pole arms), only a 20x2 critical, and damage based on size (1d4 light, 1d6 one-handed, 1d8 two-handed). Damage type is as normal, but also allows bludgeoning (as an or).
(B) Treat as the actual weapon, taking a -4 penalty to hit, but using the weapons properties as normal.
I'm still debating about allowing reach with a weapon that would normally have it, though, and am pretty sure I'm going to rescind even that property (though they would still threaten at reach, just at a -4 to hit as they'd be using option B).
This is actually occurring in a game I'm DMing right now. The way I ruled it was that they could use it one of the two following ways:
(A) Treat as improvised weapon, getting none of the weapon's special properties (except reach for pole arms), only a 20x2 critical, and damage based on size (1d4 light, 1d6 one-handed, 1d8 two-handed). Damage type is as normal, but also allows bludgeoning (as an or).
(B) Treat as the actual weapon, taking a -4 penalty to hit, but using the weapons properties as normal.I'm still debating about allowing reach with a weapon that would normally have it, though, and am pretty sure I'm going to rescind even that property (though they would still threaten at reach, just at a -4 to hit as they'd be using option B).
I like your ruling. Great minds think alike!
|
|
I should note that I wouldn't necessarily let ALL improvised weapons do bludgeoning, but ones that were meant to be weapons inevitably have a handle, hilt, haft or something equivalent that is meant to be gripped strongly that could be used to bludgeon. Things not meant to be weapons don't necessarily have that (like a shard of glass, which could only do P and/or S).
|
|
The biggest problem that I see with not clearly delineating between non-weapons and weapons is the Improvised Weapon Mastery:
You can turn nearly any object into a deadly weapon, from a razor-sharp chair leg to a sack of flour.
Prerequisites: Catch Off-Guard or Throw Anything, base attack bonus +8.
Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties for using an improvised weapon. Increase the amount of damage dealt by the improvised weapon by one step (for example, 1d4 becomes 1d6) to a maximum of 1d8 (2d6 if the improvised weapon is two-handed). The improvised weapon has a critical threat range of 19–20, with a critical multiplier of ×2.
At it's most basic, you can pick up a longsword that you aren't proficient in, and not only does it now function like a longsword with the crit, but it basically becomes a bastard sword since the 1d8 damage bumps up to 1d10.
Or pick up a light weapon, such as a short sword, which now does 1d8 damage and functions, for all intents and purposes, like a saw toothed saber, being able to be finessed and used for TWF.
I think I'd just rule that weapons are weapons, and everything else isn't a weapon and thus is a improvised weapon. That way non-proficiency penalties still apply.
Two things:
(1) This rarely improves a weapon. Improvised weapon mastery would improve a club (higher crit and 1d8), a longsword would stay the same, many two-handed weapons either end up identical or just different (but not necessarily better). This is "weird", but in the context of (2) not so bad.(2) You cannot take weapon focus, weapon specialization, etc for improvised weapons, meaning that if you have any specialized training you will always be better with the real training than the improvised training.
I'd rather have the oddity of weapons occasionally be better as improvised than the oddity of having broken-off axe-heads deal more damage than an actual axe (in the hands of the same character). At least the former can just be glossed over on the fluff side, where the latter leaves a warrior going "bwah?!"
|
I feel like this is a good time to bump this thread, as the Monk of the Empty Hand can constantly be dealing improvised weapons. I was curious if a enhancement bonus on a weapon that one of these monks is using (as an improvised weapon) would still apply? So a Monk of the Empty Hand picks up a +1 Longsword and treats it as club, but does he still get the +1 to hit and damage? If it is a +1 Flaming Longsword, does he still get the 1d6 fire damage? And what about if it was a +1 Flaming Greatsword? Since he treats it as a quarterstaff, does it now do only 1d6 damage (pretty sure about this one, just looking for confirmation/other opinions)? But he is able to treat it as a double weapon? And does the enhancement bonus carry over to "both" ends of the weapon? If he is able to benefit from the enhancement bonus, does the Ki Weapons ability stack with those enhancement bonuses?
I made a consolidated thread about this: here.
No one responded, unfortunately. I'm not the type to bump my own thread though, if no one else is showing any interest.
You can FAQ that one so that they will look at all the questions we've asked in all three threads related to this.
Similar to what Davi suggests, my house rule would probably be something like "for a Medium-sized character, all light improvised weapons do 1d4, one-handed ones do 1d6, and two-handed ones do 1d8". But that would clearly be a deviation from the actual rules.
With respect to the Monk of the Empty Hand, my previous post turned out to be prescient -- that's pretty much how the Monk of the Empty Hand improvised weapons work (except the two-handed weapon works like a quarterstaff, not a big club).
AlanM -- I would probably give the weapon the enhancement bonus even when used as an improvised weapon. For special abilities, I'd do it on a case-by-case basis (e.g. Ghost Touch would work on an improvised weapon, but not Wounding, maybe).
|
I like your ruling. Great minds think alike!This is actually occurring in a game I'm DMing right now. The way I ruled it was that they could use it one of the two following ways:
(A) Treat as improvised weapon, getting none of the weapon's special properties (except reach for pole arms), only a 20x2 critical, and damage based on size (1d4 light, 1d6 one-handed, 1d8 two-handed). Damage type is as normal, but also allows bludgeoning (as an or).
(B) Treat as the actual weapon, taking a -4 penalty to hit, but using the weapons properties as normal.I'm still debating about allowing reach with a weapon that would normally have it, though, and am pretty sure I'm going to rescind even that property (though they would still threaten at reach, just at a -4 to hit as they'd be using option B).
This seems like a great way to do things. I've been just using base weapon damage.
Now an alternate question is what happens if that weapon is masterwork? Since you are weilding it improperly do you get the masterwork benefit? What about magic?
Personally I would say no to masterwork and yes to magic.
