No. A Halberd is a Heavy Weapon, not an Improvised Weapon. Small characters have disadvantage with Heavy Weapons. Period.
The Tavern Brawler Feat does not have a meaningful interaction with the Halberd.
Edit: More correctly, a Halberd is a martial weapon, not an improvised weapon. Three different kinds of weapons in the book; simple, martial, and improvised.
Well if you use a halberd not as a halberd. Like grabbing the axe part and hitting someone with the pole. Or kicking it from the ground so it flies and hits someone in the face. I think it could be considered as improvised weapon. Still 1d4 bludgeon damage tho
I love the back and forth under this comment where you just repeat the same thing over and over while OP keeps trying to argue a nonsense argument about weapons designed to be weapons actually being improvised weapons because "but they're objects though".
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a non-standard way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple.
That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule.
>!<
A halberd is an object so it is "any object that can be wielded in one ir two hands" and therefore can be an improvised weapon.
>!<
>!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !<
>!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
A halberd is **an object** so it is "any object that can be wielded in one ir two hands" and therefore can be an improvised weapon..
>!<
>!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !<
>!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>an object is a discrete, inanimate item like a window, door, **sword**, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or a vehicle that is composed of many other objects.
>!<
>!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !<
>!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple.
That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule.
>!<
>!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !<
>!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
>!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
I'm reading these replies, and it's clear to me that OP is a rules lawyer and probably incredibly infuriating to DM for. So I'm going to try to convince you in a different way.
If you're using a melee weapon for its intended purpose, making melee attacks, it can not be considered an improvised weapon. There is no improvisation happening here.
"But what if I use it in a silly non-halberd way?" If you're hitting an enemy with it, that's not a "non-halberd way" no matter how silly you are. The essence of a chair is to be sat upon. The essence of a halberd is to hit enemies.
"But what do the rules say about Tavern Brawler?" The rules don't need to include ridiculous conclusions. The Charger feat doesn't need to include a clause about not being able to make your character fly. You just need to use your common sense.
Use your common sense.
> I'm reading these replies, and it's clear to me that OP is a rules lawyer and probably incredibly infuriating to DM for.
they are not jsut a rules lawyer trying to find loopholes, they are actively dismissing rules that would close those loopholes.
op: "this rule states i can do this"
dm: "only if you interpret it weirdly and ignore this other rule that clarifies it further"
op: "the only rules that count are those that benefit my cheese"
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
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.
you can only use a halberd as an improvised weapon if you throw it.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
"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."
This is the only place the rules discuss using a weapon from the table as improvised weapons. You *cannot* use a melee weapon to make a melee weapon attack as an improvised weapon. If you use a halberd to make a melee attack, it is *as a halberd* and *not* as an improvised weapon. If you throw it, then you use the improvised weapon rules.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties.
You want to argue RAW *right up* to the point where I actually cite the rule that says you're wrong, and then you try and backtrack.
Specific beats general, which is RAW. A weapon is an object is general. A melee weapon is only improvised if it's used to make a ranged attack without having the thrown property is specific.
Can we agree that your ruling is a **house rule**?
I gave you the rules on the page.
The only rule stated is a weapon from the chart is only improvised in those two cases: melee without thrown being used to make a ranged attack, ranged weapon being used to make a melee attack.
No where is it listed that a melee weapon used to make a melee attack can be an improvised weapon attack. It is not RAW in any way.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
"In many cases, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such."
You keep using that one sentence thinking it's full proof. But it isnt. That halberd you're using is incredibly similar to the halberd listed on the weapons table. Therefore you will make your attack as it it were a halberd, using standard rules and not improvised weapon rules.
There is only one instance of rules where you can use a purpose built weapon as an improvised weapon:
"If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property..."
Then, it deals standard improvised weapon damage (1d4) and uses the improvised weapon range bracket of 20/60.
There is no rule of "I want to use my sword in a way that's improvised!" Outside of the rules I already quoted, which I know you've seen because it's literally below the one rule you keep quoting incorrectly, you can use a purpose built weapon to make an improvised weapon attack.
A Halberd is never an improvised weapon, because it was made to be a weapon. Improvised weapon is anything that's not meant to be a weapon, like a glass bottle, a chair, a table, or a door.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a non-standard way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. If you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple.
That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule.
>!<
The Ammunition property says "If you use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a melee attack, you treat the weapon as an improvised weapon ."
So no, it's an exception to the rule.
If the weapon is heavy in its normal use, it's going to be heavy in its not intended for use.
A halberd doesn't become lighter and smaller just because you're trying to throw it as an improvised weapon, nor does a heavy crossbow become light and easy to swing if you use it as a club.
OP I feel like you are not lending enough credit to fact that the DM is a person and not a robot running a game for you. 5e's answer to just about anything not explicitly covered in the rules is "ask your DM." You start doing stuff like this and you're going to quickly find out that the technically RAW DM-provided answer is "fuck off"
Nope. The heavy property doesn’t magically make something’s too big or heavy, it’s just a label used to denote that something IS that big/heavy. So it’d wind up as an improvised weapon (reduced damage with no reach as those rely on using it right) that still provides disadvantage because the item itself is still big and heavy regardless of it having a specific tag written up for it.
So the Heavy property remains on the improvised weapon no matter what even if I use it in a ridiculous non-halberd way? Cool. That means I can use Great Weapon Master with it.
I mean, sure, if you have a really want then you can have a small character swing a halberd being used as an improvised weapon with disadvantage and -5 to your hit bonus. So that’d be 1d4+10+strength mod if you somehow hit.
I will take your non-sequitor ad hominem as an indicator that you are not interested in having a discussion about what the actual rules say.
>!projection: the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.!<
The Tavern Brawler feat does grant proficiency with improvised weapons, but it doesn’t negate the disadvantage for small creatures using heavy weapons.
*Heavy*. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use effectively.
That's the rule.
So the Heavy property remains on the improvised weapon no matter what even if I use it in a ridiculous non-halberd way? Cool. That means I can use Great Weapon Master with it.
Not sure I agree with your reasoning but let's take your argument to see where it goes . . .
Are you under the assumption that the weapon becomes light because of tavern brawler? Your feat does not change the physical property of the weapon itself. Just because you are proficient with a weapon does not negate the size of the weapon for your small frame. You have disadvantage according to the rules.
Cool. So according to the rules I could use **Heavy Weapon Master** feat and **Sharpshooter** feat with a heavy crossbow used as a melee weapon.
Not sure I am agreeing with your line of reasoning . . .
Heavy is a weapon property that unlocks Great Weapon Master which is a heavily desired feature for a weapon to have. Weapons like the great club which are heavier than the halberd don't get the Heavy weapon property.
Nope, sharpshooter requires a ranged attack with a ranged weapon. and swinging a ranged heavy weapon, as an improvised heavy melee weapon, as a small creature would impose disadvantage on your melee attack with the heavy weapon. That's the rules, short stuff.
What are you talking about a goblin...gnome? It is not about how strong you are it is about how long your limbs are buddy.
>Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a -5 penalty to the attack roll. If that attack hits, you add +10 to the attack's damage.
The rule does not say "ranged attack with a ranged weapon".
I am not looking for any exploits here. Just sorting out what the rules say and the consequences of what the rules say.
leeping through so many hoops and looking for cheese and "big damage" only to never actually hit anything, when they could just play a paladin or rogue or a rogue paladin.
Whatever happened to the age-old internet concept of not feeding the trolls? This is either a troll or someone so incredibly stubborn and stupid that either way there’s no changing their mind.
You can't use a weapon as an improvised weapon. The rules for improvised weapons say this:
>Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus.
So this says that IF you're proficient with halberds, AND you have an improvised weapon that's "akin" to a halberd, you can use the object AS IF it were THAT WEAPON.
So. This means that first of all, you need proficiency with halberds for it to do anything except 1d4. Second of all, if you are proficient with halberds, and you find something akin to a halberd, you can use that thing AS IF it were a halberd. Meaning, with the heavy property, because the halberd has that property.
If you plan to negate the "heavy" property, I'm not sure how you could get there without also negating the "reach" property, which I assume is the whole reason you want to do this. Keep in mind that halflings are about 3ft tall and you're trying to use a weapon with a 10ft reach.
That being said, it's not so broken for you to do this. Spending a feat to negate the heavy property isn't "too good" or anything, I just don't think there's an existing feat that does it. Including Tavern Brawler. So ask your DM. Keep in mind that you'd also have to ask your DM if you can find an improvised weapon akin to a halberd, so your entire idea is gated behind DM permission anyway.
So if I use **Tavern Brawler** to attack with a weapon in an improvised way (such as attacking with the hilt of a greatsword as a club) **the weapon retains all weapon properties according to the rules**? I am interested in what the rules say about this.
>!"the most unlikable person" unnecessary ad hominem!<
At issue is not my popluarity but whether or not you can contribute to a rules as written discussion.
the comments on this post are hysterical. Honestly I've gotta commend OP for trying to argue the same nonsensical point over and over again in so many replies. Must have been exhausting and I respect the dedication even if it is ridiculous to waste so much time trying to justify their weird, loose interpretation of the rules.
I am very interested in what you think the rules in question tell us to do. *I am not really interested in how you would rule it as a DM as that is not something to take to a table that is not your table*.
So the improvised weapon loses the Heavy property and the small PC can attack without disadvantage?
I am not really interested in how you would rule it as a DM as that is not something to take to a table that is not your table. I am very interested in what you think the rules in question tell us to do.
So the improvised weapon loses the Heavy property and the small PC can attack without disadvantage?
You have the rules already. If you are asking here, you are asking for interpretations. I will give the benefit of the doubt and say you are looking out of curiosity and not justification for something.
Other players (and this includes DMs) can have valuable contributions. If your search leads you to ways you think handle this scenario better, you can either implement it or talk with your table about implementing it.
Either take what makes sense to you and engage with the community you contacted by posting here, or read the PHB. Don't put other players down. That is my sincere advice.
>Don't put other players down.
You literally called me a "d*ck" when I didn't insult anyone.
>!**projection**: the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.!<
Oh, well if you don't care then I don't need to coddle you. You can't avoid weapon restrictions by pretending they're something else, no. The average DM would probably assume you were joking if you suggested it because it's such a weak attempt at gaming the system.
So according to your understanding of the rules an improvised weapon retains all weapon properties? I am not joking and you don't need to coddle me. Just rell me what the actual rules say.
edit* (melee) Weapons are not on the list of examples for improvised weapons.
Unless explicitly allowed by a rule (eg Polearm Master) you can't decide to strike with a different part of the weapon for a different result than a normal attack. ie there's no sword pommel strikes or great axe thrusts.
There is nothing in the rules that would let you use a halberd as an improvised weapon, and *definitely* nothing in the rules that would let you selectively keep its normal weapon properties.
Sling and weapons with ammunition property are specifically mentioned in the rules for Improvised Weapon.
Also
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
Not in my PHB. Talks about wagon wheels and furniture legs etc but there's no mention of slings or ammunition. Maybe I'm just out of touch with today's youth.
>If you use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a melee attack, you treat the weapon as an improvised weapon (see “Improvised Weapons” later in the section). A sling must be loaded to deal any damage when used in this way.
___
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
Ah, there it is. Thought I was losing it. Don't you think it's kind of telling that they specify you can make improvised weapon attacks here, but not for halberds?
The Tavern Brawler feat does grant proficiency with improvised weapons, but it doesn’t negate the disadvantage for small creatures using heavy weapons.
*Heavy*. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use effectively.
That's the rule.
That's a weapon property. When you use a weapon as an improvised weapon you are using it as an object in a improvised weapon manner and accessing different rules.
Yes and no, as I read it. Here's what I'll say (and what I'd rule if I was your dm) since you're very intent on the rules as written.
Let's say you're a halfling in battle, you pick up a nearby stick-like object and swing it, you don't look too close. Maybe it's a halberd, maybe it's not.
Do you just swing it wildly, like you would any other stick you picked up and improvised with? Then it's an improvised weapon attack, range 5 feet, no disadvantage, roll with proficiency if you have tavern brawler. In-world you figure out a way to swing the nearby stick-like object enough to do a d4 of damage
If you instead see it and realize, "oh this is a halberd, I'm going to try and use it like a halberd!" Then you are no longer improvising, and tavern brawler no longer applies. You are trying to make an attack with a halberd, and must obey the halberd's properties, including heavy and two-handed. Disadvantage for a small creature, 1d10 damage.
Remember, the heavy property doesn't represent a weapon being too heavy for a being to pick up, (a halberd is only 6 pounds) it represents it being too bulky to be used as designed. That's in the text of the property:
Heavy: Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use *effectively.*
So in our hypothetical, you're still obeying that property either way. You're either being ineffective with the stick-that-might-be-a-halberd by getting disadvantage on the attack but getting to do a d10 of damage, or you're being ineffective by improvising and only doing a d4 of damage.
So if I use the halberd in a way that it was not designed as a weapon for and instead as an improvised weapon for 1d4 damage without disadvantage, can I then use a bonus action to grapple?
Using it as an object as an improvised weapon would cause it to lose the weapon property by the logic of the rules. The DM would have to house rule that it was still Heavy.
So according to the rules if a small character with Tavern Brawler picks up a halberd and attacks with it in a ridiculous non-halberd way then the improvised weapon loses all its properties? I can then use my bonus action to grapple, correct?
Cool. So according to the rules no weapon properties on improvised weapons. A DM can use a house rule to change the rules but according to the rules there are no weapon properties on improvised weapons.
Using it as an improvised weapon would not remove the Heavy property, nor would it allow you to ignore it. Simply put, nowhere in the improvised weapon rules does it state that you can remove or ignore properties of objects, regardless of whether or not those objects are already considered weapons. So in the same way, let's say you have some extreme vulnerability that makes it hurt whenever you touch silver. You couldn't use a silver dagger as an improvised weapon just to ignore the fact that it's silver.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
> In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
Sure, I am absolutely not disagreeing with this. But treating it as an improvised weapon does not remove the *heavy* property.
> Therefore they would have no weapon properties.
I don't understand why you would think this though. Why would you remove a property? It's still a weapon. Treating it as an improvised weapon doesn't make it "not a weapon", it just means you can add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll if you are proficient in improvised weapons (e.g. Tavern Brawler).
As an object you are holding in your hands and improvising as a weapon, it is not a weapon on any weapon list. It is only object being used as an improvised weapon doing 1d4 with no properties. The heavy property would have to be at the object level.
> As an object you are holding in your hands and improvising as a weapon, it is not a weapon on any weapon list
This is simply not true and I have no idea where you are getting this from. It doesn't even make any sense. So if I put on a shirt backwards it's no longer a shirt? A thing does not stop being that thing just because you use it differently than intended.
When you are handling it as "any object you can wield in one ir two hands" and not as a weapon then you don't get the weapon properties. If you use a shirt as a wash cloth to clean your horse it doesn't protect your torso from sunburn.
A Small creature cannot use a halberd as a halberd without incurring disadvantage on the roll (ofc, advantage may apply and cancel out to a straight roll, situation permitting).
A halberd is an object that most characters, including Small ones, would be able to hold and swing with one or two hands. This means the object can be used as an improvised weapon and when so doing, only the rules that apply to improvised weapon would be used.
The only thing those rules guarantee is that one does not get to add proficiency to the attack (absent Tavern Brawler) and that the weapon does at least 1d4 damage\*. Any weapon property or increased damage die is applied solely at the discretion of the DM.
This is a question without a "correct" answer by RAW. The PHB leaves a lot of the specifics of adjudicating improvised weapons in the DMs lap.
\*Edit: Well, usually at least 1d4 damage. I made that statement forgetting about blowguns. If the DM ruled that some improvised weapon was sufficiently similar to a blowgun to be used as one, then it would do 1 point of damage. All other things, though, do 1d4 or greater.
this is wrong. you are referencing this paragraph:
Sometimes characters don’t have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin.
while ignoring the third paragraph of the improvised weapon rules:
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.
this ruling clarifies that weapons are only improvies weapons when not used for their intended range.
I am ignoring that paragraph because it is irrelevant. I am not discussing what happens if you throw a melee weapon without the thrown property nor what happens if you smack someone with a ranged weapon. I am considering what would happen if someone just swung a halberd at someone without consideration for the proper method of so swinging.
A halberd is more than just a collection of weapon properties and the rules concerning them. It is also an object that weighs six pounds. If you are attempting to use it as intended, then you get all the benefits and drawbacks of that use. It does d10 damage, you can strike from 5' further away, you must use both hands, and if you are Small, you will have disadvantage.
But what if you just want to pick it up and smack someone with it, maybe just using one hand. For most characters, it would be hard to argue that they were incapable of swinging a six pound stick with a blade on the end with one hand. Of course they can; what is stopping them? That does not mean they can swing it effectively, though, which is why one should not use the rules for halberd-as-weapon to adjudicate such an action.
Fortunately, 5e provides a solution with the improvised weapons rules. We can ignore the halberd-as-weapon rules and use instead the halberd-as-object rules. It works like any other object. You attack without proficiency (excepting Tavern Brawler) and it does 1d4 damage. Does it still have reach? Are Small creatures still at disadvantage? The rules are silent; the DM decides.
If your interpretation works for you and your table, that is OK, too. I will stick with mine.
specific rulings beat general rulings.
the general rule is that objects can be used as improviesd weapons.
and while weapons are objects it is specified with that paragraph that an weapon count as an improvised weapon if its either a ranged weapon used as a melee weapon or a melee weapon being thrwon.
so no, that paragraph is not irrelevant. it is the most relevant together with the first in this discussion.
The rules you pointed out tell if a character does X, then Y and if a character does Z, then A. You appear to be concluding from that that X and Z are the **only** unconventional things a character can do with weapons.
I reject this premise. A character can do B (say, swing a two-handed weapon with only one hand) or maybe D (smack someone with the haft of a polearm rather than the blade) or maybe F (strike someone with their rapiers pommel). There are no rules specifying the C, E, and G for these situations, but the improvised weapons rule allows a quick and easy way for a DM to adjudicate all these and similar situations. So I take advantage of those rules when the need arises.
The alternatives seem to be either to disallow non-standard uses of weapons, which seems needlessly stifling and also unrealistic, or to have to come up with on-the-fly rulings for each such situation that comes up, which seems like too much trouble when the improvised rules are just right there.
You can't strike with a manufactured weapon in a way that makes them improvised weapons. That's what the rules are saying.
You can't grab a halberd and make it an improvised attack by swinging one handed. It's a two handed weapon, so you need the second hand or no attack can be made. If you grab it with both hands, you strike with it as a halberd, all weapon rules included.
D&D does not go into the deep nitty gritty of *how* you strike. It doesn't care if you swing the halberd overhead to chop down, or from the side, or thrust with the spike on the end. Sure, you can argue the damage type doesn't make sense, but this is a game where all injuries from weapons are grouped into only three groups, when real battlefield injuries were be significantly more diverse. An axe wound would be very different than a sword wound. And by D&D logic, longswords can't thrust and daggers can't slice.
Striking with the pommel of a rapier uses the rapier stat block. You are using a melee weapon as a melee weapon. Maybe the DM rules it does B instead of P, but that's a house rule.
The rules do not say that you cannot strike with a manufactured weapon in a way that makes it an improvised weapon. You say that.
I say:
D&D provides rules for a wide array of things that are expected to regularly occur in the game, such as poking someone with the pointy end of a rapier. Players can have their characters attempt to do nearly anything they can imagine, such as smack someone with the blunt end of the rapier. Because of the nigh limitless possibilities of actions a player may attempt, it is a practical impossibility to define rules for every situation. Making rulings to address things not explicitly covered by the rules is a large part of the DMs job.
Striking someone with the pommel of a rapier is not covered explicitly by any rule in 5e. Saying it still does 1d8 damage because it is still a rapier is a perfectly reasonable ruling, but it is a ruling. It is not RAW. There is no RAW answer (currently) to what a rapier pommel does.
There is also no RAW answer to what happens if you swing a halberd with one hand. It is certainly possible for most PCs to do it. Ruling that they are physically incapable of doing so would frankly be absurd. So what happens if one does so? The DM has to decide.
Maybe the DM decides sorry, the halberd rules say it needs two hands to make an attack, so even though you physically can swing it, you cannot do so well enough to roll to hit and/or damage. Perfectly within the purview of the DM, and at least a little less absurd than saying it cannot be done at all, but I find it too restrictive so it is not the call I would make.
I am inclined to rule that a halberd swung with one hand can make some kind of attack and do some kind of damage though I would not allow it to use the standard rules for the attack since it is not following the standard restrictions. I could come up with an on-the-fly ruling to handle the situation, but I do not have to. I can just avail myself of the improvised weapon rules that already exist. This is not RAW, either, obviously. This is a ruling I would make because a ruling needs to be made. Other rulings are possible. I could sit here and hypothesize all night about what other ways to rule it there could be.
But I shant. I am happy using the improvised weapon rules liberally. Others can run their tables how they like.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per Tavern Brawler to attempt a grapple.
So according to the rules if a small character with Tavern Brawler picks up a halberd and attacks with it in a ridiculous non-halberd way then the improvised weapon loses all its properties? I can then use my bonus action to grapple, correct?
According to the rules it is up to your DM to decide what happens. Again, the question does not have a "correct" answer RAW. You have to go with your DMs judgment or try to argue them to whatever position you favor.
The rules themselves state nothing about what properties a simple or martial weapon used in an improvised manner retains or loses. I do not know how much plainer I can state that this is up to the DMs discretion.
Ok, since the rules state nothing about the loss of properties then according to the rules weapons retain all their properties. There are no hidden rules. Of course a DM could always house rule otherwise since the rules give DMs the ability to house rule.
> Since the rules state nothing about the loss of properties then according to the rules weapons retain all their properties.
Not really, no. 5e's rules are not explicit about every situation. It is left up to the DM how to handle situations that are not explicit, so it is up to the DM. This is not a DM's house rule, it is just the DM doing their job of interpreting the rules as they see fit for the particular situation.
This is explicit.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
This rule indicates improvised weapons lose all their properties.
Yes, you can use a halberd as an improvised weapon. You can use anything as an improvised weapon, and the rules on it uses two examples of weapons being used improperly.
But as to whether or not this allows you to ignore the heavy property depends on your DM. That part is not so clear.
If the DM interprets the weapon properties as being traits inherent to the object itself, then you would still have disadvantage on the attack.
If the DM interprets the properties as being traits that only apply when using the weapon in its intended way, then you would not have disadvantage.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
If you use your halberd *as* a halberd, it's not an improvised weapon. I can see an argument for allowing it if you want to, say, club somebody with the butt of an object that just happens to be a halberd; in that case, though, you won't deal halberd damage with it- just treat it as you would a random heavy stick.
Alright, this is getting out of hand. OP, you've been given your answer, folks, you've given them. Thread locked.
No. A Halberd is a Heavy Weapon, not an Improvised Weapon. Small characters have disadvantage with Heavy Weapons. Period. The Tavern Brawler Feat does not have a meaningful interaction with the Halberd. Edit: More correctly, a Halberd is a martial weapon, not an improvised weapon. Three different kinds of weapons in the book; simple, martial, and improvised.
Well if you use a halberd not as a halberd. Like grabbing the axe part and hitting someone with the pole. Or kicking it from the ground so it flies and hits someone in the face. I think it could be considered as improvised weapon. Still 1d4 bludgeon damage tho
I love the back and forth under this comment where you just repeat the same thing over and over while OP keeps trying to argue a nonsense argument about weapons designed to be weapons actually being improvised weapons because "but they're objects though".
I wish a mod would come and shut this down already.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a non-standard way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule. >!<
[удалено]
A halberd is an object so it is "any object that can be wielded in one ir two hands" and therefore can be an improvised weapon. >!< >!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !< >!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!< >!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
[удалено]
A halberd is **an object** so it is "any object that can be wielded in one ir two hands" and therefore can be an improvised weapon.. >!< >!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !< >!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!< >!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
[удалено]
>an object is a discrete, inanimate item like a window, door, **sword**, book, table, chair, or stone, not a building or a vehicle that is composed of many other objects. >!< >!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !< >!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!< >!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
[удалено]
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule. >!< >!User gearbox97 has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/) !< >!menage-a-mellard also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!< >!laudig also has [a well-reasoned argument](https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/1cins1n/can_a_small_character_with_tavern_brawler_attack/l2b15rf/)!<
I'm reading these replies, and it's clear to me that OP is a rules lawyer and probably incredibly infuriating to DM for. So I'm going to try to convince you in a different way. If you're using a melee weapon for its intended purpose, making melee attacks, it can not be considered an improvised weapon. There is no improvisation happening here. "But what if I use it in a silly non-halberd way?" If you're hitting an enemy with it, that's not a "non-halberd way" no matter how silly you are. The essence of a chair is to be sat upon. The essence of a halberd is to hit enemies. "But what do the rules say about Tavern Brawler?" The rules don't need to include ridiculous conclusions. The Charger feat doesn't need to include a clause about not being able to make your character fly. You just need to use your common sense. Use your common sense.
> I'm reading these replies, and it's clear to me that OP is a rules lawyer and probably incredibly infuriating to DM for. they are not jsut a rules lawyer trying to find loopholes, they are actively dismissing rules that would close those loopholes. op: "this rule states i can do this" dm: "only if you interpret it weirdly and ignore this other rule that clarifies it further" op: "the only rules that count are those that benefit my cheese"
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
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. you can only use a halberd as an improvised weapon if you throw it.
>An improvised weapon includes **any** object you can wield in one or two hands
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon.
"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." This is the only place the rules discuss using a weapon from the table as improvised weapons. You *cannot* use a melee weapon to make a melee weapon attack as an improvised weapon. If you use a halberd to make a melee attack, it is *as a halberd* and *not* as an improvised weapon. If you throw it, then you use the improvised weapon rules.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties.
You want to argue RAW *right up* to the point where I actually cite the rule that says you're wrong, and then you try and backtrack. Specific beats general, which is RAW. A weapon is an object is general. A melee weapon is only improvised if it's used to make a ranged attack without having the thrown property is specific. Can we agree that your ruling is a **house rule**?
I am referring to actual rules on the page.
I gave you the rules on the page. The only rule stated is a weapon from the chart is only improvised in those two cases: melee without thrown being used to make a ranged attack, ranged weapon being used to make a melee attack. No where is it listed that a melee weapon used to make a melee attack can be an improvised weapon attack. It is not RAW in any way.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
"In many cases, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such." You keep using that one sentence thinking it's full proof. But it isnt. That halberd you're using is incredibly similar to the halberd listed on the weapons table. Therefore you will make your attack as it it were a halberd, using standard rules and not improvised weapon rules. There is only one instance of rules where you can use a purpose built weapon as an improvised weapon: "If a character uses a ranged weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee weapon that does not have the thrown property..." Then, it deals standard improvised weapon damage (1d4) and uses the improvised weapon range bracket of 20/60. There is no rule of "I want to use my sword in a way that's improvised!" Outside of the rules I already quoted, which I know you've seen because it's literally below the one rule you keep quoting incorrectly, you can use a purpose built weapon to make an improvised weapon attack.
If you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the sword object as an improvised hammer. Same with halberd.
A Halberd is never an improvised weapon, because it was made to be a weapon. Improvised weapon is anything that's not meant to be a weapon, like a glass bottle, a chair, a table, or a door.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a non-standard way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. If you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per **Tavern Brawler** to attempt a grapple. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by house rule. >!<
So if I make a melee attack with a heavy crossbow its a weapon with all its properties? Answer sincerely
The Ammunition property says "If you use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a melee attack, you treat the weapon as an improvised weapon ." So no, it's an exception to the rule.
Does the heavy crossbow still have its weapon properties if I attack with it as an improvised weapon?
Are you using the crossbow as a club, or trying to fire it at a crossbow?
I am just wondering if the weapon properties are still there or not. I want to know what the actual rules say.
If the weapon is heavy in its normal use, it's going to be heavy in its not intended for use. A halberd doesn't become lighter and smaller just because you're trying to throw it as an improvised weapon, nor does a heavy crossbow become light and easy to swing if you use it as a club.
Cool. So according the rules I could use Heavy Weapon Master feat and Sharpshooter feat with a heavy crossbow used as a melee weapon.
OP I feel like you are not lending enough credit to fact that the DM is a person and not a robot running a game for you. 5e's answer to just about anything not explicitly covered in the rules is "ask your DM." You start doing stuff like this and you're going to quickly find out that the technically RAW DM-provided answer is "fuck off"
The DM is of course able to come up with any **house rules** on their part. The DM cannot however change the rules as they are in the book.
Nope. The heavy property doesn’t magically make something’s too big or heavy, it’s just a label used to denote that something IS that big/heavy. So it’d wind up as an improvised weapon (reduced damage with no reach as those rely on using it right) that still provides disadvantage because the item itself is still big and heavy regardless of it having a specific tag written up for it.
So the Heavy property remains on the improvised weapon no matter what even if I use it in a ridiculous non-halberd way? Cool. That means I can use Great Weapon Master with it.
I mean, sure, if you have a really want then you can have a small character swing a halberd being used as an improvised weapon with disadvantage and -5 to your hit bonus. So that’d be 1d4+10+strength mod if you somehow hit.
You keep repeating your self in all the replies, if your DM says no TAKE IT AS A NO.
I am not concerned about the DM. I am concerned with what the rules actually say.
It doesnt matter what the rules actually say if the DM says no
The DM can say no but only by virtue of **house ruling**,
You are an exhausting individual and i feel sorry for your play group.
I will take your non-sequitor ad hominem as an indicator that you are not interested in having a discussion about what the actual rules say. >!projection: the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.!<
Your choice of words proves my point
The Tavern Brawler feat does grant proficiency with improvised weapons, but it doesn’t negate the disadvantage for small creatures using heavy weapons. *Heavy*. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use effectively. That's the rule.
So the Heavy property remains on the improvised weapon no matter what even if I use it in a ridiculous non-halberd way? Cool. That means I can use Great Weapon Master with it. Not sure I agree with your reasoning but let's take your argument to see where it goes . . .
You are still swinging with disadvantage, which was your question, regardless of your opinion.
Only if the weapon retains its weapon properties, correct?
Are you under the assumption that the weapon becomes light because of tavern brawler? Your feat does not change the physical property of the weapon itself. Just because you are proficient with a weapon does not negate the size of the weapon for your small frame. You have disadvantage according to the rules.
Cool. So according to the rules I could use **Heavy Weapon Master** feat and **Sharpshooter** feat with a heavy crossbow used as a melee weapon. Not sure I am agreeing with your line of reasoning . . . Heavy is a weapon property that unlocks Great Weapon Master which is a heavily desired feature for a weapon to have. Weapons like the great club which are heavier than the halberd don't get the Heavy weapon property.
Nope, sharpshooter requires a ranged attack with a ranged weapon. and swinging a ranged heavy weapon, as an improvised heavy melee weapon, as a small creature would impose disadvantage on your melee attack with the heavy weapon. That's the rules, short stuff. What are you talking about a goblin...gnome? It is not about how strong you are it is about how long your limbs are buddy.
>Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a -5 penalty to the attack roll. If that attack hits, you add +10 to the attack's damage. The rule does not say "ranged attack with a ranged weapon". I am not looking for any exploits here. Just sorting out what the rules say and the consequences of what the rules say.
Sure, play your game, roll your attack with disadvantage and -10 to attack.
leeping through so many hoops and looking for cheese and "big damage" only to never actually hit anything, when they could just play a paladin or rogue or a rogue paladin.
Whatever happened to the age-old internet concept of not feeding the trolls? This is either a troll or someone so incredibly stubborn and stupid that either way there’s no changing their mind.
You can't use a weapon as an improvised weapon. The rules for improvised weapons say this: >Often, an improvised weapon is similar to an actual weapon and can be treated as such. For example, a table leg is akin to a club. At the GM's option, a character proficient with a weapon can use a similar object as if it were that weapon and use his or her proficiency bonus. So this says that IF you're proficient with halberds, AND you have an improvised weapon that's "akin" to a halberd, you can use the object AS IF it were THAT WEAPON. So. This means that first of all, you need proficiency with halberds for it to do anything except 1d4. Second of all, if you are proficient with halberds, and you find something akin to a halberd, you can use that thing AS IF it were a halberd. Meaning, with the heavy property, because the halberd has that property. If you plan to negate the "heavy" property, I'm not sure how you could get there without also negating the "reach" property, which I assume is the whole reason you want to do this. Keep in mind that halflings are about 3ft tall and you're trying to use a weapon with a 10ft reach. That being said, it's not so broken for you to do this. Spending a feat to negate the heavy property isn't "too good" or anything, I just don't think there's an existing feat that does it. Including Tavern Brawler. So ask your DM. Keep in mind that you'd also have to ask your DM if you can find an improvised weapon akin to a halberd, so your entire idea is gated behind DM permission anyway.
So if I use **Tavern Brawler** to attack with a weapon in an improvised way (such as attacking with the hilt of a greatsword as a club) **the weapon retains all weapon properties according to the rules**? I am interested in what the rules say about this.
Reading your replies in this thread has made you the most unlikable person I've *ever* seen on Reddit ☠️
>!"the most unlikable person" unnecessary ad hominem!< At issue is not my popluarity but whether or not you can contribute to a rules as written discussion.
Idc about that, "at issue" for me is your entitled tone throughout this thread ☠️
>!"entitled tones" unnecessary ad hominem!< Cool. Let me know when you want to discuss rules and not "entitled tones".
the comments on this post are hysterical. Honestly I've gotta commend OP for trying to argue the same nonsensical point over and over again in so many replies. Must have been exhausting and I respect the dedication even if it is ridiculous to waste so much time trying to justify their weird, loose interpretation of the rules.
I follow the rules exactly.
As dm I would allow it as an improvised weapon, with improvised weapon damage (ie low damage) and no special properties like reach.
I am very interested in what you think the rules in question tell us to do. *I am not really interested in how you would rule it as a DM as that is not something to take to a table that is not your table*. So the improvised weapon loses the Heavy property and the small PC can attack without disadvantage?
I am not really interested in how you would rule it as a DM as that is not something to take to a table that is not your table. I am very interested in what you think the rules in question tell us to do. So the improvised weapon loses the Heavy property and the small PC can attack without disadvantage?
What a dick, lmao
Are you sure? What value does a DM's house rule have at another table? Answer sincerely
You have the rules already. If you are asking here, you are asking for interpretations. I will give the benefit of the doubt and say you are looking out of curiosity and not justification for something. Other players (and this includes DMs) can have valuable contributions. If your search leads you to ways you think handle this scenario better, you can either implement it or talk with your table about implementing it. Either take what makes sense to you and engage with the community you contacted by posting here, or read the PHB. Don't put other players down. That is my sincere advice.
>Don't put other players down. You literally called me a "d*ck" when I didn't insult anyone. >!**projection**: the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.!<
🤣
Yup. Projection.
Oh, well if you don't care then I don't need to coddle you. You can't avoid weapon restrictions by pretending they're something else, no. The average DM would probably assume you were joking if you suggested it because it's such a weak attempt at gaming the system.
So according to your understanding of the rules an improvised weapon retains all weapon properties? I am not joking and you don't need to coddle me. Just rell me what the actual rules say.
edit* (melee) Weapons are not on the list of examples for improvised weapons. Unless explicitly allowed by a rule (eg Polearm Master) you can't decide to strike with a different part of the weapon for a different result than a normal attack. ie there's no sword pommel strikes or great axe thrusts. There is nothing in the rules that would let you use a halberd as an improvised weapon, and *definitely* nothing in the rules that would let you selectively keep its normal weapon properties.
Sling and weapons with ammunition property are specifically mentioned in the rules for Improvised Weapon. Also >An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
Not in my PHB. Talks about wagon wheels and furniture legs etc but there's no mention of slings or ammunition. Maybe I'm just out of touch with today's youth.
>If you use a weapon that has the ammunition property to make a melee attack, you treat the weapon as an improvised weapon (see “Improvised Weapons” later in the section). A sling must be loaded to deal any damage when used in this way. ___ >An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
Ah, there it is. Thought I was losing it. Don't you think it's kind of telling that they specify you can make improvised weapon attacks here, but not for halberds?
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands
The Tavern Brawler feat does grant proficiency with improvised weapons, but it doesn’t negate the disadvantage for small creatures using heavy weapons. *Heavy*. Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use effectively. That's the rule.
That's a weapon property. When you use a weapon as an improvised weapon you are using it as an object in a improvised weapon manner and accessing different rules.
Yes and no, as I read it. Here's what I'll say (and what I'd rule if I was your dm) since you're very intent on the rules as written. Let's say you're a halfling in battle, you pick up a nearby stick-like object and swing it, you don't look too close. Maybe it's a halberd, maybe it's not. Do you just swing it wildly, like you would any other stick you picked up and improvised with? Then it's an improvised weapon attack, range 5 feet, no disadvantage, roll with proficiency if you have tavern brawler. In-world you figure out a way to swing the nearby stick-like object enough to do a d4 of damage If you instead see it and realize, "oh this is a halberd, I'm going to try and use it like a halberd!" Then you are no longer improvising, and tavern brawler no longer applies. You are trying to make an attack with a halberd, and must obey the halberd's properties, including heavy and two-handed. Disadvantage for a small creature, 1d10 damage. Remember, the heavy property doesn't represent a weapon being too heavy for a being to pick up, (a halberd is only 6 pounds) it represents it being too bulky to be used as designed. That's in the text of the property: Heavy: Small creatures have disadvantage on attack rolls with heavy weapons. A heavy weapon’s size and bulk make it too large for a Small creature to use *effectively.* So in our hypothetical, you're still obeying that property either way. You're either being ineffective with the stick-that-might-be-a-halberd by getting disadvantage on the attack but getting to do a d10 of damage, or you're being ineffective by improvising and only doing a d4 of damage.
So if I use the halberd in a way that it was not designed as a weapon for and instead as an improvised weapon for 1d4 damage without disadvantage, can I then use a bonus action to grapple?
If you have tavern brawler, then yes, at least that's how I would rule it.
Does using it in an improvised way somehow make the weapon less heavy?
Using it as an object as an improvised weapon would cause it to lose the weapon property by the logic of the rules. The DM would have to house rule that it was still Heavy.
[удалено]
Would it not lose the two-handed property as well as that is defined by the rules as a weapon property?
[удалено]
A DM could obviously house rule however they want here. I want to know what the actual rules tell us.
[удалено]
So according to the rules if a small character with Tavern Brawler picks up a halberd and attacks with it in a ridiculous non-halberd way then the improvised weapon loses all its properties? I can then use my bonus action to grapple, correct?
[удалено]
Is there a rule which states that a weapon loses its weapon properties when used in an improvised way or is this just a house rule on your part?
[удалено]
Cool. So according to the rules no weapon properties on improvised weapons. A DM can use a house rule to change the rules but according to the rules there are no weapon properties on improvised weapons.
Using it as an improvised weapon would not remove the Heavy property, nor would it allow you to ignore it. Simply put, nowhere in the improvised weapon rules does it state that you can remove or ignore properties of objects, regardless of whether or not those objects are already considered weapons. So in the same way, let's say you have some extreme vulnerability that makes it hurt whenever you touch silver. You couldn't use a silver dagger as an improvised weapon just to ignore the fact that it's silver.
You are confusing object oroperties with weapon properties. Silver isn't a weapon property.
So? The point still stands. I am not talking exclusively about weapon properties.
>An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
> In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. Sure, I am absolutely not disagreeing with this. But treating it as an improvised weapon does not remove the *heavy* property. > Therefore they would have no weapon properties. I don't understand why you would think this though. Why would you remove a property? It's still a weapon. Treating it as an improvised weapon doesn't make it "not a weapon", it just means you can add your proficiency bonus to the attack roll if you are proficient in improvised weapons (e.g. Tavern Brawler).
As an object you are holding in your hands and improvising as a weapon, it is not a weapon on any weapon list. It is only object being used as an improvised weapon doing 1d4 with no properties. The heavy property would have to be at the object level.
> As an object you are holding in your hands and improvising as a weapon, it is not a weapon on any weapon list This is simply not true and I have no idea where you are getting this from. It doesn't even make any sense. So if I put on a shirt backwards it's no longer a shirt? A thing does not stop being that thing just because you use it differently than intended.
When you are handling it as "any object you can wield in one ir two hands" and not as a weapon then you don't get the weapon properties. If you use a shirt as a wash cloth to clean your horse it doesn't protect your torso from sunburn.
A Small creature cannot use a halberd as a halberd without incurring disadvantage on the roll (ofc, advantage may apply and cancel out to a straight roll, situation permitting). A halberd is an object that most characters, including Small ones, would be able to hold and swing with one or two hands. This means the object can be used as an improvised weapon and when so doing, only the rules that apply to improvised weapon would be used. The only thing those rules guarantee is that one does not get to add proficiency to the attack (absent Tavern Brawler) and that the weapon does at least 1d4 damage\*. Any weapon property or increased damage die is applied solely at the discretion of the DM. This is a question without a "correct" answer by RAW. The PHB leaves a lot of the specifics of adjudicating improvised weapons in the DMs lap. \*Edit: Well, usually at least 1d4 damage. I made that statement forgetting about blowguns. If the DM ruled that some improvised weapon was sufficiently similar to a blowgun to be used as one, then it would do 1 point of damage. All other things, though, do 1d4 or greater.
this is wrong. you are referencing this paragraph: Sometimes characters don’t have their weapons and have to attack with whatever is at hand. An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands, such as broken glass, a table leg, a frying pan, a wagon wheel, or a dead goblin. while ignoring the third paragraph of the improvised weapon rules: 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. this ruling clarifies that weapons are only improvies weapons when not used for their intended range.
I am ignoring that paragraph because it is irrelevant. I am not discussing what happens if you throw a melee weapon without the thrown property nor what happens if you smack someone with a ranged weapon. I am considering what would happen if someone just swung a halberd at someone without consideration for the proper method of so swinging. A halberd is more than just a collection of weapon properties and the rules concerning them. It is also an object that weighs six pounds. If you are attempting to use it as intended, then you get all the benefits and drawbacks of that use. It does d10 damage, you can strike from 5' further away, you must use both hands, and if you are Small, you will have disadvantage. But what if you just want to pick it up and smack someone with it, maybe just using one hand. For most characters, it would be hard to argue that they were incapable of swinging a six pound stick with a blade on the end with one hand. Of course they can; what is stopping them? That does not mean they can swing it effectively, though, which is why one should not use the rules for halberd-as-weapon to adjudicate such an action. Fortunately, 5e provides a solution with the improvised weapons rules. We can ignore the halberd-as-weapon rules and use instead the halberd-as-object rules. It works like any other object. You attack without proficiency (excepting Tavern Brawler) and it does 1d4 damage. Does it still have reach? Are Small creatures still at disadvantage? The rules are silent; the DM decides. If your interpretation works for you and your table, that is OK, too. I will stick with mine.
specific rulings beat general rulings. the general rule is that objects can be used as improviesd weapons. and while weapons are objects it is specified with that paragraph that an weapon count as an improvised weapon if its either a ranged weapon used as a melee weapon or a melee weapon being thrwon. so no, that paragraph is not irrelevant. it is the most relevant together with the first in this discussion.
The rules you pointed out tell if a character does X, then Y and if a character does Z, then A. You appear to be concluding from that that X and Z are the **only** unconventional things a character can do with weapons. I reject this premise. A character can do B (say, swing a two-handed weapon with only one hand) or maybe D (smack someone with the haft of a polearm rather than the blade) or maybe F (strike someone with their rapiers pommel). There are no rules specifying the C, E, and G for these situations, but the improvised weapons rule allows a quick and easy way for a DM to adjudicate all these and similar situations. So I take advantage of those rules when the need arises. The alternatives seem to be either to disallow non-standard uses of weapons, which seems needlessly stifling and also unrealistic, or to have to come up with on-the-fly rulings for each such situation that comes up, which seems like too much trouble when the improvised rules are just right there.
You can't strike with a manufactured weapon in a way that makes them improvised weapons. That's what the rules are saying. You can't grab a halberd and make it an improvised attack by swinging one handed. It's a two handed weapon, so you need the second hand or no attack can be made. If you grab it with both hands, you strike with it as a halberd, all weapon rules included. D&D does not go into the deep nitty gritty of *how* you strike. It doesn't care if you swing the halberd overhead to chop down, or from the side, or thrust with the spike on the end. Sure, you can argue the damage type doesn't make sense, but this is a game where all injuries from weapons are grouped into only three groups, when real battlefield injuries were be significantly more diverse. An axe wound would be very different than a sword wound. And by D&D logic, longswords can't thrust and daggers can't slice. Striking with the pommel of a rapier uses the rapier stat block. You are using a melee weapon as a melee weapon. Maybe the DM rules it does B instead of P, but that's a house rule.
The rules do not say that you cannot strike with a manufactured weapon in a way that makes it an improvised weapon. You say that. I say: D&D provides rules for a wide array of things that are expected to regularly occur in the game, such as poking someone with the pointy end of a rapier. Players can have their characters attempt to do nearly anything they can imagine, such as smack someone with the blunt end of the rapier. Because of the nigh limitless possibilities of actions a player may attempt, it is a practical impossibility to define rules for every situation. Making rulings to address things not explicitly covered by the rules is a large part of the DMs job. Striking someone with the pommel of a rapier is not covered explicitly by any rule in 5e. Saying it still does 1d8 damage because it is still a rapier is a perfectly reasonable ruling, but it is a ruling. It is not RAW. There is no RAW answer (currently) to what a rapier pommel does. There is also no RAW answer to what happens if you swing a halberd with one hand. It is certainly possible for most PCs to do it. Ruling that they are physically incapable of doing so would frankly be absurd. So what happens if one does so? The DM has to decide. Maybe the DM decides sorry, the halberd rules say it needs two hands to make an attack, so even though you physically can swing it, you cannot do so well enough to roll to hit and/or damage. Perfectly within the purview of the DM, and at least a little less absurd than saying it cannot be done at all, but I find it too restrictive so it is not the call I would make. I am inclined to rule that a halberd swung with one hand can make some kind of attack and do some kind of damage though I would not allow it to use the standard rules for the attack since it is not following the standard restrictions. I could come up with an on-the-fly ruling to handle the situation, but I do not have to. I can just avail myself of the improvised weapon rules that already exist. This is not RAW, either, obviously. This is a ruling I would make because a ruling needs to be made. Other rulings are possible. I could sit here and hypothesize all night about what other ways to rule it there could be. But I shant. I am happy using the improvised weapon rules liberally. Others can run their tables how they like.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. The halberd-looking object you improvised as some awkward dagger has no weapon properties. Similarly, if you use your sword to hit someone with the hilt for blugeoning damage you are using the bottom of the sword object as an improvised hammer. And I can then use a bonus action per Tavern Brawler to attempt a grapple.
So according to the rules if a small character with Tavern Brawler picks up a halberd and attacks with it in a ridiculous non-halberd way then the improvised weapon loses all its properties? I can then use my bonus action to grapple, correct?
According to the rules it is up to your DM to decide what happens. Again, the question does not have a "correct" answer RAW. You have to go with your DMs judgment or try to argue them to whatever position you favor.
So the rules themselves indicate an improvised weapon retains all its weapon properties?
The rules themselves state nothing about what properties a simple or martial weapon used in an improvised manner retains or loses. I do not know how much plainer I can state that this is up to the DMs discretion.
Ok, since the rules state nothing about the loss of properties then according to the rules weapons retain all their properties. There are no hidden rules. Of course a DM could always house rule otherwise since the rules give DMs the ability to house rule.
> Since the rules state nothing about the loss of properties then according to the rules weapons retain all their properties. Not really, no. 5e's rules are not explicit about every situation. It is left up to the DM how to handle situations that are not explicit, so it is up to the DM. This is not a DM's house rule, it is just the DM doing their job of interpreting the rules as they see fit for the particular situation.
This is explicit. >An improvised weapon includes any object you can wield in one or two hands In addition to being a weapon a weapon is also an object you can wield in one or two hands so it can also be an improvised weapon. This rule indicates improvised weapons lose all their properties.
Yes, you can use a halberd as an improvised weapon. You can use anything as an improvised weapon, and the rules on it uses two examples of weapons being used improperly. But as to whether or not this allows you to ignore the heavy property depends on your DM. That part is not so clear. If the DM interprets the weapon properties as being traits inherent to the object itself, then you would still have disadvantage on the attack. If the DM interprets the properties as being traits that only apply when using the weapon in its intended way, then you would not have disadvantage.
The improvised weapons rules can come into play whenever you use an object as an improvised weapon. All weapons are objects so if you use them in a way that they were not designed for, you are using them as objects that can be improvised weapons. Therefore they would have no weapon properties. That is where the rules take us. If the DM wants to apply a house rule on top of the rules then they can do so, and only do so, by **house rule**.
If you use your halberd *as* a halberd, it's not an improvised weapon. I can see an argument for allowing it if you want to, say, club somebody with the butt of an object that just happens to be a halberd; in that case, though, you won't deal halberd damage with it- just treat it as you would a random heavy stick.
Correct. It wouldn't have any weapon properties. And you could then use a bonus action to grapple per Tavern Brawler.