Right now there are a couple of threads waging about if you can duel wield hand crossbows. RAW you can;'t without the crossbow expertise feat.
It also seems that most people do not mind if you fire 2 hand cross bows the arguement seems to revolve around can you reload them and Jeremy Crawfords tweet or whatever saying you should have a hand free to reload them which then starts arguements over needing a hand free to fire a bow. We all know you can hold a bow in one hand and use the other to notch an arrow.
The arguement however seems to be completely idiotic. Why would you even want to use 2 hand cross bows is beyond me. Just for arguements sake lets assume the DM doesn't care and says you can do it and you think 2 crossbows makes your character look kewl. Basically you ignore Jeremy Crawfords advice on needing a spare hand to reload.
Consider these 3 things.
1. You need the crossbow expertise feat to even use 2 hand crossbows.
2. You probably want to have the archery style for +2 to hit.
3. You need the duel wielding style to add dex to damage with the off hand attack.
Sweet potatoes. However RAW you only get 1 bonus action per round and no rule gets around this. An off hand attack is a bonus action along with the extra attack granted by the crossbow expertise feat. At that point dual wielding hand crossbows seems pointless just use one in one hand and take the archery style you have already got the crossbow expertise feat which is the only way you can duel wield them anyway.
Now top make it even worse if your DM doesn't care about having to have a free hand available to use the crossbows anyway just use a shield in the off hand for +2 AC and you get the same amount of attacks per round as duel wielding would proved, you get +2 AC and save yourself a combat style. Or you could also have a rapier or other weapon in your off hand to threaten areas.
So anyone wanting to duel wield hand crossbows (which makes no sense anyway IMHO) also makes no sense according to the game rules. You are intentionally gimping your PC, your party and you may not even know you are doing it.
Any DM should ban it right there as a trap option and save your player heartache and grief. Duel hand crossbows are an out right trap option
Why did you start a new thread on this when you could have included these thoughts in one of the many threads on this topic in the Rules Questions forum?
Why would anyone want to dual-wield hand crossbows? I'd suggest you do a google image search for "Diablo III demon hunter".
My current PC started off dual-wielding hand crossbows but then I got a kick-ass magic sword, so now she dual-wields the sword and one hand crossbow. I don't actually use the TWF rules, though. It's more for the look of the thing really.
THose threads are so far gone arguing over RAW and RAI. I did post my thoguhts there but I'm not sure what is even happening in those threads anymore. They seem determined to prove a point at all costs and are in 2 camps arguing over the one tue path.
AFAIK the one true path is pointless regardless of what side you fall on.
pukunui wrote:
kalil wrote:
To reply to OP: Yeah, one hand crossbow does exactly the same thing as two hand crossbows. This does not neccessarily mean that you are not an idiot however 
Zardnaar wrote:
pukunui wrote:
kalil wrote:
A few things to note.
1. Dual Wielding Crossbows with the crossbow expert feat is not using the "two-weapon fighting rules". As such, you do not need the two weapon fighting style to get your ability modifier to damage with the "off hand" crossbow.
2. Anyone can hold two crossbows in both hands, you can even shoot with both if you have the Extra Attack feature. Without crossbow expert though, you would only get one attack with each weapon and then you would need to reload.
3. Crossbow Expert does not specify that the bonus attack from the crossbow must be made with a different weapon. By RAW you can make the bonus action attack with the same crossbow you made your first attack with. Dual Wielding crossbows is actually superfluous. You can wield a hand crossbow and a shield if you felt so inclined.
Lawolf wrote:
I would rather not argue about RAW vs RAI with the feat. Even with the most liberal interpretation one could go with the feat it is still superfluous using 2 of them.
Lawolf is very good at spotting things like combinations that work and game math. It is debateable that this combination actually workss and even if it does it is pointless due to the bonus action limits.
I don't think the main issue has to do with two hand crossbows (which offers no mechanical advantage over a single hand crossbow) - but rather, whether you can weild a hand crossbow and a shield (or another weapon), and still gain the benefits.
Requiring a hand free to reload your crossbow negates the following:
- Hand Crossbow + Shield
- Hand Crossbow + melee weapon.
The fact that the feat implies that you should be able to use your hand crossbow (as a bonus action) while also striking an opponent(s) with your melee weapon (no disadvantage in melee) is IMO a big cause of the arguments.
I can see merits for both sides of the story. At my tables, I make it simple - if they want to have hands-free reloading, they need to spend additional GP to modify their crossbow, or to create a reloading harness, or some such (the hooked vest comes to mind).
Honestly - the combo is not broken, and causes very little (to no) disruption at the table.
As such, I don't know why people are arguing over it in the first place as it is a non-issue. I am more concerned about spending my precious time adjudicating issues which actually cause disruption at the table, rather than worrying about something as negligable as 1-2 extra damage/hit, or +2 AC by using a shield with your crossbow.
Shield + Hand Crossbow is marginally superior to Shield + Javelin, due to increased range - but if the character is willing to spend a feat to gain increased range and a bonus action attack, I say let them.
Zardnaar wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Fire off a shot from each. Throw one in the air, camera shot from above with the crossbow tumbling end over end in slow-mo. Grab a bolt from your utility belt and reload the one in your hand. Throw the reloaded one into the air. Grab a bolt from your utility belt, catch the first hand crossbow you threw, and reload it. Catch the second crossbow. Aim both at your target as you drop out of slo-mo. Then offer a one-liner full of dry, cool wit like "I'm serving up a shot of pain and I'm making it a double," before firing both crossbows into your enemy's face.
That's how you get **** done.
/Trophy
Bonus points if your character is also Danny Trejo.
iserith wrote:
iserith wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Kalani wrote:
I don't know....
I tend to obsess about 'realism' issues like.... "Who's holding the torch/lamp and what are they holding in the other hand?".
So I'd be disinclined to allow a player to use a hand-crossbow in each hand AND reload the weapons in combat, without stowing one of them first. But that's me.
Why would you want to have a hand-crossbow in one hand and some other weapon in the other.... If you couldn't reload the crossbow with one hand? For the same reason a pirate would carry a single shot flintlock pistol in one hand and a cutlass in the other. One quick shot either before or during a melee which could save your life if used properly....
Facing an opponent who's obviously a better fencer? Give them the 'Indiana Jones Treatment".
Already facing an opponent and another person tries to engage? - Quick shot through the 'lights'.
Meh, I don't know how much of a fuss I'd make over it if a player wanted to try this at the table... My main fear would be encouraging the 'three handed player' phenomenon... Sword in one hand, shield in the other hand and a torch or holy symbol in the the 'other-other' hand.
Psikerlord wrote:
Let's also note that RAW you can "wield" two hand crossbows WITHOUT the Crossbow Expert feat. Just like how you can "wield" two Longswords without the Two-Weapon feat.
No, seriously!
The only stipulation is that you cannot attack with a 2nd weapon as a bonus attack. The TWF rules allow you to do that when you have 2 light weapons, but that doesn't mean you can't wield 2 Battleaxes and use the Attack action to hit once then Extra Attack to hit with the other! Same goes for Hand Crossbows. Attack with one, Extra Attack with the other. The feats simply allow you to get a Bonus Action attack in there.
Now...if you'll excuse me, I'm going to make a character who dual-wields lances. If I can stop myself from laughing at that mental image first...
Lawolf wrote:
iserith wrote:
mellored wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Shasarak wrote:
mellored wrote:
Cyber-Dave wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
Kalani wrote:
A brief recap of the progression of the debate for any who is interested.
*Note the order of some of these discussions occured in may be off since I'm doing this from memory.
I am trying to stay as unbiased as possible in my recap!
1. Discussion started off being about crossbow expertise.
2. There was disagreement over how to apply the requirement in crossbow expertise of "you can make a bonus attack with a loaded hand crossbow"
3. Side A claimed the feat wasn't very strong because of the loaded requirment listed above and characters lacking an easy way to load a hand crossbow before the bonus action attack every round.. Side B stated the loaded requirement is fluff and meaningless and (even had a developer backing them up)
4. Side A stated the rules only allowed loading before an attack and not after the attack was made. Side B claimed otherwise.
5. There was alot of back and forth on these issues and then someone brought dual wielding hand crossbows into the mix i suppose hoping that it could be treated as some kind of compromise.
6. Side A stated can't use two hand crossbows round after round since you have no way to reload them (requires a hand) and ironically have a developer backing up their claim. Side B claims the rules don't require any hands to use them.
7. Someone in side B compared the restrictions being placed on hand crossbows to "not being able to reload if you wear a grey shirt".
8. This sparked a debate over whether it was okay to add requirements to RAW and still have something be called RAW. Side A basically said it was okay to. Side B said it wasn't.
9. This led to a thread about RAW and whether it lets you breathe which was also a huge debate.
10. Sometime after this the debate started again about loading hand crossbows.
11. Side B brought up them having the light property and them not having the two handed property and the aummunition property that says drawing ammo is part of the attack. Side B also argued that side A was essentially making longbows unusable by requiring a freehand to load a bow since they are two handed and require 2 hands to use.
12. Side A claimed the two handed property only required 2 hands for attacking. Side A also claimed that it was not against RAW to say a free hand was not required.
13. Side B said it was most certainly against RAW to require a free hand and side A disagreed and thus the debate about RAW and its importance and the number of house rules used by side B and all that stuff was started up again.
I tried to give some chronology to the debates. If I missed anything important or got it out of order im sorry.
FFSAA wrote:
iserith wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Kazadvorn wrote:
iserith wrote:
iserith wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
iserith wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Ahglock wrote:
Because I don't buy the loaded crossbow part is pure fluff. One designer said so, but they have said lots of wrong things.
Ahglock wrote:
It's not trivial to justify procing the bonus action attack with the same hand crossbow since after having attacked with it that means it's unloaded and the feat requires a loaded hand crossbow
Im not saying that's the best reading but it appears to me to be a valid one. And one that may need to be overcome at some tables.
Lawolf wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
mellored wrote:
Right but ignoring the loaded property doesn't mean u get to ignore loading the crossbow. It just means you can load it faster than normal.
Lawolf wrote:
Umm the bonus action attack has no timing requirement. It does not say immediately. All it says is "when you take the Attack action...you can use a bonus action..." The rules for bonus actions state you can take them at any time unless a timing is specified.
Since no timing is specified, you could take the Attack action, use your free item interaction, move your speed, reload your hand crossbow, then take a bonus action attack. The only requirement for the attack is that the crossbow is loaded and you took the Attack action at some point on your turn.
While timing is not an issue by itself, having a loaded hand crossbow is and there are times during the attack sequence when it won't be loaded.
For example It won't be loaded after an attack until you have a way of loading it again. Typically that's part of another attack, but since you aren't even allowed to make the bonus action attack without a the hand crossbow already loaded then you have no way of meeting the loaded requirement of the feat. (Unless reloading after an attack is allowed which is the next thing this debate leads us to)
Lawolf wrote:
Isnt the fact that you can't use the bonus action without a loaded one preclude you from taking the bonus action until it's loaded? Even though if you could take that bonus action to attack you definetly could load it at that time?
mellored wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Azzy1974 wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
Lawolf wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Kalani wrote:
As someone who has run games at conventions, I know that a Session Zero is not always possible.
Sometimes you just have a 4-hour slot with a random table of people; some who show up after the start time, and all of whom have their own personal idea of how the game should be played.
iserith wrote:
autolycus wrote:
Compare the wording to the two-weapon fighting though. With two weapon fighting, they clearly designate that the bonus action attack must come from a weapon wielded in the other hand. I'm not arguing RAI here. I agree with you that RAI is that you should not be able to utilize crossbow expert with a single hand crossbow. I am merely stating that RAW it is a perfectly valid tactic.
mellored wrote:
Zardnaar wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Two comments because this just came up.
1. Does a drow ranger who uses two crossbows (crossbow expertise), get to use hail of thorns with both shots?
2. You can reload your crossbow during your move action, since you ignore the loading property. Not just during your attack action.
Daganev wrote:
Daganev wrote:
I just picture people with four or six repeating hand crossbows, tossing them to the side and drawing fresh crossbows when their others run out of ammo. Perhaps wearing a black cloak while doing so.