No arguing. No deep philosophical discussions regarding the meaning of the word "is". We have plenty enough threads of those - keep the battle out of here. I'm just curious to know how each of you are interpreting the use of a hand crossbow in one hand, anything else in the other hand, and the Crossbow Expert feat.
I'll kick it off. I believe the hand crossbow is extra-expensive for a reason. An expert trained in the use of a hand crossbow is capable of quickly reloading using only his fingertips (or has mastered some other method of quick-reloading that does not preclude use of a weapon or object held in the other hand). Using an attack action with a one-handed weapon - including the hand crossbow itself - allows for a bonus action attack with the hand crossbow.
3 options.
1: 2-handed light/heavy crossbow.
2: handbow and shield, but no bonus attack. (i think it's RAW to allow it, but not indended).
3: dual weapon (including dual crossbow), that's required for the bonus attack.
No issue reloading 1 handed.
Rule of cool >> realism.
you need a hand to reload. The other hand doesn't nexessarily have to be free. Certain small objects can be allowed in the hand while using the hand for reloading (these are decided on a case by case basis)
I would not allow a shield or other hand crossbow in the off hand and still allow reloading.
If a player really wanted to play a dual crossbow character I would work with him on special crossbows or equipment that could make it happen. I wouldn't require a feat for this. But it may have a gold cost or something like that.
I wouldn't allow a shield and hand crossbow or if I did I would only allow reloading or the +2 ac bonus per turn. And then i would still likely require some kind of special equipment.
Dual-wielding crossbows for me. Rule of cool.
I allow dual wielding hand crossbow and think its rather cool!
Plaguescarred4 wrote:
I allow it. I also continue to allow movement between attacks in whirlwind attack. 
Miladoon wrote:
I would allow the player to work towards being able to dual weild. It would likely entail an adventure, or research or something. The result would either be finding appropriate weapons, or having someone design something (special quiver, etc)
Likely it still would only work a limited number of times.
Ex. A special 'Bolt holder' that strapped on the thigh, and a special handbow that would work with it. The 'holder' can only hold 2-3 bolts, so you could 'dual fire' either 3 or 4 times before having to drop one.
I think just allowing it is less like a cool fantasy story, and more like the handwaving of a video game. So I make it a hook for further adventures....
I rule that it can be used in the most powerful way possible (I.E. two shots, one crossbow/shield.)
That being said, I also balance encounters based on what my party comp is, so having someone who can put a lot of damage downrange just means that many more monsters.
I say yes to dual-wielding hand crossbows, but in my campaigns it is more likely that a character will take to dual-wielding pistols or even revolvers that hand crossbows because A) those are things which are possible, and B) my players have at least a decade of D&D versions that make crossbows look like poor choices and at first glance they look like poor choices in the current D&D version, so basically no one ever even thinks "maybe I'll take crossbow expert with this character."
Dual Crossbows is allowed and works with Crossbow Expert.
Hand Crossbow + shield is allowed and works with Crossbow Expert.
Reloading is part of the attacks you make. No need for a free hand, additional actions (item interaction action IE) or jumping through hoops such as requiring the player to invest gold to modify the weapon or other things like that. As others have said, screw realism or simulationist crap. This is a table top game with more interesting things to do than bother players with this kind of stuff. Until they come out with errata or a FAQ which clearly states that this isn't the way it's meant to work, that's how I'm running it at my table. If the players are going to optimize around this, then my job as the DM is to adapt. Not knee jerk nerf their builds for no reason.
Noctaem wrote:
Nachturnus wrote:
Trance-Zg wrote:
I don't and won't allow it.
And the rule of cool doesn't apply as I don't think it's cool at all.
By the rules, you can conceivably load a hand crossbow with no hands but you can't do the Shield Bash from Shield Mastery to knock someone prone until after your attack resulting in the user never benefiting from the advantage gained. Both results make no sense.
guachi wrote:
Timborama wrote:
I tweeted Mr. Crawford last week about it after getting many "yes you can bash then attack" responses from online people and my local table had ruled differently. I did not receive a response to my tweet.
There is a tweet from a few days ago, however, about another bonus action timing issue where Mr. Crawford writes "The bonus action in two-weapon fighting is its own thing, taken after the Attack action." The text of two-weapon fighting states "When you take the Attack action and attack..."
Shield Master states "if you take the Attack action on your turn..." It can be difficult to determine differences in rules that are merely natural language and those that have rules implications. I will certainly accept that the wording difference of "if" and "when" has timing implications as does the fact that two-weapon fighting continues with "and attack..." and Shield Master doesn't.
As a DM, I can easily rule on crossbows and shield bashing but as a player it's much safer making an argument to the DM with actual rules (and rules clarifications) backing me up.
In any case, I still would rule you can't load a crossbow with zero free hands. It's fun to discuss online, but I don't really care enough either way. And I'd hope players in my game (whether I'm DM or not) would accept whatever ruling the DM made without too much push back.
By the wording in the PHB since it states we ignore the loading quality. At this point it is a non action to reload the crossbow.
I would allow my players to duel wield hand crossbows, fire them both in the same turn and reload them. (In savage world games I have used string/rope so I could drop my guns and quickly flip them back up in order to reload other guns, there are many tricks and I figure if I am an expert I have a few of them figured out)
As for shield and crossbow of course I would allow that, if the shield is bound to my arm I can easily temporarily free my hand to reload the cross bow and still use my shield effectively.
I may have to build a hand crossbow villian for my players for an upcoming game now, thank you for the wonderful idea.
guachi wrote:
My ruling on Crossbow Expert contains some DM Fiat, and is not supported solely by the rules:
- Wielding 1 hand crossbow alone allows you to attack, bonus attack, and reload.
- Wielding 1 hand crossbow, 1 other item, allows you to attack, bonus attack, and reload*
*Ask your DM.
I figured that the item in your other hand must leave some fingers manueverable, not be too big or heavy, and not risk setting the drawstring (or oneself) on fire as you draw and load ammo.
Daggers, shields, shortswords, wands = yes.
Bedrolls, halberds, ladders, iron pots, rapiers (with basket hilts), oil lamps, torches (lit) = no.
I'm not a fan of dual hand crossbows but, as it's mechanically weaker than 1 hand crossbow and 1 melee weapon, I'd allow the player to exchange realism and combat effectiveness for looking cool.
I allow double attacking with a hand crossbow and shield.
mellored wrote:
I think I'm going to go with allowing a dual-crossbow wielder to reload one per round. So you probably want to take your initial two shots, then drop one and draw a melee weapon. I assume characters can reload one crossbow without a free-hand because they're "just that good," but reloading two without a free-hand is where it crosses the line of my suspension of disbelief.
I don't feel too terribly strongly about it, and if a player attempted to convince me to allow them to just dual-wield hand crosbows with no penalties (and could describe a technique for it) I'd probably give in.
sigfile wrote:
I wish people wouldn't try to bring realism into this. I know the instinct is strong to do so, but look at the following example.
In 6 seconds somehow an 11th level fighter, barbarian, ranger, or paladin can ride 50 feet and stab someone with a lance 3 times and once with an offhand weapon. This is without magic. Do we need to argue about special jackhammer lances? There's no real way for someone to effective wield a lance that many times in 6 seconds, especially after riding 50 feet first.
Even more ludicrous is the use of action surge. Still no magic involved. Now in 6 seconds a fighter rides 50 feet, stabs someone 6 times with a lance, and then stabs then with their offhand weapon. Sounds the alarms! D&D is not a realism simulator.
Crossbow expert is a feat. I understand some people think it is too powerful, but please stop using the realism crutch as your argument. Rogues can be standing in the middle of a fireball and not take damage. Again, without magic or a shred of cover. Buck naked even. Firing a hand crossbow an extra time, or one in a second hand, at the cost of a feat on top of it, is not too unrealistic for the setting of D&D.
You play your game your way and I play it mine. The guy asked for how we rule it, not philosophical discussions. Different people like different levels of realism(yes even in a fantasy game) and no one should be knocked for it.
bonethug0108 wrote:
Yup - argue the fine points elsewhere. This is meant to be a thread where someone that's curious can see how various DMs are ruling the CE/Hand Crossbow combo. If someone wants to read about the arguments, there are pages and pages of multiple threads devoted to that.
Since this is an overview, it seems like it would be helpful to do a quick tally. By my count, at this point in the thread we've got:
Yes (17)
Sigfile
mellored
Dooflegna
Plaguescarred
Miladoon
Ashrym
Nachturnus
AarronOfBarbaria
Noctaem
Timborama
AndyDay
Lord_Kadarian
Clutchbone
WizardV
Ahglock
Lucas_Blackstone
CahPahkah
No* (6)
FrogReaver
CoreDump
Trance-Zg
guachi
Sword_of_Spirit
Bonethug0108
* Any variations of "yes, but only if..." are counted as "No".
bonethug0108 wrote:
Three things:
1.) I'm not articulating the question because virtually every attempt to do that in other threads has been met with accusations of bad faith by those who disagree with its phrasing, and that isn't what this thread is about.
2.) For the same reason, I'm being intentionally generous in counting anything but "Yes" as "No".
3.) I agree with you that this thread is showing an unqualified "No" to be a fringe opinion.
CahPahkah wrote:
CahPahkah wrote:
Even within the Yes group there seems to be some variation. Within that group it is mixed on whether a bonus attack is allowed with a single hand crossbow (+ shield). Some just don't answer that question.
I pretty much agree with mellowred and Ahglock and rule for balance:
Offensive option - Dual wield any weapon (incl. Hand Crossbow) with additional Hand Crossbow for bonus attack no problem with CE
Defensive option - Extra attack allowed with Hand Crossbow + Shield, but no bonus attack even with CE.
I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Tally is wrong. For example melord says no bonus attack when using a shield but u indicate yes for him. That should be a no if I understand how you are saying any restrictions mean no?
CahPahkah wrote:
Clutch one should also be counted no.
Agh lock agrees with mellrod and should be no to
None of them should be yes or no for this thread:
"I'm just curious to know how each of you are interpreting the use of a hand crossbow in one hand, anything else in the other hand, and the Crossbow Expert feat."
It's not a yes or no question(hell, it isn't even a question in a direct sense). It's intentionally open ended(I assume as to avoid any kind of debasing down into a simple yes or no in the first place). People are taking stuff from other threads and imposing them in here, which the OP was asking people not to do.
I was mostly avoiding this thread, because at the end of the day it doesn't really matter how many people rule one way or the other.
What matters is that your DM has considered the options and made a decision that they and your group are comfortable with.
As far as how I rule ... It depends. In a home game I'd limit your off hand to something small or find/research/invent a clockwork device to help loading.
FrogReaver wrote:
If this is still a thread regarding "How would YOU do it?" as opposed to getting as many tallies as possible, I say this:
I would not allow the reload if the "other" hand was occupied by something extremely bulky -- such a sword, shield, or other crossbow. On the other hand, I would allow an object to be stored in the mouth and then retrieved later, if it were small enough.
That said, feats are much more valuable in 5E, and if the player was making a concerted effort to make a certain character, I would work with him/her on a background or mechanic that explains a special reloading weapon or something to that nature. In other words, I would rather have the player enjoy "cool", but it would be neither at the expense or because of the rules themselves.
I rule the following when I am DM:
If you have the CE feat and you are:
Holding only a hand crossbow: you can attack as many times as your attack action allows and you may gain the bonus attack from the CE feat.
Holding a melee weapon (including a hand crossbow) and holding a hand crossbow in your other hand: you may take a bonus action to attack with a loaded hand crossbow as specified by the CE feat. If the hand crossbow is not already loaded, you can't take the bonus action. You cannot reload the hand crossbow after attacking unless you drop your other weapon.
Holding a hand crossbow and wearing a shield: I don't allow it. You trade defense for range and DPR by using the hand crossbow with the CE feat. I decided you do not have sufficient movement with your shield arm/hand to draw ammunition.
Holding a hand crossbow in one hand and a nonweapon and nonshield in your other hand: Reloading depends on the object. My discretion. Is the character holding a caltrop or a potion? Almost full range of use with your hand..., or are they holding a ladder or a torch? Very limited range of use with your hand... Obviously different objects present different challenges to your accessibility to your ammunition.
I guess I'm not certain why it really matters. If you want that bonus action attack with your hand crossbow from Crossbow Expertise you can get it from only using one hand crossbow so there is no real advantage wielding two hand crossbows. Is it because using two looks cool to some people? Or do people want to wield a sword and a hand crossbow? You can wield a hand crossbow in melee range with the feat so there is no real advantage using a sword instead.
Not proficent in the weapon you can shoot it but not load it.
Proficent you can shoot and load the weapon.
proficent if there are multiple loaded weapons that you can easily grab to shoot you can shoot your number of attacks but only once per crossbow and you may not reload any of them.
with crossbow expert you can shoot as many times as you have attacks with one crossbow.
If you are fighting with a sword you can hold and make a bonus attack with a already loaded hand crossbow. You may not reload the crossbow.
You may fire two hand crossbows but not load them, so you can make one attack and one bonus attack on a turn but not reload eithor of the crossbows.
Thing to note. the crossbow expert feat does not remove the loading property ... it says the loading quality. I have allowed this to mean loading property in most of the instances.
Drycanth wrote:
guachi wrote:
I am running my game from the reality + design .... so I use reality and then add to it based on magic feats etc ...
Noctaem wrote:
CahPahkah wrote:
Mischiefincdm wrote:
Trance-Zg wrote:
CulveDaddy wrote:
Save the discussion for another thread, please. We're just looking for DM rulings, here.
sigfile wrote:
Save the discussion for another thread, please. We're just looking for DM rulings, here.
I require a free hand to load a crossbow, the feat mentions a loaded crossbow for a reason (in my opinion of couse)
All crossbows have the Loading quality which states "Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can only fire one piece of ammunition when you use an action, bonus action or reaction to fire it, regardless of the amount of attacks you can normally make." This indicates that if you are Fighter 5 and can make two attacks with a Heavy Crossbow, you can only fire once with the Attack Action during that action despite having the ability to make two attacks.
When you take Crossbow Expertise, you completely ignore the Loading quality of crossbows you are proficient. This covers the problem with the above example.
The bonus action attack with hand crossbows can be explained in a similar fashion. "When you use the attack action to attack with a one handed weapon (does not state whether it is melee or ranged), you can use a bonus action to make an attack with a loaded hand crossbow you are holding." The feat indicates that you first must use an Attack Action to make an attack with a one-handed weapon, which could be a melee attack, a ranged attack with a throwing weapon, or shooting someone with a hand crossbow. Hit or miss, you can make a bonus action attack with a hand crossbow as long as it is loaded.
What constitutes as a weapon being loaded? When is a weapon loaded? Crossbows have the Loading quality, which means you can only fire once in any action no matter how many attacks you have in that action. Reloading is sorted under ammunition and indicates that a weapon draws ammunition and loads as part of the attack. This also means that a level 5 PC with the multiattack ability can potentially fire 3 times in a single turn with one hand crossbow, and this is where we should expect table variation.
On side, someone could rule that it is allowed because loading is part of the attack.
On the flip side, someone could rule that after the Attack Action attacks are made, the hand crossbow is not loaded for the bonus action. However, it may still be allowed since you can interact with your weapon as an incidental action to load, then fire.
On another note, someone could rule that you automatically load your weapon after each shot is fired, hence fixing the whole problem that people seem to have with Crossbow Expertise.
This is how it is read from the book. This is how I interpret it as a DM. And the three examples are how I have seen it ruled by other DMs. My ruling is the last ruling because it makes sense. If a player wants to bump AC with a shield and use a hand crossbow, I'm fine with that. I'll just roll higher on my monster attacks and make his great AC a moot point.
Loading is NOT part of the attack. That is never said. Drawing ammunition is part of the attack. Regular bows never state that they need to be loaded. Crossbows(by extension of the loading property) do. The actual action of loading is never described, however, and this is where the ambiguity comes in as the rules don't state you do or don't need a free hand.
Bloodscythe wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Bloodscythe wrote:
DungeonKrusher wrote:
Bloodscythe wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Bloodscythe wrote:
jonathonhawke wrote:
Wow, I remember having this discussion with my AD&D v1 group, last century,
We solved the argument by going outside and actually doing it. I successfully cocked and reloaded a hand crossbow while holding a dagger in my left hand. You only need one hand to **** the crossbow (by hooking its cocking handle over some hook on your clothing). You only need a finger and a thumb on the second hand to get a bolt from a bandolier to the crossbow, leaving the rest of that hand holding the dagger.
Edit: Oh dear, the language filter makes that sentence appear much ruder than it actually is. :-)
Greenstone.Walker wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
If you allow for the rules exploit to allow for dual wielding hand crossbows and you allow full attacks you can create your own problem.
By doing this you make the feat dual wield less viable as it is not needed to gain any extra ability with dual wielding crossbows since you already ignored half of the bonus it provides.
You also cheapen how important magic weapons are since any one can duplicate a magic self loading hand crossbow by ignoring the loading restricitons.
You make the crossbow expert feat also a automatic choice since it grants abilities of two feats and the effects of a magic crossbow.
It is not wrong to allow all of this, but by doing so you do change the game mechanics significantly and put a huge bonus on a single feat making it become a default auto choice.
I run my game from a more what works in the real world then add to it magic effects.
so if some one wanted to play a diablo 2 style dual crossbow wielding master I would allow it but it would require. proficency with the hand crossbow (this is the only thing like a weapon proficency in the game) the crossbow expert feat (which would give the bonus attack for the off hand hand crossbow) and the two weapon feat (this would allow for the exper ability to manipulate two objects at a time) if possible I would also add in to the game a pair of magic hand crossbows at a early time to help also fit this character concept.
As DM I don't want to just say no. I want to make the players goals fit into the game I want to run. It would require a significant investment from the character, and would fit the tone of the world I am running, making for a win win scenario.
Greenstone.Walker wrote:
Wow, this is a hot button issue, isn't it?
I'd rule that you need two hands to reload any weapon, regardless of how many hands you need to fire it. Guns, bows, crossbows, etc.
To me, if CE was meant to create a D3 Demon Hunter, it would state clearly that you can A) reload a hand crossbow with the same hand that is holding it, B) ignore the attack limits imposed by the loading property of the weapon, and C) use of the hand crossbow as an off-hand weapon. It only really clearly gives us B and C, as written. Anyone shoehorning A into their read of the feat is embracing the power of the house rule.
The CE feat is still valuable as-written, though. It "upgrades" two-handed crossbows into rapid-fire ranged weapons, lets you fire while in melee, and opens up the hand crossbow as an option for two-weapon fighting.
Dregoth1 wrote:
As it pertains to the Adventures League, would this be DM situational or allowed as defined by RAW?
Ravix wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrTLv9kXWno
Even this guy needed a free hand to reload.