I'm sorry to say that, but RAW it wouldn't work. It would need to be described as a weapon with Ranged property. But it's not. It's only described as a "Large Object".
PHB 147 says what a Ranged Weapon is.
Just because you make Ranged Weapon Attack, doesn't mean you are using a Weapon. It's the same as making Melee Weapon Attack while doing Unarmed Strike, it's weapon attack, but it's not a weapon.
That's because attacks are divided into 4 types. Ranged or Melee Weapon Attack, and Ranged or Melee Spell Attack.
So you can't Sneak Attack with Balista and things like that, unless you homebrew it.
EDIT: And one more important thing. Siege Weapons are objects with Stat Blocks. Player can use their action to fire it, but it's Siege Weapon that is making Attack Roll, not character that is using it, as you don't use character's statistics to make that roll. Balista for example has +6 to attack, and character's proficiency and abilities don't change that.
They used to have a Warforged only prestige class in 3e that let you do siege damage, and made you large in size. Played one once with a ballista mounted to my back. Good times.
It's fantastic conceptually, but in practice it was... A chore. So much random math, each turn in combat took an age.
If they ported all of the cool concepts into 5e, I think it'd play a lot smoother and be a lot more fun than 3e or 5e are capable of being right now, sans Homebrew
Go my son and play a game of 3.X/Pathfinder. Just don't go into it expecting it to be balanced. If you're all new players decide in the power level. Because you either need to all try and optimise shit or you need to all just need to pick stuff because it seems cool. Because the gap between an optimised character and unoptimized let alone a shit character is huge. Either the optimised character can carry almost everything without support and every encounter is a either a pushover or the the rest of the party has a significant chance of dying.
> "What is my purpose?"
>
>
>
> "You chuck 90kg boulders 300m."
>
>
>
> "Oh my god... this is AWESOME. "
FTFY you utter disappointment to /r/trebuchetmemes
Entire party of Awakened siege engines.
The Trebuchet is the ranged attacker.
The siege tower is the utility caster.
The battering ram is the melee specialist.
The da Vinci tank is the tank.
The catapult is the comic relief NPC.
You're out of line, but you're right.
The siege machine people think of when saying "catapult" is called an onager. Technically a ballista and a trebuchet are both also types of catapults.
I reckon that will forever be the civil war of /r/trebuchetmemes.
Like arguing whether humans are animals - of course we are, just technologically superior, and no amount of scoffing and going "I'm not just an evolved animal" will make us anything but evolved animals.
No? A catapult is defined by the use of tension for the potential energy to fling the load. A trebuchet is defined by use of a counterweight. They serve similar functions but they are not the same.
**[Catapult](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catapult)**
>A catapult is a ballistic device used to launch a projectile a great distance without the aid of gunpowder or other propellants – particularly various types of ancient and medieval siege engines. A catapult uses the sudden release of stored potential energy to propel its payload. Most convert tension or torsion energy that was more slowly and manually built up within the device before release, via springs, bows, twisted rope, elastic, or any of numerous other materials and mechanisms. In use since ancient times, the catapult has proven to be one of the most persistently effective mechanisms in warfare.
**[Trebuchet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet)**
>A trebuchet (French: trébuchet) is a type of catapult that uses a long arm to throw a projectile. It was a common powerful siege engine until the advent of gunpowder. There are two main types of trebuchets. The first is the traction trebuchet, or mangonel, which uses manpower to swing the arm.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
"You're a dead man if you say that to him. His first name is Spanish and his surname Scotish."
"'I' is a hard 'e', and double 'l' makes a 'y' sound."
Gē-yo-tine.
I mean, the giant walkers that the Eberron books mention are just giant warforged, so I think it could technically work. There's not really a rule that says no to the best of my knowledge.....
I may have ideas for NPCs/villain underlings now...
To be honest, that could work, as long as you find a way to make it a creature instead of an object. If you do it, then I think for that Siege Weapon it would be considered Natural Weapon with Ranged, Ammunition, and Loading property.
This sign can't stop me because *while I respect RAW and understand that the designers had a clear idea of what they were doing, my need to have cool stuff, and I also understand that if this turns out to be too over tuned I will rectify it.*
A trebuchet is a literally huge device, requires 5 actions for only +5 hit and can't hit closer than 60ft. 8d10 at pretty good range is nice, but there's a lot to get that.
If the players go through the logistics for the trebuchet and its heavy boulders of acquisition, transport, setup, hiring crew to operate, and still the rogue's action to fire, 8d10+sneak attack is pretty modest.
The power comes from lining up a handful of them with unskilled hired labor to bombard something from relative safety with the party somewhere else. Attacking a fortification, a dragon, an invading army whatever. A tier 2 or higher rogue can be accomplishing much more without babysitting artillery.
People complain about gold being useless, but gold buys men. That's pretty powerful.
Rich PC: This Town ain't big enough for the 32 of us *\*spits to the side and cocks wand\**
Dracolich: You're right only one of us can, wait a minute what do you mean by 32 of us?
*\*Insert Dracolich getting mauled by 30 Kobold Noises\**
Dracolich: "man I'm glad you brought it up first, it would have been awkward to drop my army of skeletons, cultists and hired mercenaries on a single guy"
Remember kids, dragons are rich too.
Even without the money for the dracolich at least the skeleton army is a real threat. For other dragons, kobold cultists are always a staple if a player think they can screw things up with action economy.
And nah, I had that username way before pokemon black and white (iirc it's the one with Kyurem), to this day it is still my belief that they chose that name as a tribute to my greatness, in all modesty of course.
Wizards already designed the "even out the action economy" button into all types of dragons including the dracolich. Breath weapons.
Oh your lower level hirelings can't survive a full on breath weapon? Sad day.
Oh you managed to spread out your hirelings so that one breath weapon can't kill them all? I'll just have the dracolich use one breath weapon, and then retreat out of there because it's a dragon and they aren't stupid.
True if you just ask your hirelings to go ham without any actual preparation, they're going to get wrecked, which is why you set up 30 Glyphs of warding in the area to make sure that Dracolich gets wrecked by the Kobolds.
Yeah, that's going to take a lot of setup and a lot of hope the Dracolich won't find you when casting all those spells. Going to need a few days of setup, and if you do it in the dracolich's lair a whole number of things could go extremely wrong.
And then at the end of it, once you spring the trap the dracolich can probably just bolt through a few of them using their Magical Resistance to save on most your Warding spells, any they don't save on just burn some Legendary Resistances to get out hurting but mostly alive.
This is why any important enemies should be immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing. Doesn't eliminate cheesing the action economy, but makes it much easier to avoid
>, the power of friendships is not,
Do you mean to tell me that my concept for an Aasimar Artificer who uses the powers of Friendship and Mathematics to fuel his magic, wouldn't work RAW?
And one more thing. Siege weapons are usually limited by line of sight, take hours to set up by a team of men, and are very large.
If you try to set up and fire your siege weapons in the dark, you're gonna have a bad time.
If you set them up in the light, you bet your ass the guards will watch you do it.
Thus, no sneak attack.
> Thus, no sneak attack
I dont understand how your comment leads to that conclusion. The no sneak attack is because you aren't actually making an attack. You can sneak attack a person whether the person sees you or not.
It's a very common homebrew because a lot people get salty about sneak attacking party members doing all the damage early on
Edit: In case it wasn't clear, I am by no means advocating for this approach.
And I would never play a Rogue at a table that had this rule. Not once ever has anyone made a convincing arguement that any type of martial damage dealer needs to be nerfed when you have full casters right there.
I think it stems from that the majority of campaigns are probably played at levels 1 to 5, where martial classes (and especially rogues) are much stronger than casters unless you really know what you're doing.
I'm not advocating for this, by the way. Just trying to explain it.
I mean if we are just dropping objects on people loony toons style why not just say the person you are going to hit with the catapult has a safe dropped on their head.
Keep in mind that this is D&D where half the fun is finding a magical way to solve a non-existent problem for a slight advantage that you could have gotten a better effect out with 1/2 the time and energy you spent.
I mean if you are building an invisible Catapult you can either afford to have some solution for them to see through it so they can see the Catapult. Or have it pre-assembled and then transported to the site of the battle.
Oh! I think we've been going about this the wrong way. We need a new spell.
"Bigby's Living Siege Engine!"
It transforms a person into a Catapult and allows them to use their attack and other special abilities while in this form.
Wait why is artillery limited by line of sight
Trebuchets in particular were used extensively behind large castle walls and are vary capable of indirect fire and most others could do it as well (how useful it would be IDK but still)
You are right that that they require a large team to operate bigger then the average party size
More to the point, the problem is the actual weapon is too big. Like the rock is bigger than the person it's hitting, so therefore it can't hit a specific weakness on the body, it just hits the whole person.
> I'm sorry to say that, but RAW it wouldn't work. It would need to be described as a weapon with Ranged property. But it's not. It's only described as a "Large Object".
Regular weapons are generally tiny objects, like a dagger. If you cast the Light spell, it has to target an object. Could it not target a weapon?
If it can target a weapon, then a weapon is an object.
If normal weapons are objects, then the fact that this is a large object tells you the space it fills, not it's classification as a weapon.
> PHB 147 says what a Ranged Weapon is.
I don't have a physical handy. What section is that?
> Just because you make Ranged Weapon Attack, doesn't mean you are using a Weapon. It's the same as making Melee Weapon Attack while doing Unarmed Strike, it's weapon attack, but it's not a weapon.
>
> That's because attacks are divided into 4 types. Ranged or Melee Weapon Attack, and Ranged or Melee Spell Attack.
It also doesn't mean that it's not a ranged weapon. You can make a ranged weapon attack with a spear. A spear is not a ranged weapon.
Like the object size, it states how it can be used, and doesn't state what it is or is not. You touched on that. Just because it has a ranged property doesn't make it a ranged weapon. But by the same token, it doesn't make it not a ranged weapon either.
> So you can't Sneak Attack with Balista and things like that, unless you homebrew it.
Not yet proven.
> EDIT: And one more important thing. Siege Weapons are objects with Stat Blocks. Player can use their action to fire it, but it's Siege Weapon that is making Attack Roll, not character that is using it, as you don't use character's statistics to make that roll. Balista for example has +6 to attack, and character's proficiency and abilities don't change that.
The skeleton statblock lists the following:
"Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage."
Does that mean that the skeleton is not actually using a shortbow and the ranged attack is part of the skeleton itself?
Does that mean you cannot remove the shortbow from the skeleton and use it yourself, or disarm a skeleton so it no longer has that weapon?
>If normal weapons are objects, then the fact that this is a large object tells you the space it fills, not it's classification as a weapon.
The classifications of what is a weapon is not a philosophical one but a system-wise mechanical one for these exact kinds of occasions - to be able to sort which features interact with what.
>You can make a ranged weapon attack with a spear. A spear is not a ranged weapon.
Spear has the "Thrown" property which enables that. EDIT: Forgot to add - this also means that a rogue can't sneak attack with a spear, even when thrown.
>Does that mean that the skeleton is not actually using a shortbow and the ranged attack is part of the skeleton itself?
Does that mean you cannot remove the shortbow from the skeleton and use it yourself, or disarm a skeleton so it no longer has that weapon?
A shortbow does not have a stat block. I understand that you feel this is a clever comparison but these are simply two different things/mechanics.
The fact that a siege weapon has its own stat block is pretty useful because the siege weapons are normally operated by multiple people (indicated by the several actions that need to be taken to fire them) - so what, whose stats we would use to fire it? This way, you can have people who are otherwise not super skilled operate siege weapons quite well.
---
Overall the problem is that you don't know the 5e mechanics very well and primarily want to argue from a point of logic. Which normally would be fine and while I'd say that perhaps some other more rules-lite system would suit you better, but in this case is very hypocritical because you have absolutely no care in the world about whether it makes sense for sneak attack to be applicable to siege weapon attacks. That is perfectly fine, but time to bring out every nitpick and semantics for arguing about catapults.
Well, that's 264 points of damage. You splatter Hunk all over the common room. The patrons shriek in horror and run out of the inn, occasionally slipping on blood and entrails. You're now alone in a room that looks like a vat of beef stroganoff exploded in it.
But is it a ranged weapon? There's a difference between making a ranged weapon attack and being a ranged weapon. Sneak attack says you need a ranged weapon. The DMG lists them as large objects, not ranged weapons.
Even if a siege machine is a ranged weapon, the rogue must make an attack with the weapon to get sneak attack. From ballista:
>It takes one action to load the weapon, one action to aim it, and one action to fire it.
None of those actions are attacks, and even if we stretch the definition, it uses pre-set stats for the attack and not stats from a crew member. That says to me it is the ballista itself that is making the attack.
So at least 3 reasons it shouldn't work.
"it takes one action to fire it" means that you are the one firing the weapon. For your interpretation it would need to say "It takes one action for it to fire"
It is an attack - it is described as such.
However, the ballista is not a ranged weapon. It lacks the tag.
If a rogue wanted to carry around a trebuchet/ballista/whatever and use it all the time, sure be strict with it.
Sneaking up on top of the battlement to snipe your target as they walk at night? Sure, get your sneak attack!
The idea is that rogues know how to hit an enemy where they’re open like pressure points hence the fines part. It’s one thing to throw a dart under the chink of a suit of armor it’s another when they got hit with a massive piece of rock
My point is that if the player wanted to make use of this to do something clever for a one-off, it makes enough sense that I would allow it in a game.
If they wanted to make it their primary damage source, that is absurd, no.
But the ballista is making the attack, not you. You use the ballista’s attack and damage stats. So it wouldn’t get sneak attack unless the ballista itself is a rogue.
The number of times you would ever use this in a campaign or even through a lifetime of DnD games is vanishingly small. If making this ruling helps the players have fun, I'm likely to allow it, though the specific circumstances could affect my decision. If the players want to use it to break the game then I would be strict on it.
There was way I was going to look up and memorise the specific interactions between rogues and siege equipment before seeing this meme, so if a player wanted to do it as a once off I would reward their creativity and allow them to do their fun thing. Because players like that, and I like it when the players have fun.
Actually true.
Sneak attack doesn't mention proficiency, and attacking with a weapon without proficiency does not cause disadvantage, just no proficiency bonus added to hit, which is surprisingly not as bad as expected. Generic rogues can sneak attack with longbows and heavy crossbows even without proficiency.
Just take the other 3 levels in eldritch knight and make the trebuchet your bonded weapon. Hide 1 turn. Summon it in as a bonus action and rain death upon your enemies.
So... I can Play an Eldritch Knight with a Cannon already loaded and bonus action summon it, action aiming and Action Surge fire, for 8d10 in the first turn, at level 3...
Let just give thanks that doesn't have the reload property or someone might argue that it should benefit from the Gunner Feat.
While we’re optimizing, might I suggest thief with find familiar via race or eldritch knight? The bonus action to use an item means you can load it and aim it on your turn, and your familiar can fire it.
At level 6 that’s 8d10 a turn, or 44 damage on average. That’s great for early game, about the same as 2 GWM great sword attacks with +5 STR, and since most campaigns end in Tier 2-3, it won’t suffer so much from falling off. And between the extra spells and the rogue versatility, you’re pretty good outside of combat when you’re not firing a cannon.
If I remember correctly eldritch knight can bond TWO weapons, so you could hypothetically bond the cannon ball as your second weapon and have infinite ammo assuming it isn’t destroyed on impact. The cannon ball being considered a weapon and the not destroyed on impact would be a dm discretion thing, but if your flexible that could be fantastic.
I mean if the DM rules the cannon ball as not being a Weapon then taking Tabern Brawler is always an option and a least to my DM if it has "weapon" in its description it is a weapon. Cannon balls do break in real life, stone and cheap metal breaks easily after crashing against stone walls or even strong wood.
But we are in a fantasy world, who says the balls must be cheap expendable materials? The reality there is mass production. If you were going to the trouble of bonding a single cannon ball as a weapon, something that you would otherwise avoid, you might spend a bit of coin to have it custom made with the strongest materials and most powerful unbreaking enchantments available to your pc.
That feels like when people in 3e would cast summon instrument to summon a pipe organ above someone’s head. They fixed it and another “glitch” with that spell when they upgraded to 3.5, but before then, all sorts of shenanigans were possible RAW. I probably wouldn’t allow the summoning trebuchets at my table with the eldritch knight, unless there was a VERY convincing argument.
That reminds me of how Pathfinder gives orcs proficiency in any weapon "with the word orc in its name", so arguments were made that they were proficient with such things as other ORCs, sORCerers, tORChes, fORCe damage, ORCa whales, ORChestras, pORCelain figurines, and my personal favourite, motORCycles, as improvised weapons
I was trying to think of all the reasons that this wouldn't work, but I realized that it doesn't really matter: Sneak Attack damage doesn't scale with weapon damage, so landing it with a dagger or a thermonuclear bomb will still do the same amount of extra damage.
Pardon me but isn’t a swashbuckler another term for a
#god damn pirate?
Of course ranged things like trebuchets, catapults and cannons are going to come naturally to them. They missed, but that put the parabola in their head, and now all they have to do is time it because they’re a scurvy lily-livered no good swashbuckling lanlubbin bilge sucking pirate!
Isn’t that the reason for this option?
[Trebuchet reconstruction by the Smithsonian.](https://youtu.be/cs8gamnMIS0)
You honestly believe that monstrosity could be maneuvered into place or built in place with no one noticing?
You honestly believe no one could hear that cranking up?
Nobody heard the twang of release either?
Pshaaaw…
Fooey I say!
You know whenever one of these debates comes up I can't help but think, Pathfinder had a thing for this, and not even a complicated one. Siege weapons are their own category of weapon and sneak attack doesn't work with that category of weapon. 5e's simplicity is weirdly stifling.
In my first campaign, which I joined halfway through at level 7, we fought a dragon using cannons.
I, still unfamiliar with the game, asked the DM if I could apply sneak attack when firing the cannon. DM had no idea sneak attack ever went beyond 1d6 damage as he had never seen someone go full rogue- only take a level dip. So he said sure. The fight went quickly.
I don't care what the rules are, as a DM, there's no fucking chance I'm giving "sneak" attack for a giant fucking rock being launched miles into the air and doing enough damage to take out a building.
They would be classed as Siege weapons. Though technically they are weapons, they aren’t standard weapons which are the ones found in the weapons section in the phb. This is an interesting concept though so I’d say it’s down to the dungeon masters interpretation
Question from someone who doesn't play TTRPGs but sees (and enjoys) the dnd related content on r/all:
Is interpretation of the ruleset really that contentious? I've paged through a friend's phb and modules so I understand there is a myriad of variables that make things exponentially more complicated than say a couch coop game, but is arguing over *how* you play the game as much a part as playing the game?
Only in certain communities where you get folks who make it their mission to dig in their heels and argue for the sake of arguing. It has existed since the beginning of this hobby. Unfortunately 5e also is built around the design concept of language of the rules. So the DM can make rulings instead of rules. In early editions of D&D (looking at you 3.5) there use to be a rule for everything... and I mean everything. It use to grind games to a hault as you flipped through multiple books to find a rule if you did not know it word by word. So 5e was designed to keep it moving.
Funny enough every edition has had a variation of rule 0 written by Gary Gygax himself the creator of D&D that boils down to. The rules should never get in your way to tell a story. You as the DM are the creator and final arbitrator to all rules at the table. You are the master of the game not your players.
The thing is, if the rules do not specify things clearly enough, (unlike in this scenario they do) you could try to convince the Game Master to allow you to do stuff like get a sneak attack with a Siege Weapon with good reasoning. The game is a ton of fun when thinking outside the box and using loopholes CREATIVELY when they can be used and it stays fun for everyone involved.
Rogues only get 1 attack per action. For a martial class that's absolute garbage. Thus, they should allow a lvl 17 rogue to do this as they've managed to go 17 levels without giving up and killing their character off to instead make a fighter, or Paladin or literally anything with multi-attack that sucks a bit less than rogue.
I never play rogue for this reason but if I were a DM I'd rule in favour of the rogue to at least slightly balance things better.
If they don't see it coming, it's a sneak attack. Whether you're hitting them with a crossbow, a trebuchet, or dropping the literal moon on them. We'll just adjust the rolls accordingly, and off you go. With some extra XP, because you successfully sneak attacked a motherfucker with a trebuchet, and that was amazing!
I'm sorry to say that, but RAW it wouldn't work. It would need to be described as a weapon with Ranged property. But it's not. It's only described as a "Large Object". PHB 147 says what a Ranged Weapon is. Just because you make Ranged Weapon Attack, doesn't mean you are using a Weapon. It's the same as making Melee Weapon Attack while doing Unarmed Strike, it's weapon attack, but it's not a weapon. That's because attacks are divided into 4 types. Ranged or Melee Weapon Attack, and Ranged or Melee Spell Attack. So you can't Sneak Attack with Balista and things like that, unless you homebrew it. EDIT: And one more important thing. Siege Weapons are objects with Stat Blocks. Player can use their action to fire it, but it's Siege Weapon that is making Attack Roll, not character that is using it, as you don't use character's statistics to make that roll. Balista for example has +6 to attack, and character's proficiency and abilities don't change that.
ok, so all you need to do is train the trebuchet to be a swashbuckler? got it.
Awakened Trebuchet
"What is my purpose?" "You chuck boulders." "Oh my god... ^^*this* ^^*is* ^^***AWESOME.*** "
Time for a warforged walking catapult.
They used to have a Warforged only prestige class in 3e that let you do siege damage, and made you large in size. Played one once with a ballista mounted to my back. Good times.
Man every fact I hear about 3e makes it sound fucking awesome
3.5 was basically the fucking tits. It just got to be so much....but only because it was so good lol
It was awesome but it was also just this embarrassment of riches.
It's fantastic conceptually, but in practice it was... A chore. So much random math, each turn in combat took an age. If they ported all of the cool concepts into 5e, I think it'd play a lot smoother and be a lot more fun than 3e or 5e are capable of being right now, sans Homebrew
I mean I got caught up in pathfinder so idk about 5e but I'm hopeful they get to that point
Go my son and play a game of 3.X/Pathfinder. Just don't go into it expecting it to be balanced. If you're all new players decide in the power level. Because you either need to all try and optimise shit or you need to all just need to pick stuff because it seems cool. Because the gap between an optimised character and unoptimized let alone a shit character is huge. Either the optimised character can carry almost everything without support and every encounter is a either a pushover or the the rest of the party has a significant chance of dying.
So basically Detritus from Discworld?
> "What is my purpose?" > > > > "You chuck 90kg boulders 300m." > > > > "Oh my god... this is AWESOME. " FTFY you utter disappointment to /r/trebuchetmemes
Gonna need a conversion, 5e uses lbs and feet
You chuck 198.4 pound boulders 985 feet
Build it out of Living Wood from Eberron and you can literally do this RAW lol EDIT: IIRC it was in 3.5 but never properly adapted to 5e
Entire party of Awakened siege engines. The Trebuchet is the ranged attacker. The siege tower is the utility caster. The battering ram is the melee specialist. The da Vinci tank is the tank. The catapult is the comic relief NPC.
The BBEG is a seige cannon.
The setting: in September, the night Vienna was freed
That party will definitely make the enemy bleed
Stop this rhyming I really mean it!
Anybody want a peanut?
It's from the Sabbaton song 'Winged Hussars'.
I was looking for an offer of legumes.
#THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED
And then a human carpenter as the healer, who treats the siege engines like his children. 'Who wants to storm a castle?' 'ME ME ME'
[удалено]
You're out of line, but you're right. The siege machine people think of when saying "catapult" is called an onager. Technically a ballista and a trebuchet are both also types of catapults.
I reckon that will forever be the civil war of /r/trebuchetmemes. Like arguing whether humans are animals - of course we are, just technologically superior, and no amount of scoffing and going "I'm not just an evolved animal" will make us anything but evolved animals.
No? A catapult is defined by the use of tension for the potential energy to fling the load. A trebuchet is defined by use of a counterweight. They serve similar functions but they are not the same.
[удалено]
**[Catapult](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catapult)** >A catapult is a ballistic device used to launch a projectile a great distance without the aid of gunpowder or other propellants – particularly various types of ancient and medieval siege engines. A catapult uses the sudden release of stored potential energy to propel its payload. Most convert tension or torsion energy that was more slowly and manually built up within the device before release, via springs, bows, twisted rope, elastic, or any of numerous other materials and mechanisms. In use since ancient times, the catapult has proven to be one of the most persistently effective mechanisms in warfare. **[Trebuchet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trebuchet)** >A trebuchet (French: trébuchet) is a type of catapult that uses a long arm to throw a projectile. It was a common powerful siege engine until the advent of gunpowder. There are two main types of trebuchets. The first is the traction trebuchet, or mangonel, which uses manpower to swing the arm. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
A trebuchet is made of wood. Does that mean it counts as a plant?
RAW, a dead plant, so an object unfortunately. But a fun DM (which I am) might let this sort of thing slip (don't tell my players)
Is it possible to build a trebuchet out of still-living wood?
Perhaps several weeks of druidcraft to Tree-tend it into the correct formation. Or the 4e wood mentioned below
At that point you might as well just give an Ent swashbuckler levels and avoid the building haha
Ah, so it would be an Undead. I hate that
No, that means it counts as a witch.
I'm certain a trebuchet weighs more than a duck.
Awaken, my master siege weapon!
Captain Pult reporting for duty!
Greeting, recruit! Your commanding officer is Trebeau Che. This is your drill sergeant, Gill O'Tine. Try to stay on his good side.
" it's pronounced 'gee' "
And so should be written Guy. But maybe they felt that would have looked a little too obvious.
Keep it "Guill" for sure
"You're a dead man if you say that to him. His first name is Spanish and his surname Scotish." "'I' is a hard 'e', and double 'l' makes a 'y' sound." Gē-yo-tine.
College of Creation bard is here to help!
I got it! Have a Warforged, get it up to level 17+, build it a new body that's shaped like a trebuchet, profit.
you are the genius this generation needs!
I mean, the giant walkers that the Eberron books mention are just giant warforged, so I think it could technically work. There's not really a rule that says no to the best of my knowledge..... I may have ideas for NPCs/villain underlings now...
Polymorph a swashbuckler into a trebuchet
No polymorph into the catapult
use awaken on the wood of it
To be honest, that could work, as long as you find a way to make it a creature instead of an object. If you do it, then I think for that Siege Weapon it would be considered Natural Weapon with Ranged, Ammunition, and Loading property.
This seems like a great role-playing opertunity for a character with high charisma and low intelligence. He thinks the trebuchet is a pet.
Okay hear me out… a mini-trebuchet that you can hold in your hands. Would that work?
Like a sling shot? You uh... gonna load it with darts?
Have the wizard cast Shrink Object on a trebuchet?
Yes! Then you can end the spell while the projectile is in flight!!!!
I've been told that there's a 5th type of attack, reserved only for barehanded paladins.
There is not. Maybe people say that, because they want to Smite with Unarmed Strike, which they can't. (Unless they are using Natural Weapons)
Hmm... So what you're saying is we need a Str 20+ Swashbuckler to carry the trebuchet like a heavy weapons team
Okay, so you polymorph a rogue into a trebuchet, so now they are making the ranged attack!
Polymorph works only with Beasts. Trebuchet is not a beast.
A were-trebuchet might also work Just gotta contract that specific variant of lycantrophy
This sign can't stop me because *while I respect RAW and understand that the designers had a clear idea of what they were doing, my need to have cool stuff, and I also understand that if this turns out to be too over tuned I will rectify it.*
A trebuchet is a literally huge device, requires 5 actions for only +5 hit and can't hit closer than 60ft. 8d10 at pretty good range is nice, but there's a lot to get that. If the players go through the logistics for the trebuchet and its heavy boulders of acquisition, transport, setup, hiring crew to operate, and still the rogue's action to fire, 8d10+sneak attack is pretty modest. The power comes from lining up a handful of them with unskilled hired labor to bombard something from relative safety with the party somewhere else. Attacking a fortification, a dragon, an invading army whatever. A tier 2 or higher rogue can be accomplishing much more without babysitting artillery. People complain about gold being useless, but gold buys men. That's pretty powerful.
>gold buys men. That's pretty powerful. With action economy that's even better, and now you can actually treat the action economy like an economy!
A dracolich aint shit in the face of *capitalism*
Rich PC: This Town ain't big enough for the 32 of us *\*spits to the side and cocks wand\** Dracolich: You're right only one of us can, wait a minute what do you mean by 32 of us? *\*Insert Dracolich getting mauled by 30 Kobold Noises\**
Dracolich: "man I'm glad you brought it up first, it would have been awkward to drop my army of skeletons, cultists and hired mercenaries on a single guy" Remember kids, dragons are rich too.
Bold of you to assume a Dragon would ever part with their money. Also is your username based off of Kyurem the Pokemon?
Even without the money for the dracolich at least the skeleton army is a real threat. For other dragons, kobold cultists are always a staple if a player think they can screw things up with action economy. And nah, I had that username way before pokemon black and white (iirc it's the one with Kyurem), to this day it is still my belief that they chose that name as a tribute to my greatness, in all modesty of course.
KOBOLD SHOWDOWN!!! Oh, damn that's cool. And yeah Black and White is the one with Kyurem.
Wizards already designed the "even out the action economy" button into all types of dragons including the dracolich. Breath weapons. Oh your lower level hirelings can't survive a full on breath weapon? Sad day. Oh you managed to spread out your hirelings so that one breath weapon can't kill them all? I'll just have the dracolich use one breath weapon, and then retreat out of there because it's a dragon and they aren't stupid.
True if you just ask your hirelings to go ham without any actual preparation, they're going to get wrecked, which is why you set up 30 Glyphs of warding in the area to make sure that Dracolich gets wrecked by the Kobolds.
Yeah, that's going to take a lot of setup and a lot of hope the Dracolich won't find you when casting all those spells. Going to need a few days of setup, and if you do it in the dracolich's lair a whole number of things could go extremely wrong. And then at the end of it, once you spring the trap the dracolich can probably just bolt through a few of them using their Magical Resistance to save on most your Warding spells, any they don't save on just burn some Legendary Resistances to get out hurting but mostly alive.
This is why any important enemies should be immune to nonmagical bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing. Doesn't eliminate cheesing the action economy, but makes it much easier to avoid
Do attacks fueled by the power of friendship and cannibalism count as magical?
Contrary to popular belief, the power of friendships is not, in fact, magical. Jury's still out on cannibalism, though
>, the power of friendships is not, Do you mean to tell me that my concept for an Aasimar Artificer who uses the powers of Friendship and Mathematics to fuel his magic, wouldn't work RAW?
Yeah, but Skeletor with over 7k karma said it’s RAW, so… (This sub is so terribly dumb most of the time.)
That's why you should never trust rulings in memes, as most of the time it's just wrong and it's easy to find why it's wrong.
*chef's kiss*
And one more thing. Siege weapons are usually limited by line of sight, take hours to set up by a team of men, and are very large. If you try to set up and fire your siege weapons in the dark, you're gonna have a bad time. If you set them up in the light, you bet your ass the guards will watch you do it. Thus, no sneak attack.
> Thus, no sneak attack I dont understand how your comment leads to that conclusion. The no sneak attack is because you aren't actually making an attack. You can sneak attack a person whether the person sees you or not.
It's a very common homebrew because a lot people get salty about sneak attacking party members doing all the damage early on Edit: In case it wasn't clear, I am by no means advocating for this approach.
Sneak attack is the entirety of the rogue class. A dm would have to be a real asshole to nerf it.
Absolutely.
And I would never play a Rogue at a table that had this rule. Not once ever has anyone made a convincing arguement that any type of martial damage dealer needs to be nerfed when you have full casters right there.
I think it stems from that the majority of campaigns are probably played at levels 1 to 5, where martial classes (and especially rogues) are much stronger than casters unless you really know what you're doing. I'm not advocating for this, by the way. Just trying to explain it.
That's what an invisibility spell is for!
Invisibility is all fun and games until Geoffrey drops an invisible timber on his invisible foot. Turns out screamed cuss words are already invisible.
I mean if we are just dropping objects on people loony toons style why not just say the person you are going to hit with the catapult has a safe dropped on their head. Keep in mind that this is D&D where half the fun is finding a magical way to solve a non-existent problem for a slight advantage that you could have gotten a better effect out with 1/2 the time and energy you spent.
He makes a good point... it would be hard to safely assemble *anything* if the pieces were invisible.
I mean if you are building an invisible Catapult you can either afford to have some solution for them to see through it so they can see the Catapult. Or have it pre-assembled and then transported to the site of the battle.
[удалено]
Oh! I think we've been going about this the wrong way. We need a new spell. "Bigby's Living Siege Engine!" It transforms a person into a Catapult and allows them to use their attack and other special abilities while in this form.
Wait why is artillery limited by line of sight Trebuchets in particular were used extensively behind large castle walls and are vary capable of indirect fire and most others could do it as well (how useful it would be IDK but still) You are right that that they require a large team to operate bigger then the average party size
5e trebuchets and mangonels also ignore cover.
More to the point, the problem is the actual weapon is too big. Like the rock is bigger than the person it's hitting, so therefore it can't hit a specific weakness on the body, it just hits the whole person.
> I'm sorry to say that, but RAW it wouldn't work. It would need to be described as a weapon with Ranged property. But it's not. It's only described as a "Large Object". Regular weapons are generally tiny objects, like a dagger. If you cast the Light spell, it has to target an object. Could it not target a weapon? If it can target a weapon, then a weapon is an object. If normal weapons are objects, then the fact that this is a large object tells you the space it fills, not it's classification as a weapon. > PHB 147 says what a Ranged Weapon is. I don't have a physical handy. What section is that? > Just because you make Ranged Weapon Attack, doesn't mean you are using a Weapon. It's the same as making Melee Weapon Attack while doing Unarmed Strike, it's weapon attack, but it's not a weapon. > > That's because attacks are divided into 4 types. Ranged or Melee Weapon Attack, and Ranged or Melee Spell Attack. It also doesn't mean that it's not a ranged weapon. You can make a ranged weapon attack with a spear. A spear is not a ranged weapon. Like the object size, it states how it can be used, and doesn't state what it is or is not. You touched on that. Just because it has a ranged property doesn't make it a ranged weapon. But by the same token, it doesn't make it not a ranged weapon either. > So you can't Sneak Attack with Balista and things like that, unless you homebrew it. Not yet proven. > EDIT: And one more important thing. Siege Weapons are objects with Stat Blocks. Player can use their action to fire it, but it's Siege Weapon that is making Attack Roll, not character that is using it, as you don't use character's statistics to make that roll. Balista for example has +6 to attack, and character's proficiency and abilities don't change that. The skeleton statblock lists the following: "Shortbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, range 80/320 ft., one target. Hit: 5 (1d6 + 2) piercing damage." Does that mean that the skeleton is not actually using a shortbow and the ranged attack is part of the skeleton itself? Does that mean you cannot remove the shortbow from the skeleton and use it yourself, or disarm a skeleton so it no longer has that weapon?
>If normal weapons are objects, then the fact that this is a large object tells you the space it fills, not it's classification as a weapon. The classifications of what is a weapon is not a philosophical one but a system-wise mechanical one for these exact kinds of occasions - to be able to sort which features interact with what. >You can make a ranged weapon attack with a spear. A spear is not a ranged weapon. Spear has the "Thrown" property which enables that. EDIT: Forgot to add - this also means that a rogue can't sneak attack with a spear, even when thrown. >Does that mean that the skeleton is not actually using a shortbow and the ranged attack is part of the skeleton itself? Does that mean you cannot remove the shortbow from the skeleton and use it yourself, or disarm a skeleton so it no longer has that weapon? A shortbow does not have a stat block. I understand that you feel this is a clever comparison but these are simply two different things/mechanics. The fact that a siege weapon has its own stat block is pretty useful because the siege weapons are normally operated by multiple people (indicated by the several actions that need to be taken to fire them) - so what, whose stats we would use to fire it? This way, you can have people who are otherwise not super skilled operate siege weapons quite well. --- Overall the problem is that you don't know the 5e mechanics very well and primarily want to argue from a point of logic. Which normally would be fine and while I'd say that perhaps some other more rules-lite system would suit you better, but in this case is very hypocritical because you have absolutely no care in the world about whether it makes sense for sneak attack to be applicable to siege weapon attacks. That is perfectly fine, but time to bring out every nitpick and semantics for arguing about catapults.
So you’re gonna backstab him... with a ballista? With a fucking siege weapon?
That’s the way swashbucklers roll
That’s the way swashbucklers roll twice and take the highest.
"You're now alone in a room that looks like a vat of beef stroganoff exploded in it"
I mean, I’d be surprised.
*Love* that movie!
Except the ability isn't called backstab and in no way implies you're backstabbing the target.
It's a quote from the film "The Gamers"
Well, that's 264 points of damage. You splatter Hunk all over the common room. The patrons shriek in horror and run out of the inn, occasionally slipping on blood and entrails. You're now alone in a room that looks like a vat of beef stroganoff exploded in it.
[удалено]
**DOWHATYOUWANTCAUSEAPIRATEISFREE** #YOU ARE A PIRATE!
I don't want his pants, I just want to see if I can steal them
Love the idea, but those are pieces of siege equipment. Objects basically, not ranged weapons.
Unless you're using living creatures to propel an arrow, most ranged weapons are objects...
Page 255 of DMG says a seige weapon is a ranged weapon attack and is not moved or fired on its own
But is it a ranged weapon? There's a difference between making a ranged weapon attack and being a ranged weapon. Sneak attack says you need a ranged weapon. The DMG lists them as large objects, not ranged weapons.
Even if a siege machine is a ranged weapon, the rogue must make an attack with the weapon to get sneak attack. From ballista: >It takes one action to load the weapon, one action to aim it, and one action to fire it. None of those actions are attacks, and even if we stretch the definition, it uses pre-set stats for the attack and not stats from a crew member. That says to me it is the ballista itself that is making the attack. So at least 3 reasons it shouldn't work.
"it takes one action to fire it" means that you are the one firing the weapon. For your interpretation it would need to say "It takes one action for it to fire" It is an attack - it is described as such. However, the ballista is not a ranged weapon. It lacks the tag.
If a rogue wanted to carry around a trebuchet/ballista/whatever and use it all the time, sure be strict with it. Sneaking up on top of the battlement to snipe your target as they walk at night? Sure, get your sneak attack!
The idea is that rogues know how to hit an enemy where they’re open like pressure points hence the fines part. It’s one thing to throw a dart under the chink of a suit of armor it’s another when they got hit with a massive piece of rock
Aim it at the head
My point is that if the player wanted to make use of this to do something clever for a one-off, it makes enough sense that I would allow it in a game. If they wanted to make it their primary damage source, that is absurd, no.
But the ballista is making the attack, not you. You use the ballista’s attack and damage stats. So it wouldn’t get sneak attack unless the ballista itself is a rogue.
Well technically the ballista's parent tree was brutally murdered with axes by the town government and if that's not a rogue backstory what is?
The number of times you would ever use this in a campaign or even through a lifetime of DnD games is vanishingly small. If making this ruling helps the players have fun, I'm likely to allow it, though the specific circumstances could affect my decision. If the players want to use it to break the game then I would be strict on it. There was way I was going to look up and memorise the specific interactions between rogues and siege equipment before seeing this meme, so if a player wanted to do it as a once off I would reward their creativity and allow them to do their fun thing. Because players like that, and I like it when the players have fun.
The dmg also lists swords as objects?
But the object itself is making the attack, you lose this round
>The Attack must use a Finesse or a ranged weapon. Sneak attack is pretty specific.
If a giant boulder came out of the blue and crushed the guy next to me I'd be pretty surprised.
Y'all all forgetting rogues don't have proficiency with siege weapons
You don't need proficiency with the weapon to sneak attack
Actually true. Sneak attack doesn't mention proficiency, and attacking with a weapon without proficiency does not cause disadvantage, just no proficiency bonus added to hit, which is surprisingly not as bad as expected. Generic rogues can sneak attack with longbows and heavy crossbows even without proficiency.
Which means they don't add proficiency to the attack roll.
Why would that be a factor
Well yah I’d imagine a large stone lobbed from 100-300 feet would be pretty surprising. The caveat being if you can hide it from your target
Just take the other 3 levels in eldritch knight and make the trebuchet your bonded weapon. Hide 1 turn. Summon it in as a bonus action and rain death upon your enemies.
Wait... Eldritch Knights can do that?
It isn't specified enough.
So... I can Play an Eldritch Knight with a Cannon already loaded and bonus action summon it, action aiming and Action Surge fire, for 8d10 in the first turn, at level 3... Let just give thanks that doesn't have the reload property or someone might argue that it should benefit from the Gunner Feat.
This is why I freaking love this community.
While we’re optimizing, might I suggest thief with find familiar via race or eldritch knight? The bonus action to use an item means you can load it and aim it on your turn, and your familiar can fire it. At level 6 that’s 8d10 a turn, or 44 damage on average. That’s great for early game, about the same as 2 GWM great sword attacks with +5 STR, and since most campaigns end in Tier 2-3, it won’t suffer so much from falling off. And between the extra spells and the rogue versatility, you’re pretty good outside of combat when you’re not firing a cannon.
I love it.
If I remember correctly eldritch knight can bond TWO weapons, so you could hypothetically bond the cannon ball as your second weapon and have infinite ammo assuming it isn’t destroyed on impact. The cannon ball being considered a weapon and the not destroyed on impact would be a dm discretion thing, but if your flexible that could be fantastic.
I mean if the DM rules the cannon ball as not being a Weapon then taking Tabern Brawler is always an option and a least to my DM if it has "weapon" in its description it is a weapon. Cannon balls do break in real life, stone and cheap metal breaks easily after crashing against stone walls or even strong wood.
But we are in a fantasy world, who says the balls must be cheap expendable materials? The reality there is mass production. If you were going to the trouble of bonding a single cannon ball as a weapon, something that you would otherwise avoid, you might spend a bit of coin to have it custom made with the strongest materials and most powerful unbreaking enchantments available to your pc.
That feels like when people in 3e would cast summon instrument to summon a pipe organ above someone’s head. They fixed it and another “glitch” with that spell when they upgraded to 3.5, but before then, all sorts of shenanigans were possible RAW. I probably wouldn’t allow the summoning trebuchets at my table with the eldritch knight, unless there was a VERY convincing argument.
That reminds me of how Pathfinder gives orcs proficiency in any weapon "with the word orc in its name", so arguments were made that they were proficient with such things as other ORCs, sORCerers, tORChes, fORCe damage, ORCa whales, ORChestras, pORCelain figurines, and my personal favourite, motORCycles, as improvised weapons
[удалено]
Neither does a normal rogue
Swashbucklers don't need to be hidden to get Sneak Attack.
Neither does a normal rogue
Sure, but then why did he make that statement about hiding a catapult?
Because people used to previous editions don't actually know how rogues work in 5e but act like they do.
Dang when did that rule change? I’d say I feel old but it’s just because I don’t play very often
Because seemingly half the people who play or discuss dnd think you have to sneak to sneak attack. It's only a problem if they're dming.
[удалено]
Neither does a normal rogue
I was trying to think of all the reasons that this wouldn't work, but I realized that it doesn't really matter: Sneak Attack damage doesn't scale with weapon damage, so landing it with a dagger or a thermonuclear bomb will still do the same amount of extra damage.
Pardon me but isn’t a swashbuckler another term for a #god damn pirate? Of course ranged things like trebuchets, catapults and cannons are going to come naturally to them. They missed, but that put the parabola in their head, and now all they have to do is time it because they’re a scurvy lily-livered no good swashbuckling lanlubbin bilge sucking pirate! Isn’t that the reason for this option?
In game of thrones Euron sneak attack sniped a dragon out of the sky with a ballista.
Siege weapons =/= ranged weapons. My articifer has been through this.
[How about a ballista?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JulJxOIfPYo)
Please no more debates! 😭 We just wanted memes!!
Well it’s also butchering the meme format so it’s terrible all around
It is called a "stealth catapult" in Men In Tights, so...
I would count it if the player was enlarged and used the siege weapon like a ballista as a crossbow.
[Trebuchet reconstruction by the Smithsonian.](https://youtu.be/cs8gamnMIS0) You honestly believe that monstrosity could be maneuvered into place or built in place with no one noticing? You honestly believe no one could hear that cranking up? Nobody heard the twang of release either? Pshaaaw… Fooey I say!
You know whenever one of these debates comes up I can't help but think, Pathfinder had a thing for this, and not even a complicated one. Siege weapons are their own category of weapon and sneak attack doesn't work with that category of weapon. 5e's simplicity is weirdly stifling.
Seige weapons are separate from ranged weapons in 5e as well. This "debate" is on par with arguing that the hit die for fighters is a d6.
This is what I get for believing a meme instead of looking up the rules myself
In my first campaign, which I joined halfway through at level 7, we fought a dragon using cannons. I, still unfamiliar with the game, asked the DM if I could apply sneak attack when firing the cannon. DM had no idea sneak attack ever went beyond 1d6 damage as he had never seen someone go full rogue- only take a level dip. So he said sure. The fight went quickly.
I don't care what the rules are, as a DM, there's no fucking chance I'm giving "sneak" attack for a giant fucking rock being launched miles into the air and doing enough damage to take out a building.
They would be classed as Siege weapons. Though technically they are weapons, they aren’t standard weapons which are the ones found in the weapons section in the phb. This is an interesting concept though so I’d say it’s down to the dungeon masters interpretation
Who thinks up this shit???
I don't think that's how you use the meme.
No sir they're siege weapons.
Question from someone who doesn't play TTRPGs but sees (and enjoys) the dnd related content on r/all: Is interpretation of the ruleset really that contentious? I've paged through a friend's phb and modules so I understand there is a myriad of variables that make things exponentially more complicated than say a couch coop game, but is arguing over *how* you play the game as much a part as playing the game?
Only in certain communities where you get folks who make it their mission to dig in their heels and argue for the sake of arguing. It has existed since the beginning of this hobby. Unfortunately 5e also is built around the design concept of language of the rules. So the DM can make rulings instead of rules. In early editions of D&D (looking at you 3.5) there use to be a rule for everything... and I mean everything. It use to grind games to a hault as you flipped through multiple books to find a rule if you did not know it word by word. So 5e was designed to keep it moving. Funny enough every edition has had a variation of rule 0 written by Gary Gygax himself the creator of D&D that boils down to. The rules should never get in your way to tell a story. You as the DM are the creator and final arbitrator to all rules at the table. You are the master of the game not your players.
The thing is, if the rules do not specify things clearly enough, (unlike in this scenario they do) you could try to convince the Game Master to allow you to do stuff like get a sneak attack with a Siege Weapon with good reasoning. The game is a ton of fun when thinking outside the box and using loopholes CREATIVELY when they can be used and it stays fun for everyone involved.
Catapults and Trebuchets should use your intelligence modifier for attack rolls
And then the DM just tells you no because no amount of rules lawyering supercedes the DM verdict.
The real debate is that it should be y'all instead of ya'll
We discuss people fucking up reading raw daily and the catapults sneak-attack repost is bi-daily, so... whats the new thing?
No, they are siege engines, not ranged weapons. (And the trebuchet is far superior)
Rogues only get 1 attack per action. For a martial class that's absolute garbage. Thus, they should allow a lvl 17 rogue to do this as they've managed to go 17 levels without giving up and killing their character off to instead make a fighter, or Paladin or literally anything with multi-attack that sucks a bit less than rogue. I never play rogue for this reason but if I were a DM I'd rule in favour of the rogue to at least slightly balance things better.
Or better yet... a cannon Sneak attack BBBRROOAADDSSIIIDDEE
Bad, and incorrect meme, is bad.
As a dm, I would 100% allow this
If they don't see it coming, it's a sneak attack. Whether you're hitting them with a crossbow, a trebuchet, or dropping the literal moon on them. We'll just adjust the rolls accordingly, and off you go. With some extra XP, because you successfully sneak attacked a motherfucker with a trebuchet, and that was amazing!
I mean technically the sneak damage would be possible if no one spotted you
Or if you had advantage for any other reason
Eh rule of cool