19
\$\begingroup\$

I found the boomerang while designing a character (with homebrew not selected during character generation.)

Is this a homebrew weapon or is it an official piece of equipment?

| improve this question | | | | |
\$\endgroup\$
20
\$\begingroup\$

It's a pared down version of the Storm Boomerang from Princes of the Apocalypse.

In that module, there is an Uncommon Magic Weapon called a Storm Boomerang that reads like this:

Simple Weapon, Ranged Weapon, Uncommon
1d4 bludgeoning

This boomerang is a ranged weapon carved from griffon bone and etched with the symbol of elemental air. When thrown, it has a range of 60/120 feet, and any creature that is proficient with the javelin is also proficient with this weapon. On a hit, the boomerang deals 1d4 bludgeoning damage and 3d4 thunder damage, and the target must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of its next turn. On a miss, the boomerang returns to the thrower's hand.

Once the boomerang deals thunder damage to a target, the weapon loses its ability to deal thunder damage and its ability to stun a target. These properties return after the boomerang spends at least 1 hour inside an elemental air node.

I've bolded the text that's not only similar, but identical, between the two weapons.

The DnDBeyond admins determined that the extra thunder damage, plus the stun effect, are solely the properties of the "enchantment" (or whatever) on the boomerang, and that removing those properties is enough to make the boomerang equivalent to a normal weapon.

It's not an official weapon

I see no issue with the mundane weapon from a balancing perspective, and wouldn't object to seeing it in a campaign, but as-is, the statblock presented by DnDBeyond is not official, and I would personally consider it to be Homebrew.

Additionally, because the statblock on DnDBeyond is... underspecified, it may be difficult to justify using it without at least specifying a bit more detail about the weapon in totality.

| improve this answer | | | | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I guess a nitpick with the DnDB section is that they needed to create a base weapon in order to create the magic weapon. They never made the determination that the base properties are equivalent to a normal weapon (and in fact most of the properties of a normal weapon (weight etc) are missing from it. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Sep 27 '18 at 18:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Xirema I question its "not being an official weapon". DnDBeyond is an "official" source (in a "from the horses mouth" way). I agree that it is "under detailed, namely in cost and weight. But that issue should hopefully be rectified (I have PM'ed addmins there & questioned this directly to WotC via email). Seeing how item creation works in 5e (needing a "base" item) boomerangs indeed "exist" in the 5e multiverse. You cant buy one (to date) so you could end up with it in rare situations of the magical one becoming "magically inert", making an "official boomerang"...even inside AL rules \$\endgroup\$ – Jeffrey Witty Feb 24 at 19:38
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @JeffreyWitty "Official" in this context is synedoche for "the game provides rules for how to use it." There's no sourcebook that provides a statblock for a "Boomerang", so it doesn't officially exist. The fact that DNDBeyond has a statblock for it isn't especially convincing to me: DNDBeyond has made plenty of mistakes in the past in how it aggregates items, class features, monsters, etc., and we have a directly linked source that the only reason the item exists in their database was to patch over some arbitrary restrictions in how their database collates magic items. \$\endgroup\$ – Xirema Feb 24 at 19:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Xirema Ok, I'm following that line of thought, so what happens if it became permantly "un-magical" in some way? Does it phase out of reality, turn to dust? (Also could a woodworker or other sufficiently skilled crafts person replicate the non-magical variant? seeing its mundane effect is physics not magic) \$\endgroup\$ – Jeffrey Witty Feb 24 at 20:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JeffreyWitty Probably the same thing that happens to any magical item that passes through an Anti-Magic Field: it turns mundane and non-magical. Again, as I mentioned in my answer: from a DM perspective, I'm perfectly fine with using the mundane weapon statblock if someone comes to me and says "I'd like my weapon to be a Boomerang", but I don't think it's correct to say "well, here's the rules-as-written for using a Boomerang as a weapon", because A) those rules don't exist outside a campaign module, and B) it's not 100% clear which features of the boomerang are magical and which aren't. \$\endgroup\$ – Xirema Feb 24 at 20:14
26
\$\begingroup\$

It's based on a magic item from an adventure module

By removing the magical properties from the magic item in question, the basic boomerang can be arrived at. However, I do not think the mundane version of this item is officially released. Below you can find details from the module:

In Princes of the Apocalypse, there is a magic weapon called storm boomerang which has a theoretical non-magical counterpart. It states the following:

"When thrown, it has a range of 60/120 ft, and any creature that is proficient with the javelin is also proficient with this weapon. On a hit, the boomerang deals 1d4 bludgeoning damage and 3d4 thunder damage, and [magical effect]. On a miss, the boomerang returns to the thrower’s hand."

It looks like D&D Beyond extracted the 1d4 bludgeoning damage from the above item as a statistic for a standard boomerang.

Since all of the details of the boomerang comes from the reduction of the magic item, many qualities typically present on items are lost such as weight, cost, and properties. As such, you should ask your GM before attempting to use the item and what should be filled in for those statistics.

A moderator for D&D Beyond has stated that this is the case as well:

Due to the way D&D Beyond builds magic weapons ontop [sic] of base weapons, we needed a "standard boomerang" in the database to be able to add the magic item.

| improve this answer | | | | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I would argue "On a hit or a miss, the boomerang returns to the thrower’s hand." is part of the magical enchantment... you ever hit stuff with a real boomerang? It doesn't return to you. \$\endgroup\$ – Nelson Sep 28 '18 at 1:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ The mundane boomerang still returns on a miss (like the magical one), but as clarified by David Coffron neither the mundane or magical version returns on a hit. \$\endgroup\$ – Captain Man Sep 28 '18 at 13:07
-5
\$\begingroup\$

Yes, otherwise there could be no boomerangs at all in the 5e multiverse

My 2 cents: I'm not an expert, just willing to attempt to explain my understanding on RAW. I do not feel this will be most correct answer, but it mentions a few good points

I agree that it (the boomerang listing on DnDBeyond) is "under detailed", namely in cost and weight.

But that issue should hopefully be rectified (I have PM'ed addmins there & questioned this directly to WotC via email).

Seeing how item creation works in 5e (needing a "base" item) boomerangs indeed "exist" in the 5e multiverse. You cant buy one (to date) so you could end up with it in the rare situation of the magical one becoming "magically inert", making an "official boomerang"...even inside AL rules. So a "wish", or other permanent "anti-magic" applied to it could facilitate the need for "an official boomerang entry", that is fully complete when compared to a dart and/or javelin (see note below)

Note: Its closest siblings, mechanically, although it is more akin to a "dart" in that it is not a melee weapon that has the "thrown" property but a "simple ranged weapon")

"the boomerang is a magic item solely from SKT" 100% Agreed. But for that to be possible (inside the mechanics of magical item creation in 5e) a mundane version needs to exist to either: "be enchanted", OR "exist in its place, if item became non-magical"

5e Multiverse: My meaning, all 5e content/campaign settings that are "officially" released and/or endorsed as "official" by WotC to date

It seems my interpretations constantly require me to restate my reasoning in comments, base item needing to exist.

| improve this answer | | | | |
\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.