I seem to have coined a phrase among my friends at the table. The “Naked Barbarian Standard.”
I used this to explain to someone, how I would handle a players improvised play. The Player was forced into close range combat, and declared he would hit them with his bow, What became contested is how damage would be calculated. They ended up settling on one D4 Unarmed Strike, but later asked me what I would have done, where I said it made no sense and the DM was being too focused on the literal rules instead of the scene in question. For an example I presented the Naked Barbarian.
With the unarmored feat, a Naked Barbarian has one of the highest Armor Classes in the game, it’s pure 20 if you max out the stats, making a totally nude character have an insane armor check. Now someone who’s using a literal interpretation of the rules would say Armor Class equals Armor, therefore all attacks would hit, and just do no damage, but Your AC is so much more complicated that that, sure the thunderous clap of your ass cheeks could send an arrow to the heavens, but you could also dance to the nutcracker and nimbly avoid the arrows like the beautiful athletic specimen you are. How did this come into play in this situation? well by ruling it to be an unarmed strike, even though the player said “Hit him with my bow” changes the dynamic of the attack, and acts as if the bow fades out of existence for the attack, but that’s not what would have happened.
Here’s how I would have run the scenario. Since the player has now changed how their weapon is being used, I would no longer treat it as a bow. Therefore I would have them swing to hit as if using a quarterstaff, since the thickness, length and material of the bow would more closely match that. upon a successful hit, they’d roll 1d6 Bludgeoning Damage like usual, but this is not a straight edge weapon like a staff, and it’s more awkward to hit with, so after a successful hit I’d have them roll two strength checks, the first with no bonuses. This first roll would be the strength of the bow versus the object it hits to see if it breaks. The second (With bonuses) would be against their own fingers to see if they keep the grip. This way I think it would be most closely matching the scene, letting the player deal the damage they intend to, while dishing out a reasonable challenge to misusing a weapon. I’d always rather fudge rules to match a scene, than to fudge a scene to match the rules.
Anyway, these were just my own thoughts on this, if you read this thank you. What do you think of this, do you like how I would have handled the scene, or do you agree with the original DM on the matter and it should always be 1d4 unarmed strike?