@JeremyECrawford Can an Eldritch Knight bond to a shield (since it is an improvised weapon)?
— Dominik (@plancktum) April 12, 2016
Weapon Bond works with a bona fide weapon ("Behold, my sword!"), not an improvised weapon ("Look, a stool!"). #DnD https://t.co/bI30jbEcn6
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) April 12, 2016
@JeremyECrawford @plancktum how about a quiver? Or would it have to be a single arrow?
— Johni Rico (@johnirico) April 13, 2016
Weapon Bond works with a bow or a crossbow, not with a quiver or an arrow. #DnD https://t.co/Zpar4FYrv8
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) April 20, 2016
I really hate this sort of limitation.
1) It’s illogical. If I can bond to and summon a wooden club, then why can’t I bond to and summon a wooden chair leg that I’ve decided to USE as a club?
2) It doesn’t have a mechanical reason to exist. Someone being able to summon a shield, or really any other hand-held item, doesn’t make the Eldritch Knight meaningfully more powerful or upset class balance in any way.
3) It limits flavor and self expression for no reason. The developers have repeatedly stated that they consider this to be a “ribbon” ability, which means they consider it to be insignificant in terms of balance, and included it purely for flavor. So why, then, do they feel the need to restrict what kinds of objects an Eldritch Knight can summon?
4) It already has an opportunity cost. A player already can only bond to two weapons. If they want to bond to a shield instead of a weapon, that takes up one of their bonds, and they can’t use it for something else. Why restrict what you can summon to weapons? Why not just restrict it to objects? Let an Eldritch Knight bond to and summon a shield if they really want to, or their favorite ale tankard, or the key to an important door, or whatever.
What’s the point behind this kind of limitation? Because as far as I can tell, there isn’t one.