D&D 5E Dropping a Weapon

[the Jester]

So say you have a pc who wants to attack with his bow, then drop (not stow) it and draw his sword.

In 3e and 4e, dropping an item was a free action, while drawing a weapon took a minor (in 4e) or... hmm... maybe a move-equivalent, if you didn't have a +0 BAB? Anyway, some kind of action in 3e.

In 5e, does dropping a weapon count as your free interaction with the environment for the round? In other words, is it impossible to attack, drop, draw on the same turn in 5e (without some kind of extra action shenanigans)?

 

[guachi]

I think dropping is more than a free action. It's like getting an arrow to fire a bow. It just happens. No use of the action economy at all.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Mike Mearls suggested that the whole point of this edition was to not deal with such minor details, and that if you want your "one free object interaction" to be stowing your bow and drawing your sword, then that's cool and completely within the intent of the rules. There's no need to litter the battlefield with your old weapon whenever you want to bring out a new one.

 

[guachi]

No, no... you have to toss it aside all cool like in slow motion like Neo from the Matrix!

 

[Tzarevitch]

Mike Mearls suggested that the whole point of this edition was to not deal with such minor details, and that if you want your "one free object interaction" to be stowing your bow and drawing your sword, then that's cool and completely within the intent of the rules. There's no need to litter the battlefield with your old weapon whenever you want to bring out a new one.

The DM is certainly free to allow this, but any interaction that involves an "and" is actually more than one interaction.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Mike Mearls suggested that the whole point of this edition was to not deal with such minor details, and that if you want your "one free object interaction" to be stowing your bow and drawing your sword, then that's cool and completely within the intent of the rules. There's no need to litter the battlefield with your old weapon whenever you want to bring out a new one.

Mike may have said that, but he'd be wrong. Jeremy Crawford is the one to go for to get rules interpretations. (Not that I have a problem with anyone choosing to use Mike's rulings--it shows how the designers aren't too picky with the rules.)

As far as I can tell, dropping a weapon is completely free. Drawing, sheathing, or picking up a weapon from the ground, however, are each an interaction with the environment. You can do one or the other and still act, but if you want to do both it will eat up your action. Page 70 of Basic D&D is the rules source.

As far as a specific example of attacking with one weapon, dropping it, and then drawing another, that is completely legit.

 

[the Jester]

As far as I can tell, dropping a weapon is completely free. Drawing, sheathing, or picking up a weapon from the ground, however, are each an interaction with the environment. You can do one or the other and still act, but if you want to do both it will eat up your action. Page 70 of Basic D&D is the rules source.

As far as a specific example of attacking with one weapon, dropping it, and then drawing another, that is completely legit.

Are you basing this on the fact that dropping a weapon isn't in the list of examples given of things that count as your free Interact with the Environment, or am I missing something more explicit?

 

[PinkRose]

Drawing a weapon is part of attacking, so if you really want to get picky, you can drop as a free action and draw AND attack as your action, but really, minor stuff like this is what 5e is trying to get away from.
Let go of the rules and just play, Man.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

Guys, guys, guys!... "You must unlearn what you have learned..." (to quote a small, wrinkly old muppet who lives on a swamp planet). If you find yourself trying to rely on your 3e or 4e knowledge when trying to decide on a rule mechanic thing, nine times out of ten you will be wrong. The rules for 5e are written in the style of BECMI/1e/2e, with only a smattering of 3e/4e mechanics. Those italicized and underlined words are important to grasp.

The 5e rules are deliberately written from a "each table sets their own rules and interpretations for many things". In the 5e style, it is much better to say "You can perform any reasonable action in a combat situation", than it is to say "You can perform the following actions [LIST OF ACTIONS], in the following situations [LIST OF SITUATIONS]".

In the OP's question:

So say you have a pc who wants to attack with his bow, then drop (not stow) it and draw his sword.

...the correct answer would come from asking ones self: "Would it be easy to do this in the current situation?" If you think, "Yeah, can't see anything interfering with it", then Yes, the PC can do it "for free". If you think, "Well, because of X, Y and Z, I don't think he could do it easily", then No, the PC can't do it "for free". And if you think, "Well, probably, but then again there is W...so...yes, you can do it for free, but your Initiative drops by 1d6 points" (or some other adjudication).

The bottom line is this...: 5e is YOUR game, and YOU are the one in charge of it...not Mike Mearls, not Jeremy Crawford, nor anyone else. Their "decision" should be viewed as nothing more than any other DM's interpretation of what he thinks would make a good game. Their ruling shouldn't be viewed as having any more weight than any other DM's with regards to YOUR CAMPAIGN.

Sorry I'm not really 'answering' your question with a quote and a page number...but that's the nature of 5e.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

I gotta say, while I generally am down with the more lax approach to technical issues with the rules, it's not always helpful to say "it's up to the DM." We already know that; everything is up to the DM. Many of the people asking ARE the DM. So when the rules say "one free object interaction per turn" and the dual wielding feat says something about drawing both weapons, it's perfectly reasonable to ask for clarification on those things. I mean, is it actually supposed to be a balancing factor that mages need an empty hand to cast spells? I honestly don't know.