A strange question about wielding a big sword

I had an interesting discussion the other day with one of my players about something so basic in DND play, I found it hard to convince him of my point due to probably our different understanding of English.

In a session he DM'd, I was playing a cleric wielding a Greatsword two handedly. However, when I was casting a spell, he told me I needed a move action to re-grab the Greatsword afterwards with my second hand.

According to his logic, you needed 1 hand free to cast spells with somatic components (which I don't contest), and a greatsword needs to be wielded 2handed to wield it. (I don;t contest that too.) But then he states that according to RAW, putting a weapon away or sheathing a weapon for the purpose of gaining a free hand to cast was a free action unless I dropped the weapon. In the light of this logic, he was willing to forego the first move action to let go of one hand for casting, but the re-grabbing was a move action in his eyes.

Mind you, this pertains only to the situation where I would still hold the greatsword in my other hand during the casting of a spell, and regrab the weapon afterwards so that I would at least threaten squares around me again and able to AoO if needed.

How can I explain to him that I don;t need any move actions to cast a spell whilst holding on to a Greatsword as a cleric and not having a need to drop the greatsword to do so?

And yes, it's hairsplitting, but sometimes we go there.

Try page 11 of the FAQ

https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a

Ravellion said:

Try page 11 of the FAQ

https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/er/20030221a

Click to expand...

Useful, but it mainly covers switching a 1-handed weapon between hands, rather than letting go of a two-handed weapon with one hand and then grasping it again.

Personally I think there's no problem holding (but not wielding) a two-handed weapon in one hand, and that it shouldn't require more than a free action to remove or replace one hand upon it. Real-life medieval soldiers would frequently alter their grip upon a sword depending upon the type of attack they were making, and doing so was a natural part of their combat style, requiring little in the way of time or conscious thought.

Rules of the Game: Attacks of Opportunity, Part Two

Although the rules don't mention it, letting go of a two-handed weapon with one hand or putting a free hand back on the weapon is a free action for you.

Click to expand...

I'm not specifically sure what the rules say, but I sympathize with the DM. There does seem like there should be some sort of penalty for attempting something like that with a 2H weapon, even just to get the weapon back into proper position.

And whyever should there be a penalty for such minute an adjustment? Ever tried holding something in both hands (say, a broom), then letting go with one hand, then putting that hand to work again? If not, try it. See, that wasn't so hard, was it? Maybe just a free action after all...

As indicated up-thread, the rules don't actually say one way or another, and WotC have been inconsistent in their rulings (the FAQ and Sage Advice have both said "move action", "Rules of the Game" says "free action" (which is particularly amusing since IIRC it was Skip Williams who was doing SA back when that question was asked, and he's also the author of the linked RotG).

Because there's no consistent ruling, it falls to the DM to make a decision (even in a strict "by the book" game; obviously, in any game the DM can choose to rule either way if he wishes).

As far as I can see, the requirement to spend an action to "Draw" a weapon is largely for balance purposes, with one of those balance purposes being exactly this sort of operation. So, yeah, I would rule that re-gripping the greatsword with the spellcasting hand would indeed require an action - in this case, the caster isn't just adjusting his grip on the weapon; he's doing that and bringing the sword back into a 'ready' position.

That said, it's perhaps worth noting that the requirement for a move action to draw a weapon predates the existence of swift/minor actions in the game. It is likely that, if they were to rewrite the game now, drawing a weapon would become a swift action (and incidentally drop the weird exception about "you can combine drawing with a move if your BAB is +1 or more"...).

IMO only, of course, and YMMV.

Dandu said:

Rules of the Game: Attacks of Opportunity, Part Two

Click to expand...

This, basically.

I did it like this on a game I DM'ed a while back, only it was a paladin and an elven courve blade. I creates no balance issues, IMO.

I've always assumed that you could hold your greatsword in one hand while casting. Or it's balanced on your shoulder. Or you've set the tip on the ground. Or something like that.

Of course I, and no other DM I've ever played with, have made a fuss over the cleric casting while holding a shield and mace either. So I doubt I'm the best to person to ask for advice.

Thanks for all the answers all! Nice to know it's cleared up.