Satyrn
First Post
And if players won't take Warcaster because of this, you can always give it something else to replace what you've already given everybody
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Do you let Eldritch Knight or Clerics cast while using a (real) shield?
- Thread starter S'mon
- Start date
smbakeresq
Explorer
If you don’t enforce the rule then you are giving them exclusive access to feats
Azzy
ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ
I'm in the "why bother" crowd.
See, with a (non-buckler) shield, you typically have a stap and a hand grip—and you can still manipulate things with your hand on the hand grip (akwardly, but still). So, you could hold your weapon or components in your shield hand. You can also have a hole in the pommel or haft of a weapon to fit a tether of sorts that you can put your hand through, so when you drop your weapon it merely hangs from yor wrist. Or you can forego the tether and just drop it and pick it up as others have said.
With all these ways around it, it just seems like a silly idea to enforce it. Personally, I'd just allow an EK, AT, or whatever to use their weapon as a focus, have the War Caster feat have a different benefit and just be done with it.
See, with a (non-buckler) shield, you typically have a stap and a hand grip—and you can still manipulate things with your hand on the hand grip (akwardly, but still). So, you could hold your weapon or components in your shield hand. You can also have a hole in the pommel or haft of a weapon to fit a tether of sorts that you can put your hand through, so when you drop your weapon it merely hangs from yor wrist. Or you can forego the tether and just drop it and pick it up as others have said.
With all these ways around it, it just seems like a silly idea to enforce it. Personally, I'd just allow an EK, AT, or whatever to use their weapon as a focus, have the War Caster feat have a different benefit and just be done with it.
Couldn't the EK just drop their weapon for free (not an object interaction), cast Shield as a reaction, then resummon or pick up weapon on their turn? Having used their reaction, they don't even need the weapon for opp atts.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
They could, but that would also be silly.
Generally, I don’t sweat object interactions, as long as the player isn’t trying to do something obviously over the top. You want to sheath your sword at the end of your turn so you have a free hand to cast shield, but you already drew your sword as part of your attack? Sure, go ahead. It’s functionally no different than dropping your sword and doesn’t make you look like a tool. Decide to sheath it on your next turn to cast a spell with your action? Sure, that’s totally reasonable But try to sheath the sword again at the end of the same turn and you’re starting to push it.
Oh, definitely. I think just letting EK use weapon as spell focus is the way to go, for my games - I see the EK as an Elric type character.
I think for Arcane Trickster, having them use a spell component pouch does make thematic sense.
Mercule
Adventurer
I didn't realize it until this thread, but I don't think I've ever had anyone try. For example, the current EK in my game is a warforged carrying two versatile weapons (longsword and warhammer). He can always just shift his grip, for free, and have a free hand. It being Eberron, I'm inclined to let him have a "masterwork" longsword that counts as a focus, regardless of rules.
Really, with him being warforged, I'll be happy if he just doesn't ask for a mini-gun of wands that pops out of his arm or shoulder or tries to come up with an excuse to dual wield the two versatile weapons. I love Eberron. I'm less excited about warforged, at least certain concepts people have about warforged.
Really, with him being warforged, I'll be happy if he just doesn't ask for a mini-gun of wands that pops out of his arm or shoulder or tries to come up with an excuse to dual wield the two versatile weapons. I love Eberron. I'm less excited about warforged, at least certain concepts people have about warforged.
MechaPilot
Explorer
I guess my biggest issue around this is that RAW requires one hand free to use (S) spells, but RAW also allows a caster to drop their weapon for free, cast spell, then pick up weapon from the floor as their Object Interaction - and the visuals of this happening repeatedly are so silly that I would rather just ignore the whole thing.
Doesn't RAW also let you adjust how you're holding a weapon so that you're holding it but not wielding it? Presumably, instead of dropping the weapon, the character could tuck a weapon under her other arm while casting. That's one of the narratives I use for such things. I also let flashier casters simply throw the weapon into the air during the casting and catch it afterward.
Here's another thing I consider to explain why I don't bother with components...
Magic has been around a long, long, long time. Long enough that people have figured out how to use it. And if using magic was difficult in some form or fashion, over time people would figure out how to adapt it to make its use easier. Or if they couldn't make its use easier, they wouldn't use it in that fashion.
So if we assume paladins, clerics, eldritch knights and so on exist in the world... it is because people have figured out how to use magic *and* wield weapons without jumping through all manner of hoops. If using magic and weapons *did* involve having to swing a sword then dropping the sword on the ground then casting a spell then reaching down to pick the sword back up... if all of those things were required... NO ONE would do that. In a fight that's suicide. Which means to me that *if* we have paladins and clerics and eldritch knights etc... it's because magic-users have spent the past hundreds and thousands of years figuring out how to use magic WITHOUT having to do something stupid like dropping your weapon on the ground and then turning your back to your opponent to go pick it up again. They would have figured out an easier and safer way to use magic *and* fight with weapons. Which is why classes like paladins, clerics, and eldritch knights are now a thing.
It's like all technology... if you wanted to accomplish something easily, there would always be experimenters out there working with the current technology to expand it and make it cheaper, to figure out how to accomplish it. And over time, it would become easier and easier and easier to do. Which in a lot of ways makes D&D magic kind of dumb when you think about it-- magic has the capabilities to alter the world on the power level of 9th level spells, but because of the game mechanics not wanting to make things too simple for players... things like the "Photocopy" spell only show up in obscure game books in select editions. Something so obvious and which would make wizards' lives so much easier. Something any set of magicians over the centuries who were stuck having to hand write spells into spell books from scrolls and such would have decided long ago that this was stupid and there could be a better way. "Photocopying" spells into spellbooks would have been one of the first ease-of-use magics wizards would have worked on and come up with. But simply due to the game not wanting magic to be too handwavy for players, it just assumes no one has ever "thought of it" or "worked on it" enough to have it be a standard part of the game. Kinda illogical if you ask me.
It's one of those incongruous concepts when you try to pair a typical medieval society with massive magical capability. Not many campaigns and settings ever really take those two things being mushed together into account to produce logical results.
Magic has been around a long, long, long time. Long enough that people have figured out how to use it. And if using magic was difficult in some form or fashion, over time people would figure out how to adapt it to make its use easier. Or if they couldn't make its use easier, they wouldn't use it in that fashion.
So if we assume paladins, clerics, eldritch knights and so on exist in the world... it is because people have figured out how to use magic *and* wield weapons without jumping through all manner of hoops. If using magic and weapons *did* involve having to swing a sword then dropping the sword on the ground then casting a spell then reaching down to pick the sword back up... if all of those things were required... NO ONE would do that. In a fight that's suicide. Which means to me that *if* we have paladins and clerics and eldritch knights etc... it's because magic-users have spent the past hundreds and thousands of years figuring out how to use magic WITHOUT having to do something stupid like dropping your weapon on the ground and then turning your back to your opponent to go pick it up again. They would have figured out an easier and safer way to use magic *and* fight with weapons. Which is why classes like paladins, clerics, and eldritch knights are now a thing.
It's like all technology... if you wanted to accomplish something easily, there would always be experimenters out there working with the current technology to expand it and make it cheaper, to figure out how to accomplish it. And over time, it would become easier and easier and easier to do. Which in a lot of ways makes D&D magic kind of dumb when you think about it-- magic has the capabilities to alter the world on the power level of 9th level spells, but because of the game mechanics not wanting to make things too simple for players... things like the "Photocopy" spell only show up in obscure game books in select editions. Something so obvious and which would make wizards' lives so much easier. Something any set of magicians over the centuries who were stuck having to hand write spells into spell books from scrolls and such would have decided long ago that this was stupid and there could be a better way. "Photocopying" spells into spellbooks would have been one of the first ease-of-use magics wizards would have worked on and come up with. But simply due to the game not wanting magic to be too handwavy for players, it just assumes no one has ever "thought of it" or "worked on it" enough to have it be a standard part of the game. Kinda illogical if you ask me.
It's one of those incongruous concepts when you try to pair a typical medieval society with massive magical capability. Not many campaigns and settings ever really take those two things being mushed together into account to produce logical results.
Last edited:
The dwarven War cleric I am playing at the moment uses his warhammer as his holy symbol/focus in just this manner, and everybody seems happy. It does give him issues when he goes to a place that doesn't allow weapons. He has to keep a bag of components around, just in case.
