D&D 5E Dual Wielder Feat question

[Paul Farquhar]

I don’t think that’s as clear from the text as you make it out to be. It’s a valid reading, but it’s not the only valid reading.

That's deliberate contrariness. The intent is clear, and the wording does not contradict the intent. You could take advantage of the ambiguities that are always present in the English language to read it differently, but that is deliberate rule-bending, and deserves to be punished, not rewarded.

 

[Charlaquin]

That's deliberate contrariness. The intent is clear, and the wording does not contradict the intent. You could take advantage of the ambiguities that are always present in the English language to read it differently, but that is deliberate rule-bending, and deserves to be punished, not rewarded.

I don’t agree that the intent is clear.

 

[Blue]

It says "draw OR stow" not "draw AND stow". i.e. You can draw two weapons at the same time or you can stow two weapons at the same time, but you can't stow one and draw another.

This is "draw XOR stow". The English word "or" is not exclusive.

 

[NotAYakk]

I can climb or descend two mountains today.

I can cook or cleanup 2 meals today.

Oh baby, punish me real hard. You know I'm a bad, bad, bad rule-bender.

 

[Bacon Bits]

You can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.

So Tina the Bladesinger brought up a question and I’m not sure how this would work. The above is from the dual wielder feat in question. Tina asked if this could be done RAW or RAI. Can Tina see oh I need to cast a spell with S and/or M I put one of my weapons away (1 item interaction) then I pull out my arcane focus which is a staff. (2nd item interaction) The question is does the feat allow this or not?

If they have the Dual Wielder feat, I think that's within the RAW. The feat never explicitly states that you can't draw one and stow a second or vice-versa. Technically, RAI is unclear, but I don't think that it's really that important here.

Personally, if I were a DM then I would rule that a Bladesinger could use any one-handed bladed weapon as an arcane focus, especially when bladesong is active. It's kind of the point of the subclass. It's also important to remember that focuses and spell component pouches are a flavor rule, not an intentional mechanical restriction. They exist to allow a spellcaster to be partially disarmed and to evoke narrative imagery, not to be cumbersome action economy puzzles in combat. And if the designers did intend them to be cumbersome action economy puzzles, then they're bad designers and they should feel bad.

Simply put, I wouldn't sweat the action economy for drawing and stowing weapons all that much. After all, you can always drop an item as a free action, and then spend the free interaction on a later turn picking it back up. That works flawlessly in the lion's share of combats. You can also lash a weapon to your wrist with a leather thong, meaning you can "drop" it for free without actually dropping it.

 

[Sir Brennen]

The staff thing is a red herring with regards to the OP question - the feat wouldn't let you put one dagger away and pull out a different one.

I disagree. IMO the RAI is to be able to draw or stow a weapon with each hand. So I could stow the dagger in my right hand as I draw another with my left. (Whether this applies to cases where the wielder has more than two hands is up for debate, but it makes marilith's more fun! )

Along that line of reasoning, stowing a weapon for both the left and right and then drawing the staff would still not be allowed by the feat.

As @Bacon Bits mentions, though, the character could simply drop both swords as a free action and draw the staff as their object interaction. If they want to retrieve the swords, first they'd drop the staff for free, and then I'd rule the feat would let the character pick up both swords at the same time as their object interaction.

 

[Oofta]

Personally I don't get too concerned with things like spell foci. Use a component pouch instead if you want. I'd rather keep the game and the fiction moving - if that means the caster uses a sword instead of a staff as their focus for flavor so be it.

Otherwise you just get silliness like people tying a string to their sword/staff so they can "drop" them without worrying about loosing it and other stupid stuff. Keep the visuals evocative and don't get caught in RAW.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Doh! Of course! Though not RAW, it would make total sense for someone trained in bladesong to use their weapon as their arcane focus. I'd houserule it in as part of the Training in War and Song class feature.

 

[Dogo]

this weapon/shield drawing/stowing and object iteraction limit is just needless hair splitting.

If you want a nice house rule for it, here it is,

As a one free object interaction you can replace one weapon set with one other,
That means you could stow sword&shield and draw a bow or stow a greatsword and draw a hammer and a lantern(if you can't see in the dark).

Might require Extra interaction to lit the lantern, but everyone above 1st level has few continual flames casted on various items

That is a good point.

 

[Dogo]

Doh! Of course! Though not RAW, it would make total sense for someone trained in bladesong to use their weapon as their arcane focus. I'd houserule it in as part of the Training in War and Song class feature.

So allow Bladesingers to have Swords Bards Sword focus ability? It does make sense that a Bladesinger would have this. Thinking about it why do they not have this? It seems every “Sword and Spell” full caster seems to have this.