D&D 5E Bad Sage Advice?

[FrogReaver]

Can language even get married to hyper literal interpretations? What's the law on that these days? Who presides over that ceremony? Jeeze! This is tough.

lol. Or we could say you never "hold" the shield since on the atomic level your hand and the shield never actually touch. It's just kinda suspended in mid-air due to atomic level forces of your hand and it interacting.

 

[Helldritch]

Alternatively, holding the shield is never defined as holding it with your hand. Thus, the fighter can ask the wizard to hold onto his shield for him and the wizard could then place it in his bag of holding and get the bonus AC because he is technically holding the shield for the fighter.

IMO - Natural English is a terrible language in which to be married to hyper literal interpretations.

Yep, that is why most international treaties and documents are written in French. It is much more precise.

 

[FrogReaver]

Yep, that is why most international treaties and documents are written in French. It is much more precise.

I thought that was because everyone knows the french will retreat from any position they hold. I'm also pretty sure the expedious retreat spell was made solely for them.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

So you have to 'hold' the shield? Generally we wouldn't consider holding to be wearing on one's back, so it has to be in one's hands.

You could technically hold something in your teeth but that would be pretty difficult I imagine for anything bigger than a buckler. (Plus, I think I would rule that if the Shield stops you from being hit then you have to make some kind of save or risk losing lots of teeth).

I think the "risk" that people are getting most het up about is that a non-proficient user holding (but not wielding) a magical shield to get the magical bonus to AC (but not the shield bonus) without suffering the penalties for non-proficient use.

There are other more edge cases (such as creatures with extra limbs), but I think the above case is the most likely example that might possibly happen with a group that insisted on using the Sage advice ruling.

I thought part of the point of 5e was a return to natural language.

If we're going to quibble over legalistic definitions of words then what was the point of that?

It seems pretty obvious to me that holding was supposed to be synonymous with wielding.

I mean for god's sake if you deliberately eschew technical language then you need to go with common sense interpretations of ambiguities not legalistic ones.

Even though you might write in natural language, that is not going to stop some people trying to exploit or quibble with the rules based on a legalistic interpretation.
For those people who insist on a legalistic literal interpretation of RAW, there is Sage Advice.
For everyone else, there is their DM's decision, which is likely to be an interpretation based on common sense.

So if a magic shield gives you magical bonus AC while holding it in any fashion, then shouldn't simply holding the edge of that shield also count as wielding it?

Ask your DM.

 

[FrogReaver]

Ask your DM.

I want the RAW answer.

 

[Hriston]

I think it would be hard to make the argument that going from not holding to holding the edge of a shield takes an action.

 

[DND_Reborn]

In a rather perverse manner, I love it when a thread I start arrives at the point when I no longer care to follow it. There is a sort of grim satisfaction there...

Enjoy, folks! I had to use my Action to write this post, so time for my bonus action to Misty Step and then move to get even farther away!

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I want the RAW answer.

Then you've pretty much already stated it: You get the bonus when you are holding the shield using any definition of holding that your table will accept.

 

[FrogReaver]

Then you've pretty much already stated it: You get the bonus when you are holding the shield using any definition of holding that your table will accept.

What does my table have to do with RAW?

 

[Flamestrike]

Why? Teleportation is not moving.

It is movement the rules.

Also the definition of 'moving' is: change of place or position or posture

How does one teleport somewhere without moving there?