D&D 5E Champion Fighter level 11 only one shot with crossbow?

[The Crimson Binome]

I think it's worth noting that if you allow characters to draw melee thrown weapons like ammunition, it wouldn't make much sense to not allow them to draw two melee thrown weapons (like handaxes) at once and just use them in melee. Of course that would be a direct conflict with the one item interaction rule on drawing weapons, and would make the "thrown" property be a melee buff rather than just a ranged feature. Not exactly what I'd say is rules as intended.

The rules say you get one free item interaction per round, but are vague enough to allow different interpretations. My reading is that you can sheathe a longsword and draw two short swords as a single interaction, and I stand firm by my understanding that this is the intent of the rules - to not get bogged down with spending entire turns on changing your weapon.

Then, with the feat, it goes into greater clarification that even if your DM is making things more difficult than intended, for whatever reason, that you still get to bypass that limit and draw two weapons at once.

 

[Coredump]

You've advanced a claim, so the burden of proof is on you.

I have no idea which/what claim you are referring to....

 

[Sword of Spirit]

The rules say you get one free item interaction per round, but are vague enough to allow different interpretations. My reading is that you can sheathe a longsword and draw two short swords as a single interaction, and I stand firm by my understanding that this is the intent of the rules - to not get bogged down with spending entire turns on changing your weapon.

Then, with the feat, it goes into greater clarification that even if your DM is making things more difficult than intended, for whatever reason, that you still get to bypass that limit and draw two weapons at once.

I don't know. That seems like a really weird way to do a feat, and doesn't have any other examples of similar strength. There are some really mild examples (can't think of one off the top of my head) where there is redundant permission or restriction in the rules, but this one seems more than those ones.

 

[Coredump]

The rules say you get one free item interaction per round, but are vague enough to allow different interpretations. My reading is that you can sheathe a longsword and draw two short swords as a single interaction, and I stand firm by my understanding that this is the intent of the rules - to not get bogged down with spending entire turns on changing your weapon.
.

You are, of course, free to play it any way you and your friends enjoy the game. But the object interaction rules are actually pretty clear, and there is just no way that you can sheathe one weapon, and draw a second weapon, and draw a third weapon....as your one free interaction.
The rules explicitly say you can draw or sheathe a weapon (not both) They continue to explicitly say if you want to use a second object interaction, it would require you to use your action.

You may deem that wrong, or stupid, or unfun.... and thats all cool. But to say what they explicitly wrote is not what they intended.... seems to be a stretch.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The rules explicitly say you can draw or sheathe a weapon (not both) They continue to explicitly say if you want to use a second object interaction, it would require you to use your action.

Not quite. They give drawing or sheathing a weapon as an example of such an interaction. And of course, it would be ludicrous to suggest that drawing two short swords must take more time than drawing one short sword, since the motions take place simultaneously and you have two hands.

The only question is whether you can sheathe and draw a weapon with the same interaction. I would argue that you can, because your arm is going in that direction anyway, so it doesn't take any additional effort, and because the alternative would mean dropping your weapon to the ground whenever you want to change weapons - which is exactly the sort of minutiae that 5E is trying to get away from.

 

[Coredump]

In all seriousness, I appreciate the effort you went into for researching this. It can be a pain.
I think it would have been better without the passive aggressive comments like "evidence you demand" and "that would be lame".... but okay...

"Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack."

The attack is one handed. Drawing the ammunition is part of the attack. You seem to be describing some loading action that doesn't exist.

Your description is obviously designed to sound needlessly complicated. The bullet can easily be drawn as you are crouching, so no need to spend so much time on your knees. One end of the sling is always looped on the finger or wrist, otherwise slingers would be throwing away their slings all the time, so there's no need to hold it. Most sling cups don't have a "right way." In fact, the most accurate design simply splits the cord in the middle into two cords that the stone rests between. The weight keeps it in place.

Why can't you look down?

Edit: I do believe I've finally dug up the video evidence you demand:

http://youtu.be/Kz0DPMU5hwg

http://youtu.be/bapNApChPp8

I also dug up a photo series of a guy using the same technique with a single grip shield and a few more 12th century depictions of shielded slingers (bottom of page).

http://slinging.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1282647004/0

http://slinging.org/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1257503658/30

I do hope you'll accept this as proof that shield and sling can be used in conjunction, rather than going, "Ah-hah! But they used their second hand to help load the sling! Hand economy broken!"

Because that would be lame.

There are a number of issues.

1) In everything you have shown, at no point has anyone made any claims of a slinger actually using only one hand to load the sling. That is not necessarily a deal breaker, but it *is* an important distinction. No matter if you think its 'lame' to point it out.

2) I have never said it was physically impossible to use a sling while holding a shield. Of course it is. I can do a whole lot of things while holding a shield. But there are 3 things to consider...

A) Can you use the sling with the same speed and accuracy with and without the shield
B) Can you actually use the shield to protect yourself while you are also using the shield hand to help load.
C) Does allowing the shield hand to also help load break any of the rules of the game.

A) One of the people you presented has another video where he is slinging for speed, and it take more than twice as long to sling with the shield as without. And that is not even considering having to also use the shield for defense. (which is likely to slow you down even more)

B) Both of the videos you presented make it obvious that the shield is *not* going to be very effective at defending. Either the shield is out of position, or the slinger is looking in the wrong direction (down usually), or the shield hand is occupied helping load and can't move well.
The picture series author seems to indicate that he could keep the shield on target, but anytime the hand is busy loading, it becomes problematic to also block. And as mentioned, anytime you are blocking, it will likely slow down the slinging even more.

C) I guarantee I can create a video where I am using a shield and using a spear, or a greatsword, or a crossbow, or a polearm. I even think if I use the right shield, I could use a bow. But the rules of the game dictate that when a hand is being used for something, it is not free to be used for other things. Now DMs get to adjudicate, and if using the shield hand was for something trivial (like holding a javelin, or holding your sword) I could see it. But from a DnD rules perspective, you are trying to get one hand to do two things, and the rules tend to frown on that.


As for the pictures... *of course* slingers used shields.... *especially* in a seige situation (which both pictures are). They will gladly give up their offensive ability to get much better defense. But you are asserting that they can get that added defense with *no* change to their offense....


So yes, you can use a sling while holding a shield, except
You will sling much more slowly
Your shield will not work as well
you will be changing the rules of the game.

 

[Coredump]

Not quite. They give drawing or sheathing a weapon as an example of such an interaction. And of course, it would be ludicrous to suggest that drawing two short swords must take more time than drawing one short sword, since the motions take place simultaneously and you have two hands.

The only question is whether you can sheathe and draw a weapon with the same interaction. I would argue that you can, because your arm is going in that direction anyway, so it doesn't take any additional effort, and because the alternative would mean dropping your weapon to the ground whenever you want to change weapons - which is exactly the sort of minutiae that 5E is trying to get away from.

You can argue all you want. But the words they put on the page say Draw *or* sheathe.... not draw *and* sheathe.
You may think you should be able to interact with two objects. But the words on the page say you need to use your action to interact with a second object. You are free to find it 'ludicrous'... but that does not change what they have written.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

You can argue all you want. But the words they put on the page say Draw *or* sheathe.... not draw *and* sheathe.
You may think you should be able to interact with two objects. But the words on the page say you need to use your action to interact with a second object. You are free to find it 'ludicrous'... but that does not change what they have written.

It's an example. It's a list of things which do qualify. It is not an exhaustive or definitive list.

You can feel free to stick to the letter of the rule, for your own games, but don't try and claim that any interpretation which deviates from RAW is some sort of house rule. The rules were specifically written to allow for multiple interpretations. The intent behind the rule is infinitely more important than the specific words on the page.

 

[famousringo]

In all seriousness, I appreciate the effort you went into for researching this. It can be a pain.
I think it would have been better without the passive aggressive comments like "evidence you demand" and "that would be lame".... but okay...




There are a number of issues.

1) In everything you have shown, at no point has anyone made any claims of a slinger actually using only one hand to load the sling. That is not necessarily a deal breaker, but it *is* an important distinction. No matter if you think its 'lame' to point it out.

2) I have never said it was physically impossible to use a sling while holding a shield. Of course it is. I can do a whole lot of things while holding a shield. But there are 3 things to consider...

A) Can you use the sling with the same speed and accuracy with and without the shield
B) Can you actually use the shield to protect yourself while you are also using the shield hand to help load.
C) Does allowing the shield hand to also help load break any of the rules of the game.

A) One of the people you presented has another video where he is slinging for speed, and it take more than twice as long to sling with the shield as without. And that is not even considering having to also use the shield for defense. (which is likely to slow you down even more)

B) Both of the videos you presented make it obvious that the shield is *not* going to be very effective at defending. Either the shield is out of position, or the slinger is looking in the wrong direction (down usually), or the shield hand is occupied helping load and can't move well.
The picture series author seems to indicate that he could keep the shield on target, but anytime the hand is busy loading, it becomes problematic to also block. And as mentioned, anytime you are blocking, it will likely slow down the slinging even more.

C) I guarantee I can create a video where I am using a shield and using a spear, or a greatsword, or a crossbow, or a polearm. I even think if I use the right shield, I could use a bow. But the rules of the game dictate that when a hand is being used for something, it is not free to be used for other things. Now DMs get to adjudicate, and if using the shield hand was for something trivial (like holding a javelin, or holding your sword) I could see it. But from a DnD rules perspective, you are trying to get one hand to do two things, and the rules tend to frown on that.


As for the pictures... *of course* slingers used shields.... *especially* in a seige situation (which both pictures are). They will gladly give up their offensive ability to get much better defense. But you are asserting that they can get that added defense with *no* change to their offense....


So yes, you can use a sling while holding a shield, except
You will sling much more slowly
Your shield will not work as well
you will be changing the rules of the game.

Fine, for the sake of verisimilitude, limit shielding slingers to a single attack per round in your game because the shield slows down the slinging. Add a weird rule where you can have a shield drawn and in your hand, but you lose the AC bonus if you load a sling that round. While you're at it, require 5 rounds of stationary loading for a player to re-arm his crossbow and consider basing longbow damage on strength.

But while you've placed all these doubts on the evidence I've worked to gather, you still haven't shown me anything in the RAW that suggests slinging requires two hands. They had a great opportunity in the weapon table and another one in the ammunition description, and they left out "two hands" in both, obviously quite deliberately in the first case. As far as I can see, there is no ambiguity, it's something you've entirely read in on your own. It's your house rule, and you're welcome to it.

 

[MerricB]

The rules say you get one free item interaction per round

The actual wording is "You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action." (PHB 190) The "one object" is pretty clear.

Mike Mearls and Jeremy Crawford have differing views of how it works, with Jeremy going more for my interpretation. (And, when it comes to rules interpretations, Mike defers to Jeremy).

Here's a couple of examples:
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/02/sheating-two-weapons/ - Mike for the looser interpretation
http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/09/11/sheating-or-draw/ - Jeremy for the stricter interpretation.

Cheers!