maritimo80
First Post
A character can draw a sword and sheathe a dagger (change weapon) in the same turn with free action ( Interacting with Objects Around You) ?
Last edited:
-
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!
D&D 5E Draw a sword and sheathe a dagger with free action ?
- Thread starter maritimo80
- Start date
Jaelommiss
First Post
No. One or the other. Or drop the dagger and draw the sword. Or use the Attack Action to throw the dagger at someone and draw the sword, and then, if the character has Extra Attack, attack with the sword. But no stowing one and drawing the other without the Dual Wielder feat or the thief's Fast Hands.
Edit: Looking at the book more closely, I can't see anything about being able to drop an action for free. It would make sense, but I would certainly appreciate it if someone could tell me where in the book it is written.
Edit: Looking at the book more closely, I can't see anything about being able to drop an action for free. It would make sense, but I would certainly appreciate it if someone could tell me where in the book it is written.
Never thought of that. RAW is probably no, but I'd allow it at my table. It has the built in disadvantage that the character is no long in possession of the item. Meaning it would definitely take an action to pick it back up. Also, the enemy could pick it up, and that could be interesting
Jaelommiss
First Post
Never thought of that. RAW is probably no, but I'd allow it at my table. It has the built in disadvantage that the character is no long in possession of the item. Meaning it would definitely take an action to pick it back up. Also, the enemy could pick it up, and that could be interesting
It's always eyeopening to learn that something I have been doing since the beginning of 5e was in fact a houserule. If I had to guess, it probably started as an on-the-fly ruling that stuck around.
The Crimson Binome
Hero
Ask your DM.
At my table, performing a weapon change counts as your free object interaction for the round. I think the most I've ever seen it matter was a couple of times when the paladin would sheathe a sword, draw and throw two javelins, and then draw the sword again.
Seriously, we don't want this game to turn into Pathfinder. If you're using an object interaction to change weapons, then you have free reign to swap them back and forth, but you can't draw a potion or open a door or anything else. It's way easier, and I think it still fits with the underlying spirit of the rules. Just be sure to check with your DM first.
At my table, performing a weapon change counts as your free object interaction for the round. I think the most I've ever seen it matter was a couple of times when the paladin would sheathe a sword, draw and throw two javelins, and then draw the sword again.
Seriously, we don't want this game to turn into Pathfinder. If you're using an object interaction to change weapons, then you have free reign to swap them back and forth, but you can't draw a potion or open a door or anything else. It's way easier, and I think it still fits with the underlying spirit of the rules. Just be sure to check with your DM first.
Greenstone.Walker
Adventurer
In my game, the object interaction can be used for simple actions that don't require care. Sheathing a weapon requires care (at least it does if you don't want to lose fingers). Sheathing a dagger is a Use An Object Action (but you can sheathe two of you have the Dual Wielder feat).
UngeheuerLich
Legend
I liked the playtest rule, that you could spend movement to interact with objects, and I would still use it in some cases: Juggling around with weapons: only half movement.
Picking up a weapon may let you bow down and stand up frome prone again.
I am generally quite lenient with free object interactions as long as it makes sense.
Picking up a weapon may let you bow down and stand up frome prone again.
I am generally quite lenient with free object interactions as long as it makes sense.
slaughterj
Explorer
In my game, I want play to reflect reasonable actions taken.
An Eldritch Knight with sword and shield is not going to free drop the sword in order to cast a spell and then use his one interaction to draw another sword from a "real world" perspective, that's just using game mechanics to enable the result of still being armed for opportunity attacks, etc. Instead, I would say the EK would briefly put the sword in the shield hand, cast the spell, and swap the sword back to the open hand. This might minimize the value of Warcaster (but it still is useful for Shield spell, etc.), but I prefer actions to reflect reality more, and dropping swords constantly does not reflect that.
Similarly, the Thief gets to pick locks as a bonus action at 3rd level. Let's say the Thief is armed with two daggers. An anal GM might require the Thief to either free drop or use an interaction to stow the dagger (or both!), then require an additional interaction to retrieve the thieves tools, then use the bonus action to pick the lock, then use another interaction to put the tools away, then use another interaction to retrieve the dropped or stowed dagger, which is impossible in a round, and makes the ability to pick locks as a bonus action basically worthless. So instead, I would say the Thief could stow a dagger under his arm as a free action instead of dropping it as a free action, then later retrieve it as his one interaction, and as part of the action to pick locks, would be able to retrieve and stow the lock picks, thus allowing Thief to pick locks as a bonus action and still have his Standard Action available for use.
I base the foregoing Thief interaction off of the initial concept of reflecting game actions reasonably and comparing to a Wizard's typical turn, as follows. A Wizard can cast a bonus action spell and a standard action spell in a round, but I am not going to micromanage the Wizard such that he may have to use interactions to (a) open his spell pouch for material components, (b) find and retrieve the applicable components, and (c) close his spell pouch. I consider all that subsumed in the action to cast the particular spell. So similarly, for a Thief, I consider the retrieval and stowage of the thieves' tools to pick a lock as part of the action taken to pick a lock.
Otherwise all this stuff gets overly micromanaged and reasonable actions can't be taken (i.e., actually taking just the bonus action to pick a lock) and people are encouraged to take unreasonable actions (like dropping swords all the time).
However, I do still monitor some level of interactions.
An Eldritch Knight with sword and shield is not going to free drop the sword in order to cast a spell and then use his one interaction to draw another sword from a "real world" perspective, that's just using game mechanics to enable the result of still being armed for opportunity attacks, etc. Instead, I would say the EK would briefly put the sword in the shield hand, cast the spell, and swap the sword back to the open hand. This might minimize the value of Warcaster (but it still is useful for Shield spell, etc.), but I prefer actions to reflect reality more, and dropping swords constantly does not reflect that.
Similarly, the Thief gets to pick locks as a bonus action at 3rd level. Let's say the Thief is armed with two daggers. An anal GM might require the Thief to either free drop or use an interaction to stow the dagger (or both!), then require an additional interaction to retrieve the thieves tools, then use the bonus action to pick the lock, then use another interaction to put the tools away, then use another interaction to retrieve the dropped or stowed dagger, which is impossible in a round, and makes the ability to pick locks as a bonus action basically worthless. So instead, I would say the Thief could stow a dagger under his arm as a free action instead of dropping it as a free action, then later retrieve it as his one interaction, and as part of the action to pick locks, would be able to retrieve and stow the lock picks, thus allowing Thief to pick locks as a bonus action and still have his Standard Action available for use.
I base the foregoing Thief interaction off of the initial concept of reflecting game actions reasonably and comparing to a Wizard's typical turn, as follows. A Wizard can cast a bonus action spell and a standard action spell in a round, but I am not going to micromanage the Wizard such that he may have to use interactions to (a) open his spell pouch for material components, (b) find and retrieve the applicable components, and (c) close his spell pouch. I consider all that subsumed in the action to cast the particular spell. So similarly, for a Thief, I consider the retrieval and stowage of the thieves' tools to pick a lock as part of the action taken to pick a lock.
Otherwise all this stuff gets overly micromanaged and reasonable actions can't be taken (i.e., actually taking just the bonus action to pick a lock) and people are encouraged to take unreasonable actions (like dropping swords all the time).
However, I do still monitor some level of interactions.
Last edited:
slaughterj
Explorer
Though as noted above I am lenient with interactions, I wouldn't go that far. That would take 4 interactions under RAW. If the paladin had a shield, I would let him free action briefly put the sword in the shield hand, use an interaction to draw one javelin, presumably throw it as a standard, and then free action swap the sword back to the wielding hand. If the paladin had just a sword and the dual-wielder feat, I would let him free action tuck the sword away briefly, draw as an interaction and throw both javelins as a standard action (and bonus for offhand, or if has extra attacks, throw both on a standard action), and then free action re-equip the sword.
Allowing for drawing two weapons (or 3 in your example) is really controlled by the dual-wielder feat unfortunately (the drawing limitation really kills STR-based thrown-weapon characters once they get extra attack, unless they get the feat, and even with it, still suck for range and never can draw and throw 3 times in a round for fighters with 3 attacks).
Similar Threads
