D&D 5E Draw a sword and sheathe a dagger with free action ?

[slaughterj]

A somatic component is very specifically checking for whether you're free to move your arms. Are you tied up, with both arms bound? If not, then you're fine.

That's how I feel it should be, but it appears pretty clear that the RAW are more strict than that, but it's certainly fine to run it that way.

 

[slaughterj]

From Sage Advice Compendium:

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the
mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a
material component but does have a somatic component.
She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures.
If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this
restriction.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

That's how I feel it should be, but it appears pretty clear that the RAW are more strict than that, but it's certainly fine to run it that way.

In the absolute worst-case scenario, you need to use your Object Interaction for the round to temporarily stow your weapon. Even then, though, the DM can allow "temporarily stow" as the action that you're doing with your weapon, in which case it's right back in your hand afterward.

It really does just come down to DM discretion, and how restrictive they want to be in their interpretation.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

RAW/RAI:
1. Sheathing a weapon is an object interaction.
2. Drawing a weapon is an object interaction.
3. Dropping a weapon is not an object interaction.
4. Picking up a weapon is an object interaction.
5. You can only do one object interaction per round, if you want to do a second, you need to use your main action for it.
6. You need a pouch/focus/emblem in your hand (or on an item in your hand) to use a spell with a material component.
7. If a spell has somatic and material components, you can use the hand with the material for the somatic component.
8. If a spell has only somatic components, you need a completely free hand to use the spell.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

RAW/RAI:
1. Sheathing a weapon is an object interaction.
2. Drawing a weapon is an object interaction.

Just because sheathing a weapon and drawing a weapon are both examples of an Object Interaction, that doesn't mean "sheathing one weapon and drawing another weapon" is not an example of an Object Interaction. The list is meant to be representative, rather than definitive.

The relevant question is, " Is sheathing one weapon and drawing another weapon," enough like "Sheathing one weapon," or "Drawing one weapon," that we can fold it into the same category? That answer is going to vary from person to person, but given that it doesn't upset the game balance (since clerics and paladins can already do it regardless), and given that it simplifies the bookkeeping significantly, my ruling is that it is similar enough for what we care about.

It's definitely open to interpretation, though, and you might be able to make a compelling case to your DM (or as the DM) if you really feel that it's important. Ultimately, though, it's up to the DM - but it's a case of Rulings-Not-Rules, and not an instance of House-Ruling.

 

[Ristamar]

Just because sheathing a weapon and drawing a weapon are both examples of an Object Interaction, that doesn't mean "sheathing one weapon and drawing another weapon" is not an example of an Object Interaction. The list is meant to be representative, rather than definitive.

I'm all for "Rulings Not Rules", but that's really reaching, especially in light of the Dual Wielder feat.

 

[slaughterj]

RAW/RAI:
1. Sheathing a weapon is an object interaction.
2. Drawing a weapon is an object interaction.
3. Dropping a weapon is not an object interaction.
4. Picking up a weapon is an object interaction.

I agree with all of this. Unfortunately the result of such is that if someone wants to cast, needs the free hand to do it, yet wants to remain armed (e.g., to enable opportunity attacks), that results in the following actions:
1. Free drop the weapon
2. Standard action cast the spell with the free hand
3. Use the one interaction to retrieve and re-equip the dropped weapon.

Because I feel that is an unrealistic result (the constant dropping of the weapon for free to work the system of actions), that is why I instead let PCs slip the sword into the shield hand briefly or tuck it under an arm, etc. and then re-equip it after, as the interaction, since that seems more reasonable that constantly dropping and picking up a weapon. It may not strictly be RAW, but it is more RAR (rules as reality).

I do like the even looser approach of if the caster is not bound, then they can do somatic actions without worrying about all this juggling, but (a) that even further demeans the War Caster feat (at least under my approach, that bullet for War Caster is still useful for casting reactions while holding 2 items), and (b) loosening about somatic actions just affects spells, and I'm concerned about broader actions than that, including using thieves' tools reasonably for the bonus action lock-picking, etc., so a rule just loosening somatic actions doesn't really accomplish what all I need to rules to actually work.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I don't think it's unrealistic. If you only have 500 milliseconds to start casting your spell to make it go off on time and you know sheathing your weapon takes you at least 1 second, then dropping it and instantly starting to move your hand according to the somatic components of the spell actually makes sense to me.

I find it much more unrealistic to think "I need to keep my weapon in hand to be able to do opportunity attacks" in a situation where every second matters.

Edit: If anything I'd think of a cantrip I could potentially use as opportunity attack (when the time has come).

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I'm all for "Rulings Not Rules", but that's really reaching, especially in light of the Dual Wielder feat.

Which, like I said, is a great reason to not use feats. It's far from the only example of a feat which explicitly grants an ability that the DM might otherwise allow regardless.

If there's no skill related to using rope to tie someone up, then anyone can do it at the DM's discretion. If there is skill that exists which is all about using rope, then that places a limit on what everyone without the skill can do. It's a problem that shows up in many games - especially those with many supplements.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

If action A takes time X and action B takes time X then action A+B takes time X*2 and not time X.
That's how I see it.