Greatsword weilding caster

[Andras]

But a readied action changes your init...

"Initiative Consequences of Readying
Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the readied action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed your readied action, you don’t get to take the readied action (though you can ready the same action again). If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round."

So when the readied action went off, it was the player's turn, right?

FAQ=teh suxxorz!

I don't think so, he already took most of his turn earlier, 'reserving' a second or two to make a single attack. Now, after that, the players turn changes initiative, but it doesn't effect the current turn.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't think so, he already took most of his turn earlier, 'reserving' a second or two to make a single attack. Now, after that, the players turn changes initiative, but it doesn't effect the current turn.

I would tend to agree with this. You ready a standard action. You do not ready a standard action plus a free action.

If the DM allows you to ready both actions, you should minimally have to declare that you are putting your hand back on your weapon as a free action portion of your readied action ahead of time.

Also, your initiative count only changes if you take your action in the next turn (before your existing count), not in the current turn at a later count.

No, your initiative count changes if you take the readied action, regardless of when you take it.

 

[Andras]

Ok, I see that now, thanks.

 

[werk]

I would tend to agree with this. You ready a standard action. You do not ready a standard action plus a free action.

OK, ready does seem pretty specific as to what can be readied, "You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action."

If the 2-h sword weilding caster readied a spell...

Caster's init-15-free action, remove hand, move 30' to safer safety, ready to cast a spell, grease, if the target flees.
(so the caster would not be 'weilding' the sword at this time, no AoO with it)
Ready triggers-17-casts grease, but cannot return his hand to the sword, does not threaten until next turn.

He cannot ready the free action to remove his hand before he begins casting, nor can he include the regrip in the ready.
So a caster can do less in one or two turns using ready than he can do in a normal round.

Are you letting him regrip as a move action reduced to a free action, or just a free action?

 

[KarinsDad]

So a caster can do less in one or two turns using ready than he can do in a normal round.

Isn't this what you would expect anyway for someone waiting for something to happen?

Are you letting him regrip as a move action reduced to a free action, or just a free action?

I think that letting go with one hand should be a free action and regripping with one hand should be a free action.

I have no problem with a character letting go, moving and casting, and then regripping all in the same round.

 

[buzz]

As compared to the history of accuracy from say Customer Support?

Noted. At least their answer directly addresses the question at hand, though. None of the FAQ or RotG quotations in the thread have yet done this.

I emailed the Sage, too, but I get the impression that, with Paizo, a question is only going to get answered if it's published in Dragon.

 

[buzz]

Caster's init-15-free action, remove hand, move 30' to safer safety, ready to cast a spell, grease, if the target flees.
(so the caster would not be 'weilding' the sword at this time, no AoO with it)
Ready triggers-17-casts grease, but cannot return his hand to the sword, does not threaten until next turn.

RAW and the answer I posted from WotC CS supports this, AFAICT.

Personally, I'm not sure if I'd sweat denying the PC their AoO, as I'm not sure that there's anything unbalanced about it, especially given how often this situation is going to come up. But that's just IMO.

 

[werk]

Personally, I'm not sure if I'd sweat denying the PC their AoO, as I'm not sure that there's anything unbalanced about it, especially given how often this situation is going to come up. But that's just IMO.

So the question presents itself, aren't you really just ignoring the free hand stipulation from the spell casting rules?
When do you think that rule should apply?
Only when bound?

 

[KarinsDad]

So the question presents itself, aren't you really just ignoring the free hand stipulation from the spell casting rules?
When do you think that rule should apply?
Only when bound?

I think you are doing the opposite. Trying to use a rule to impose a penalty where one is not explicitly written within the rules.

There are cases where the rule would apply as is with the "this is a free action interpretation". For example, a Cleric with a light shield could put his one handed weapon into his shield hand, cast the spell, and then put the weapon back into his weapon hand. A Cleric with a heavy shield cannot do this according to the rules, so he must either drop or sheathe the weapon in order to cast.


This also brings up the subject of a focus and material components. Does a caster need a free hand for his somatic component, a second free hand for his material components, and a third free hand for his focus for a spell that requires all three?

Or does he juggle his focus and his other material components with one hand?

Can he have his focus dangling from a chain around his neck?


Etc., etc., etc.


At what point does this level of minutia make the game unplayable?

 

[buzz]

So the question presents itself, aren't you really just ignoring the free hand stipulation from the spell casting rules?

No, it's more just me musing about applying the rule in this specific instance. I can definitely see denying the AoO if material components are involved (prepping them being a Free Action the PC takes before readying), as we're assuming the spellcaster is standing there with a hand full of bat guano or whatever. If material components are not involved, though, I can see some wiggle room.

The WotC CS ruling would say Somatic compnents will deny the AoO, but even though I'm happy the ruling supports my general opinion on the greatsword caster issue, I still feel like "shifting grip" shouldn't even count as an action.

Naturally, a spell with only a Verbal component would not interfere with AoOs.

Anyway, all this makes me think that if a wizard or sorcerer goes the "spend a feat" route to gain a good 2H weapon, they should go for EWP(bastard sword) (assuming they have Str13), as it can still be used one-handed. Argument avoided!