Snatch

[Azazu]

Thought that would get your attention.

Anyway. Gloves of Arrow Snaring, Snatch Arrows feat and the Deflect Arrows Feat. All say that you must have a free hand.

Does weilding a two handed weapon mean that you could have a free hand???

 

[LGodamus]

awww crud i thought it was gonna be a thread on dragons

 

[Shadowdweller]

I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that there's been a sage ruling to the effect that one can choose to hold a two-handed weapon in one hand as a free action, thus allowing one to use any of these feats after attacking. However, to return to the two-handed grip is equivalent to re-drawing the weapon (move action, or free if one has quick-draw).

Interpret this as you will.

 

[jgsugden]

FWIW: This is another lousy sage ruling that ignores the concepts behind the rules.

Having people perform all their actions for the round at one point is an abstraction performed to make the game easier to run. The concept behind the game is not that creatures move around one at a time, waiting for creratures to walk up to them and hack at them a few times with a sword. The concept is that they are constantly performing actions at the same time as other creatures.

Thus, a character with a two handed weapon should be swinging the weapon with both hands constantly, not just for a millisecond during their initiative. Even if he has quickdraw, he should not be able to let go with one hand and grab an arrow just because he can draw the weapon quickly.

THis is just my opinion, but it is backed by the intent of the rules. The sage, OTOH, is granted some authority by WotC, but his ruling applies to the game only if you ignore the intent behind the rules and treat it purely as a strategy game.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Having people perform all their actions for the round at one point is an abstraction performed to make the game easier to run. The concept behind the game is not that creatures move around one at a time, waiting for creratures to walk up to them and hack at them a few times with a sword. The concept is that they are constantly performing actions at the same time as other creatures.

Except in certain very, very specific situations, trying to adjudicate that is just a recipe for headaches.

If I'm holding a weapon, I threaten an area. If I'm not, I don't.

If I stab someone with my dagger and then throw it at someone else, I don't threaten until my next turn, when I might draw another weapon, for example.

How is this different to hitting someone with a greataxe and then taking one hand off the haft? I'm no longer wielding the weapon effectively, so I don't threaten, but I have a hand free.

Would you deny the dagger wielder the ability to deflect an arrow with the hand he now has free, since he threw the dagger?

-Hyp.

 

[jgsugden]

If I stab someone with my dagger and then throw it at someone else, I don't threaten until my next turn, when I might draw another weapon, for example.

How is this different to hitting someone with a greataxe and then taking one hand off the haft? I'm no longer wielding the weapon effectively, so I don't threaten, but I have a hand free.

Would you deny the dagger wielder the ability to deflect an arrow with the hand he now has free, since he threw the dagger?

Take into account the abstraction.

In your first example (assuming the off hand is holding something, a torch perhaps), the dagger wielder will spend some time slashing with his dagger in hand, spend some time throwing the dagger and then spend some time with no dagger in hand. This will take place over six seconds. In the abstraction, there will be plenty of instances where he couldbe attacked and have a hand free to catch an incoming missile.

In your second example, someone fighting with a greataxe would not swing the axe with both hands, let go with one of his hands for no reason, put the hand back on the axe, swing again, etc .... Instead, he would maintain his grip (or switch between grips) throughout the fighting. Both of his hands would be constantly busy. It only makes sense for the character to be treated as if he only has one hand on a weapon for most of the round if the abstraction is ignored.

Keeping abstraction in mind is simple. Keep a mental image of the combat in your head. If something allowed by the rules seems really odd in your mental image, take a moment and figure out why. Then, address the issue.

 

[Master Psion]

Thought that would get your attention.

Anyway. Gloves of Arrow Snaring, Snatch Arrows feat and the Deflect Arrows Feat. All say that you must have a free hand.

Does weilding a two handed weapon mean that you could have a free hand???

My ruling as a DM (for simplicity's sake) would be that the only way that would be possible is if your character was of at least one size category larger than the two-handed weapon you are trying to wield one-handed (i.e large character using a medium-sized two-handed weapon). When a character wielding a two-handed weapon makes an attack, it's assumed that during that 6 second round that the character maintains a grasp on the weapon with both hands. The only way that I could see that the character could have a free hand while wielding a two-handed weapon would be if that character chooses during his/her turn to make no attack that round. Just my opinion. But ultimately, it depends on your DM's ruling.

 

[Hypersmurf]

In your second example, someone fighting with a greataxe would not swing the axe with both hands, let go with one of his hands for no reason, put the hand back on the axe, swing again, etc .... Instead, he would maintain his grip (or switch between grips) throughout the fighting. Both of his hands would be constantly busy. It only makes sense for the character to be treated as if he only has one hand on a weapon for most of the round if the abstraction is ignored.

So we have someone with an axe, who is trained to be able to deflect arrows if he has one hand free.

And one of his opponents is hanging around with a bow.

And yet for him to take one of his hands off the haft at the times when he is not actually swinging is "for no reason"?

-Hyp.

 

[RigaMortus]

I can very easily picture someone swining an axe with all their might, then noticing someone firing an bow at them. They lift one hand off the axe just in time to deflect the arrow. They then regripe their axe and continue in the melee. You may assume the axe-wielder is being fired on in mid-swing, where he would need both his hands to grip the weapon effectively. But you can also assume he is being fired on before (or after) his swing, when he no longer "needs" to be griping the weapon with both hands.

 

[jgsugden]

I can very easily picture someone swining an axe with all their might, then noticing someone firing an bow at them. They lift one hand off the axe just in time to deflect the arrow. They then regripe their axe and continue in the melee. You may assume the axe-wielder is being fired on in mid-swing, where he would need both his hands to grip the weapon effectively. But you can also assume he is being fired on before (or after) his swing, when he no longer "needs" to be griping the weapon with both hands.

You assume his axe stops moving at some point. In battle, nobody just stands around unless they are dead tired and about to fall over in exhaustion. If you stop moving in combat, you get hurt. If you stop swinging that axe, you get hurt.

I'll tell you what. Go out and find a 10 to 15 pound bar (perhaps a medium sized bar from a weight set). Start swinging it around. Then, have a friend with a long stick (much longer than your bar) try to poke you with their stick. Try to stop them. See if you can manage to take your hands off that bar while swinging it around and trying not to be hit. [Note: Don't really do this. You'll end up throwing the bar through a window or something.]

Yes, some of your inability will be due to a lack of skill. Most of it will be due to physics. Heavy objects being swung at arms length take a heck of a lot of effort to control.

*If* you want to follow a fairly realisitic design, treat a two handed weapon in combat as if it is being held in two hands at all times.

D&D is a game of abstraction. You must decide how far you're willing to run away from reality in any given direction. If you want your fighters to be acting like their weapons are made of tin foil, go for it. If you want them to deal with some realistic implications, follow my advice. I don't really care.