Summary of Spell Casting with a Shield?

[Infiniti2000]

The fact that you added a house rule to allow someone to both move and put the weapon back into the weapon hand indicates that as written in the Rules of the Game (i.e. move action to put weapon in other hand, move action to put it back in original hand) made the game more difficult than you and your players wanted. You house ruled it to make it easier, hence, you compromised and took a middle ground. So, I do not quite understand how compromising and making it easier makes it any less difficult if you do not compromise and play it according to RotG.

Yeah, well, see, there is no rule on it in the first place, so is any rule a house rule? In other words, why did you houserule it differently?

So there.

But, if you have a melee weapon out, most likely you are in front of an opponent, so in practice this "house" rule is not so beneficial.

The houserules I have are regarding sheathing a weapon (not part of this discussion) and quick draw (on sheathing), not part of this discussion. The fact that I treat shifting a weapon like drawing a weapon is, IMO, closer to the RAW than any other interpretation.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yeah, well, see, there is no rule on it in the first place, so is any rule a house rule?

There are no core rules. There are Rules of the Game rules (if you use those).

In other words, why did you houserule it differently?

Because I considered a free action directly derived from RAW.

Move Action: A move action allows you to move your speed or perform an action that takes a similar amount of time.

...

Free Action: Free actions consume a very small amount of time and effort.

It should take a lot less time to move a weapon from one hand to the other than it does to move 30 feet. So, I do not consider this action to be "a similar amount of time" to moving 30 feet. I consider it a very small amount of time and effort.

The fact that I treat shifting a weapon like drawing a weapon is, IMO, closer to the RAW than any other interpretation.

How so? For most weapons (e.g. longsword), it takes more range of motion and time to pull them out of a scabbard than it does to simply move a weapon from one hand to the other (and use both hands to do that operation). Drawing a weapon is time consuming, hence, the reason they added a simultaneous with moving rule (since you are using one or both hands for drawing the weapon and your feet for moving).

When I look at move actions, the vast majority of them take 2+ seconds to do in real life:

Mount a horse, stand up from prone, move 30 feet, ready a shield, etc.

When I look at moving a weapon from one hand to the other, I am seeing a fraction of a second. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I can move a hunting knife 20 times from hand to hand in 6 seconds, so that is less than a third of a second per switch. That to me is "a very small amount of time and effort", not "a similar amount of time" to moving 30 feet. JMO.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

I don't recall a WotC 3.5 feat that allows this. If I've missed one please let me know. There are class abilities that allow it - but IIRC they are all touch spells only and not "ranged" ones.

I was thinking the feat was SMITE SPELL from the PHBII but reading that one, it just allows you to store up a spell in a weapon for a minute.

I was confusing that with a similar feat from a third party book that did let you deliver a touch spell via a melee weapon.

DS

 

[Infiniti2000]

Because I considered a free action directly derived from RAW.
...
It should take a lot less time to move a weapon from one hand to the other than it does to move 30 feet. So, I do not consider this action to be "a similar amount of time" to moving 30 feet. I consider it a very small amount of time and effort.

Why don't you compare apples to apples and instead use "draw a weapon." Drawing a weapon is so closely matched with shifting grips on weapons that I'm continually amazed when people draw a different parallel.

How so? For most weapons (e.g. longsword), it takes more range of motion and time to pull them out of a scabbard than it does to simply move a weapon from one hand to the other (and use both hands to do that operation).

No, it doesn't. But, this part is entirely opinion, so I'll not actually say you're wrong on this point. Let me offer why I think differently, however. When you have a weapon in hand, the weapon is vulnerable. Not only that, but your opponent knows you have it. Switching hands with the weapon is one of the things you should almost never do. It's an incredibly risky maneuver. (Only do it, say if your arm is held or similar situations.) Your concentration on the weapon while switching hands is imperative. You certainly don't toss it from hand to hand or flip it like a hairbrush. It's not even likely that you'll look at it, instead you'll have your gaze fixed on your opponent because his reaction at the point you switch grips is critical. When drawing a weapon, however, all of these concerns and the concentration required are gone.

When I look at moving a weapon from one hand to the other, I am seeing a fraction of a second. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, I can move a hunting knife 20 times from hand to hand in 6 seconds, so that is less than a third of a second per switch. That to me is "a very small amount of time and effort", not "a similar amount of time" to moving 30 feet. JMO.

Sure, keep both hands on the knife and then you can switch them an infinite number of times per second. Just kidding.

Let me ask you, though, are you wielding the knife each time you switch? I'm thinking not. Unfortunately, that argument treads on other waters and I can't recall which side you took on it, but based on this discussion, I'd have to say that you don't actually require characters to 'wield' things, holding them in hand is considered wielding, right?

 

[Twowolves]

Why don't you compare apples to apples and instead use "draw a weapon." Drawing a weapon is so closely matched with shifting grips on weapons that I'm continually amazed when people draw a different parallel.

Ok, how's this: If you hold a longsword in it's scabbard in your left hand, then draw the sword out with your right hand, is that not "drawing the weapon"? Now, what if you are holding a mace in your left hand, and do the same? Is that not also "drawing the weapon"? Why should it be a move action for the sword and not the mace?

 

[KarinsDad]

Why don't you compare apples to apples and instead use "draw a weapon." Drawing a weapon is so closely matched with shifting grips on weapons that I'm continually amazed when people draw a different parallel.

I find this odd. To me, drawing a weapon and moving one to your other hand is apples and oranges. The length of time drawing the weapon is caused by both using one hand and the range of motion required to draw a weapon out of a sheath or some other snap type device. Switching weapons is near instantaneous since you are using both hands and do not have to change the orientation of the weapon at all. Drawing the weapon changes the orientation of the weapon. For example, a sword hangs down in a sheath, but it typically points forwards or upwards when wielding. That's at least a 90 degrees orientation difference.

I see no apples to apples comparison between drawing a weapon and switching a weapon. There is no DND concept of wielding versus carrying when it comes to holding a weapon in your hand. If you pick up your weapon from the ground, you are automatically wielding it.

I see an apples to apples comparison with a free action consumes a very small amount of time and switching a weapon to a different hand consumes a very small amount of time.


So, the difference in point of view is:

1) Yours. Find a similar action (getting a weapon in a hand) and make it the same action type.

2) Mine. Read what free and move actions state and pick the one that matches the closest.

I cannot conceive that you really think it takes a similar amount of time to move a weapon from one hand to the other as it takes to move 30 feet or mount a horse or even draw a weapon. You cannot truly believe that.

 

[Legildur]

I'm with KarinsDad that shifting weapons is substantially quicker and easier than drawing or sheathing. That being said, I could live with a DM restricting the number of free actions of this type to reduce possible abuse.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I see no apples to apples comparison between drawing a weapon and switching a weapon. There is no DND concept of wielding versus carrying when it comes to holding a weapon in your hand. If you pick up your weapon from the ground, you are automatically wielding it.

All I can say to reply is that this shows a lack of experience in combat training. There is a significant difference between holding and wielding on a number of weapons (but admittedly not all). To use a modern analogy for easier reference, if you pick up a gun by the barrel, for instance, are you wielding it? Of course not.

So, the difference in point of view is:

1) Yours. Find a similar action (getting a weapon in a hand) and make it the same action type.

2) Mine. Read what free and move actions state and pick the one that matches the closest.

Agreed. You'll find that my approach actually has precedence in the rules as, dare I say, the preferred approach. Consider improved weapons or magic item pricing, for example. Both rules guidelines ask you to compare with existing weapons or prices, which is what I do. Your method would have you never compare an improvised weapon's damage with existing weapons, or new magic items with existing magic items. So, how much is that ring of cure minor wounds, use-activated, unlimited times per day?

I cannot conceive that you really think it takes a similar amount of time to move a weapon from one hand to the other as it takes to move 30 feet or mount a horse or even draw a weapon. You cannot truly believe that.

And I cannot conceive that you really believe your view either. For example, I cannot believe that you think you can switch grips on a weapon, or shift the weapon into your shield hand in the middle of mounting a horse, charging an enemy, or whatever.

I mean, really. Try your switching the knife trick while running down the running the street, or climbing a tree.

 

[Prism]

The houserules I have are regarding sheathing a weapon (not part of this discussion) and quick draw (on sheathing), not part of this discussion. The fact that I treat shifting a weapon like drawing a weapon is, IMO, closer to the RAW than any other interpretation.

I am interested to know what you rule for shifting your grip on two handed weapons. Do you make it a move action to change from a single handed grip on a weapon to a two handed grip? This could certainly prevent players and monsters from taking AoO's and having full attacks if they run out of actions

 

[Infiniti2000]

I am interested to know what you rule for shifting your grip on two handed weapons. Do you make it a move action to change from a single handed grip on a weapon to a two handed grip? This could certainly prevent players and monsters from taking AoO's and having full attacks if they run out of actions

Shifting your grip from one-handed to two-handed on a one-handed weapon (or bastard sword) is a move action that does not provoke an AoO. Removing your grip from a two-handed weapon is akin to dropping it and thus a free action. You are going from wielding a weapon to merely holding it, and thus it is really easy. Going back to a two-handed grip is a move action that does not provoke an AoO (or a free action with Quick Draw). Switching from a two-handed grip to a one-handed grip (wielding, not just holding) is also a move action. Just dropping your hand is insufficient. While I could be convinced to allow a houserule that dropping your hand is a free action if you take, say, a -2 penalty on attack rolls, you will need most likely a different grip when switching from two-handed to one-handed than merely taking one hand off.

Follow? That's my 2 cents, take it or leave it. I believe it works well in practice, both from a game perspective (player and DM point of view) and adherence to "realism".