switching a versatile weapon between 1h and 2h, what action?

[Celtavian]

re

If I were DMing, I would go with the intent of the rules. There is no real world analogue to base magic powers on and 4E is strongly oriented towards balance. If it says you must have a hand free and your last attack was made with two hands to gain the versatile advantage, then you lose the ability to gain any benefits from having an offhand free such as gaining the shield bonus or the ability to use your aegis.

I do not allow exploitation of the rules by players that try to fast talk the DM into allowing them to do something that the rules clearly do not intend them to do because of some fuzzy or poor wording they are trying to manipulate.

So as far as the Swordmage goes, no, I wouldn't allow them to use 2 hands and then use their Aegis if it says they must have one hand free. I would consider that a requirement of the power. And if they want some real specific reason, I would just tell them the hand just be working in some strange pattern to enable the ritual throughout the round.

I do not allow power gamer exploiters and will decide against them immediately when they try to abuse. This sounds like an uintended abuse of a class ability to me. That +1 damage may not be a big deal, but the shield using fighter or paladin can't gain the +1 damage while using their shield, so neither can the sword mage.

 

[the8bitdeity]

What about making it analogous to stances? Isn't switching / activating a stance a minor action? I conceptually view stances in the same context as weapon position / grips.

 

[Nytmare]

Would a standing rule that you can't take the "same" free action more than once in a round solve things? Or that the same free action, done twice, becomes a minor?

 

[Pickles JG]

Would a standing rule that you can't take the "same" free action more than once in a round solve things? Or that the same free action, done twice, becomes a minor?

This used to come up in 3rd too (spell casting while holding a 2 handed weapon for example). We ruled it was a free to switch but you could not do it after your last "real" action. So if you moved/cast you would be stuck but if you cast/ moved you were OK. Hmm I guess that's cos in 3 you could have drawn a weapon while moving.

I think "free action but dont take the mickey" is right for 4th .

 

[keterys]

I disagree with this, as this issue can, will, and already has come up in RPGA tournament play. Heck, my Living Forgotten Realms character is a swordmage, so I would love to hear discussions about rules from other people.

Let me word it differently, then. As an LFR player, don't do it. As a DM, request that people don't do it.

The return on doing it (1 damage) is not worth the cost.

For a tournament, eh, follow the RAW, which are curiously silent except for the free drop a weapon and minor ready a weapon. But it's a tournament, so go ahead and exploit loopholes.

In fact, I am surprised there are people who will try and shut down conversations on this board by saying things like 'this is obviously cheese, so stop.'

It's errata waiting to happen. You make note of it, possibly send WotC a mail, and move along. This generally isn't a competitive game. Searching for loopholes is healthy for the game, but using them is not. This is a particularly minor example, but that only makes it easier to avoid.

Isn't the whole point of threads like this to prevent cheese by coming up with a fair and reasonable ruling made through spirited discussions?

Sometimes there are obvious questions on how the game works and whether something is intended to work that way and it is good to discuss the rules in that light, absolutely. Do you honestly believe that the swordmage is intended to _ever_ get the +1 versatile damage while retaining the +3 AC? That's the easiest cheese prevention ever. "That's not how the class is designed. Whether it's possible to work that way or not, that's not how we'll be playing it." - a "fair" ruling is subjective, so you're just as likely to annoy someone and it's easy for loss of respect, distrust, or animosity to arise from attempted bending or cheesing of the rules. Especially in con games. And that cost is too high.

I feel it was a poor decision on the designers part for not addressing this glaring hole in the rules before it went to print.

Agreed.

A solution, other than the one I gave earlier, would be that the Swordmage must declare at the beginning of their turn if they are using their versatile weapon one handed or two handed, and consequently their Warding will grant them the corresponding bonus until the beginning of their next turn, where they can choose to switch grips or keep it the same.

Sure. Also avoids silliness like wielding it two-handed and back on opportunity attacks

Which is one reason I dislike free action, especially with the minor action precedent for equipping a weapon already set.

 

[Lakoda]

Seems to me to be a really easy thing to fix, it should be an easy thing to use too, no of this complicated crap.

Change Grip (Free Action)
Effect: You may change between holding a 1H weapon with one or two hands.
Special: Until the beginning of your next turn you may Change Grip again.

At worst you could have shenanigans every other turn, but at the trade off of the character not making their attack with their preferred number of hands ever other turn as well. Seems fair to me, and it makes sense.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The rules don't give an action for changing grips or swapping hands. Maybe it's because it's not an action at all? A two-handed weapon (or a versatile weapon gaining the +1 damage) has a requirement: that you use both hands to wield it. If you have two hands available, you meet that requirement. OTOH, holding an item only requires one hand. If you're not wielding a two-handed weapon, but only holding it, you have a hand free. Thus you could perform any activity that requires one free hand while holding the weapon. 'Changing grips' thus isn't an action at all, it's just a matter of whether you have the right number of hands free to perform an action you want to perform, when you perform it.

 

[yesnomu]

I don't really see anything wrong with letting the Swordmage get +1 damage. I agree with the tennis example, adding a hand and taking it off is pretty effortless.

For what it's worth, I played a swordmage using this trick with a Bastard Sword. I didn't really see any power disparity between me and the other players, and nobody complained I was outdamaging them.

 

[keterys]

It's a difference of 1 damage. It's hardly noticeable.

It doesn't make it right.

 

[Mahali]

I make it a non-action (Free) but also make them choose between wielding a weapon on or two handed for the entire round.

Combat is an abstract of constant fighting, not "I do all of this and no one else does anything. Now it's your turn."

Prevents any cheese and is 100% with the spirit of the game.