Switching from bow to swords - how does it work?

[Crazy Jerome]

For a non-RAW version which is, I feel, more in the spirit of 4E as a whole:

For a minor action, you can put things into either or both empty hands.
For a movement action, you can put things up instead of dropping them.

With Quickdraw, you can turn the above minor into a free, and the above movement into a minor. Which means that as a minor action, you can change what is in your hands.

This is very generous to dual wielders, casters holding a weapon and an implement, etc. I'm ok with that, since I'm playing 4E as a more epic than gritty.

 

[Zaran]

Hmm, I always thought that the minor action to draw a weapon became two weapons when you knew how dual wield and thus a Ranger with Quick Draw and Two Weapon Fighting could put the bow away as a Minor, then quick draw both swords and Twin STrike as a Standard and still have a move action left. The Compendium doesn't have the chart that shows move actions so I can not back my statement up. I do know that Quick Draw does not downgrade any actions. It just makes drawing a weapon part of the same action as the attack. So it would make sense that if the attack required two weapons to function that you would have to quick draw both weapons at once to use it.

 

[IanB]

Cool, another rule I'll be leaving by the wayside because I don't want to have to tell a player "Nope, you can't talk during an attack." That is a bit silly to me.

Or you could just ignore it for talking. There are other interactions that get a lot cleaner with that rule (the psion free action push for example).

 

[Gryph]

For a non-RAW version which is, I feel, more in the spirit of 4E as a whole:

For a minor action, you can put things into either or both empty hands.
For a movement action, you can put things up instead of dropping them.

With Quickdraw, you can turn the above minor into a free, and the above movement into a minor. Which means that as a minor action, you can change what is in your hands.

This is very generous to dual wielders, casters holding a weapon and an implement, etc. I'm ok with that, since I'm playing 4E as a more epic than gritty.

My table rule is you can fill both hands with a minor if the hands start empty and the items are carried to facilitate drawing. So sheathed weapons or implements, something tucked into a belt or sleeve. Items in a pack or pouch take a minor per item to retrieve.

 

[aurance]

Hmm, I always thought that the minor action to draw a weapon became two weapons when you knew how dual wield and thus a Ranger with Quick Draw and Two Weapon Fighting could put the bow away as a Minor, then quick draw both swords and Twin STrike as a Standard and still have a move action left. The Compendium doesn't have the chart that shows move actions so I can not back my statement up. I do know that Quick Draw does not downgrade any actions. It just makes drawing a weapon part of the same action as the attack. So it would make sense that if the attack required two weapons to function that you would have to quick draw both weapons at once to use it.

This is how I always ruled it, and I believe could be supported (albeit with a bit of ambiguity) by RAW for Quick Draw.

"You can draw a weapon as part of the same action used to attack with the weapon or use the object."

Is "a weapon" equivalent to "one and only one weapon"? (I submit that it is not.)

For multi-attack powers, say, Twin Strike, is "action used to attack with the weapon" equivalent to a "single attack roll from one arm", or equivalent to "standard action", being the whole of Twin Strike? (I submit that it is the latter.)

YMMV.

 

[mneme]

It's still basically inconsistent. But the clear intent with Quick Draw/Paired Weapon is that you can draw, split, and attack.

If you add in the Deep Pocket Cloak, you have:

Without Master of Arms or Quick Draw:
Bow->Swords: 2 minor actions (stow+draw)+ 1 free action (to draw a sword stashed in the cloak).
Swords->Bow: 2 minor actions (stow+draw)) + 1 free action (stow a sword in the cloak).

With Master of Arms:
Bow->swords: 1 minor action [swap]
Swords->Bow: 1 minor action [swap]

With Quick Draw (assuming the GM lets Quick Draw be used to draw an item from the cloak--which IMO they should):
Bow->Swords: 1 free action (to stow)
Swords->Bow: 1 minor action (to stow one blade) + 1 free action.

 

[Zaran]

Besides in any world where you can Twin Strike with a Heavy Crossbow, quick drawing two weapons at once should be trivial. =)

 

[WalterKovacs]

They did at least notice this craziness for the Executioner assassin, who wants to be going back and forth between having two-weapon defense and a garotte ... so their swap either let's you draw 2 weapons as a single free action or swap one weapon for another the same way ... so if you do have a third weapon in the mix it's just one minor action without extra feats (which is nice, since you'd prefer Ki Focus expertise to master at arms since unless you are ok with giving up on a chunk of the poisons that are implement based). I pity the shield wielding Executioner assassin though.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

The simpler solution would be to use a double weapon. This has several advantages. First of all if you are not a TBF ranger you would need to be using an off-hand weapon in the second hand anyway, so using a double sword is zero disadvantage. Secondly you can have a more effective enchantment on your sword since it doesn't have to be a Paired Weapon. You also avoid all the possible arguments about exactly when you can split the weapon.

So in that case it is just
Minor action: Stow Bow
Minor action: draw double sword

and of course with Quick Draw you can reduce that all to just one minor action to stow and a standard to draw and attack (and again avoid any arguments about whether Quick Draw + Twin Strike lets you draw 2 weapons etc).

Granted double weapons are a bit hokey in a way, but if it bugs you just fluff it as a special rig that lets you draw/sheath both quickly and allows an enchantment to work on both. Certainly the design objective of double weapons was exactly to smooth out this kind of thing and remove some of the extra cost associated with a ranger needing 3 enchanted weapons to be maximally effective.

Of course if you ARE a TBF ranger then you're taking a small DPR hit using a double weapon vs 2 bastard swords or the like. Still, it might be worth it if you switch a lot. I'd note though that these days there are a pretty hefty number of ways to simply make bow use in close combat perfectly feasible.

 

[Jhaelen]

Is "a weapon" equivalent to "one and only one weapon"? (I submit that it is not.)

For multi-attack powers, say, Twin Strike, is "action used to attack with the weapon" equivalent to a "single attack roll from one arm", or equivalent to "standard action", being the whole of Twin Strike? (I submit that it is the latter.)

YMMV.

Agreed. I mean, _I_ can draw two weapons using a single action, having two hands

... which reminds me: How about Thri-kreen?