Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="glass" data-source="post: 2468496" data-attributes="member: 12251">I'd agree with that. 'Wield' has connotations of combat readyness that 'hold' does not.In your example, in the absence of any further information, I would read those phrases pretty much the same: 'hold' doesn't have the connotation of using the gun in an agressive manner that 'wield' does, but 'bankrobber' does!Cute.For the rules to work you are also 'forced' to have a distinction between 'is' and 'is not'. Is that bizarre?Yes, but not what it means to be armed with a specific weapon (as opposed to armed in general).It says you can quickdraw and attack with an off hand weapon, as long as you have taken TWF penalties on your earlier attack, which is the one thing with both agree on. It says nothing about what 'wield' or 'this way' mean, or whether you can use TWD withour taking TWF penalties, which are the points of contention.Now you making a distinction between wield and use. You distinctionless model is looking less distinctionless with every post!Right back attya.I like smileys. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> (Actually, they usually indicate where I'm trying to be funny. Otherwise, how would anyone know?)glass.</blockquote>