Two-handed weapons and spellcasting

[Pinotage]

But then, I'm so lax that I allow Clerics to cast with weapon and shield provided the shield is light.

Rav

In this case I'd rule that the cleric loses the shield bonus for the round since the shield arm is holding the weapon as well.

Pinotage

 

[Thanee]

I rule a little differently, ...

Yep, with what I have written above you could not use different weapons in an attack without penalties, but I'm sure that could be figured in there somehow, as it certainly makes sense, as long as you do not use them together (i.e. you could make it a free action to wield another weapon you are holding just before every attack, tho any TWF/MWF penalties apply for the remainder of the round as soon as you use TWF/MWF).

(EDIT: Changed my above post a bit to accomodate.)

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

In this case I'd rule that the cleric loses the shield bonus for the round since the shield arm is holding the weapon as well.

A light shield’s weight lets you carry other items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

If I carry a magic dagger, however, I take penalties.

The difference is between carrying and using/wielding.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

If I carry a magic dagger, however, I take penalties.

Not at all! I wouldn't dream of penalising you for carrying a magic dagger.

Only for wielding it.

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Must you wield a shield in order to gain a benefit from it?

EDIT: Probably not. The SRD does not mention "wield" in the description of shields. Only "wear."

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

The difference is between carrying and using/wielding.

Right. And I think that this is a meaningless, and ultimately arbitrary, distinction that results in more problems than it solves.

EDIT:

Amend the above with, "... that it solves, in relation to having multiple weapons at hand."

Carrying vs. wielding are fine when it comes to, say, a sheathed weapon, or something in a backpack, etc.

 

[Thanee]

I don't think so.

For shields there is a move action to ready/loosen them to switch between carrying and using state.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Hypersmurf]

Must you wield a shield in order to gain a benefit from it?

EDIT: Probably not. The SRD does not mention "wield" in the description of shields. Only "wear."

Right. However, if someone wanted to bash/threaten/benefit-from-Defending with a shield, I'd require them to be wielding it, and thus incur TWF penalties.

-Hyp.

 

[DaveStebbins]

How strange. I read this thread yesterday and then got a request from my monk player via our message board that he wishes to use a halberd.

2. Can I still unarm strike while holding the halberd? I assume a Monks/Drunken Masters unarmed strikes include kicking, headbutt, Kneeing etc.........Would I be able to hold on to the Halberd and kick an opponent as unarmed strike?

from the SRD (should be in the PHB chapter 3 section on the Monk class):

Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full.

So that one is answered.