Two-handed weapons with Whirling Blade
- Thread starter silentspace
- Start date
takasi
First Post
wildstarsreach said:
We've discussed this many times. Here is the closest thing in the FAQ:
"The light shield doesn’t give you a free hand for spellcasting, but since you can hold an item in the same hand that holds the light shield, you could switch your weapon to that hand to free up a hand for spellcasting. (You can’t use the weapon while it’s held in the same hand as your shield, of course.) The rules don’t state what type of action is required to switch hands on a weapon, but it seems reasonable to assume that it’s the equivalent of drawing a weapon (a move action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity)."
From this statement as a DM I would rule that it's a move action to shift a two handed weapon from one hand to another.
So if you are casting as a swift action on a two-handed weapon you would not get your full attack but you could get a single attack.
Again, the FAQ does not specifically address this issue. I'm sure some DMs would rule that it's a free action to shift a two handed weapon from one hand to the other, cast a spell and then a free action to shift it back.
DMs could also make it an swift action, allowing someone to move and cast a spell without dropping their two-handed weapon but then you couldn't cast a spell in the same round that's also a swift action.
Edit: So it sounds like Artoomis is ruling that it's a move action to shift a staff from two hands to one hand and then ANOTHER move action to shift a staff from one hand to two hands. So for a spell that takes a standard action to cast if you shift from two to one and cast you cannot take an AoO as a two-handed weapon. You could, however, take an AoO with the staff as a one-handed weapon because the wizard is still armed. Personally I find this a little too strict but since there is no ruling that I know of then this is just as valid an interpretation as any other.
Last edited:
wildstarsreach
First Post
Artoomis said:
You are making a ruling that in your games XXXX. Are you making that based on FAQ or just your opinion? At best, a wizard who has a staff would get 1d6+2 damage which is neglible. Now if you had an Eldrich Knight that had a greatsword. Damage could be problematic. He could begin to approach fighter damage potential. But again, he holds the weapon with 2 hands, balances it for a fraction of a round to do somatic components, holds the weapon again. Why not? Nothing in the FAQ disputes my interpretation. Where does the FAQ support yours?
Artoomis
First Post
wildstarsreach said:
The key is to decide what sort of action "switching grips" or "readying a weapon for combat" is in your game - the rules do not specify this.
Using a move action is fine. Thus you could cast a spell and NOT move and still be able to make an AoO.
Or you could cast a spell and move and NOT take an AoO.
Seems somewhat reasonable.
Or it could be any of several other choices for an action.
It's a DM call with no firm rules support no matter which way you go. Emphasis on "DM's call."
Artoomis
First Post
Gaiden said:
I think you'll find nothing about changing grips in RAW. EVen if you did, it would STILL be a DM's call for how many times you could do that in a round, since:
srd said:
The FAQ tells us that perhaps the best thing to do is to use the "draw/sheathe a weapon" rules. I tend to agree, as what folks are really trying to do here is duck around those rules by using a "switch grip" free action that is not in the rules.
srd said:
I think I'd allow both actions, switch to one hand (aka "sheathe") and switch to both hands (aka "draw") to be done without provoking an AOO, though. This does give some advantage to keeping the weapon in your hand(s).
Last edited:
wildstarsreach
First Post
Artoomis said:
Okay, I can abide by that even though I would rule differently.
