Two-handed Weapons and Spellcasting

[Lord Kakabel]

I'm a Cleric of Shelyn wielding a glaive in two hands. Can I take one hand off of my glaive to grab the holy symbol around my neck to cast heal with Material, Somatic, and Verbal Casting?

I'm having trouble figuring out which actions I need to use to move my hands around. The new action economy seems more like micro-managing mundane actions than being conducive to epic storytelling.

[Master E]

I'm confused about this two. From what I have read it seems like you need to take a manipulate action to grab or let go of a weapon. I agree that this seems like micro-management. The paladin wielding a two handed weapon for example seems like it needs to spend all of its turn use lay on hands to 1) let go of the weapon 2) Lay on hand 3) Re-grasp the weapon

[Bardarok]

The section about weapons says you need to spend an action to grab a weapon but letting go is free. As a cleric though you can take the level one feat emblazon symbol that let's you cast divine spells while holding a weapon anyways.

As a paladin you can let go as a free action so it's only 1) lay on hands (letting go of weapon as free action) 2) regrip weapon 3) whatever.

EDIT: It's a bit over complicated as well since drop is a defined free action in the running the game chapter. It's [F] Drop free action triggered by the start of your turn [A] Somatic Component Action [A] Interact Action (to regrip sword) and then whatever maybe [A] Strike.

[Shadowtalon]

The way the game is with hands and actions is really weird in general. Pulling an arrow out of a quiver, nocking it to the bow, and pulling the bowstring is one action, but placing my off hand back on my greatsword and swinging is two?

[Melkiador]

Andrew Overstreet wrote:

The way the game is with hands and actions is really weird in general. Pulling an arrow out of a quiver, nocking it to the bow, and pulling the bowstring is one action, but placing my off hand back on my greatsword and swinging is two?

Maybe weird, but it will cause less issues in the future, I believe. It’s one of those places where the game needs to be unrealistic to work right.

[Igor Horvat]

It's funny that re-grasping a weapon need same time as drawing it out of scabard.or unlocking a door.

[Seisho]

Andrew Overstreet wrote:

The way the game is with hands and actions is really weird in general. Pulling an arrow out of a quiver, nocking it to the bow, and pulling the bowstring is one action, but placing my off hand back on my greatsword and swinging is two?

consider this:

if you fired an arrow you already had your bow in the right direction, have the right body posture and can easily repeat what you done before

while when in the middle of a melee you have to readjust you stance, grip and balance while at the same time looking out for enemies who want to punch your beautiful face

it is not just the action that is executed at core but also the sorrounding scenario

[Igor Horvat]

Seisho wrote:

Andrew Overstreet wrote:

The way the game is with hands and actions is really weird in general. Pulling an arrow out of a quiver, nocking it to the bow, and pulling the bowstring is one action, but placing my off hand back on my greatsword and swinging is two?

consider this:

if you fired an arrow you already had your bow in the right direction, have the right body posture and can easily repeat what you done before

while when in the middle of a melee you have to readjust you stance, grip and balance while at the same time looking out for enemies who want to punch your beautiful face

it is not just the action that is executed at core but also the sorrounding scenario

Greatsword, a large twohanded sword 5-6ft in length can we carried with one hand and you can run with it with only one hand gripping it. Actually it's preferable :p

You even have onehanded only lunges with greatsword as they cannot be done with twohanded grips.

Taking the hand off the grip and returning it takes fraction of a second and has no place costing an action.

And as twohanders are very weak in this playtest comparing to one handers: 2d6 goes to 1d12 and no one-and-a-half str bonus to damage, extra utility for melee casters would be nice.

[DM Livgin]

Is there a page number that describes changing your grip from one handed to two handed?

[Yossarian]

The level 1 cleric feat Emblazon Symbol is what you need.

The 'grip' action stuff appears to be an important balancing issue to constrain multiclass (archetype now) wizard / fighters and similar. Otherwise we'll have 2-h greatsword strike followed by spellcast with no action issues at all and we'll all be playing various flavours of magus before long.

[Volkard Abendroth]

Yossarian wrote:

The level 1 cleric feat Emblazon Symbol is what you need.

The 'grip' action stuff appears to be an important balancing issue to constrain multiclass (archetype now) wizard / fighters and similar. Otherwise we'll have 2-h greatsword strike followed by spellcast with no action issues at all and we'll all be playing various flavours of magus before long.

With the current system, there is little reason for a wizard not to multiclass fighter, swing a weapon with his first action or two, and use a spell with his last action or two.

The first attack is going to be accurate and it conserves the far more limited spells he has available.

[Manykittens]

DM Livgin wrote:

Is there a page number that describes changing your grip from one handed to two handed?

The closest thing I could find is the hands section on page 184.

It is referenced (kind of) in table 6-2 on page 175. It is discussed circumspectly on page 174 in the carrying and using items section, kind of talked about on page 179 in the hands section. It is mentioned in the method of use on page 345 which also gives a junk page reference to page 307. I feel like it only sort of gives rules for how this works and I feel that this is an area where the rules could stand to be more clear.

[evilbob]

I agree with the consensus that at the moment, it looks like you cast, then spend an action to "re-ready" the weapon. I also agree it seems overly penalizing, especially given what you're already giving up by using a 2-handed weapon.

In previous editions we hand-waved things like using your shield hand to hold a holy symbol to cast spells, or opening a door while you're wielding two weapons... It's just too much to track and doesn't actually make you feel good about how you're spending your actions to do otherwise. This will probably be one of those things as well.

[RealAlchemy]

evilbob wrote:

I agree with the consensus that at the moment, it looks like you cast, then spend an action to "re-ready" the weapon. I also agree it seems overly penalizing, especially given what you're already giving up by using a 2-handed weapon.

In previous editions we hand-waved things like using your shield hand to hold a holy symbol to cast spells, or opening a door while you're wielding two weapons... It's just too much to track and doesn't actually make you feel good about how you're spending your actions to do otherwise. This will probably be one of those things as well.

Does the action usage change if the two handed weapon can also be wielded one handed, such as a bastard sword or dwarven waraxe? Trying to figure out actions for a two handed weapon wielding paladin of Sarenrae with the fire ray domain power.

[tivadar27]

I played a Sorcerer with Fighter Multiclass at level 4 (used a Dwarven Waraxe). I think the cost to re-grip makes sense. There were lots of times I took a single swing, let go of my weapon with one hand (free action) then cast a spell. Sometimes I also did spend the action to re-grip. Either way, I don't think the economy/usage changes with a two-hand weapon (dwarven war axe, bastard sword).

[Previloc]

Seisho wrote:

consider this:

if you fired an arrow you already had your bow in the right direction, have the right body posture and can easily repeat what you done before

while when in the middle of a melee you have to readjust you stance, grip and balance while at the same time looking out for enemies who want to punch your beautiful face

it is not just the action that is executed at core but also the sorrounding scenario

The original Conan movie (I think that's the right one - with the rogue archer) portrayed an adventuring archer well. Plant arrows ahead of time, run away from melee weapons, sneak and take potshots.

Shooting arrows around melee weapons is for high fantasy movies (and Fantasy RPG), not attempting reality (that's what guns are for), but anyway...Your delicate real shortbow (longbow is too big for this kind of thing) is pointed at the target (assuming you don't shift target), you reach behind you to draw a 2' arrow out of a 2' quiver on your back (3' each for longbow, and with a backpack there too) - which is why bowmen planted arrows in the ground pre-battle (and put up large wooden stakes to slow down approach), and place it carefully to land on both that 1/8th inch bowstring and guide (which might just be your index finger). Reloading a bow in under 2 seconds in combat conditions takes a LOT of practice (more for a longbow), so balancing a 2 handed weapon in one hand for a couple seconds spellcasting isn't that far-fetched. A dart (lawn dart), and other small throwing weapons should be reload 0 before a bow gets it.

Just once, I would like the RPG to let my fighter AoO that bowstring, or even bowstaff (wood, under a lot of strain) with a nice edged weapon.

The bow is Reload 0 and usable in the midst of melee because of fantasy precedent (and Paizo wants to stay in business). The damage is so low because it balances out to a fun game.

[Fuzzypaws]

Yeah, per physical reality, darts etc should be reload 0 while bows etc should be reload 1, with a feat allowing reload 0, because you /can/ train to get that fast. The bow can then do more damage / have more and better traits to compensate.

I don't mind a high level character playing Legolas, but a 1st level novice (or goblin) definitely shouldn't be able to put that many arrows in the air.