Newb question about arcane bond...

Sorry if this has been beaten to death. . . I spent several hours looking through this site and have found contradicatory info.

Anyway,

Can a wizard perform somatic spell components with hand that holds a (single-handed) bonded weapon?

Common sense seems to suggest "yes" if only for reasons of flavor. rapier is a *great* tool for gesturing and pointing at things. Otherwise, I can't see any reason to bond a weapon as opposed to a ring.

Finally, has this been definitively ruled on or is their merely a lot of well-intentioned speculation? Normally I wouldn't care (and houserule it), but this is for a pathfinder society character. Thanks!

J

Sorry if this has been beaten to death. . . I spent several hours looking through this site and have found contradicatory info.

Anyway,

Can a wizard perform somatic spell components with hand that holds a (single-handed) bonded weapon?

Common sense seems to suggest "yes" if only for reasons of flavor. rapier is a *great* tool for gesturing and pointing at things. Otherwise, I can't see any reason to bond a weapon as opposed to a ring.

Finally, has this been definitively ruled on or is their merely a lot of well-intentioned speculation? Normally I wouldn't care (and houserule it), but this is for a pathfinder society character. Thanks!

J

Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.

3.5 Faq ruled you could take one hand off a two handed weapon as a free action to cast a spell, so a wizard could carry a staff.

I strongly advise you not to take a bonded weapon.

1. It's very easy to have your weapon sundered or stolen. Especially if a clever enemy guesses that your weapon is your bond.

2. You need one hand free to cast Somatic spells (as Glutton pointed out). What will you do when you want to use a wand, or a staff, or a rod of Metamagic, or throw a bead from a Necklace of Fireballs, or cast a spell while you're climbing a rope or ladder or while you're riding a horse?

Answer: You can't.

Even if #1 is not a big concern (when I DM, I generally avoid crippling players in this fashion unless I have a good story for it and a readily avialable means for the player to un-cripple himself fairly soon), #2 should be a huge concern.

Note: you can offset this somewhat by taking Still Spell, but then you have to increase the level of every Somatic spell you cast by +1. That's a huge penalty. HUGE.

Further note: You can avoid much of that HUGE penalty by mostly preparing spells that have no Somatic component.

Another Further Note: If you optimize correctly, you can find feats or other tricks to reduce the cost of Still Spell by 1 so that you can eventually prepare a Stilled spell in its normal slot - but you won't likely be doing this at low level, so until you get there, you're crippled when it comes to wands, rods, etc.

Pick anything else - just don't pick something you have to hold in a free hand.

The Arcane Duelist bard from the APG gets a bonded weapon which explicitly says that he can use the hand holding the weapon for somatic component. This is a special ability of the Arcane Duelist and that's the only class that can use a bonded weapon this way. So, as said, a wizard would still need a free hand even when holding a bonded weapon.

What will you do when you want to use a wand, or a staff, or a rod of Metamagic, or throw a bead from a Necklace of Fireballs, or cast a spell while you're climbing a rope ladder...

Answer: You can't.

I didn't think you had to have use somatic components or even actually "cast" when using a wand/staff, they both use the "spell trigger" activation method, which only requires the user to have the "knowledge" in hand. The rod I can understand, however, 9 times out of 10 if a Wizard is using a weapon as his bond, he intends to be more of a "combat wizard", and not too many wizards like that use the rods. Also, on an upside, the bonded weapon is harder and has more hit points than it's non-bonded counterpart, and it recovers fully whenever the wizard (or bard/sorcerer) rests, if I remember correctly.

However, I do agree, for all of it's benefits, the weapon is the least beneficial bond of the options. The Ring is my personal fave, with the staff following behind. Reason being, the ring can be enchanted without taking the feat which to me, Forge Ring is one of the least taken creation feats. Also, rings are hard to lose or destroy. Staffs are also highly preferred for me, simply because of the versatility, you can make it a staff or a weapon if you want, again, not having to take feats to enchant them.

Now, I use the weapon in a current game, but I'm a heavy melee combatant that uses magic as a support utility, and the only reason I do this is because our DM lets me use the "master crafter" feat for my caster level for purposes of enchanting my weapon.

Also, technically speaking you can still cast without your bound item, you just have to be able to pass a concentration check.

Thanks folks. . .

While I disagree with the letter of the law, it's good to know.

DM_Blake wrote:

What will you do when you want to use a wand, or a staff, or a rod of Metamagic, or throw a bead from a Necklace of Fireballs, or cast a spell while you're climbing a rope ladder...

Answer: You can't.

I didn't think you had to have use somatic components or even actually "cast" when using a wand/staff, they both use the "spell trigger" activation method, which only requires the user to have the "knowledge" in hand.

Sorry, I guess I didn't make myself very clear. I am not talking about actually using the powers of the staff or wand. I am talking about spellcasting.

You do not want to drop your bonded longspear (or whatever) in order to cast - that forces all of your spells to require concentration checks. So you keep that bonded longspear in your left hand.

That leaves your right hand free for somatic components.

Until you want to use a wand.

Round 1: Cast some spell and draw the wand from your backpack. Now you cannot cast any more spells while that wand is in your hand since you don't have any free hands. Note that this uses all your actions for the round; all you have left is a 5' move.
Round 2: Use the wand and put it away. Now you have a free hand again so you can cast spells next round. Note that this uses all your actions for the round; all you have left is a 5' move.

But in those two rounds, you used your move actions retrieving and putting away your wand. And while youre wand is in your hand, you cannot cast any spells that have Somatic components.

Alternatively, if you had a bonded ring (for example), you could walk around the dungeon with your favorite wand in your hand. Each round, you can decide to cast a spell or use your wand - and you never have to waste move actions taking your wand out of your backpack or putting back into your backpack. So you are free to move around the battle, getting out of danger, changing your line of sight/line of effect, lining up the enemies for a perfect Lightning Bolt, or whatever, and all the while you can freely use your wand or cast spells whenever you want to.

When I run games, normally I allow the player to have a "free hand" to cast spells, unless there is something expressly keeping them from doing so. For example, say you have a sword (arcane bond) and a wand in the other. Technically speaking, I can "hold" the weapon and the wand in one hand, since the handles of both have about the same width/depth as a candy bar or so (the sword having a larger diameter, and the wand possibly having a smaller one). Now, I'm not going to want to run around like that, as I can't carry items like that for too long, but in general, it should free up 6-10 seconds or so. Now, I wouldn't allow that on a ladder or something similar, but just on the ground, in combat, etc.

Also, I was thinking, a cool concept for a bonded weapon that wouldn't hurt casting too much: Spiked or armored Gauntlet... :)

Interesting thread, and very helpful. But I've a question. If your Arcane Bond is a wand why could you not use that to make somatic gestures? Or maybe I spent to much time reading the Harry Potter books lol. Now why I agree that I would not allow anyone who has a wand to make such use of it, and would say you would have to use it with an empty hand, I feel wizards with the arcane bond of a wand should be allowed to use the wand to make such gestures.

Interesting thread, and very helpful. But I've a question. If your Arcane Bond is a wand why could you not use that to make somatic gestures? Or maybe I spent to much time reading the Harry Potter books lol. Now why I agree that I would not allow anyone who has a wand to make such use of it, and would say you would have to use it with an empty hand, I feel wizards with the arcane bond of a wand should be allowed to use the wand to make such gestures.

I would say that that's exactly how a wand or staff bonded wizard casts their spells. It's not RAW, though.

Interesting thread, and very helpful. But I've a question. If your Arcane Bond is a wand why could you not use that to make somatic gestures? Or maybe I spent to much time reading the Harry Potter books lol. Now why I agree that I would not allow anyone who has a wand to make such use of it, and would say you would have to use it with an empty hand, I feel wizards with the arcane bond of a wand should be allowed to use the wand to make such gestures.

This would probably get into the nitty gritty of a somatic component:

"A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component."

I always imagined that a somatic component involved various finger movements which varied from spell to spell, and this would be hard to do while holding anything in your hand. But even without finger movement, it would be harder to be precise while holding something since that effort molds your hand into a certain shape, and therefore, you couldn't be as precise as someone with a free hand who can move it any which way.

EDIT: Also, I'm guessing the rules was designed this way for the sake of simplicity. If you hold anything in your hand, you can't use that hand to cast. Nice and easy and no debate about how you might be able to hold certain items or hold them in a certain way to still allow casting. And for items that do allow casting, such as the buckler, the item description says so and explains how it works.

Basically I suppose it would come down to a house ruleing on wands and staves. Whether the GM would allow for the player to "emulate" spellcasters from various books and movies. Least till someone at Paizo wishes to make some sort of "OFFICIAL" ruling, which I doubt they will. Not like it's actually a big deal.

The Arcane Duelist bard from the APG gets a bonded weapon which explicitly says that he can use the hand holding the weapon for somatic component. This is a special ability of the Arcane Duelist and that's the only class that can use a bonded weapon this way. So, as said, a wizard would still need a free hand even when holding a bonded weapon.

Ahem ... well, being able to use the arcane bond weapon to cast spells with somatic components is also an important part of the Vanguard from Super Genius Games ... I'm just saying ;)