If a wizard decides to make a two-handed weapon his arcane bond, is he able to case spells without making the concentration check, if he holds it with only one hand? There seems to be some disagreement with the wording in the Arcane Bond entry:
If the object is an amulet or ring, it must be worn to have effect, while staves, wands, and weapons must be wielded. If a wizard attempts to cast a spell without his bonded object worn or in hand, he must make a concentration check or lose the spell.
Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively
The idea being, in order to wield a two-handed weapon, for the purposes of being able to cast spells without having to make a concentration check, you must have it in both hands. Obviously, you can't cast spells if both your hands are occupied.
I don't think to "wield" is an official and specific condition to qualify for anything. I think they just use it as a general verb. To elaborate, I think the general dictionary definition of "to wield" would be appropriate.
To handle (a weapon or tool, for example) with skill and ease.
Hmmm...
I know.. I just got sick with the other thread.. it's pure insanity to think you can't just let one hand go of the two handed weapon and chuck a fireball from your free hand, then grab the weapon again.
I know.. I just got sick with the other thread.. it's pure insanity to think you can't just let one hand go of the two handed weapon and chuck a fireball from your free hand, then grab the weapon again.
I think it has less to do with being confused about a rule and more to do with the glee of finding something (read: anything) that has even a sliver of inconsistency no matter how unfounded.
I understand, I guess I'm just hoping to end the 'debate' once and for all with an 'official' ruling. The whole thing is silly to me in any case.. I don't even know why I'm so upset about it really. I tried being rational and respectable, but it seems the OP of the other thread has no issue with ignoring blatant facts that support what he wants to be able to do, and is actually arguing against... sigh.. I'm just going to step back for a while, and hope a Paizo official clarifies this 'mess'.
I don't even know why I'm so upset about it really.
Someone is WRONG on the INTERNET, dude.
As much as we nerds love to point out stupid, pin-sized holes in the rules, we also HATE it when someone is wrong on the freakin internet. :)
Lol.. I'll try to remember that, and try to stand back next time :)
I don't even know why I'm so upset about it really.Someone is WRONG on the INTERNET, dude.
As much as we nerds love to point out stupid, pin-sized holes in the rules, we also HATE it when someone is wrong on the freakin internet. :)
http://xkcd.com/386/
:)
Haha! Nice, thanks :)