My group's got a barbarian who plans to eventually go Barbarian/Sorcerer (titan mauler and tattooed sorcerer respectively), and who wields two weapons. We're looking for potential ways to make spellcasting not an extreme hassle for her, hopefully something better than casting everything with the Still Spell metamagic feat.
(This question came up in particular due to a Barbarian/Sorcerer, but it technically applies to any caster who wields two weapons. For example, how would a ranger of the two-weapon combat style cast the majority of their spells?)
(At the moment she says she's inclined to cast mainly True Strike. The spell is one of the few with no somatic components after all)
Weapons Cords. Or revive the old v3.5 feat "Somatic Weaponry".
|
Make one (or both) weapons also be a rod of still? It's established that rods are also often weapons like clubs or maces. It would mean very expensive weapons (the lesser enchantment is +50% cost), but would technically work (even if only for a few casts per day).
For one spell you could take magical lineage.
One strange option would be to use a quickdraw shield and take the quickdraw feat. Any time you want to cast a spell simply stow the shield, cast, then redraw (when you have Quickdraw, both donning and putting away the quickdraw shield are free actions). If you have improved shield bash this can be used as your off-hand weapon while still providing some AC (it acts as a light shield for those purposes).
The only other option I can think of off the top of my head is to be an Arcane Duelist, but that makes you a bard rather than a sorc and requires 5 levels.
EDIT: I would recommend doing the quickdraw shield route as it allows you to cast as many times per day as you need while also providing some AC, and doesn't require high cost magic items. It takes two feats (Improved Shield Bash and Quickdraw), but it's reliable. If you don't care about the AC so much then just skip improved shield bash and it still works, but you'd only get the AC if you didn't attack that turn (which would be the turns you had cast in).
|
|
Glove of Storing, can stow and draw weapon as free action.
Can only have one because it takes up the "Hand" item slot, but combined with the Weapon Cord which is a swift action i believe you could drop/stow both weapons then cast and draw again in the same round.
You could Quick Draw if you could find a way to stow a weapon as a free action, or you could but one away as a move action then cast then Quick Draw.
|
|
Make one (or both) weapons also be a rod of still? It's established that rods are also often weapons like clubs or maces. It would mean very expensive weapons (the lesser enchantment is +50% cost), but would technically work (even if only for a few casts per day).
Rod of still does not exist but puting an ability to that effect on a weapon is a neat idea.
Technically you can have two Gloves of Storing because it only uses one hand. If a GM says you can't wear two gloves because it takes up the handslot, I think that GMs a little bit of a hard ass on the rules. Such a GM should be told theres nothing in the rules that explicitly says you can't take actions after you're dead. 'Dead' is not a game term that is clearly defined by the rules. Neither is there any actual mechanical side effects for 'not sleeping' according to the rules.
Oh, I know it's a rule, I'm just talking about technicalities. It's a single glove, and a GM that doesn't allow you to wear two is being kind of a hard ass for the rules.
Ah, the good old glove of storing. Can't believe I forgot about my own mystic theurge's favourite magic item!
Maybe a variant of the "dancing" weapon enhancement ? When you loose the weapon to cast, it "animates" (but doesn't attack like a REAL dancing weapon does), but can be re-grasped as a free action ?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Incidentally, I've compiled a list of all the (sorcerer/wizard) spells I could find that lack somatic components. These spells can be cast with hands full, and don't incur the normal chance of spell-failure brought on by armor. I made this list for my player, but felt I may as well share it here as well.
0th - Flare, Light
1st - Hold Portal, True Strike, Flare Burst, Ventriloquism, Feather Fall, Jury-Rig, Liberating Command, Lighten Object
2nd - Darkness, Blur, Blindness/Deafness, Steal Voice, Buoyancy, Knock
3rd - Tongues, Lover's Vengeance, Suggestion, Displacement, Vision of Hell
4th - Dimension Door, Communal Tongues, Lesser Geas, Shout
5th - Teleport, Contact Other Plane, Echolocation, Mass Lighten Object, Planar Adaptation, Planetary Adaptation*, Truespeak**, Damnation Stride**
6th - Ice Crystal Teleport, Quest Geas, Mass Suggestion, Unconscious Agenda***
7th - Phase Door, Greater Teleport, Teleport Object, Power Word Blind, Resonating Word
8th - Mass Charm Monster, Irresistible Dance, Power Word Stun
9th - Mage's Disjunction, Prismatic Sphere, Interplanetary Teleport, Teleportation Circle, Power Word Kill, Wail Of The Banshee, Fiery Body, Time Stop
* From Distant Worlds
** Racial Spell (Truespeak is an Aasimar spell, Damnation Stride is a Tiefling spell)
*** From Rise of the Runelords Anniversary Edition
The good ol' Glove of Storing method is always great, however I see one issue; What type armor is the barbarian wearing? Will you be using Arcane Armor Training?
@Gluttony: I've always wanted to see a list like this, but was always too lazy to do the work.
The good ol' Glove of Storing method is always great, however I see one issue; What type armor is the barbarian wearing? Will you be using Arcane Armor Training?
@Gluttony: I've always wanted to see a list like this, but was always too lazy to do the work.
No armor, aside from mage armor. Her schtick is that she's a tattoo-covered female barbarian who goes into battle naked (I'm looking into a method for her to have situationally invisible magic items, so that she can still wear magic items without visually breaking her whole naked-warrior theme. Possibly a custom spell).
No prob on the list. I've wanted one too, but couldn't find one, so I figured I'd make it and share it.
|
Technically you can have two Gloves of Storing because it only uses one hand. If a GM says you can't wear two gloves because it takes up the handslot, I think that GMs a little bit of a hard ass on the rules. Such a GM should be told theres nothing in the rules that explicitly says you can't take actions after you're dead. 'Dead' is not a game term that is clearly defined by the rules. Neither is there any actual mechanical side effects for 'not sleeping' according to the rules.
You cannot have 2 Gloves of Storing, per the wording in Glove of Storing:
"Glove of StoringAura moderate transmutation; CL 6th
Slot hands; Price 10,000 gp (one glove); Weight —
Description
This device is a single leather glove. On command, one item held in the hand wearing the glove disappears. The item can weigh no more than 20 pounds and must be able to be held in one hand. While stored, the item has negligible weight. With a snap of the fingers wearing the glove, the item reappears. A glove can only store one item at a time. Storing or retrieving the item is a free action. The item is shrunk down so small within the palm of the glove that it cannot be seen. Spell durations are not suppressed, but continue to expire. If the glove's effect is suppressed or dispelled, the stored item appears instantly. A glove of storing uses up your entire hands slot. You may not use another item (even another glove of storing) that also uses the hands slot."
**EDIT** Oops, I see this was addressed already.
Technically you can have two Gloves of Storing because it only uses one hand. If a GM says you can't wear two gloves because it takes up the handslot, I think that GMs a little bit of a hard ass on the rules. Such a GM should be told theres nothing in the rules that explicitly says you can't take actions after you're dead. 'Dead' is not a game term that is clearly defined by the rules. Neither is there any actual mechanical side effects for 'not sleeping' according to the rules.
Technically you CAN'T because RAW expressly forbids it. It takes up the entire spell slot, and is clearly RAW that you're not supposed to be able to store an item in each glove. The way I rationalize it is that even though one glove stores the object, you need both to open and close the storage magic.. think of the other glove being the "lid" -- and while you do not expressly have to use the other hand to summon the stored item, it needs to be there, and can't store an item itself.
I can understand why you'd really want this not to be true, but they are clearly saying no as the item is defined. In errata they should change the description to clear this up... "Only one hand" and "Uses whole slot" seem to be at odds with certain wishful thinkers... the folks who ask "Why?" when the GM says no 5+ times. Why? Because the rules say so.
Well, the wishful thinkers think that, because that line about 'taking up the whole slot' was purposefully added from the 3.5 version of the item. In 3.5 you could wear two Gloves of Storing, or a Glove of Storing and a Gauntlet of Rust, or a Glove of Storing and [Insert Custom Item Here] and it was a valid combo. Not really sure why they changed it for Pathfinder, but we use the 3.5 version at our tables.
Technically you can have two Gloves of Storing because it only uses one hand. If a GM says you can't wear two gloves because it takes up the handslot, I think that GMs a little bit of a hard ass on the rules. Such a GM should be told theres nothing in the rules that explicitly says you can't take actions after you're dead. 'Dead' is not a game term that is clearly defined by the rules. Neither is there any actual mechanical side effects for 'not sleeping' according to the rules.Technically you CAN'T because RAW expressly forbids it. It takes up the entire spell slot, and is clearly RAW that you're not supposed to be able to store an item in each glove. The way I rationalize it is that even though one glove stores the object, you need both to open and close the storage magic.. think of the other glove being the "lid" -- and while you do not expressly have to use the other hand to summon the stored item, it needs to be there, and can't store an item itself.
I can understand why you'd really want this not to be true, but they are clearly saying no as the item is defined. In errata they should change the description to clear this up... "Only one hand" and "Uses whole slot" seem to be at odds with certain wishful thinkers... the folks who ask "Why?" when the GM says no 5+ times. Why? Because the rules say so.
Technically you can in fact wear two. Gloves of storing are individual gloves, not a set, and the rules for that particular item only forbid you from using a second item in the hand slot, they don't forbid wearing one. (Presumably the first one messes with the other one in a similar way as summoner's magic items messing with the slots of their eidolons).
There's not much mechanical benefit to wearing two gloves of storing, but in the event that your hand or arm gets severed or one of the gloves is sundered or stolen right off of your hand, at least you have the second to work with.
So, why not Still Spell?
Still Spell on a spontaneous caster in this situation means that practically everything has to be cast as a full-round action. Not to mention that since she's multiclassing it won't do her much good until at least 6th level (when she gets her 2nd level spell slots). It's a bit of a hassle.
I assume she likely will get the feat anyway though.
So, why not Still Spell?Still Spell on a spontaneous caster in this situation means that practically everything has to be cast as a full-round action. Not to mention that since she's multiclassing it won't do her much good until at least 6th level (when she gets her 2nd level spell slots). It's a bit of a hassle.
I assume she likely will get the feat anyway though.
I don't think there are any rules against this, but why not go with a double weapon instead of two weapons? When you spell cast (which needs one hand free) just hold the weapon in one hand (shift from wielding to just holding) and cast at no loss of actions. Heck, if a wizard can do it with a staff, you can do it with a double-bladed sword or axe. All it costs are a couple of feats maximum to be proficient with it.
I don't think there are any rules against this, but why not go with a double weapon instead of two weapons? When you spell cast (which needs one hand free) just hold the weapon in one hand (shift from wielding to just holding) and cast at no loss of actions. Heck, if a wizard can do it with a staff, you can do it with a double-bladed sword or axe. All it costs are a couple of feats maximum to be proficient with it.So, why not Still Spell?Still Spell on a spontaneous caster in this situation means that practically everything has to be cast as a full-round action. Not to mention that since she's multiclassing it won't do her much good until at least 6th level (when she gets her 2nd level spell slots). It's a bit of a hassle.
I assume she likely will get the feat anyway though.
Two-weapon fighting with a greataxe in one hand and a short sword in the other.
It's not my decision of course, it's the decision of the player who's designed the PC. However I get the impression that the dual greataxe and shortsword aren't meant for optimization, but rather to create a neat character concept that uses the titan mauler barbarian's special abilities in a unique way.