| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm having a debate about abilities that require a free hand.
Someone said to me that if you have one free hand, you can use two actions that require a free hand at the same time. He argued that:
1) RAW do not say the hand is no longer free when executing such tasks, and
2) Using an action that says "you must have a free hand to do this" does not exclude of other actions with the same condition.
I argue this isn't the case because:
1) The rules imply the hand is no longer free when performing an action that requires it,
2) RAW does not explicitly say this because it's common sense that an action requiring a free hand uses that hand,
3) Grappling with two hands and spellcasting with somatic/material components are examples of actions that require free hands and very clearly preoccupy it, despite not explicitly saying so.
For context, this came from a discussion about whether a magus could provoke an attack of opportunity with spell combat and then deflect it with crane wing.
For context, this came from a discussion about whether a magus could provoke an attack of opportunity with spell combat and then deflect it with crane wing.
Crane Wing (Combat): "Once per round while using Crane Style, when you have at least one hand free and are either fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you."
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: "You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action."
Spell Combat (Ex): "As a full-round action, he can..."
Fighting Defensively as a Standard Action and Total Defense are both standard actions, and Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action, despite the name, requires a full-attack action. Since Spell Combat is a full-round action (but not a full-attack action) it is incompatible with all three of those, which means it does not function with Crane Wing.
If your hand is doing something in that round, such as helping wield a two handed weapon like a great sword or a bow, it is not "free".
Do you have any particular reason for believing this is the case?
For example, I fire my bow (standard action), move over a bit (move action), release the bow with one hand (free action), then end my turn. Now an orc shoots an arrow at me. I have the deflect arrows feat, I'm aware of the attack, I'm not flat-footed, and my hand is clearly free.
Instead, if the orc had a readied action to shoot me while I was firing my bow, then his attack would interrupt my standard action, during which my hand was not free, so I could not deflect it.
So to be more accurate, an action that requires using a hand means that hand is not free for the duration of that action. After that action if the hand is free, then it's free until you use that hand to do something.
So for a non-magus example, a sorcerer is holding a metamagic rod (Extend) in one hand, and he uses it to cast extended Grease. He uses his other hand to perform the somatic components and manipulate the material component.
For the entire full-round action, he is using both of his hands, and thus does not have a hand free to deflect an arrow someone shoots at him. Once he has finished that action, the grease appears, and he's no longer casting, so if an orc then shoots him after that point, his hand is free.
Spell Combat is a full-round action (but not a full-attack action)
As an aside, if you consider the consequences of this to perhaps be unintended, there's a FAQ Request thread here.
Spell combat is obviously not compatible with crane wing.
The question is whether two actions that require free hands can be used at the same time if you only have one free hand. It was argued that unless the action explicitly says it uses the hand, an action requiring a free hand does not use that hand. That hand remains a free hand, even for the duration of the action.
I disagree with this and say that the free hand requirement implies usage of that hand.
If your hand is doing something in that round, such as helping wield a two handed weapon like a great sword or a bow, it is not "free".
From the FAQ:
Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).
As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think it depends on the actions/uses in question.
For instance, Crane Wing and Deflect Arrows both require a free hand, but since you're not likely to ever be attacked both in melee and at range at the exact same time, there's no reason to think using one would preclude the use of the other in the same round. For instance, if I have a sword in one hand and the other hand is free, I could use Crane Wing against Mook1's melee attack, and use Deflect Arrows against Mook2's ranged attack. I see no conflict here.
Do you have any other examples besides the Spell Combat/Crane Wing issue?
I think it depends on the actions/uses in question.
For instance, Crane Wing and Deflect Arrows both require a free hand, but since you're not likely to ever be attacked both in melee and at range at the exact same time, there's no reason to think using one would preclude the use of the other in the same round. For instance, if I have a sword in one hand and the other hand is free, I could use Crane Wing against Mook1's melee attack, and use Deflect Arrows against Mook2's ranged attack. I see no conflict here.
Do you have any other examples besides the Spell Combat/Crane Wing issue?
I pretty much agree with this but would ask if this would change in the event of a full attack. A single attack is just a standard action but is it safe to say you can release your (two handed) weapon at the end of a full round action or does the "full round" imply your hands are on the weapon until your next turn?
The concept of the prestige class is that you have one hand free.
That doesn't prevent you from making unarmed strikes or claw attacks, as your hand is still empty.
It would prevent you from using a spiked shield, as your hand is not empty.
This implies that a "hand free" means a hand that is empty, not holding or carrying anything, rather than a hand that isn't doing something.
So if you're making a full-attack, using unarmed strike to punch, that hand is free to deflect arrows or crane wing or whatever, because it's not holding anything, thus it's free.
This makes sense, since Spell Combat requires a free hand, yet casting a spell often involves somatic components. If performing a somatic component means your hand is not free, you may cease to meet the requirements for Spell Combat, and the action fails.
This also fits in with the description from Deflect Arrows.
Deflect Arrows (Combat): "You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat."
Your hand is holding nothing, even while performing somatic components, so you could use Deflect Arrows while casting. Which means my example earlier with the sorcerer and the orc is incorrect.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
A single attack is just a standard action but is it safe to say you can release your (two handed) weapon at the end of a full round action or does the "full round" imply your hands are on the weapon until your next turn?
There's a recent FAQ stating that grabbing or releasing a weapon with a second hand is a free action. Thus, you could full-attack with a two-handed grip on a longsword (for example), then as a free action take one hand off so you have that hand free. At the start of your next turn, you can put your free hand back on the sword as a free action, and repeat the process.
A single attack is just a standard action but is it safe to say you can release your (two handed) weapon at the end of a full round action or does the "full round" imply your hands are on the weapon until your next turn?There's a recent FAQ stating that grabbing or releasing a weapon with a second hand is a free action.
Yes, I just quoted it 30 minutes ago.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is only a thought experiment example.
A monk has the feats Snapping Turtle Style, Combat Reflexes, Dervish Dancer and Snatch Arrows (implying the prerequisites of Improved Unarmed Strike and Deflect Arrows). Assume the monk's scimitar has the 'ki focus' ability.
On the monk's turn, he activates Snapping Turtle as a swift action and then fights with Dervish Dance (so he's using dex instead of strength for attack and damage, but only so long as he wields a scimitar in one hand and does not have a weapon or shield in the other). Snapping Turtle style gives him a +1 shield bonus, but isn't actualy a shield, so Dervish Dance works.
Bad guy's turn(s);
Mook #1 simply attacks, monk has his +1 shield bonus from Snapping Turtle.
Mook #2 throws a magic dagger. The monk gets the +1 shield bonus from Snapping Turtle. Dagger hits anyway. Can the monk uses Snatch Arrows to catch it ? The Defect Arrows prerequisite states "You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat." The monk's hand is indeed "holding nothing", but it is the free hand required by Snapping Turtle. Does this matter ?
Assume the monk can catch the dagger and does so, electing not to throw it back because, hey, expensive magic dagger for free. He can't drop it yet, because that's a free action and you can only do those on your turn
Mook #3 does something that provokes an AoO (let's say a disarm attempt without Improved Disarm). The monk can take this AoO, but can't use his Dervish Dance because he's holding a weapon in his other hand. He could even use his newly acquired magic dagger to do so. Mook #3 now attacks the monk who does not benefit from Snapping Turtle, because that hand is busy with the dagger. Let's say the Mook succeeds at disarming that magic dagger because that belongs to his buddy who's gonna want it back !
Mook #4 attacks the monk. The monk's hand is now free, because he lost the dagger, but does the fact that he used it to snatch the dagger (a once per round only thing) mean he can't use it for Snapping Turtle now ?
Edit: attach <> attack, his <> him, other spelling mistakes
I can't think of any explicit examples where you have to keep a hand free for one round other than grappling and spellcasting. Even grappling is fuzzy because you technically don't need free hands to grapple.
I suppose one question is: "Is a spellcasting hand considered a free hand?" It's not holding anything, but at the same time, it's not free to perform other actions. And does deflect arrows actually use the free hand and therefore not make it free anymore?
|
The monk would be foolish to catch that dagger, even if he can. He should use Deflect Arrows to, y'know, deflect it rather than catch it!
Fair enough, you're just trying to think of an example to test the rule. : )
For a hand to be free, it must be free to do what you want it to do, wether that is Crane Wing, Deflect Arrow, Dervish Dance or whatever. For Dervish Dance the hand needs to be empty (meaning able to hold something new without having to drop something else first). So a Dervish Dancer could wear a spiked gauntlet on that hand and it would still be free (wearing and holding are different things).
Casting a spell with a somatic component with a 1-round casting time, or when a readied attack on you is triggered by your spellcasting a spell with a somatic component: your hand is still free so you can use Crane Wing or Deflect Arrows. Will this disrupt your spell? Dunno, make a concentration check and we'll find out!
For Dervish Dance the hand needs to be empty (meaning able to hold something new without having to drop something else first).
Not QUITE. According to the D20 PFSRD link, the important sentence is "You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.". You CAN have something in that hand, it just can't be a weapon or a shield. It might be your holy symbol if you're a Dawnflower Dervish of Sarenrae, for example. It can be complicated by the fact that almost anything that can be held can be used as an improvised weapon, but that's almost certainly not the intent.
I just went with an empty hand because otherwise the thought experiment can't help us with our 'when is an empty hand "free"' question, nor could it have been used for Snapping Turtle.
Mook #4 attacks the monk. The monk's hand is now free, because he lost the dagger, but does the fact that he used it to snatch the dagger (a once per round only thing) mean he can't use it for Snapping Turtle now ?
His hand is free at the time the attack happens, so he qualifies to use Snapping Turtle Style.
There is nothing in the rules that says your hand must have been free for any particular period of time before the relevant act happens.
I agree, Grick, but what about Mook #2 ? That's the tricky one, IMHO, because the hand was busy using Snapping Turtle to modify the monk's AC (by adding the +1 shield bonus) when he was attacked and hit by the dagger that he then snatched using that very same hand.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Dervish Dance is beyond this discussion because the feat does not say "free hand." It specifically says "You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand."
I still argue that casting a spell uses up a free hand. If a hand busy doing somatic gestures for a spell, it is not free because you cannot do anything else with it.
I go on to say that perhaps a free hand and an empty hand are two different things. A free hand is one at liberty to perform an action. An empty hand is simply one carrying nothing. Of course, there's overlap. A free hand is an empty hand, but not necessarily vice versa.
Also note that there's little to no "free hand" abilities that explicitly say the hand is no longer free. For example, grappling has no penalty if you have two free hands. However, it never explicitly says you have to use those hands to meet this condition -- but it's generally accepted this is the case.
Maybe the following should be FAQ'd:
What is the definition of a "free hand?"
Does an action requiring a free hand use the free hand, therefore making it no longer free?
A hand can't do two different things simultaneously, like Deflect Arrows and Crane Wing, if both attacks were to occur at the same time somehow, but there is nothing to stop that hand doing both of those things in the same round as long as both attacks are not simultaneous.
That's assuming an action saying "you must have a free hand" means the hand is no longer free when performing that action. That's the question of this thread.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
That's assuming an action saying "you must have a free hand" means the hand is no longer free when performing that action. That's the question of this thread.
Unless and until there are two actions which both require a free hand and technically could occur at the same time in the game but wouldn't make sense to do so, then that question is pointless.
If you have Crane Wing and Deflect Arrows, it doesn't matter whether your hand is no longer considered "free" while using one of them, because you'll never be using both at the same time.
So is there actually a scenario (and I admit I haven't read some of the longer posts in this thread) in which answering "the question of this thread" will have a meaningful impact on what can and cannot be done?
The only scenario I can think of on this is a spell caster with crane wing (or similar ability) casting a spell that takes more than one standard action to cast.
Yeah, using Deflect Arrows while casting a full round spell is a good example. So the questions are:
What is a free hand?
A) An empty hand, a hand not carrying or grasping anything
B) A hand at liberty to perform an action. A hand that is busy with an action or carrying something that would obstruct an action is not free.
Is a hand no longer free during an action requiring a free hand?
Because if a "free hand" is merely one that's empty and an action that requires a free hand does not use it, it's perfectly legal to Deflect Arrows while casting a full round spell.