Wands in an Efficient quiver


Rules Questions

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Has there ever been an official ruling on this. I can spot several different threads on this, but has a developer ever stamped a final answer to this topic?

Shadow Lodge

This should work, its no different than having wands on a bag of holding or other extradimensional space

Liberty's Edge

yeah i agree logic says that if can put a bolt in there a wand is no different, but there are about 10 threads i can find where people have argued this point. I was wondering if official word was ever given.


The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?

Internet loves nothing better than argument, unless it's bacon.


daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?

Because some people take RAW to extremes that it was never meant to be taken.

In my opinion I find it ridiculous that it has to be discussed. Wands are clearly of the same size (and presumably smaller) and shape as arrows/bolts/javelins and should of course be allowed in an efficient quiver... But some people have to have everything spelled out in minute detail... In my eyes, discussing this is like asking "So what does this condition >dead< mean for my character?"...


Bacon is evil!

Evily delicious.

...sorry had to.

and should work. and some rods should even work

Liberty's Edge

ok so there has been no official answer. I think they argue because it would allow a user to pull a wand from a stored inventory a, effectively, a free action (like an arrow) and it make the rule lawyers in them go into spasms. Anyway i will mark the question for FAQ and pray.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
neferphras wrote:
ok so there has been no official answer. I think they argue because it would allow a user to pull a wand from a stored inventory a, effectively, a free action (like an arrow) and it make the rule lawyers in them go into spasms. Anyway i will mark the question for FAQ and pray.

I don't think the efficient quiver changes the action economy of drawings items. The description says:

Once the owner has filled it, the quiver can quickly produce any item she wishes that is within the quiver, as if from a regular quiver or scabbard.

but this has no mechanical crunch associated. Therefore, the type of action required to draw something from an efficient quiver is the same as the action required to normally draw the item from a readily accessible location. For arrows that is a free action. For wands that is a move action. For bow that is a move action or a free action as part of a move action.


Or, if you want to reopen the pages long debate, wands treated as a weapon-like object can also be drawn as a free action as part of a move. ;)


Yeah doesn't increase speed at all.

Wands aren't weapon like (generally.. you could i guess make an argument for ray and ones that do melee touch attacks). Some rods that are weapons would work.

Or.. i guess.. You could take "catch off guard" and pull it out wielding it as a club XD


Rough and Ready. Use Profession wand maker/magic item creation or something similar. As the trait says "Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons".


_Ozy_ wrote:
Or, if you want to reopen the pages long debate, wands treated as a weapon-like object can also be drawn as a free action as part of a move. ;)

I had missed that debate. What was it about? Wands are explicitly called out as something you can draw as part of a move action.


Well, we don't need to reopen the debate, as it was many pages long, but, under the 'Draw or Sheathe a Weapon' in the Combat section, there was some disagreement as to whether the first paragraph defining the 'draw a weapon' action, which explicitly applied to and called out wands as weapon-like objects also applied to the following paragraph which specified 'drawing a weapon' as part of a move action with a +1 BAB or higher.

Some people assert that the weapon-like wands defined in the first paragraph do not apply to the 'draw a weapon action' defined in the 2nd paragraph.


graystone wrote:
Rough and Ready. Use Profession wand maker/magic item creation or something similar. As the trait says "Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons".

Hmm, wonder if that would override the 'not for wands' feature of the Quickdraw feat.

Free action draw a wand? Yes please. ;)


_Ozy_ wrote:
graystone wrote:
Rough and Ready. Use Profession wand maker/magic item creation or something similar. As the trait says "Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons".

Hmm, wonder if that would override the 'not for wands' feature of the Quickdraw feat.

Free action draw a wand? Yes please. ;)

It should work yup. It makes it a valid weapon


_Ozy_ wrote:
graystone wrote:
Rough and Ready. Use Profession wand maker/magic item creation or something similar. As the trait says "Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons".

Hmm, wonder if that would override the 'not for wands' feature of the Quickdraw feat.

Free action draw a wand? Yes please. ;)

It makes them weapons that don't have a non-proficiency penalty. No reason you can't draw them like any other weapon. ;)

There is already a wand you can do this with:Icicle Wand is a wand AND a dagger.


icicle wand is cool. I wish it was expanded for more + modifier possibilities.

well I also sorta wish it was a rod or something.. and you could pay spell slots to use it.

and depends on how the gm does crunch vs fluff.
Most things say can be used as a weapon. (improvised weapon feats in particular have that fluff) this one treats as a weapon. So you could I suppose ask on that basis.

but still if you draw it as an improvised weapon it's still a valid choice for quickdraw... it's kinda weird though since it's using a weird specific rule to bypass another rule.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?
Internet loves nothing better than argument, unless it's bacon.

Dude! You are one of the (only?) loudest voices against this. You don't get to make snark comments like that when you actively engage.


It's not bypassing, it's making an item count as more than one item. Pull out a potion to drink is a move. Now load it into a launching crossbow while you have crossbow mastery for it and it only takes a free action. It's because you where able to use it as more than one thing, alchemical weapon and ammo.

Another example is adding throwing to your melee weapon and now you can use it for abilities that work with ranged and not melee.

All Rough and Ready does is add weapon to the ways a wand is used.


Yeah, I tend to agree with you. The difference, though, is that the Quickdraw specifically says that you can't quickdraw wands. Even if that wand is counted as a weapon, it still is a wand.

So I could see some arguing, RAW, that it wouldn't work.

I just think it's too badass not to work. ;) Plus I think RAI it should.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
LazarX wrote:
daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?
Internet loves nothing better than argument, unless it's bacon.

Only Americans love bacon so much.


Diego Rossi wrote:
LazarX wrote:
daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?
Internet loves nothing better than argument, unless it's bacon.
Only Americans love bacon so much.

Why are you lying on the internet?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
graystone wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
graystone wrote:
Rough and Ready. Use Profession wand maker/magic item creation or something similar. As the trait says "Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons".

Hmm, wonder if that would override the 'not for wands' feature of the Quickdraw feat.

Free action draw a wand? Yes please. ;)

It makes them weapons that don't have a non-proficiency penalty. No reason you can't draw them like any other weapon. ;)

There is already a wand you can do this with:Icicle Wand is a wand AND a dagger.

PFSRD wrote:

Rough and Ready

Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons and makes them more effective for that purpose than they would normally be.

Benefit: When you use a tool of your trade (requiring at least 1 rank in the appropriate Craft or Profession skill) as a weapon, you do not take the improvised weapon penalty and instead receive a +1 trait bonus on your attack. This trait is commonly used with shovels, picks, blacksmith hammers, and other sturdy tools — lutes and brooms make terribly fragile weapons.

You should consider the benefit, not the description without the mechanics.

It don't make the tool a weapon when you draw it, it remove the "improvised weapon penalty" and give "a +1 trait bonus on your attack". End of the benefits.


Oh. it won't work for quick draw as that calls it out.

I was referring to the "draw during a move action" bit they asked shortly before that.

---------
Improvised weapons are still weapons, so they can still be drawn as weapons.
i can whip out my shovel on the move as a lv 6 character because I have +1 bab. I can quick draw it as well as it's not on the prohibitied list.

Assuming wands count as weapons. they can also be done so-excluding quick draw as it cites the example in specific.
It's really quite easy to make most things count as a weapon (spells not included) for the purposes of feats and such. Just gets hard when you try to enchant stuff


Diego Rossi wrote:


PFSRD wrote:

Rough and Ready

Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons and makes them more effective for that purpose than they would normally be.

Benefit: When you use a tool of your trade (requiring at least 1 rank in the appropriate Craft or Profession skill) as a weapon, you do not take the improvised weapon penalty and instead receive a +1 trait bonus on your attack. This trait is commonly used with shovels, picks, blacksmith hammers, and other sturdy tools — lutes and brooms make terribly fragile weapons.

You should consider the benefit, not the description without the mechanics.

It don't make the tool a weapon when you draw it, it remove the "improvised weapon penalty" and give "a +1 trait bonus on your attack". End of the benefits.

At worst, an improvised weapon is STILL a weapon. AT best, you compare the wording from Martial Weapon Proficiency: "You make attack rolls with the selected weapon normally (without the non-proficient penalty)."

So it turns it into a weapon you're proficient in and gives a +1 to hit. By my reading that's the benefits you wanted me to read. If you really want to quibble over improvised vs normal weapons you could but it has no impact on abilities that need/use a weapon.


Zwordsman wrote:


Assuming wands count as weapons. they can also be done so-excluding quick draw as it cites the example in specific.
It's really quite easy to make most things count as a weapon (spells not included) for the purposes of feats and such. Just gets hard when you try to enchant stuff

My reading of it is that the list of items listed is a list of items not normally counted as a weapon. As such I'd allow the trait + quickdraw to work as I think it switches from not a weapon to weapon.

I can see a reading of it as just a prohibitive list so I'll leave it up to a judgment call.

EDIT: the prohibited list approach also means that an Icicle Wand can't be quickdrawn even though it's a dagger. It's one of the reason I rule the other way.


graystone wrote:
Zwordsman wrote:


Assuming wands count as weapons. they can also be done so-excluding quick draw as it cites the example in specific.
It's really quite easy to make most things count as a weapon (spells not included) for the purposes of feats and such. Just gets hard when you try to enchant stuff

My reading of it is that the list of items listed is a list of items not normally counted as a weapon. As such I'd allow the trait + quickdraw to work as I think it switches from not a weapon to weapon.

I can see a reading of it as just a prohibitive list so I'll leave it up to a judgment call.

EDIT: the prohibited list approach also means that an Icicle Wand can't be quickdrawn even though it's a dagger. It's one of the reason I rule the other way.

Feel like theres no issue with Icicle wand as it specifies directly it also counts as a dagger.. so it's the "clearly two weapon types" situatoin sorta like daggers and melee and ranged enchantments working.

I can see the trait allowing quick draw as well. but i also don't really see hte point in most of hte restrictions on quick draw.

Edit:I can never type the quick

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
graystone wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:


PFSRD wrote:

Rough and Ready

Your intense familiarity with the tools of your trade allows you to use them in combat as if they were actual weapons and makes them more effective for that purpose than they would normally be.

Benefit: When you use a tool of your trade (requiring at least 1 rank in the appropriate Craft or Profession skill) as a weapon, you do not take the improvised weapon penalty and instead receive a +1 trait bonus on your attack. This trait is commonly used with shovels, picks, blacksmith hammers, and other sturdy tools — lutes and brooms make terribly fragile weapons.

You should consider the benefit, not the description without the mechanics.

It don't make the tool a weapon when you draw it, it remove the "improvised weapon penalty" and give "a +1 trait bonus on your attack". End of the benefits.

At worst, an improvised weapon is STILL a weapon. AT best, you compare the wording from Martial Weapon Proficiency: "You make attack rolls with the selected weapon normally (without the non-proficient penalty)."

So it turns it into a weapon you're proficient in and gives a +1 to hit. By my reading that's the benefits you wanted me to read. If you really want to quibble over improvised vs normal weapons you could but it has no impact on abilities that need/use a weapon.

I allow to draw wands while moving, as they are weapon like object, but your statement are simply wrong.

"At worst, an improvised weapon is STILL a weapon." No, it isn't. That is why it is an improvised weapon.

"So it turns it into a weapon you're proficient in and gives a +1 to hit." Wrong again. You are inferring something that isn't there. Removing the non-proficient penalty don't give you proficiency. The rules don't work that way.
Only proficiency give you proficiency. Note that there are several feats to get proficiency with weapons and other implements, You don't get the same benefit for a trait and a skill point.

You can't take this trait and 1 skill point in Profession (soldier) and claim proficency in every weapon that exist in the game.


i really wish there was a clarrrification someday about
proficiency and non proficiency penalties..

Thats another lil argument that occurs here and there.. if removing penalties counts as profieicny for feats and effects or not

oddly enough.
if you do take profession soilder and this trait.
you can infact use all thesoilder weapons just fine. but might not be profiecent. What sort of issues would arrise?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DominusMegadeus wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
LazarX wrote:
daimaru wrote:
The description for each of the three compartments specifically state that they can hold "...objects of the same general size and shape..." so why not wands? Why do people argue that they can't?
Internet loves nothing better than argument, unless it's bacon.
Only Americans love bacon so much.
Why are you lying on the internet?

I'm from Denmark (northern Europe) and me and my friends love bacon! In fact we have amended the periodic table to include bacon as one of the elements, because clearly it was a mistake that it was left out!


Diego Rossi:

"No, it isn't. That is why it is an improvised weapon.": So improvised weapons aren't weapons? Really? An attack with them isn't an attack with a weapon? Don't they have weapon dice? LOL Improvised weapon is a kind of weapon. If you're going to focus on the words in front of weapon, then no weapon can ever be used as the all have ranged/melee/light/one handed and/or two handed.

"Wrong again. You are inferring something that isn't there. Removing the non-proficient penalty don't give you proficiency. The rules don't work that way.": Martial weapon proficiency feat doesn't grant proficiency. It explains what proficiency is though. It's the ability to "make attack rolls with the selected weapon normally (without the non-proficient penalty)." How is this not true with Rough and Ready? Please point out what non-proficient penalty you take with it? If you can't, how is it not proficiency?

If you disagree, then please feel free to post an explanation of proficiency that overrides what the proficiency feat says. Proficiency is the lack of any non-proficient penalty; that's it. Instead of me inferring, you seem to be adding to the rules.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Wands in an Efficient quiver All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.