Can you hold a two handed weapon in one hand? If so, are there any penalties? The main example I am thinking of is holding a gun, such as a scatter gun or rifle in one hand while wielding a long sword in the other.
|
Yes you can hold it. No there are no penalties, as long as you aren't using it as a weapon, which will become wielding. Like you can hold a short sword and a club in both hands and just use one every turn without incurring two weapon fighting penalties for example if you are the kind who wants to check the type of damage reduction on a monster.
Thank you.
What exactly is the point of this question? Why are you holding weapons you don't intend to use?
Because at the moment it would be better to use my sword, but I do not want to set my gun down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly is the point of this question? Why are you holding weapons you don't intend to use?Switch-hitting.Then you ARE intending on using them. The problem is when you switch to large weapon, you're going to have drop the smaller one. I'd probably impose a penalty to hit on your longsword of -1 to -2 because you're off balance trying to hold this big honking sword/gun/crossbow with one hand.
And before someone says "There's no RAW for that..." I'd also point out that RAW doesn't cover corner cases like this either.
There is no rule against holding any weapon in one hand and weilding another in another hand. It is not only "not RAW", it is a house rule which to me serves no purpose. If you can hold a shield and it not affect your ability to attack accurately then you should be able to hold a gun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly is the point of this question? Why are you holding weapons you don't intend to use?Switch-hitting.I'd probably impose a penalty to hit on your longsword of -1 to -2 because you're off balance trying to hold this big honking sword/gun/crossbow with one hand.
And before someone says "There's no RAW for that..." I'd also point out that RAW doesn't cover corner cases like this either.
This is a really petty houserule. I would be quite upset if someone tried to enforce this, especially considering the initial idea is not even vaguelly in the realms of cheese.
I'd go with the 'OK, just don't use them both at once, and drop the sword for the musket' idea, too.
Or you could spring for a bayonet, but sadly it's not quite as badass an archetype in Pathfinder as it is in a more modern game.
And yes, I'd enforce that. Either sheathe (move action) or drop (free) the sword before going shooty. And I don't think Pathfinder has any actual handedness issues, does it?
I'd go with the 'OK, just don't use them both at once, and drop the sword for the musket' idea, too.
Or you could spring for a bayonet, but sadly it's not quite as badass an archetype in Pathfinder as it is in a more modern game.
And yes, I'd enforce that. Either sheathe (move action) or drop (free) the sword before going shooty. And I don't think Pathfinder has any actual handedness issues, does it?
I don't think anyone was complaining about needing to drop the sword to use the musket. That's pure RAW: you need to two free hands to actually wield the musket in this case. The debate is about using the sword while carrying the musket in one hand.
As an aside,by not dropping the musket to wield the sword you are losing the 1.5x str bonus, which hurts -- so it is far from optimal in the other direction even without additional houserules.
Popular example, is the Wizard with a Quarterstaff.
Free Action to let go with one hand, Standard Action to cast a spell, Free Action to regrip Quarterstaff, then move.
This is a legal round of actions.
|
this is herePopular example, is the Wizard with a Quarterstaff.
Free Action to let go with one hand, Standard Action to cast a spell, Free Action to regrip Quarterstaff, then move.
This is a legal round of actions.
Yup. Straight outta the FAQ.