|
Spells with semantic components normally require a free hand. So the part saying they don't need one is important.
Honestly nobody really pays attention to that. I let clerics using a mace and shield cast spells all the time. It only becomes an issue when the cleric gets paralyzed or some other circumstance prevents them from wiggling their fingers.
"Spells cast in this way don't require somatic components..." It looks like they decided it was clearer to say that the spells don't require somatic components at all, instead of saying the Warpriest doesn't need a free hand. So if it's somatic components that require a free hand, and the spells no longer require somatic components, then they don't require a free hand.
I don't know how that would affect a spell with material components (other than the divine focus). Thankfully one of my Warpriests fights with a whip and has his other hand free most of the time, and my other Warpriest has a consecrated weapon, which serves as his divine focus. He can also remove a hand from the weapon to cast if needed.
As far as I've seen, Warpriests can cast Fervor upon themselves even while wielding sword/board or even TWF. If they want to cast a spell properly or a class ability used on one of their allies, then yes they need one hand free (unless otherwise noted).
The spell in question really comes down to the components of the spell though; if the spell in question is (S) somatic, then yes obviously, a free hand is needed. If the spell is (V) verbal, then no, the Warpriest could cast that spell with no hand gestures required.
Since changing your grip and switch weapons between hands are free actions you really only need to question if you can hold two objects in your hand.
For my group, this means that you can hold a weapon and shield in one hand and then place the weapon back in your free hand. However, we don't usually allow someone to hold two weapons in one hand.
But fervor gets around that whole issue as long as the spell you intend to cast only has somatic components (and not material).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spells with semantic components normally require a free hand. So the part saying they don't need one is important.
Honestly nobody really pays attention to that. I let clerics using a mace and shield cast spells all the time. It only becomes an issue when the cleric gets paralyzed or some other circumstance prevents them from wiggling their fingers.
I actually enforce the free hand requirement for casting. I think it's logical in game terms.
I also find that it kind of balances things. The idea of a full caster turtling up behind a shield, nearly as tough as a fighter and casting spells of tremendous power really bothers me.
I mean, caters can still do that even if you force them to have a free hand. Besides, turtle is a bit string of a statement when it's only +2 to AC. And still has arcane spell failure chance.
I mean, caters can still do that even if you force them to have a free hand. Besides, turtle is a bit string of a statement when it's only +2 to AC. And still has arcane spell failure chance.
That's why you go for the mithril buckler instead. It's only +1 AC but there's no spell failure or armor check penalties. Additionally, since it's strapped to your arm you can use both hands when needed.
I mean, caters can still do that even if you force them to have a free hand. Besides, turtle is a bit string of a statement when it's only +2 to AC. And still has arcane spell failure chance.That's why you go for the mithril buckler instead. It's only +1 AC but there's no spell failure or armor check penalties. Additionally, since it's strapped to your arm you can use both hands when needed.
This.
The buckler has a niche, it lets you use the shield hand for other things. If you just say "fine, you can cast with any shield", you're removing the Buckler's whole purpose. I say reward those more creative players who learn the rules and find a RAW permissible way to do something.
But fervor gets around that whole issue as long as the spell you intend to cast only has somatic components (and not material).
Where does it say that you need a free hand to use material components? I'd just assume they disappear out of your spell component pouch. Don't material component spells usually have somatic components if you have to actually do something with them?
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just not aware of that rule. I don't think you need to manipulate material components unless the spell has somatic components as well.
If I'm wrong I'd like to know. Thanks. :)
But fervor gets around that whole issue as long as the spell you intend to cast only has somatic components (and not material).Where does it say that you need a free hand to use material components? I'd just assume they disappear out of your spell component pouch. Don't material component spells usually have somatic components if you have to actually do something with them?
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just not aware of that rule. I don't think you need to manipulate material components unless the spell has somatic components as well.
If I'm wrong I'd like to know. Thanks. :)
To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any).
"Needs a free hand" isn't actually specified anywhere AFAICT, but I think people usually interpret "manipulate" as implying that.
That seems pretty clear. Thanks. :)
But fervor gets around that whole issue as long as the spell you intend to cast only has somatic components (and not material).Where does it say that you need a free hand to use material components? I'd just assume they disappear out of your spell component pouch. Don't material component spells usually have somatic components if you have to actually do something with them?
I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just not aware of that rule. I don't think you need to manipulate material components unless the spell has somatic components as well.
If I'm wrong I'd like to know. Thanks. :)
To cast a spell, you must be able to speak (if the spell has a verbal component), gesture (if it has a somatic component), and manipulate the material components or focus (if any)."Needs a free hand" isn't actually specified anywhere AFAICT, but I think people usually interpret "manipulate" as implying that.
Yep, I've always interpreted "manipulate" as must have a "hand" handle the component.
Agreed. I just never read that before...or don't remember doing so. :)
Thanks. :)
The rules for holy symbols are pretty vague too. You could simply have it engraved on your armor or equipment. And there is a trait to have a birthmark as your holy symbol. And an option to tattoo it on your body.
The rules for holy symbols are pretty vague too. You could simply have it engraved on your armor or equipment. And there is a trait to have a birthmark as your holy symbol. And an option to tattoo it on your body.
and a craft feat to make it part of your weapon and/or armor. Which seems a bit excessive instead of it just being a thing that can be added to a magic weapon or armor. Especially considering the other options.