How is Lay on Hands supposed to work?


Classes


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Does the paladin's Lay on Hands actually work even with Warded Touch? As far as I can tell, removing the manipulate trait means that Lay on Hands no longer triggers reactions, but it still requires you to have a free hand. It takes an action to remove a hand from a two-handed weapon, and then another action to place a hand back on a two-handed weapon, so Lay on Hands seems nearly unusable.

Did I miss something about how Lay on Hands is supposed to work? It seems terribly finicky.


It doesn't take an action to remove a hand, only to put it back. I don't have the PDF on me - work is just slow.


Long John wrote:
It doesn't take an action to remove a hand, only to put it back. I don't have the PDF on me - work is just slow.

Could you please break down how this works?


Remove Hand (Free), Interact (1), Strike (1) You are immobile while doing this, unless you choose to have something like a bastard sword, which I kind of recommend. Like, I really recommend this.


Long John wrote:
Remove Hand (Free), Interact (1), Strike (1) You are immobile while doing this, unless you choose to have something like a bastard sword, which I kind of recommend. Like, I really recommend this.

Where is the passage that stipulates that removing a hand from a weapon takes a free action? I sincerely apologize; I genuinely cannot find the passage.


I actually read that from one of Mark's posts. I also do not have the PDF on hand - don't feel it's the best move to download it on a work computer.


Does this mean that a sword and shield setup is completely unfeasible for a paladin?


Long John wrote:
I actually read that from one of Mark's posts.

This one? Not sure if it made it into the Playtest book.


@Colette

Unsure. Doubtful- as I thiiiiink the Warding feat removes the actual need to have the hand empty. Sword and Board pally is a staple - no way they'd [intentionally] kill it.

@Fallyna

Yup! That is the one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I cannot find anything on Warded Touch removing the need to have the hand empty. Is there a clarification somewhere?

Suppose Warded Touch really does mean that a touch can be channeled through a weapon; does that not make Warded Touch a mandatory tax for all paladins?


It removes a keyword. Manipulate or something? Again, I don't have it on me. At the very least, the feat makes LoH not provoke- which if that's all it does it's much less strong than I thought considering not all characters will even be able to make AoOs


It just says its removes the manipulate keyword from the somatic action on Lay on Hands. Attack of opportunity triggers off an action keyworded with manipulate.

The somatic action lists the manipulate keyword. It lists the free hand requirement in a different section. Nothing indicates they are linked other than both being mixins on the somatic action.

The text provides an exception that contradict the requirement on the rule for clerics and druids allowing, but not requiring, them to use holy symbols (but why would you? That would have been a waste of an action to draw the holy symbol, after you got done arguing with your GM about if you had it out or not when the fight started. Maybe you found a legendary crafter to make you a really heavy and well balanced holy symbol shaped and balanced suspiciously like a mace that you argue ought to function just like a mace while still being a holy symbol... or something...)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Looking into the Lay on Hands matter more, here is page 182:
"Most items that require two hands can be carried in only one hand, but you must spend an Interact action to change your grip in order to use the item."

And here is page 345:
"If a character must wield the item to use it, this entry in the item’s stat block lists the word “held” along with the number of hands the character must use when wielding the item, such as “held, 1 hand.” If the character is not using the correct number of hands, she’ll have to either draw the item or change her grip with the Interact action, as described on page 307."

So yes, it takes three whole actions to change grips, Lay on Hands, and then reestablish grip. All of this is before the fact that by RAW, Warded Touch (already a feat tax) does not free up a hand for Lay on Hands.

Why in the world is it so hard for a paladin to Lay on Hands?


Colette Brunel wrote:

Looking into the Lay on Hands matter more, here is page 182:

"Most items that require two hands can be carried in only one hand, but you must spend an Interact action to change your grip in order to use the item."

And here is page 345:
"If a character must wield the item to use it, this entry in the item’s stat block lists the word “held” along with the number of hands the character must use when wielding the item, such as “held, 1 hand.” If the character is not using the correct number of hands, she’ll have to either draw the item or change her grip with the Interact action, as described on page 307."

So yes, it takes three whole actions to change grips, Lay on Hands, and then reestablish grip. All of this is before the fact that by RAW, Warded Touch (already a feat tax) does not free up a hand for Lay on Hands.

Why in the world is it so hard for a paladin to Lay on Hands?

or smite something without waiting around for them to hit your friend first (and ONLY then)


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Colette Brunel wrote:

Looking into the Lay on Hands matter more, here is page 182:

"Most items that require two hands can be carried in only one hand, but you must spend an Interact action to change your grip in order to use the item."

Why in the world is it so hard for a paladin to Lay on Hands?

If we follow the above mentionned Mark's post : http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lkz1&page=7?Multiclassing-and- Archetypes#313

It would just take :
- free action to let go of a hand (in the case you're using a 2h weapon)
- an actual action to cast lay on hands
- another action to change grip to add a hand

It feels clanky, we should have to spend an action to add a hand on a weapon tbh.

For sword&board paladins RIP (I've no idea how it works but feel very sad for some reason).

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The only thing I can think of is that it's viable for a paladin to ONLY use a shield--using it as a shield and as his weapon. Probably want to put a shield boss or spikes on it. That's still kinda unimpressive, but it's an option.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

In my game, the paladin ended up using sword-and-board style in combat and applying lay on hands between fights only, to heal up when it is safe. Right now, combat use of the ability seems to be too much trouble.

The Exchange

I would like to echo Laik on this one on the playtest (dooms day Dawn prt1) I played it seem like I was being punished for trying to use this class ability in combat and when the competition for Warded Touch is Deity's Domain that grants an extra spell point I regretted taking Warded Touch almost immediately. I think the loss of an action is ok but the inability to use it with a two handed weapon or a shield (unless you are just using a shield) is rough.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
countchocula wrote:
I would like to echo Laik on this one on the playtest (dooms day Dawn prt1) I played it seem like I was being punished for trying to use this class ability in combat and when the competition for Warded Touch is Deity's Domain that grants an extra spell point I regretted taking Warded Touch almost immediately. I think the loss of an action is ok but the inability to use it with a two handed weapon or a shield (unless you are just using a shield) is rough.

Using it as two hands weapon user use two actions and not three so it's still useable I would say.

- Let go of a hand (free action)
- Use lay on hands
- Change grip (add one hand)

The Exchange

your absolutely right it is usable mechanically but I would rather not use 3 actions to perform it. The other paladin players who play tested also used Lay On Hands only when not in combat due to the action requirements.


Laik wrote:
In my game, the paladin ended up using sword-and-board style in combat and applying lay on hands between fights only, to heal up when it is safe. Right now, combat use of the ability seems to be too much trouble.

That's a big problem to me, since the ability specifically grants an AC bonus for a round, meaning it is meant to be used in combat. :/ And a 4th level paladin can get the much more powerful Heal spell for out of combat needs. Also, clerics can get Emblazon Symbol as a 1st level feat, so why not paladins? (Better yet, give it to them for free and solve this problem.)

Bastard sword and shield seems workable, as you can drop the shield as a free action and then choose to use the sword with one or two hands, but very little else does. At the very least it seems weird that you need to remove a hand to lay on yourself.

I hope the designers are paying attention to this one and clarify the intent.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
countchocula wrote:
your absolutely right it is usable mechanically but I would rather not use 3 actions to perform it. The other paladin players who play tested also used Lay On Hands only when not in combat due to the action requirements.

To be honest depends the situation, face tanking a boss, using 2 actions and spending the third to attack at full bonus seems okay to me.

I would not use it as often as my 1st paladin but I'm pretty sure I would if the situation is propice to it.


I'm actually cool with needing to grip a weapon in two hands taking an action in most cases, and this being an issue for most casters. I think having a niche for single hand weapons is important. (It may be a tad overly punitive to also require a free hand for most combat maneuvers, but that's getting off topic.) Again, releasing your grip is a free action, so that's fine.

But having clerics being able to circumvent this with a feat while Paladins can't strikes me as pretty wrong. Especially if sword and board is going to continue to be pushed as the iconic fighting style for Paladins.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I Don't know why you think you need to drop your shield you can just touch them with the hand holding the shield.


The primary reason for the warded touch feat is that it no longer provokes Opportunity Attacks. The manipulate keyword sets off attacks.

That being said, it's a weak option to me.

Overall, I really dislike all three feats being forced to make the ability usable, when I don't think it is very good by base. There's no diversity in options there, where other classes have distinct playstyles supported by their starting feats.

It just seems lazy.


Most of these feats are weak options, and often gaining full utility of a single ability had it's feats spread out inn such a way that you really don't get a choice in what feats to take. It's like the 5e paladin but with no real way to generate meaningful damage. When the benefits of a 12th level feat give me +1 good damage I'm skeptical.


removing a hand from a 2handed weapon and then returning it will cost an action?

That is the stuppidest thing ever.

It's not drawing a weapon from a scabbard or other holder.

If one round is 6 seconds, that means that one action is 2 seconds.

I can probably switch grips 5 times or more in 2 seconds.

Scarab Sages

Releasing your hand from a 2-handed weapon is the same action as dropping an item with that hand.

Wielding 2-handed weapons often requires changing grips to compensate for reach (half-swording) or to attack from a different direction (a zweihander can be held like a spear for quick defensive attacks from a high position, to being held like a broom in a low position for a power stroke). Curious how grip is ignored for simplicity but then forget it happens and justify the action cost for balance: In 3.5 regripping a 2-handed weapon held in one hand was a free action - it became a move action in response to a magus with a 2-handed weapon full-attacking and using a spell-strike.


scott berry wrote:
I Don't know why you think you need to drop your shield you can just touch them with the hand holding the shield.

Because "Somatic Casting" specifically requires having one hand free, regardless of the manipulate trait.

Quote:
Most of these feats are weak options, and often gaining full utility of a single ability had it's feats spread out inn such a way that you really don't get a choice in what feats to take. It's like the 5e paladin but with no real way to generate meaningful damage. When the benefits of a 12th level feat give me +1 good damage I'm skeptical.

Eh. The 1st level feats leave me a little cold, mostly cuz I still haven't gone through the domain powers and the other 2 sort of feel like they should be built in, some of these later feats are pretty good. Divine Grace, AoO, and Channel Life all jump out at me. There are some really cool property runes for a Bladadin too. I particularly like the tactical flexibility of Shifting,

Also, that 12 level feat isn't awesome on its own, but it SLAYS fiends. CTRL+F "good" in the bestiary. The Aura means triggering those weaknesses on every hit you make + the first strike each ally makes a round.

That means a Bone Devil isn't taking 1 extra damage, it is taking 11. That can be 44 extra damage or more a round pretty easy, which is more than a third of that creature's health.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Laik wrote:
In my game, the paladin ended up using sword-and-board style in combat and applying lay on hands between fights only, to heal up when it is safe. Right now, combat use of the ability seems to be too much trouble.

That's a big problem to me, since the ability specifically grants an AC bonus for a round, meaning it is meant to be used in combat. :/ And a 4th level paladin can get the much more powerful Heal spell for out of combat needs. Also, clerics can get Emblazon Symbol as a 1st level feat, so why not paladins? (Better yet, give it to them for free and solve this problem.)

Bastard sword and shield seems workable, as you can drop the shield as a free action and then choose to use the sword with one or two hands, but very little else does. At the very least it seems weird that you need to remove a hand to lay on yourself.

I hope the designers are paying attention to this one and clarify the intent.

Inori. Inori's deific weapon is the fist; it's simple so it goes up to a d6 in damage and your hand is always empty. It's the "best" lay on hands build right now. :-)

But, yeah - let's trade channel life from Paladin for emblazon symbol from Cleric, take channel energy off Cleric, and call it a day. That would fix, like, four things.


fibbonaughty wrote:

Inori. Inori's deific weapon is the fist; it's simple so it goes up to a d6 in damage and your hand is always empty. It's the "best" lay on hands build right now. :-)

But, yeah - let's trade channel life from Paladin for emblazon symbol from Cleric, take channel energy off Cleric, and call it a day. That would fix, like, four things.

Oh, we'd need to give feat-starved Clerics a 1st-level class feat if we did that.

Silver Crusade

Captain Morgan wrote:
scott berry wrote:
I Don't know why you think you need to drop your shield you can just touch them with the hand holding the shield.
Because "Somatic Casting" specifically requires having one hand free, regardless of the manipulate trait.

aren't shields by RAW (in 1st ed) strapped to your arm, and have a hand hold?

So couldn't you just release the handle, cast LOH and then re-grip the handle without ever dropping the shield? because frankly, you can't drop something that is strapped to your arm?

Wouldn't it stand to reason that shields are the same in the playtest?


Only relevant rule I can see is:

Quote:
A shield requires the use of one of your hands.

If there was a handle you could release / re-grip, that would probably require an Interact action.


It seems like warded touch is supposed to make it so you can LoH with your hands full, but I'm genuinely confused as to how this works since LoH still requires a somatic action and hence a free hand.

So like Paladins with an open hand can LoH freely in combat, and Paladins with 2h weapons can pull a hand off for free, lay some hands, then spend an action to regrip; but classic sword and board pallies seem out of luck if they want to heal in the middle of combat.


So the manipulate trait says: "You must physically manipulate an item or make gestures to use this type of action. Creatures without a suitable appendage cannot perform actions with this trait. Manipulate actions often trigger reactions."

That suggests that actions which lose the manipulate trait would work like this: "You do not have to manipulate an item or make gestures to use this type of action. Even creatures without a suitable appendage can perform actions with this trait. Non-manipulate actions don't often trigger reactions."

(Tip: Don't define rules with vague words like 'often'. A rule like "Manipulate actions trigger reactions unless otherwise stated," would be a lot easier to interpret.)


PossibleCabbage wrote:

It seems like warded touch is supposed to make it so you can LoH with your hands full, but I'm genuinely confused as to how this works since LoH still requires a somatic action and hence a free hand.

So like Paladins with an open hand can LoH freely in combat, and Paladins with 2h weapons can pull a hand off for free, lay some hands, then spend an action to regrip; but classic sword and board pallies seem out of luck if they want to heal in the middle of combat.

This is basically why you don't use a non-natural 'software like' language to describe something that you could have used a more natural language to describe.

This is exactly the sort of thing that happens like clockwork in a software project. They are notoriously over budget and behind schedule, even when the people making the budget and schedule know to expect things to be more complicated and take longer than estimated. If you've ever wondered why some software releases are missing half their features or are buggy dumpster fires... it is because paladin analogs don't use LoH analogs like they were assumed to be able to use them in the original requirements because of issues like this and they either ran out of time and had to release something, or worse, they thrashed around like a drowning person and tried to weld on additional corner case logic all over the place to get it to 'work properly' (which it never does since that welded on logic will create MORE issues needing MORE welded on logic to make it 'work right' in a giant downward spiral that will basically never produce a clean piece of software that works correctly).


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I seriously think the spirit and intent of this is being missed. Think of the “Manipulate” part of the somatic component being what requires the free hand. Therefor there is still a somatic component to the spell, you need to touch someone. However the complex part that normally comes with somatic gestures isn’t needed. Therefor Warded Touch(thinking of the wording, your hands are constantly warded with LoH) all you have to do is slap/fistbump/rest a palm on them which you can do with a closed fist around a sword. Sword and board in hand? No problem. Open palm slap them on the back with the inside of the shield or slug them in the shoulder with your fist clenched around a sword. No need to reposition weapons or drop shields to do that.

tl/dr: The gesture goes from something complex to something simple and quick that can be done as long as your hands can touch them in any way because they’re constantly warded.


Partly the issue is I don't know what RAI for warded touch is. Is it-

- you can LoH without provoking.
or
- you can LoH without provoking and with your hands full.

Since the somatic casting action lists a bunch of examples of people who can do somatic casting actions with their hands full (Bards with instruments say), it's not absurd that we just create a paladin specific exception with the Paladin rules.

I mean, if any spells should be able to be cast with a shield in one hand and a weapon in another, it's Paladin Champion Powers.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jaling wrote:

I seriously think the spirit and intent of this is being missed. Think of the “Manipulate” part of the somatic component being what requires the free hand. Therefor there is still a somatic component to the spell, you need to touch someone. However the complex part that normally comes with somatic gestures isn’t needed. Therefor Warded Touch(thinking of the wording, your hands are constantly warded with LoH) all you have to do is slap/fistbump/rest a palm on them which you can do with a closed fist around a sword. Sword and board in hand? No problem. Open palm slap them on the back with the inside of the shield or slug them in the shoulder with your fist clenched around a sword. No need to reposition weapons or drop shields to do that.

tl/dr: The gesture goes from something complex to something simple and quick that can be done as long as your hands can touch them in any way because they’re constantly warded.

If that's what the intent of the rule is then they have spectacularly failed to convey it in the text.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Ninja in the Rye wrote:
If that's what the intent of the rule is then they have spectacularly failed to convey it in the text.

Looks like they're listening. :)

Rulebook Updates, under the Other Updates section:

Page 108—In the paladin’s Warded Touch feat, just before
the final period, add, “, and you can cast it and deliver your
touch with a hand holding a weapon or shield.”

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / How is Lay on Hands supposed to work? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Classes