If you have a particularly villainous GM, he'll make you take Quick Stow, as well.
My recommendation? Take a page out of history. More than a few knights and men-at-arms had weapons connected to their cuirass using thin chains. The weapon cord works along those lines. Drop your weapon as a free action, cast a spell, than recover it as a free action. See if your GM will let you replace the leather straps with actual chains, so they don't fail you so easily.
Either blade and cestus or a double weapon let you cast and utilize two weapon fighting with no quickdraw/ stow needed.
weapon cords got errata'd, see the FAQ(in 2013 - been 10 years). Move action and not "drawing a weapon". The cords have penalties and essentially not worth it. They ARE good if you just want to dangle stuff in your square or the square behind you. Just get a Handy Haversack and be done with it.
Is the argument that the weapon cord disqualifies a character from using it in conjunction with the Quick Draw feat?
Come on, man... with respect, Masalic asked for advice, he was given advice, you're saying the rules don't support that advice, and when asked to be more specific, you're basically telling me to do my own research with regard to other people's readings of the rules. That doesn't help him, me, or the discussion. "I don't know" is genuinely far more helpful, because if the answer comes down to RAI, that's also fine--because then it's something their GM can figure out.
|
Come on, man... with respect, Masalic asked for advice, he was given advice, you're saying the rules don't support that advice, and when asked to be more specific, you're basically telling me to do my own research with regard to other people's readings of the rules. That doesn't help him, me, or the discussion. "I don't know" is genuinely far more helpful, because if the answer comes down to RAI, that's also fine--because then it's something their GM can figure out.
Weapon Cords is an issue that isn't going to get resolved here. Quick Draw? Debatable. Can you even cast spells while you have a weapon hanging from a weapon cord? Debatable. ("a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions"). There have been many threads over the years. It doesn't even come down to RAW/RAI because there isn't enough information to figure out Intention. So the answer is ask your GM, but if you want more analysis there are plenty of other threads on the board to peruse.
For the original poster - I played a Zealot for 16 levels of PFS. I went with a single weapon. Using a light shield adds to AC and doesn't hurt your spellcasting (since you can swap your weapon to that hand to cast, then back). Maximizing damage wasn't my primary concern but the mechanics of managing two weapons while casting spells were definitely a consideration.
If you do want to use two weapons, you don't have to have quick draw. Spells are usually a standard action. You can open combat by casting, then move and draw your weapon at the same time with your move action. It's only if you see yourself casting a lot during later rounds of combat that it becomes an issue. Then, yes. Move (sheathe), standard (cast), swift (quick draw). You may want to invest in the called magic weapon property instead as that gives you even more options (like dropping a weapon for free, casting as a standard, calling it back as a swift, and saving your move action).
Particularly for inquisitors/zealots, there are several things you may want to be spending your swift action on in the first few rounds of combat, so you may not be able to use quick draw, even if you have it.
That's a perfectly reasonable answer, Belafon. "Debatable" essentially means "your GM's call," though. It's completely different from "the rules don't allow this." One allows player and GM to at least discuss whether the character's concept of fighting (and, possibly, larger theme) is feasible. The other demands that the player go back to the drawing board.
You only need a free hand if the spell has Somatic components right?
So any spell without an S component works
anything with Still Spell works, If you have a Cleric with Blessing of Fervour you could even get the Still on low level spells without the feat.
|
|
You only need a free hand if the spell has Somatic components right?
So any spell without an S component works
anything with Still Spell works, If you have a Cleric with Blessing of Fervour you could even get the Still on low level spells without the feat.
Unfortunately very few inquisitor spells lack an (S) component. And since the inquisitor (and zealot) are spontaneous casters, Still Spell would bump a standard action cast up to a full-round, in addition to taking a higher level spell slot. At that point Quick Draw is a better feat choice than Still Spell.
How many spells do you plan on casting in combat on the same turn you are fighting? Inquisitors have a limited number of spells, and a lot of their spells are utility spells or are best cast before combat begins. I have built several inquisitors that had very little in the way of offensive spells and only a few personal combat buffs. Most of their combat ability came from bane or judgements.
I would look to see how often you will be casting spells while using two weapons fighting and decided is his is going to be often enough that it justifies spending a feat, much less two feats.
Blessing of Fervor does not grant you the feat it allows you to cast a spell as if it were enlarged, extended, silent or still. You do not have to follow the normal rules for applying metamagic or it would not work. A prepared caster has to memorize the spell with the metamagic feat applied. If you have to follow the rules for metamagic that means a cleric has to have the metamagic version of the spell memorized in order to cast, it with the benefit of Fevor of Blessing. If that is the case what is the point of the spell granting that ability? If the prepared caster can ignore their requirements to use the ability, so can the spontaneous caster.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I think the inquisitor has one of the better spell lists especially for a 6th level caster. The Inquisitor already has decent combat ability without spell, so they don’t need to rely on spell to be effective in combat. Inquisitor spells are very good at overcoming obstacles and getting information.
If you want to play a blaster the inquisitor is probably not the best choice of class, but if you want to play a problem solver the inquisitor is a great choice.
have you considered unarmed strikes? Zealot gives you Improved Unarmed Strike if you pick a suitable deity, and while the base stats are bad, they're finessable, they don't restrict hand movement so you can cast while wearing them without issue, and Handwraps let you use TWF while only paying the enchantment cost for a single weapon. Since handwraps are literally just a bit off cloth, you can smuggle them ito any place.
You could also use a buckler instead of a light shield. The AC bonus is the same. When you use the hand for something else you will lose the shield bonus. But you can take Unhindering Shield to retain the bonus when casting.
|
That's a perfectly reasonable answer, Belafon. "Debatable" essentially means "your GM's call," though. It's completely different from "the rules don't allow this." One allows player and GM to at least discuss whether the character's concept of fighting (and, possibly, larger theme) is feasible. The other demands that the player go back to the drawing board.
What is sure is that you can't Quickdraw a different weapon in the hand that has a weapon linked with a Weapon cord: "you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord".
Personally, I would allow the Quickdraw of the weapon linked by the weapon cord.
Using the arm when the weapon is sheathed is a problem. You have a 2' rope linking it to your waist or shoulder (depending on where you store the weapon). Generally, melee weapons are stashed on the opposite side of the body, so it would be even more limiting.
Climbing, grappling, and other activities will be hindered.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unfortunately very few inquisitor spells lack an (S) component. And since the inquisitor (and zealot) are spontaneous casters, Still Spell would bump a standard action cast up to a full-round, in addition to taking a higher level spell slot. At that point Quick Draw is a better feat choice than Still Spell.You only need a free hand if the spell has Somatic components right?
So any spell without an S component works
anything with Still Spell works, If you have a Cleric with Blessing of Fervour you could even get the Still on low level spells without the feat.
A lot of divine spells have a Divine Focus (DF) component and there are several ways to make your weapon or shield a DF. The hand with the DF can fulfill the Somatic (S) components of a spell, so it is possible to resolve the problem of S components that way.
The hand with the DF can fulfill the Somatic (S) components of a spell
Rule quote please.
|
|
The hand with the DF can fulfill the Somatic (S) components of a spellRule quote please.
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). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.
It is the only place where it clearly says that you need to manipulate the M or F/DF components.
Then we have spells that require S, M, and F/DF components:
Raise Dead, Resurrection, and a few others.
At this point, if the hand that makes the somatic components can't manipulate the M or F/DF component we need 3 hands to cast them.
We can argue that out-of-combat spells aren't really relevant, as they generally are long there is time to pick up and set down multiple items during the casting. But ruling that the hand with a Material or Focus/Divine Focus component can't fulfill the Somatic part of a spell means that a lot of spells require two free hands to be cast.
It is a possible interpretation, but it will generate a lot of problems.
With that interpretation the traits that give you a holy symbol inscribed in your body and feats like Eskew Materials or the ones that allow you to use your deity weapon as a holy symbol become practically mandatory for an adventuring spellcaster.
- * - * -
Role-playing note: I can easily image a cleric of Iomedae performing the somatic part of a spell by moving his/her consecrated sword in the right patterns.
That's a perfectly reasonable answer, Belafon. "Debatable" essentially means "your GM's call," though. It's completely different from "the rules don't allow this." One allows player and GM to at least discuss whether the character's concept of fighting (and, possibly, larger theme) is feasible. The other demands that the player go back to the drawing board.What is sure is that you can't Quickdraw a different weapon in the hand that has a weapon linked with a Weapon cord: "you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord".
Personally, I would allow the Quickdraw of the weapon linked by the weapon cord.
Using the arm when the weapon is sheathed is a problem. You have a 2' rope linking it to your waist or shoulder (depending on where you store the weapon). Generally, melee weapons are stashed on the opposite side of the body, so it would be even more limiting.
Climbing, grappling, and other activities will be hindered.
Historically, weapon cords were looped around your wrist, so that if you let your weapon drop it would dangle right next to your hand. Paizo reflect this in the text for the weapon cord.
Weapon chains were historically used to keep one’s weapons connected to his breastplate (or coat of plates), but not one’s shoulders. They were of a length where sheathing or unsheathing a weapon wasn’t an issue. Weapons secured that way wouldn’t interfere with finer hand actions, but recovering them wasn’t as simple as flicking your wrist (and probably shouldn’t qualify for synergy with the Quick Draw feat). To my knowledge, such equipment isn’t reflected in any Paizo products.
Then we have spells that require S, M, and F/DF components [...] At this point, if the hand that makes the somatic components can't manipulate the M or F/DF component we need 3 hands to cast them.
This is faulty logic. Just because a hand that manipulates a focus component can also be used for a somatic component, doesn't mean satisfying the focus component portion in another way also satisfies the somatic component portion.
You're applying "a poodle is a dog, so every dog is a poodle" logic.
I have to agree with Diego Rossi on this. If you cannot use the same hand to manipulate the M/F/DF as you use for the S component most spells require two free hands. That is going to shut down spell casting divine caster using a shield or holding a weapon. Spells like bless, divine favor, or shield of faith can only be cast by a divine caster that completely disarms themselves and drops their shield.
Absolutely no one is saying that you can't use the same hand for multiple components. Stop attacking windmills.
|
|
Then we have spells that require S, M, and F/DF components [...] At this point, if the hand that makes the somatic components can't manipulate the M or F/DF component we need 3 hands to cast them.This is faulty logic. Just because a hand that manipulates a focus component can also be used for a somatic component, doesn't mean satisfying the focus component portion in another way also satisfies the somatic component portion.
You're applying "a poodle is a dog, so every dog is a poodle" logic.
Absolutely no one is saying that you can't use the same hand for multiple components. Stop attacking windmills.
Before assaulting other people's positions, clarify your one. You say that a hand holding a Focus/Divine Focus component can fulfill the need for a somatic component, then you say it can't. In the same post.
A Focus/Divine Focus is Focus/Divine Focus.
What is your argument against that?
It is that only an F/DF of a specific size allows the hand to manipulate it to cast the somatic component?
If so citation, please.
Something different? Then explain clearly.
What I -think- the text means: a hand that is available for S components can also count for DF/M components. Descriptively the hand that is making fiddly finger gestures can also sprinkle the colored sand or touch the holy symbol hanging around the neck.
Not all holy symbols are worn around the neck, some are held objects.
Answer me this can a divine caster be using a shield in one hand and a holy symbol in the other cast a spell with S, and DF components? If so, why does it not work when the holy symbol is a weapon?
My reading: if the spell has S components a free hand is required. A hand performing S components can also perform DF/M. But a hand occupied by holding a sword/holy symbol cannot be used for S.
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). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.
Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.
I think the issue here is that it's being assumed that the "measured precise movement of the hand" associated with a somatic component is equivalent to manipulating a divine focus component. But that's just all that is: an assumption. The reality is that Pathfinder has a number of rules whose basis is found on a need for game restrictions and/or game balance, not on reality.
The more plausible answer to this question is that if manipulating a Divine Focus is the only gesturing required, the spell components section of the spell in question would simply list "V, DF" or just "DF."
|
|
I think there may be some miscommunication here. Diego, can you clarify exactly what you are intending to state here? I see two possibilities
A lot of divine spells have a Divine Focus (DF) component and there are several ways to make your weapon or shield a DF. The hand with the DF can fulfill the Somatic (S) components of a spell, so it is possible to resolve the problem of S components that way.
A. These are two completely separate statements that just happen to be in the same paragraph. 1) There are ways to make a weapon or shield count as a Divine Focus. 2) A hand presenting a Divine Focus can fulfill Somatic components at the same time.
B. These are linked statements. If you have a weapon or shield that counts as a divine focus (such as with Create Reliquary Arms and Shields then the hand wielding that weapon or shield can be used to make Somatic Gestures.
If the hand presenting the divine focus can be used to fulfill the somatic components it should not matter what the divine focus is. If my divine focus is an ankh, why can I use the hand presenting it to fulfill the somatic component, but not the dagger that has the reliquary prosperity? Both items are of similar weight and size and could be made of the same material. If I can use a dagger, why cannot I use a sword?
I can’t find anywhere in the rules it says you need a hand free to use material components (or a divine focus for that matter).
The only component where you need to have “at least one hand free” is the somatic component.
The rules say you need to manipulate material components to cast spells. Last I checked manipulate means to influence or control. I don’t see any requirement to actually handle the material component, just for it to be under your control or be influenced by you. I can see an argument whereby a mind controlled minion that carries the material component for you still counts.
Getting back to the topic. I don’t think you need the Quick Draw feat. My experience with playing melee inquisitors is that a typical combat would involve a round of buffing and identifying threats, maybe a second round of offensive spells while closing to melee range and then attacking in the third round onwards. There was usually time to draw a weapon before melee combat started without needing the Quick Draw feat.
Sometimes I would be surprised and start in melee combat, in which case I would use my swift action to use Judgement and move action to draw a weapon and reposition if necessary before attacking as a standard action. Quick Draw would not have helped.
I can’t find anywhere in the rules it says you need a hand free to use material components (or a divine focus for that matter).
The only component where you need to have “at least one hand free” is the somatic component.
The rules say you need to manipulate material components to cast spells. Last I checked manipulate means to influence or control. I don’t see any requirement to actually handle the material component, just for it to be under your control or be influenced by you. I can see an argument whereby a mind controlled minion that carries the material component for you still counts.
The definition you're referencing pertains to manipulating people. The primary definition, and the original one, pertains to handling an object with your hands. In this case, "manipulate the material components or focus" goes hand in hand with things like a buckler's entry stating "You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn," a light shield's entry stating "A light steel shield’s weight lets you carry other items in that hand," a heavy shield's entry stating "A heavy steel shield is so heavy that you can’t use your shield hand for anything else," etc.
Before assaulting other people's positions, clarify your one. You say that a hand holding a Focus/Divine Focus component can fulfill the need for a somatic component, then you say it can't.
It's only a contradiction if you assume that you need to firmly grasp a divine focus throughout the entire casting process. If that's not the case, using the same hand for both a (divine) focus, and a somatic component, is a non-issue for your average (read: small) focus. Meanwhile, you need to keep grasping a weapon or heavy shield, so even if that object counts as a divine focus, in this particular situations you can not do both components with the same hand.
Note that "preparing components" is done as a free action before actually casting a spell.
I can’t find anywhere in the rules it says you need a hand free to use material components (or a divine focus for that matter). [...] The rules say you need to manipulate material components to cast spells. Last I checked manipulate means to influence or control.
The "mani" in "manipulate" means "with a hand" (from latin manus, hand).
A deity-based divine focus is "a holy symbol appropriate to the character’s faith", nothing says this can't be e.g. a heavy shield, which you would "manipulate", e.g. move around with your hand.
|
|
I can’t find anywhere in the rules it says you need a hand free to use material components (or a divine focus for that matter).
The only component where you need to have “at least one hand free” is the somatic component.
The rules say you need to manipulate material components to cast spells. Last I checked manipulate means to influence or control. I don’t see any requirement to actually handle the material component, just for it to be under your control or be influenced by you. I can see an argument whereby a mind controlled minion that carries the material component for you still counts.
It says you "need to manipulate" them:
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). Additionally, you must concentrate to cast a spell.
"Manipulating" something generally requires a hand.
handle or control (a tool, mechanism, information, etc.) in a skillful manner.
I don't think the alternate meaning works:
control or influence (a person or situation) cleverly or unscrupulously.
|
|
Before assaulting other people's positions, clarify your one. You say that a hand holding a Focus/Divine Focus component can fulfill the need for a somatic component, then you say it can't.It's only a contradiction if you assume that you need to firmly grasp a divine focus throughout the entire casting process. If that's not the case, using the same hand for both a (divine) focus, and a somatic component, is a non-issue for your average (read: small) focus. Meanwhile, you need to keep grasping a weapon or heavy shield, so even if that object counts as a divine focus, in this particular situations you can not do both components with the same hand.
Note that "preparing components" is done as a free action before actually casting a spell.
I can’t find anywhere in the rules it says you need a hand free to use material components (or a divine focus for that matter). [...] The rules say you need to manipulate material components to cast spells. Last I checked manipulate means to influence or control.The "mani" in "manipulate" means "with a hand" (from latin manus, hand).
A deity-based divine focus is "a holy symbol appropriate to the character’s faith", nothing says this can't be e.g. a heavy shield, which you would "manipulate", e.g. move around with your hand.
Emote: head-scratching in perplexity.
So, your argument is that you can always manipulate the focus, even if it is an encumbering one, but (if encumbering) it can't fulfill the somatic components?
From my point of view, if your deity acknowledges your holy symbol, his/her spell somatic components are appropriate for the use of that holy symbol.
You aren't an arcane spellcaster.
|
|
I think there may be some miscommunication here. Diego, can you clarify exactly what you are intending to state here? I see two possibilities
A lot of divine spells have a Divine Focus (DF) component and there are several ways to make your weapon or shield a DF. The hand with the DF can fulfill the Somatic (S) components of a spell, so it is possible to resolve the problem of S components that way.A. These are two completely separate statements that just happen to be in the same paragraph. 1) There are ways to make a weapon or shield count as a Divine Focus. 2) A hand presenting a Divine Focus can fulfill Somatic components at the same time.
B. These are linked statements. If you have a weapon or shield that counts as a divine focus (such as with Create Reliquary Arms and Shields then the hand wielding that weapon or shield can be used to make Somatic Gestures.
Semi-relevant post from SKR when he was a Dev:
On page 66 of Ultimate Equipment, I see we have a holy symbol in the form of a tattoo on your body. Does this allow you to not need a free hand manipulating a divine focus when casting a spell?Correct; that's the point of getting the tattoo. Of course, if you try to infiltrate an evil cult, you're gonna have some 'splainin' to do...
That seems to take care of the "manipulate the holy symbol part.
My opinion is that we are speaking of divine spells. Those are different from arcane spells, even if the description in the rulebooks conflates them in a description.
The divine focus is a component of most divine spells and those are wildly different between different deities. Manipulating them will require different gestures.
Based on that, the divine version of spells have different somatic components, depending on what deity grants them (and, from many of them, that will include boldly showing the divine focus).
With all the above in mind, I think that, as long as it is held in a hand, a weapon or shield that is a holy symbol, can be used to fulfill the somatic components of a spell of the appropriate deity.
I should say that this whole discussion has helped clarify for myself how the whole thing works for me. Before it was something taken for granted without analyzing it.
What SKR did was remind us that there are alternatives to standard divine foci, and that at least one of those alternatives does not require you to manipulate it. We already knew that, though. Ultimate Equipment was released five years after Ultimate Magic, which gave us reliquary armor, shields, or weapons. Tattooed holy symbols are little different in that regard (that is, in terms of how they are used). In either case, these options say nothing about divine foci satisfying the need for a separate and distinct somatic component.
|
|
I think that, as long as it is held in a hand, a weapon or shield that is a holy symbol, can be used to fulfill the somatic components of a spell of the appropriate deity.
I can’t agreee with that as a logical extension of the published rules. Perfectly fine if you want to make it a house rule, but it’s not really supported. Here’s a spell that illustrates the inconsistencies in your position: cause fear.
Cause fear has verbal and somatic components but no F/DF. So under your reasoning what happens if a cleric is wielding two weapons, one of which is a Holy Symbol thanks to Create Reliquary Arms and Shields, and wants to cast cause fear?
1. She can’t, because she doesn’t have a free hand for the somatic component.
2. She can, because the weapon counts as a DF, even though the spell does not have a DF component.
If 1 is true, then you’ve created a rule where spells with an extra component - (DF) - are easier to cast.
If 2 is true, you’ve created a rule that being able to fulfill a (DF) component - even if there is no (DF) component - automatically fulfills the (S) component.
Either way, you’ve created a rule that doesn’t exist.
|
|
I think that, as long as it is held in a hand, a weapon or shield that is a holy symbol, can be used to fulfill the somatic components of a spell of the appropriate deity.I can’t agreee with that as a logical extension of the published rules. Perfectly fine if you want to make it a house rule, but it’s not really supported. Here’s a spell that illustrates the inconsistencies in your position: cause fear.
Cause fear has verbal and somatic components but no F/DF. So under your reasoning what happens if a cleric is wielding two weapons, one of which is a Holy Symbol thanks to Create Reliquary Arms and Shields, and wants to cast cause fear?
1. She can’t, because she doesn’t have a free hand for the somatic component.
2. She can, because the weapon counts as a DF, even though the spell does not have a DF component.If 1 is true, then you’ve created a rule where spells with an extra component - (DF) - are easier to cast.
If 2 is true, you’ve created a rule that being able to fulfill a (DF) component - even if there is no (DF) component - automatically fulfills the (S) component.Either way, you’ve created a rule that doesn’t exist.
Under your ruling, some spells can be cast only by a spellcaster with 3 hands.
Example: Resurrection, Components V, S, M (diamond worth 10,000 gp), DF.At that point we need to invent a different rule, the one Derklord proposes: when someone casts, manipulating the components requires only part of the time and we can use the same hand for multiple actions.