Personally I like: - Dropping a weapon is free - Drawing a weapon is an Object Interaction - Picking up a weapon off the ground is an Action. This not only stops shenanigans, but it reflects the totally reasonable idea that drawing from a scabbard (a device literally intended to provide your weapon) is easier than picking up a sword.
@@robinthrush9672 Throwing Weapon Fighting Style and Dual Wielder Feat can make that better. Since Thrown Weapon FS takes away the limitation for Object Interaction if and only if you intend to throw the weapon. And Dual Wielder lets you take out or put away 2 weapons at once.
@@robinthrush9672 indeed, tho if a player wants a throwing build I'd advise they still discuss with the DM cos throwing can have some weird edge cases in 5e
Sword, probably (if you dont have a gauntlet), however same thing doesnt hold true for a stick or even a hook mace (that is easily straightened up by just stepping on it). Naturally if the character already used their interaction that turn, thats 100% raw as its the use a object action.
@@ANDELE3025 I respectfully disagree. Your character has likely drawn their weapon from its scabbard dozens of times, a smooth practised motion that is literally within arms reach, the handle fully available. Even if we assume that your character isn't going to Sideshow Bob themselves when trying to step on the weapon, it is still out of arm's length and laying in an unfamiliar position (remember, you've *dropped* it, not 'placed it neatly on the ground in a good spot'). Now potentially if a player wanted to make weapon shenanigans part of their character, I'd personally allow it with some kind of mechanical cost (eg: it counts as a tool proficiency, or replaces a class bonus to a relevant skill)
I only wonder, wouldn't it be a free action for the squire to draw your new weapon, and another to give it to you? Not to mention a free action to put the old weapon away, otherwise it would have to be dropped on the ground.
@@dumsquirrel Well, the squires arent actually using their actions to do anything, so they can spend all the time they need getting your weapons. And, as stated by Zee, giving a weapon to someone else only takes your action, not theirs.
This has actually been a running gag in campaigns within my friend group. All of our characters are constantly dropping their melee weapons to switch to ranged options (or vice versa). I'm waiting for the day the dm just announces something like "Suddenly a shape rapidly moves at the corner of your vision, as you turn to look you see a goblin collecting all your dropped equipment."
i did that once, they immidiately stopped killing the lich (phyklactries destroyed) to go kill the loot goblin, they literally chased it to a new continent, somewhere in the multiverse theres a verison of the sword coast ruled by a lich
Do not play D&D, but if I was the game master: So you drope the sword widout thinking so you can draw your crossbow, in one action? Player: That is correct. Roll a luck save to see if the sword did hit your foot or not.
The hotswapping thing always makes me wish to be in a prison break session where all the players have to share a dagger and quickly pass it between each other between turns. It would be like a 4-man John Wick fight scene as they all shiv their way out.
that's pretty hot, I might encourage that in a new underdark campaign I'm running where they all start in a Drow jail cell and need to make it back to their wizard benefactor who has diplomatic immunity with the kingdoms
If there's a high level monster that can only be killed by a certain magic weapon, going by the official rules there's nothing stopping you using it on your turn and then passing it to the next player in the initiative to continue the onslaught and on so.
@@aetherspiralknight He literally said, "No they're not, but just because that's the flavor we want, there's no real reason lol, do what you want". Like, my guy, if it's that inconsequential, and literally makes sense by the rules you wrote, why bother even specifying the lore based limitation when you note that it doesn't matter?
@@aaronsirkman8375 If you read the rules of Divine Smite very closely, you will see that the Divine Smite damage is dealt "in addition to the weapon's damage". Since there was no weapon involved in the process, there is nothing to add the damage to, and it is therefore lost. The real RAW interpretation is "it's possible but useless". It may be RAI as well, but the wording is so obtuse you have to wonder if they purposefully wrote all these obscure rules to have a game full of gotchas. JC is the ultimate rules lawyer and hates fun. He values what's written in his "perfect" book over common sense. I seriously hope they don't bring him back for 5.5e or 6e.
@@neirenoir Agreed. Ever since I saw the multiple times people have asked him how exactly "Improved Divine Smite" works as there is some ambiguity on whether or not it gets added twice when you smite (Yes I know it doesn't, but it's been asked multiple times) he never actually answers and just posts the wording in the book verbatim instead of a simple yes or no I've doubted JC's "rulings." Honestly I ignore most of the Sage Advice unless it's in the players favor or a player wants me to go by the rule, then I'll look into it. Because he WANTS gotchas, and it's my biggest problem with 5e. It tries to straddle this line of "We don't have rules for everything because we want DMs to make the rulings" and "there is this odd interaction with rules that don't obviously interact but because we added a specific word that makes them interact (ie Magic Missile with Empowered Evocation: because the darts hit simultaneously it falls under the AoE rules and thus is a single dice roll multiplied by the number of darts so every dart gets buffed)." It also uses common vernacular as keywords without specifying them as such. And to top it all off half the time the rulings aren't even consistent. For example: Why does magic missile get +int per dart when it automatically hits and does force damage but Scorching Ray gets shafted with abilities wording actually changed to add +cha to a single roll? Why does Eldritch Blast and agonizing blast get +cha on every roll when it functions almost identically to scorching ray except it doesn't use a resource, does a better damage type and scales with overall level instead of spell slots. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Finally someone talks about this! It's super interesting, and it lets you play as a spellsword with both hands full without needing the war caster feat
Yeah but you wouldn't be able to use important reaction spells like Shield if you pick your weapon up again And if you don't your weapon could get stolen/kicked away
This was the way I always DMed it. Players can drop something for free, but swapping items takes actions. Why not just drop? Once the Party encountered a Gelantinous Cube, fired their bows, and next round dropped them to draw weapons. Then watched as the Cube slowly move across their bows digesting them as it went.
@@jimvoozhenzhan8435 I mean, I wouldn't consider picking up someone's sword they just dropped when I'm staring them in the eyes about to get my head cleaved in two (though kicking is interesting, still wouldn't really solve the seemingly common use of using it to cast a spell or two hand an axe, etc) As far as when not in melee deathmatches? Could be kinda fun with little minion enemies like kobolds or goblins trying to steal dropped weapons/items and booking it like a maniac while everyone else is in combat lmao.
@@khaylis8933 so i DM AD&D, allowed my thief gnome with the tinkering proficiency to manufacture 2 arquebuces. So yeah, when in trouble just fire, drop and rearm.
@@khaylis8933 I mean...it is still D&D...ot costs the NPC villain a single object interaction to pick it up with a free hand, just like it would cost the PCs. And, you KNOW that if the villain dropped their cool looking longbow to start fighting in melee, the PCs would 100% be tempted to grab that thing. Mid-combat or no.
It's also good to remember that you can hold (but not attack with) a two handed weapon in only one hand. I mean it should be obvious that when you aren't actively firing a bow, it only lives in one hand, and it's reasonable that you can hold a greatsword even if you can't really swing it like that. This is the super-secret special move that makes two handed weapons really, really useful for gish type characters like clerics, druids, and eldritch knights -- you can have a strong weapon, but any time you aren't literally in the middle of an attack, your off-hand is free to do somatics, including manipulating focus items or material components as needed.
I've used the "drop shit to swap weapons" rule actually pretty consistently in a few of my campaigns. While I could, COULD be a fuck about "you didn't SAY you went to pick up your weapon" I fit that comfortably next to "dysentery" and "changing currency at the border" in my big box of stuff that's not interesting and therefore doesn't happen.
I'm having flashbacks to my first game of DnD and losing my starting spear because the DM ruled because I didn't say I recovered it that it was left behind. :))))))))))))))))))))))) (The more distance I get from that game the more I realized it was a trashfire.)
This was something I picked up along the way as a sorta-new player. I'd watched my parents and brothers D&D together as I grew up. Most of the time there was little issue with rules and whatnot, since they mostly went from what the book says or the DM decides what they'll allow or not allow. I'd always seen people drop the weapon they were using to swap weapons as a 'free action' or 'bonus action' or what all and it just kinda made sense anyway. It takes longer to neatly put your bow on your back and draw your longsword than it does to just...drop the bow AS you pull out your weapon. Though we usually have to specify that we are picking our weapons up afterwards, since a keen-eyed DM will probably say that you didn't retrieve it otherwise the next time you want to use it or mention it, and you didn't specify. Extra: As said sorta-new player, I love baffling my parents with the characters I bring about. They've played it since 1st Ed, so they're used to the 'normal' races, and I got some laughs and odd looks when I brought around a tiefling, or a pink female satyr. My goal is to try all the classes at some point, and a variety of archetypes and races as well!
@@vincentmuyo yeah, not ruling common sense on adventurers leaving Weapons behind is boring and annoying, last dm I had that told me that, also told me I needed to make multiple rolls to fly since I the druid, having shapeshifted into a flying animal, didn't know how to fly yet. which I might not take problem with, if I weren't so high level already
@@littlecow2000 That's just malicious behaviour from the DM since the rules specifically state that you gain the abilities of the form you shapeshift into. If you rule that you wouldn't know how to fly then you could also argue that you can't use any of the abilities of your shapeshifted form or have a disadvantage on everything you do since you don't know how to move or attack in a non-humanoid form... That's genuinely a reason to have a proper discussion with your DM or even walk out from the game in the worst case scenario.
@@MrQwertysystem I agree. I did argue enough that he changed the ruling mid game which was nice, didn't end up playing too long with him but was fun :)
Anyone remember the Spare Hand item from 3.5e? This feels like a good time to mention a magic belt with an arm dangling from it that can hold things for you.
Oh this totally needs to be brought to 5th ed! I’d love to reward a player at my table who is always having to worry about their character’s hand slots with this! ❤️
I remember the first group i was in, there was one guy that always dropped hes shortbow mid-battle to draw hes melee weapon because of these rule interactions.... ...The funny thing was just that not even once did he remember to collect the bow after the battles.
My players did this too, but we just stated once that ofc you pick up your weapon afterwards. No need to say it each time that just slows the game down/gets old. :P Unless they wanted to pick it up again during the encounter ofc.
@@SwedishWookie I agree. We also hand wave using the bathroom, gathering wood for a campfire and filling out paperwork for the insurance claim when the dragon torches our keep. D&D isn't a real world simulator. :) I've played at a table where a player let us know every move that lead to his action. "I approach the door. I take out the key we found on the Goblin guard from my right, front pocket. I place the key in the lock. I turn the key clockwise. I test the door to see if it is now unlocked. I place the key back into my pocket, but this time I place it into my left, front pocket. That's where I put keys that we probably won't need again. I open the door." I should say I played *once* at that table.
Yeah, no shit, in one medieval poem a serf brings to his master 7 shields for upcoming battle. 7 shields! Bruh, I wish I was at least half as cool as a dude who wields 7 shields in combat.
Makes even more sense if mounted and using some optional rules I read up on about how some lances are prone to breaking in combat. Charge in, smash the weapon, ride back around and pick up a fresh one from your squire out at a safe distance from the combat.
This is the second new video in two days I've watched that has a reference to something Jocat has made. I'm loving these little crossovers between the D&D animators
This reminds me of an observation I had about any disarming mechanics such as in the DMG or Battle Master maneuvers. In Xanathar's guide adamantine weapons are stated to automatically crit when hitting objects, and the DMG says magic items are generally resistant to damage, not immune. So your fighter runs up to the arcmage and disarms them of their staff of infinite power, then with their next attack they strike the staff on the ground to destroy it and ruin their day.
@@EasilyBoredGamer I mean, you're also dealing that damage to the Archmage, so... Depending on the situation, that might actually be a worthwhile trade off.
@@funnyvalentinedidnothingwrong sort of, the person who breaks it takes 16 x the number of charges, whereas people within 10 feet only take 8 x. 50% chance you get sent to a random plane of existence instead of taking the damage (good or bad?), but if you have a cleric then just cast death ward on the fighter.
Why break it when your fighter might have a bag of holding on them ? 1) Disarm the mage with an unarmed attack to take the staff from them. 2) Free Item Interaction (drop the staff in the bag) 3) grin smugly at the Mage that now has to make do without the material component to most of his spell. 4) After you ruined the mages day , your own mage might want said staff or you could trade it for an item you could use. Or hang it over your keeps fireplace... you do you.
Finally someone's talking about this! I differentiate between "Interaction" (only 1 per turn) and "Free Action" (as many as you like). Free Actions include not only dropping an object but alao falling prone and communicating. COMBAT: Round (6 seconds) Turn 1. Movement - Walk - Crawl - Jump - Climb - Swim - Fly - Burrow - Stand up - Mount/dismount - Move through difficult terrain - Squeeze through smaller space 2. Action - Attack - Ranged Weapon Attack - Melee Weapon Attack - Improvised Weapon Attack - Unarmed Strike - Grappling Attack - Shoving Attack - Extra Attack - Cast a spell - Dash - Disengage - Dodge - Help - Hide - Ready - Search - Use an object - Drink a potion - Administer a potion - Improvise 3. Bonus Action - Hand Crossbow Attack (CBE) - Shortsword Attack (TWF) - Cast/Move Hunter's Mark - Command Animated Shield 4. Reaction - Opportunity Attack - Readied Action - Absorb Elements 5. Interaction - Draw or sheathe a sword - Open or close a door - Withdraw a potion from your backpack - Pick up a dropped axe - Take a bauble from a table - Remove a ring from your finger - Stuff some food into your mouth - Plant a banner in the ground - Fish a few coins from your belt pouch - Drink all the ale in a flagon - Throw a lever or a switch - Pull a torch from a sconce - Take a book from a shelf you can reach - Extinguish a small flame - Don a mask - Pull the hood of your cloak up and over your head - Put your ear to a door - Kick a small stone - Turn a key in a lock - Tap the floor with a 10-foot pole - Hand an item to another character 6. Free Action - Communicate through brief utterances and gestures - Drop an object - Fall prone
This does let you swap weapons/spellcasting focus/etc in the middle of a fight without damaging your action economy by just thinking ahead. Put away thing 1 at the end of your turn, and then at the start of your next turn pull out thing 2. Easy.
@@aaaaaa-ts3rw Definitely, unless you have natural weapons like a Tabaxi. Arcane caster gishes like greatsword hexblades can abuse this also in reverse; draw the spell focus to cast a spell while holding the greatsword with one hand, then next turn put the focus away and resume greatsword. You can't use the greatsword while holding it this way but you don't have to ever put it away.
@@carsonm7292 Eldritch Knight: "I'll drop one of my Versatile Claymores. Then beat the Extra Attack out of the Goblin with my bare hands... ... ... I then take out my other Versatile Claymore and Bonus Action Weapon Bond the Claymore I dropped on the floor... ... ... Then I Action Surge with the Lucky Feat."
You come across the most broken part of this rule when you try to deprive your players of weapons and they find a single weapon. Now they all rotate through the single weapon by dropping it and picking it up like some violent hot potato
Reminds me of the second Pirates of the Carribbean movie where Elizabeth, Raggitte, and Pintel are running from cursed ocean zombies and only have one or two swords between them and keep passing them around as someone needs one.
A sane DM would tell them this doesn't work because the turns are an abstraction and a round only lasts six seconds. They cannot all be using the same weapon at the same time. (Also what stops the enemies from stealing the one weapon while it's on the ground?)
@@theuncalledfor they aren't using it at the same time, they're taking turns with one weapon, and you can enforce consequences such as reaction or opportunity attacks having to be unarmed only if it isn't that person's turn to hold the weapon
When I played pathfinder kingmaker, I loved how the potion, weapon swapping or other mechanics took movement. it made a lot of sense as in my experience its harder to move quickly while doing something with your hands. running down the hall while shuffling all your books in school is not as easy as if they stayed in your backpack, but faster than stopping and rummaging through your pack, the difference is weather you think you'll immediately need your supplies. therefore, I think that system has some verisimilitude
in the group i play with online, we found out that dropping the weapon on the ground is itself a disadvantage. we play on roll20, and therefore we not only have constant access to battlemaps, which are often used for covert interaction (thanks DM, your group loves you for this). this means that if you drop an item, it stays where it landed. thus far this campaign i´ve had to drop my crossbow twice to fight with a melee weapon, and then at a later stage of combat retreat, without time to pick up my crossbow for one reason or another. the first time i did this i lost the ability to fight from afar until end of combat, and the other time i lost my hand crossbow, which i got simply because i needed the compact armament. of course some items can´t be dropped, like potions, and other time you might not want to drop a magic item, which would risk it being nabbed by the enemy.
Yeah, maybe health potions taste like rancid sewage? One of my favourite houserules has always been drinking a health potion as a bonus action for the normal effect or taking an action to drink it carefully in order to get the max roll (i.e. a regular healing potion gives 2d4+2 as a bonus action or 10 hitpoints if taken as an action), feeding an unconscious (or I guess lazy) player always takes an action but still requires the roll. The idea essentially being that drinking quickly (or pouring it down someone else's throat) causes you to spill some potion and lose some of the effect.
It’s because of that I like to play with a house rule where taking your entire action to get every last drop of a health potion grants the full benefit as opposed to a quick free action swig that will just have you roll for the health gained as normal. Makes for fun decisions in the heat of battle.
lore wise im pretty sure health potions taste like absolute fucking garbage to the extent that it 100% takes an action to drink it or to force someone to drink it
@@crtwrght That's actually pretty smart way to go with it. I never was a fan of how drinking a potion takes an action so usually it ends up being smarter to just attack your opponent in hopes of killing them before they get to kill you rather than drink a potion and waste both your and your opponents action.
I love the "I pull the lever as a Free Action" "That lever is attached to a catapult, that's CLEARLY an attack!" I also love how Zee effectively confirms what I houseruled for my campaigns, where if you wanted to switch from say, sword and shield to mace and shield, you would DROP the sword, and use the Interact to draw the mace!
I actually recognized this, but intentionally changed it to a free object interaction to change your loadout (including Shield). The resolution I came to was that you had to deal with the lowest stats during your turn resulting from this, meaning if you used your Longbow on a turn then pulled out a sword and shield, your AC is still without that shield until your next turn. Considering 90% of my issues with the situation was just that: ranged weapon usage then switching to shields, it was all I needed to make my games work properly. Glad somebody actually talked about this for once though!
To think that Shields are considered Armor... At least, in RAW, since that is the case. The Eberon Warforged can amalgam (merge) with the Shield. Then no one can steal the Shield without outright killing the Warforge since it is immune to be incapacitate.
I like this ruling. It seems silly to intentionally encourage people to do something like dropping gear so they cast a spell when we have so many gish characters now, so I’ve always just ignored stowing and unsheathing weapons. They purposefully made a way for players to do it. Might as well make it not look silly.
@@FenrisZAmarok Yeah, the dropping is a bit wonky when it's really thought about. Like, who in their right mind is going to *DROP* their sword in the middle of a fight?
@@GoblinKoboldGaming someone who really immediately needs another hand, like for grabbing, grappling, pulling thing off, dropping a sword that was superheated, dropping on a sword that is really heavy on a weak npc to trap them (think big sword here), maybe dropping the sword because it's the conduit for your evil warlock patron to speak to you and you're trying to ignore the fucker, etc etc etc. Use your imagination lol
This is how I always run Object Interacting in combat. I could never figure out why people always threw a fit when I said these things. It was right there in the PHB!
Wizard: "I told you that a +1 Axe will be useless. Now, prepare for my Fire Ball, you Necromancer." DM: "You killed both the Fighter and the Necromancer with Fire Ball." Wizard: "I AM A GOD!!!"
Because doff isnt actually a real word outside of 1420-1620s poetry/literature that wants to show characters being posh (and some works by late 18th century writers). When it comes to common vernacular things like "do off (with)", "take off", "doffen" (if french influenced) and "don off" were actually used/far far more common. Even "daff" gets more use in middle english texts despite it also being another word for "dumbass/idiot". TLDR: Old, middle and new middle english dont/didn't have it as part of the core vocabulary, so it really is a fantasy word.
My table ignores the rules for switching weapons like this. We just say "switching whatever is in your hands is a free object interaction (excluding shields)". Though it is an interesting mechanic, my players come to the table to do quests, fight monsters, and use their cool features. They don't come over to the have to overthink switching weapons and learn the interaction-hand-dance.
I tend to agree with this, specifically with regards to weapon switching, not necessarily other object interactions. Reason being that dual wielding is already a mechanically inferior fighting style even without screwing the player over on drawing their weapons. Also inclined to let thrown weapons draw and throw as many javelins/darts/daggers as they have attacks for a similar reason. Both of these interactions actually already have a feat/fighting style to cover them, but the way feats are handled in 5e requiring one to use dual wielded or thrown weapons properly is a BIG ask.
Sure, but now you've reduced the value of special features in the game, such as the Warcaster feat or the Cleric's ability to use their shield as their spellcasting focus. With every hand-wave of the rules, you remove a bit of nuance and strategy from the game. Just something to think about.
I had a ranger who used a bow and a musket. Because the musket took a full round to reload, he'd use the musket as a first attack then drop it on the ground and go ham with the bow
not how muskets work ingame Loading: Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make. it doesn't take 'a full round' it's just 1 attack per any-action prompt to attack with it.
This is one of the most underrated utilities of the dual weilder feat. Being able to sheathe or draw two weapons whenever you could draw or sheathe one means you can switch your loadout on the fly by using a free object interaction to sheathe both weapons, and draw both of your new weapons as part of making your attack. You also get +1 AC whenever you have a weapon in each hand, and you can dual weild weapons that don't have the light property. Spicy times for two weapon fighting specialists.
Almost - you only get one free object interaction as part of your turn, so you could do something like run up to an enemy, attack them, and then sheath your weapons as part of your attack (of course, you lose the AC bonus for having a melee weapon in each hand). Drawing the new weapons could be done as part of your attack next turn but, if you want to sheathe and draw on the dame turn, it'll cost an action regardless of whether you used the free interaction as part of your movement or attack actions. What it does save you from is requiring a full action, or two rounds of free interactions, just to sheathe both swords. With the other bonuses it's still a great feat, but it doesn't bend time and space to disrupt the action economy in exactly the way you implied.
Fun Fact: A Thief Rogue can Doff and Don a shield as a bonus action. This only becomes useful if they get shield proficiency from something, but I just think its neat.
@@zufieusagi7509 If you have the extended book for the Warforge (both UA and Eberon), then true... Kind of like the Variant Human extended content. Otherwise, base form, Eberon Warforged cannot merge or attach themselves with Weapons, unfortunately.
This free object interaction can be quite deadly in the hands of a mage that likes to use wind spells to blow sharp debris everywhere. Imagine caltrops, daggers, vials and flasks that shatter when dropped, nails, tacks, and other pointy bits and bobs tearing through flesh like a rabid goblin at a meat buffet.
Which I think is fine, considering that A, doing such a thing would require the DM to make up a homebrew mechanic anyway, and B, spellcasters already have plenty of strong area of effect damage spells.
considering a literal cloud of spinning daggers is 4d4 slashing damage a round, that’s not a huge deal. wizards can already deal a lot of damage with spells, make sure any improvised damage isn’t exceeding damaging spells of the same level and structure.
Shields are interesting, because they take an action to don/doff but they are "held in one hand" so they're a valid target for Disarming Strike. If you knock their shield off, it's gone. They have to use their whole action to put it back on.
I’m kind of disappointed that shields can’t also be considered weapons because it means you can’t shield bash in D&D. Unless that exists somewhere and I don’t know about it.
@@thornangel16 The shield master feat allows for a shield bash. Also it can be used as an improvised weapon for a pitiful 1d4 damage. You might convince a DM to boost that by adding spikes along the outer edge or center.
@@thornangel16 Yeah, shields with spikes could be considered improvised qeapons *which happen* to double as shields. Just saying, flavor is free and the DM could always agree with you and change the ruling if its more fun that way
Glad to know that I've been running things right. On top of this when people speak on their turn, i let other people reply immediately if they use their reaction. So if they wanna make more advanced plans they can while still keeping things in character (feel like its important to say that i dont mind if they plan basic strategy out of character, just if they wanna do something special/unique they gotta speak in character)
What's fun about this especially if you are using a component pouch means that you can have one hand free any time you need, BUT have a shield in another hand too. The rare shielded spell caster using one hand is funny
We've ran into this where I was handing a party member a healing potion. I could hand it to them as a free action, but to out it in their mouth was an action.
Uncorking the thing, possibly opening their mouth, and controlling the pour _do_ take a lot more effort than just handing it to them. Fair ruling, in my opinion.
Honestly, I would argue that having two NPC squires to allow you to change your load out between turns makes perfect sense. Is assisting in that kind of thing not part of a squire's job? The downside, of course, is that you now have two (probably pretty weak) NPCs in the middle of combat who the DM is free to target with attacks or AoEs.
@@christophershell7564 Reasonable, though depending on what you were trying to do, a vindictive DM might argue that such a familiar isn't large or strong enough to be able to carry your weapon. Though like you said, unless you had some really weird build, I can't see why you would need to switch weapons as a Warlock. Eldritch Blast is already the best ranged option, and gishes are usually pretty hyper-specialized to avoid multi-ability dependency.
these specific and stupidly niche rules were what gravitated me and helped me sink my fanaticism into the Thief subclass for rogues i love that subclass so much for their extra free object interaction and their free climb speed never need a climb check again (not actually, but basically never need one again)
Dropping an item being costless makes sense to me; not only is the absence of any action taken literally *how* to drop something, but dropping prone is also free. It's consistent.
"Shields are armor and always require an action to doff or to don." *Laughs in Custom Shield Homebrew where shields are weapons that come in three size categories*
@@darienb1127, I don't exactly understand what to consider. If you're smashing someone with a mail plate it doesn't stop being armor. So, shields are armor that's convenient to bash with
Your ability to make a video about adventurers invading a snake temple and another about holding stuff both such enjoyable viewings is honestly magical. I respect you, your range of skill, and I wish you a good day
This is great for Eldritch Knights with their Weapon Bond. Allowing them to drop their sword on their turn, cast Shield on enemy's turn, then recall weapon as bonus action on their next turn.
Just wanted to say I really enjoy your style of animation and storytelling in these things. It's all wonderfully engaging, charming, and well explained. Thank you for doing this!
You pulling out the camera was hilarious to me. I just love the idea that the necromancer is either so lonely or fucked up on some magic after affects that he’s rambling about different games to no one.
Another thing to remember is that there's a specific ruling for dual wielding. Normally, you can only draw/stow one weapon at a time, but if you have the Dual Wielder feat, you can draw/stow two one-handed weapons at the same time.
Okay.... having a servant on hand that will help you swap out your weapons.... that IS stylish, and I genuinely never thought to do that before. I love it! Also, weather or not a shield requires an action would depend on the GM I'd say. Depending on the make of the shield, you could reasonably say that just dropping it on the ground is a trivial enough effort to make a free action.
Loving the consistent stream of videos lately 😌 Zee has such a calming voice (when he’s not hollering) would love a longer form podcast-style video or podcast 👀
Thank you! Ive been hoping someone would cover this for a while. ` (Ive been intending to cover it myself on my own channel but... you know, life and shit. *cries in 7 months since last upload)
And its contradicting raw on every level, not only is the requirement for a smite a melee weapon attack, not a melee attack with a weapon (as is used when a weapon is required), but also because the official stance (by now sadly deleted post, tho its still in a few wotc and crawford tweets of old errata updates) is that Erratas are optional content. So since the OG print of the PHB includes unarmed strikes in the weapons table, its still a melee weapon attack with a melee weapon.
For an Eldritch Knight with Warcaster and other Feats... You could hold two double handed great swords until you feel like using one of it. Then drop one of the two Weapon Bonded greatswords. And if you're a Warforged (non UA), then you can merge with a Shield for a permanent 2 AC until you cease function...
I don't know if this was a thing in 3.5 e, but in Saga Edition, on top of your free object interaction, you could sacrifice you movement, action, or reaction for another object interaction
I'm honestly amazed Zee didn't mention the thousand peasant railgun. Put an adventurer with a good BaB at the end of line to aim it, maybe throw in a bard inspiring courage and a cleric with a dash of Cat's Grace and maybe Blessing, just for funzies.
3:12 Really, you only need _one_ NPC squire, seeing as a single squire can use both their free action and their main action to kit you up. Buuut ideally it’d be nice to have 2 squire main actions that the squires can use to take the Dodge action for them, the Help action for you, or cast support spells and/or use Bardic Inspiration, if they have those available.
@@DvirPick Technically the rules don't use the phrase "free action" but they state that, "You can communicate however you are able, through brief utterances and gestures, as you take your turn." This is actually less restricted than your free object interaction which is explicitly tied to your action or movement. Which means that technically, by RAW you cannot use your free object interaction as part of a bonus action or reaction, nor can you simply use it on it's own without using your action or movement. But that's getting nitpicky and enforcing that might encourage players to start concocting odd combos to get everything out of their action economy they can like moving 1 inch so they can use their object interaction, then bonus action, then action and the rest of their movement...
Free actions do technically exist in 5e (same way how take 10 still exists and is actually the default for all ability checks that aren't a instantaneous and 1 time thing like counterspell or a trap/bomb that explodes on failure to disarm rather than on timer). It are things that require you to be able to act that state (no action required).
My players are definitely allowed to drop their bow and grab thier sword for free, that's what scabbards are for! They're also allowed to panic when they remember my favorite spell is Catapult.
Could you do a video on the peasant railgun? Wherein you have an absurd number of hirelings pass an object to each other down a line, which thanks to the combat rules always takes 6 seconds thereby accelerating the object to an arbitrary speed determined solely by the number of hirelings you can afford.
Just because it's traveling arbitrarily fast in the middle of the line, doesn't mean that it retains that speed at the end. For the last person in line to grab it, it necessarily must be moving slow enough to grab. At the end of the turn, the last guy is either holding the object, drops it (onto the ground next to him), or makes an improvised ranged weapon attack against an enemy.
Peasant Rail Gun annoys me as a DM because it is the biggest example of 'Players will try to apply real world physics to game mechanics only when it benefits them'. Like acceleration is never calculated in any other instance, but now suddenly players want to do a physics equation to justify shenanigans...
Peasant railgun ignores that no matter the speed during the passing, the maximum velocity of the object is capped when thrown thus is its speed, so no matter the amount of peasants, it cant be beyond 60 ft over 6 seconds aka 3.048ms. Or 5~9 ft (around 0.5ms typically) for a regular peasant in 3e (5+ every 2 above 10 on the the strength roll/check for item throw, attack for weapon throw which due to improvised has a -4 penalty ontop). Which honestly is quite pathetic and enforces the medieval undernourishment of a setting as typically people can throw regular handheld objects at around 20~33ms when one really means it.
@@kid14346 I won't disagree with you, however given the number of cooperative hirelings required I think this is something that can only ever happen with the dms approval anyway. Shenanigans are entirely appropriate if the tone of the campaign allows.
My rule of thumb for if something more complex is an action or bonus action, comes down to whether of not you need to roll a d20. If you need to roll, it is action.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Oh this is for things that RAW doesn't cover. Of course things that are stated to be actions and bonus actions are considered as such.
My favourite approach is this: "you provoke opportunity attacks if you try to pick something up with an enemy nearby". Makes disarming a valid tactic and prevents the drop, cast, pick-up loophole
I knew all of this, but I'm glad more people will know it moving forward. I sometimes list the interact with object alongside the movement, action, and bonus action, as one of the resources you get each turn.
Once dropped a wand of magic missiles for my offhand dagger, because I kept failing my use magical item check. Poor choices were made as a turn later the kobold magic user approached it with a sh*t eating grin.
"Dropping your weapons is free!" That's what my bard always very reasonably explains to the enemies. The remaining ones that weren't slain by the first fireball, that is.
Fun little thing i've been doing since figuring this out, in most typical engagements I have two pistols on me and mainly use a sword and shield. First I engage at range, first gun, fire then drop and engage with my second pistol. After which I would close distance and use my free item interaction on next turn to draw my sword. DM liked my approached to this and allowed me to put lanyards on my little wheellocks so I don't have to collect them afterwards. Nice little working to this lot, thanks Zee.
Never more had I considered how important the “use an object” action was until I played a thief rogue. His name was Dr. Alexander Hampton and his background was a failed merchant specializing in medicine. My “gimmick” was taking the healer’s feat and using medkits mid combat to patch up my allies. As I could do it twice a turn so long as they were within 35 ft of movement. It wasn’t a great build but it was fun! I gave him the flaw that “he must save everyone” so when he hears screaming he’s the first to run headlong into danger.
Thank you for adding the feets-notes regarding shield snagging/plonking. As the video started to wind down for the advertisement, I was just gearing up my skull taffy to start forming an inquiry about the matter -then °boop° Exception: Shields are considered armor with relevant action cost to strap on or yank off. Thank you for your continued thoroughness, and highly entertaining quality animated antics. I always immediately watch them the moment they show up on my feed -regardless of whatever else I might be watching already.
my house rule for holding weapons is rather involved due to several rulings i've had do make regarding this. and goes thusly: at the beginning of any turn and when you roll initiative, you choose what you are doing with your hands if you choose to hold one one-handed weapon or one two-hande weapon, you can attack with that weapon and cast spells with somantic components if you hold two weapons you can attack with both but not do spells with somantic components if you hold a weapon and a shield you can attack with the weaon but not do spells with somantic components if you hold a spell casting focus, you can cast spells requireing that focus and spells with somantic components and make unarmed attacks. if you hold a spell casting focus and a one-handed weapon, you can attack with that weapon and cast spells with somantic components and components that require that spell casting focus. you can always throw a weapon with the thrown property shields do not require time to doff holy symbols do not need to be held. (this one is kinda in the book p.151 holy symbol)
Which is why the Dual Wielder feat states - You can draw or Stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or Stow only one. If I had a player try to abuse the squire situation, his who the first target would be in battle... but if they were just using them for roleplay flavour, a few rolls may get fudged in order to keep them alive.
I think shields being separate from object interactions makes sense when you consider that to don or doff a shield you usually have to go our of your way to strap it to your arm and then hold it. Though this also gets weird with how there are many different TYPES of shields that may function differently Edit/Addition: Though I'll suggest a small amount of homebrew stolen from a book called The Warrior's Codex if you want to change that. - Handled shields use a wood or metal handlebar on the inside of a shield. These shields can be doffed or donned with the item interaction you receive as part of your turn and can be dropped freely, but enemies have advantage on checks made to disarm you of them. - Strapped shields attach the shield to the arms, reinforcing the handle with a series of cloth or leather straps. These shields take an action to don or doff, and enemies have disadvantage on checks made to disarm you of the shield.
The tables that just handwave picking up stuff and drawing them are the best tables. Same goes for tables who do not care about encumbrance unless someone tries to carry a horse on their backpack.
From holding items, we can segway to disarming attacks. It's an attack in which your attack roll is contested by the defender's Athletics. You can target an enemy's shield to lower its AC on a success. However, it the target object is held with 2 or more hands, the defender has advantage on the skill check.
One of my earliest characters, which I remember oh so fondly. (mostly because they were broken beyond all imagination, but I was a noob and didn't realize it at the time, nor did I take full advantage of it due to noobishness as well - it was a campaign with very broad acceptance of homebrew for a bunch of power gamers though, so I fit in well!) -- was a 3.5e swordsage (ToB was cool :p) who animated their armory of weapons one by one, and would just drop them in random places on the battlefield and then use them to retain the ability to attack or AOO creatures within the minefield of animate swords, hammers, and polearms. As I got to higher levels I had to take advantage of the "you can drop without cost" to be able to drop my maximum number of weapons per turn. I also had a stupidly comical setup involving multiple different methods for different weapons for how I would be able to draw/equip enough weapons per turn to feed the rapid-anima machine. By the end of the campaign I'd honed in primarily on a specific type of sword that could have reach but could also still hit adjacent enemies, to maximize my battlefield coverage. I was carrying around some Attack on Titan style hip-mounted blade carriers that launched swords into my hands quickly. And my character turned into a very frightening battlefield-control-mage style of play as it would gradually set up a bigger and bigger area each round that was uncomfortable for any enemies to be inside, though it was all as a martial :D
Free weapon switching can get crazy the more attacks/actions you have per turn, such as with haste. Swing a sword, fire a bow, then cast a cantrip then bring your sword back out to start next turn. Major multitasking.
Кино
It's all fun and games until the enemy you're facing picks up your weapon.
ooooh, yeah, that would be a problem wouldn't it. XD
@@AegixDrakan oh heck what if they just kick it away.
Jokes on them- I'm unarmed! Oh wait- that would be grappling
Random Kobold picks up your holy avenger.
B-but wait, th-that's illegal... D:
Personally I like:
- Dropping a weapon is free
- Drawing a weapon is an Object Interaction
- Picking up a weapon off the ground is an Action.
This not only stops shenanigans, but it reflects the totally reasonable idea that drawing from a scabbard (a device literally intended to provide your weapon) is easier than picking up a sword.
And doesn't penalize throwing builds who would naturally make stacks of darts or quick draw sheaths so they can throw more than one dart per round.
@@robinthrush9672
Throwing Weapon Fighting Style and Dual Wielder Feat can make that better.
Since Thrown Weapon FS takes away the limitation for Object Interaction if and only if you intend to throw the weapon.
And Dual Wielder lets you take out or put away 2 weapons at once.
@@robinthrush9672 indeed, tho if a player wants a throwing build I'd advise they still discuss with the DM cos throwing can have some weird edge cases in 5e
Sword, probably (if you dont have a gauntlet), however same thing doesnt hold true for a stick or even a hook mace (that is easily straightened up by just stepping on it).
Naturally if the character already used their interaction that turn, thats 100% raw as its the use a object action.
@@ANDELE3025 I respectfully disagree. Your character has likely drawn their weapon from its scabbard dozens of times, a smooth practised motion that is literally within arms reach, the handle fully available. Even if we assume that your character isn't going to Sideshow Bob themselves when trying to step on the weapon, it is still out of arm's length and laying in an unfamiliar position (remember, you've *dropped* it, not 'placed it neatly on the ground in a good spot'). Now potentially if a player wanted to make weapon shenanigans part of their character, I'd personally allow it with some kind of mechanical cost (eg: it counts as a tool proficiency, or replaces a class bonus to a relevant skill)
Zee: Mentions Sword and Board, shows a certain SnS loving Wiggler
Well played, lol.
Video got twice as funny when I was like "wait.... was that....?!" xD
I miss JoCat's crap guides.
I immediately came down here to see if anyone else noticed.
2:21 for those who missed it
The rivalry continues.
Having squires hot swapping your weapons sounds like such fun and flavorful combat privelige. Need to make this happen now.
thay did in history whith lances. after a knight had broken a Lance by impaling an enemy thay rode back an gott a New one.
I only wonder, wouldn't it be a free action for the squire to draw your new weapon, and another to give it to you? Not to mention a free action to put the old weapon away, otherwise it would have to be dropped on the ground.
@@dumsquirrel Well, the squires arent actually using their actions to do anything, so they can spend all the time they need getting your weapons. And, as stated by Zee, giving a weapon to someone else only takes your action, not theirs.
I have an insane old fighter who thinks his unseen servant is his squire, I'll definitely be adding this to his style.
Hear me out here, friendly mimic belt
This has actually been a running gag in campaigns within my friend group. All of our characters are constantly dropping their melee weapons to switch to ranged options (or vice versa). I'm waiting for the day the dm just announces something like "Suddenly a shape rapidly moves at the corner of your vision, as you turn to look you see a goblin collecting all your dropped equipment."
I shout to the goblin “Hey thanks man! Good looking out!”
Imagine trying to pick your dropped weapons back up in thick mud.
Or worse - A swamp.
Or *worse* worse, in deep or running water.
i did that once, they immidiately stopped killing the lich (phyklactries destroyed) to go kill the loot goblin, they literally chased it to a new continent, somewhere in the multiverse theres a verison of the sword coast ruled by a lich
@@Introbulus or worse, in a room where rthe first few CM of the floor is a corrosive slime
Do not play D&D, but if I was the game master: So you drope the sword widout thinking so you can draw your crossbow, in one action? Player: That is correct. Roll a luck save to see if the sword did hit your foot or not.
The hotswapping thing always makes me wish to be in a prison break session where all the players have to share a dagger and quickly pass it between each other between turns. It would be like a 4-man John Wick fight scene as they all shiv their way out.
my equivalent fantasy is in Dead Man's Chest when Elizabeth, Pintel, and Ragetti are toss-sharing two swords to fight their way off the island
that's pretty hot, I might encourage that in a new underdark campaign I'm running where they all start in a Drow jail cell and need to make it back to their wizard benefactor who has diplomatic immunity with the kingdoms
That’d be super nice but one of my players is running an unarmed strike build
If there's a high level monster that can only be killed by a certain magic weapon, going by the official rules there's nothing stopping you using it on your turn and then passing it to the next player in the initiative to continue the onslaught and on so.
Congratulations, you now understand the concept of the peasant railgun
"He whose rulings we hold holy (unless we disagree with them)" is an underrated line from this. XD
*divine smites with unarmed attacks are allowed, darnit!*
@@aetherspiralknight He literally said, "No they're not, but just because that's the flavor we want, there's no real reason lol, do what you want". Like, my guy, if it's that inconsequential, and literally makes sense by the rules you wrote, why bother even specifying the lore based limitation when you note that it doesn't matter?
@@aaronsirkman8375 If you read the rules of Divine Smite very closely, you will see that the Divine Smite damage is dealt "in addition to the weapon's damage". Since there was no weapon involved in the process, there is nothing to add the damage to, and it is therefore lost. The real RAW interpretation is "it's possible but useless". It may be RAI as well, but the wording is so obtuse you have to wonder if they purposefully wrote all these obscure rules to have a game full of gotchas.
JC is the ultimate rules lawyer and hates fun. He values what's written in his "perfect" book over common sense. I seriously hope they don't bring him back for 5.5e or 6e.
@@neirenoir Agreed. Ever since I saw the multiple times people have asked him how exactly "Improved Divine Smite" works as there is some ambiguity on whether or not it gets added twice when you smite (Yes I know it doesn't, but it's been asked multiple times) he never actually answers and just posts the wording in the book verbatim instead of a simple yes or no I've doubted JC's "rulings." Honestly I ignore most of the Sage Advice unless it's in the players favor or a player wants me to go by the rule, then I'll look into it.
Because he WANTS gotchas, and it's my biggest problem with 5e. It tries to straddle this line of "We don't have rules for everything because we want DMs to make the rulings" and "there is this odd interaction with rules that don't obviously interact but because we added a specific word that makes them interact (ie Magic Missile with Empowered Evocation: because the darts hit simultaneously it falls under the AoE rules and thus is a single dice roll multiplied by the number of darts so every dart gets buffed)." It also uses common vernacular as keywords without specifying them as such. And to top it all off half the time the rulings aren't even consistent.
For example:
Why does magic missile get +int per dart when it automatically hits and does force damage but Scorching Ray gets shafted with abilities wording actually changed to add +cha to a single roll?
Why does Eldritch Blast and agonizing blast get +cha on every roll when it functions almost identically to scorching ray except it doesn't use a resource, does a better damage type and scales with overall level instead of spell slots.
Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
his approach to the rules is "the rules are perfect, there shall be no errata" and occasionally ignoring the rule of specific trumps general
I love the little goblin you’ve been using lately. He’s such a fuckin’ gremlin of a guy.
Ohana means family
hes just a widdle gobwin
"you crack me up, little buddy!" - wolf man in a suit
Getting loads of Max from Sam and Max presence coming off of them, so cool!
Smol goblins are the best
Finally someone talks about this! It's super interesting, and it lets you play as a spellsword with both hands full without needing the war caster feat
A Dumplin pfp. I see you are a person of impeccable taste~
@@DemonicEngineer y e s
@@APerson-ws4cw Would you happen to have also been introduced to D&D thanks to TFS at the table?
Yeah but you wouldn't be able to use important reaction spells like Shield if you pick your weapon up again
And if you don't your weapon could get stolen/kicked away
@@prosamis A free action is not the same as a reaction.
(Edit, I misunderstood)
This was the way I always DMed it. Players can drop something for free, but swapping items takes actions. Why not just drop? Once the Party encountered a Gelantinous Cube, fired their bows, and next round dropped them to draw weapons. Then watched as the Cube slowly move across their bows digesting them as it went.
Answer, why wouldn't enemies pick up those weapons or kick them away
@@jimvoozhenzhan8435 I mean, I wouldn't consider picking up someone's sword they just dropped when I'm staring them in the eyes about to get my head cleaved in two (though kicking is interesting, still wouldn't really solve the seemingly common use of using it to cast a spell or two hand an axe, etc)
As far as when not in melee deathmatches? Could be kinda fun with little minion enemies like kobolds or goblins trying to steal dropped weapons/items and booking it like a maniac while everyone else is in combat lmao.
@@khaylis8933 so i DM AD&D, allowed my thief gnome with the tinkering proficiency to manufacture 2 arquebuces.
So yeah, when in trouble just fire, drop and rearm.
@@khaylis8933 I mean...it is still D&D...ot costs the NPC villain a single object interaction to pick it up with a free hand, just like it would cost the PCs.
And, you KNOW that if the villain dropped their cool looking longbow to start fighting in melee, the PCs would 100% be tempted to grab that thing. Mid-combat or no.
Drop them behind you.
It's also good to remember that you can hold (but not attack with) a two handed weapon in only one hand. I mean it should be obvious that when you aren't actively firing a bow, it only lives in one hand, and it's reasonable that you can hold a greatsword even if you can't really swing it like that. This is the super-secret special move that makes two handed weapons really, really useful for gish type characters like clerics, druids, and eldritch knights -- you can have a strong weapon, but any time you aren't literally in the middle of an attack, your off-hand is free to do somatics, including manipulating focus items or material components as needed.
I've used the "drop shit to swap weapons" rule actually pretty consistently in a few of my campaigns. While I could, COULD be a fuck about "you didn't SAY you went to pick up your weapon" I fit that comfortably next to "dysentery" and "changing currency at the border" in my big box of stuff that's not interesting and therefore doesn't happen.
I'm having flashbacks to my first game of DnD and losing my starting spear because the DM ruled because I didn't say I recovered it that it was left behind. :))))))))))))))))))))))) (The more distance I get from that game the more I realized it was a trashfire.)
Why is dysentery in that box? You don't make your players roll dysentery saves?
I do hope we get to see more of the 'example demonstration goblins' in future videos, they amuse me greatly.
This was something I picked up along the way as a sorta-new player. I'd watched my parents and brothers D&D together as I grew up. Most of the time there was little issue with rules and whatnot, since they mostly went from what the book says or the DM decides what they'll allow or not allow. I'd always seen people drop the weapon they were using to swap weapons as a 'free action' or 'bonus action' or what all and it just kinda made sense anyway. It takes longer to neatly put your bow on your back and draw your longsword than it does to just...drop the bow AS you pull out your weapon.
Though we usually have to specify that we are picking our weapons up afterwards, since a keen-eyed DM will probably say that you didn't retrieve it otherwise the next time you want to use it or mention it, and you didn't specify.
Extra: As said sorta-new player, I love baffling my parents with the characters I bring about. They've played it since 1st Ed, so they're used to the 'normal' races, and I got some laughs and odd looks when I brought around a tiefling, or a pink female satyr. My goal is to try all the classes at some point, and a variety of archetypes and races as well!
It’s awesome that both your parents play! I wanna do this with my future kids! ❤️
"Keen eyed DM" in this case meaning "boring DM who will waste everyone's time to mess with players"
@@vincentmuyo yeah, not ruling common sense on adventurers leaving Weapons behind is boring and annoying, last dm I had that told me that, also told me I needed to make multiple rolls to fly since I the druid, having shapeshifted into a flying animal, didn't know how to fly yet. which I might not take problem with, if I weren't so high level already
@@littlecow2000 That's just malicious behaviour from the DM since the rules specifically state that you gain the abilities of the form you shapeshift into. If you rule that you wouldn't know how to fly then you could also argue that you can't use any of the abilities of your shapeshifted form or have a disadvantage on everything you do since you don't know how to move or attack in a non-humanoid form...
That's genuinely a reason to have a proper discussion with your DM or even walk out from the game in the worst case scenario.
@@MrQwertysystem I agree. I did argue enough that he changed the ruling mid game which was nice, didn't end up playing too long with him but was fun :)
Anyone remember the Spare Hand item from 3.5e?
This feels like a good time to mention a magic belt with an arm dangling from it that can hold things for you.
Obligatory “a belt with an arm dangling from it”… that’s not a belt joke.
@@selflesswarrior no, it's literally what it was! Just a handy spare hand
@@SymbioteMullet I am sure it came in handy when you were alone
@@0_Body sadly I never played Ebberron or an artificier in 3rd edition, so it's not an item I ever actually used
Oh this totally needs to be brought to 5th ed! I’d love to reward a player at my table who is always having to worry about their character’s hand slots with this! ❤️
I remember the first group i was in, there was one guy that always dropped hes shortbow mid-battle to draw hes melee weapon because of these rule interactions....
...The funny thing was just that not even once did he remember to collect the bow after the battles.
My players did this too, but we just stated once that ofc you pick up your weapon afterwards. No need to say it each time that just slows the game down/gets old. :P
Unless they wanted to pick it up again during the encounter ofc.
@@SwedishWookie I agree. We also hand wave using the bathroom, gathering wood for a campfire and filling out paperwork for the insurance claim when the dragon torches our keep. D&D isn't a real world simulator. :)
I've played at a table where a player let us know every move that lead to his action. "I approach the door. I take out the key we found on the Goblin guard from my right, front pocket. I place the key in the lock. I turn the key clockwise. I test the door to see if it is now unlocked. I place the key back into my pocket, but this time I place it into my left, front pocket. That's where I put keys that we probably won't need again. I open the door."
I should say I played *once* at that table.
We make certain assumptions... recovering dropped weapons while looting bodies is one.
Holy cow that's what the nobles 4 man entourage is meant to be used for. SERFS NEW WEAPONS!!
Yeah, no shit, in one medieval poem a serf brings to his master 7 shields for upcoming battle. 7 shields! Bruh, I wish I was at least half as cool as a dude who wields 7 shields in combat.
Makes even more sense if mounted and using some optional rules I read up on about how some lances are prone to breaking in combat. Charge in, smash the weapon, ride back around and pick up a fresh one from your squire out at a safe distance from the combat.
This is the second new video in two days I've watched that has a reference to something Jocat has made.
I'm loving these little crossovers between the D&D animators
This reminds me of an observation I had about any disarming mechanics such as in the DMG or Battle Master maneuvers. In Xanathar's guide adamantine weapons are stated to automatically crit when hitting objects, and the DMG says magic items are generally resistant to damage, not immune. So your fighter runs up to the arcmage and disarms them of their staff of infinite power, then with their next attack they strike the staff on the ground to destroy it and ruin their day.
If you do that, your life is gonna be ruined, those powerful staffs do like 3 billion damage to the people near it who break them.
@@EasilyBoredGamer I mean, you're also dealing that damage to the Archmage, so... Depending on the situation, that might actually be a worthwhile trade off.
@@funnyvalentinedidnothingwrong sort of, the person who breaks it takes 16 x the number of charges, whereas people within 10 feet only take 8 x. 50% chance you get sent to a random plane of existence instead of taking the damage (good or bad?), but if you have a cleric then just cast death ward on the fighter.
Why break it when your fighter might have a bag of holding on them ?
1) Disarm the mage with an unarmed attack to take the staff from them.
2) Free Item Interaction (drop the staff in the bag)
3) grin smugly at the Mage that now has to make do without the material component to most of his spell.
4) After you ruined the mages day , your own mage might want said staff or you could trade it for an item you could use. Or hang it over your keeps fireplace... you do you.
All fun and games until the fighter does this on a charged staff of the magi instakilling the party and teleporting the mage to another plane
Finally someone's talking about this! I differentiate between "Interaction" (only 1 per turn) and "Free Action" (as many as you like). Free Actions include not only dropping an object but alao falling prone and communicating.
COMBAT:
Round (6 seconds)
Turn
1. Movement
- Walk
- Crawl
- Jump
- Climb
- Swim
- Fly
- Burrow
- Stand up
- Mount/dismount
- Move through difficult terrain
- Squeeze through smaller space
2. Action
- Attack
- Ranged Weapon Attack
- Melee Weapon Attack
- Improvised Weapon Attack
- Unarmed Strike
- Grappling Attack
- Shoving Attack
- Extra Attack
- Cast a spell
- Dash
- Disengage
- Dodge
- Help
- Hide
- Ready
- Search
- Use an object
- Drink a potion
- Administer a potion
- Improvise
3. Bonus Action
- Hand Crossbow Attack (CBE)
- Shortsword Attack (TWF)
- Cast/Move Hunter's Mark
- Command Animated Shield
4. Reaction
- Opportunity Attack
- Readied Action
- Absorb Elements
5. Interaction
- Draw or sheathe a sword
- Open or close a door
- Withdraw a potion from your backpack
- Pick up a dropped axe
- Take a bauble from a table
- Remove a ring from your finger
- Stuff some food into your mouth
- Plant a banner in the ground
- Fish a few coins from your belt pouch
- Drink all the ale in a flagon
- Throw a lever or a switch
- Pull a torch from a sconce
- Take a book from a shelf you can reach
- Extinguish a small flame
- Don a mask
- Pull the hood of your cloak up and over your head
- Put your ear to a door
- Kick a small stone
- Turn a key in a lock
- Tap the floor with a 10-foot pole
- Hand an item to another character
6. Free Action
- Communicate through brief utterances and gestures
- Drop an object
- Fall prone
This does let you swap weapons/spellcasting focus/etc in the middle of a fight without damaging your action economy by just thinking ahead. Put away thing 1 at the end of your turn, and then at the start of your next turn pull out thing 2. Easy.
totally, although it DOES eat your ability to make attacks of opportunity. I love this rule, bunch of meaningful decisions to make ^_^
@@aaaaaa-ts3rw Definitely, unless you have natural weapons like a Tabaxi. Arcane caster gishes like greatsword hexblades can abuse this also in reverse; draw the spell focus to cast a spell while holding the greatsword with one hand, then next turn put the focus away and resume greatsword. You can't use the greatsword while holding it this way but you don't have to ever put it away.
@@aaaaaa-ts3rw You can still make unarmed attacks I guess. So you're not entirely out of options for AoO, you're just out of *good* options.
@@carsonm7292
Eldritch Knight: "I'll drop one of my Versatile Claymores. Then beat the Extra Attack out of the Goblin with my bare hands... ... ... I then take out my other Versatile Claymore and Bonus Action Weapon Bond the Claymore I dropped on the floor... ... ... Then I Action Surge with the Lucky Feat."
@@RayPoreon
Unarmed Combat Fighting Style or UA Juggernaut Warforged can fix that for you.
You come across the most broken part of this rule when you try to deprive your players of weapons and they find a single weapon.
Now they all rotate through the single weapon by dropping it and picking it up like some violent hot potato
Reminds me of the second Pirates of the Carribbean movie where Elizabeth, Raggitte, and Pintel are running from cursed ocean zombies and only have one or two swords between them and keep passing them around as someone needs one.
A sane DM would tell them this doesn't work because the turns are an abstraction and a round only lasts six seconds. They cannot all be using the same weapon at the same time.
(Also what stops the enemies from stealing the one weapon while it's on the ground?)
@@theuncalledfor they aren't using it at the same time, they're taking turns with one weapon, and you can enforce consequences such as reaction or opportunity attacks having to be unarmed only if it isn't that person's turn to hold the weapon
@@spicysalad3013
No, they are using it at the same time if you "zoom out" of the abstraction of turn-based combat. I explained this.
@@theuncalledfor except they can else the combat wouldn't work at all.
When I played pathfinder kingmaker, I loved how the potion, weapon swapping or other mechanics took movement. it made a lot of sense as in my experience its harder to move quickly while doing something with your hands. running down the hall while shuffling all your books in school is not as easy as if they stayed in your backpack, but faster than stopping and rummaging through your pack, the difference is weather you think you'll immediately need your supplies. therefore, I think that system has some verisimilitude
in the group i play with online, we found out that dropping the weapon on the ground is itself a disadvantage. we play on roll20, and therefore we not only have constant access to battlemaps, which are often used for covert interaction (thanks DM, your group loves you for this). this means that if you drop an item, it stays where it landed.
thus far this campaign i´ve had to drop my crossbow twice to fight with a melee weapon, and then at a later stage of combat retreat, without time to pick up my crossbow for one reason or another. the first time i did this i lost the ability to fight from afar until end of combat, and the other time i lost my hand crossbow, which i got simply because i needed the compact armament.
of course some items can´t be dropped, like potions, and other time you might not want to drop a magic item, which would risk it being nabbed by the enemy.
Use a sling like the ones the ones they make for guns.
Don't look at this as the tragic loss of a Hand crossbow, look at this as the reason you invented the mitten string early
I pick up stuff in real life, this video is too real….. too real. I pick up stuff in real life…. too real
I find it funny "drinking a flagon of ale" is listed as a free action but "drinking a health potion" takes an action.
Yeah, maybe health potions taste like rancid sewage? One of my favourite houserules has always been drinking a health potion as a bonus action for the normal effect or taking an action to drink it carefully in order to get the max roll (i.e. a regular healing potion gives 2d4+2 as a bonus action or 10 hitpoints if taken as an action), feeding an unconscious (or I guess lazy) player always takes an action but still requires the roll. The idea essentially being that drinking quickly (or pouring it down someone else's throat) causes you to spill some potion and lose some of the effect.
It’s because of that I like to play with a house rule where taking your entire action to get every last drop of a health potion grants the full benefit as opposed to a quick free action swig that will just have you roll for the health gained as normal. Makes for fun decisions in the heat of battle.
because potions fall under the "use object" category, mechanically. You could say their corks take a few seconds to remove.
lore wise im pretty sure health potions taste like absolute fucking garbage to the extent that it 100% takes an action to drink it or to force someone to drink it
@@crtwrght That's actually pretty smart way to go with it. I never was a fan of how drinking a potion takes an action so usually it ends up being smarter to just attack your opponent in hopes of killing them before they get to kill you rather than drink a potion and waste both your and your opponents action.
Bazooka goblin is my new favorite character.
Followed closely by goblin casting "Lightning of the Center Digit."
I love the "I pull the lever as a Free Action" "That lever is attached to a catapult, that's CLEARLY an attack!"
I also love how Zee effectively confirms what I houseruled for my campaigns, where if you wanted to switch from say, sword and shield to mace and shield, you would DROP the sword, and use the Interact to draw the mace!
Love the nod to the long gone fireball video!
One of my favorites to this day. "He's a monk, of course he passed the save!"
0:52 Goblins right- the catapult is already loaded and aimed. Goblin is only pulling a lever, not preparing the catapult. Thats an action.
Technically free action
The "unless we disagree with them" that's my vibe right there thank you
Rule zero still applies
I actually recognized this, but intentionally changed it to a free object interaction to change your loadout (including Shield). The resolution I came to was that you had to deal with the lowest stats during your turn resulting from this, meaning if you used your Longbow on a turn then pulled out a sword and shield, your AC is still without that shield until your next turn. Considering 90% of my issues with the situation was just that: ranged weapon usage then switching to shields, it was all I needed to make my games work properly. Glad somebody actually talked about this for once though!
To think that Shields are considered Armor...
At least, in RAW, since that is the case. The Eberon Warforged can amalgam (merge) with the Shield. Then no one can steal the Shield without outright killing the Warforge since it is immune to be incapacitate.
I like this ruling. It seems silly to intentionally encourage people to do something like dropping gear so they cast a spell when we have so many gish characters now, so I’ve always just ignored stowing and unsheathing weapons. They purposefully made a way for players to do it. Might as well make it not look silly.
Thank you for making a nice ruling.
@@FenrisZAmarok Yeah, the dropping is a bit wonky when it's really thought about. Like, who in their right mind is going to *DROP* their sword in the middle of a fight?
@@GoblinKoboldGaming someone who really immediately needs another hand, like for grabbing, grappling, pulling thing off, dropping a sword that was superheated, dropping on a sword that is really heavy on a weak npc to trap them (think big sword here), maybe dropping the sword because it's the conduit for your evil warlock patron to speak to you and you're trying to ignore the fucker, etc etc etc. Use your imagination lol
This is how I always run Object Interacting in combat. I could never figure out why people always threw a fit when I said these things. It was right there in the PHB!
*Drops his +1 Axe to take out a maul, to deal extra damage to a skeleton*
Enemy necromancer - Catapults the +1 Axe into the river
Wizard: "I told you that a +1 Axe will be useless. Now, prepare for my Fire Ball, you Necromancer."
DM: "You killed both the Fighter and the Necromancer with Fire Ball."
Wizard: "I AM A GOD!!!"
eldritch knight summons it back into their hands on their following turn, and the dance continues
I always loved that word. Doff. It just sounds like a fantasy word. Also, autocorrect doesn't recognize it which is funny.
Because doff isnt actually a real word outside of 1420-1620s poetry/literature that wants to show characters being posh (and some works by late 18th century writers). When it comes to common vernacular things like "do off (with)", "take off", "doffen" (if french influenced) and "don off" were actually used/far far more common. Even "daff" gets more use in middle english texts despite it also being another word for "dumbass/idiot".
TLDR: Old, middle and new middle english dont/didn't have it as part of the core vocabulary, so it really is a fantasy word.
My table ignores the rules for switching weapons like this. We just say "switching whatever is in your hands is a free object interaction (excluding shields)". Though it is an interesting mechanic, my players come to the table to do quests, fight monsters, and use their cool features. They don't come over to the have to overthink switching weapons and learn the interaction-hand-dance.
Of course, rules like these exist for those scoundrels that want to find a loophole, like the Peasant Railgun.
I tend to agree with this, specifically with regards to weapon switching, not necessarily other object interactions. Reason being that dual wielding is already a mechanically inferior fighting style even without screwing the player over on drawing their weapons. Also inclined to let thrown weapons draw and throw as many javelins/darts/daggers as they have attacks for a similar reason. Both of these interactions actually already have a feat/fighting style to cover them, but the way feats are handled in 5e requiring one to use dual wielded or thrown weapons properly is a BIG ask.
Sure, but now you've reduced the value of special features in the game, such as the Warcaster feat or the Cleric's ability to use their shield as their spellcasting focus. With every hand-wave of the rules, you remove a bit of nuance and strategy from the game. Just something to think about.
@@LukeMason oh I know, I just judge it to be worth it for my table :p
@@sheepmans Fair enough.
I had a ranger who used a bow and a musket. Because the musket took a full round to reload, he'd use the musket as a first attack then drop it on the ground and go ham with the bow
I think you heard this a hounded times already but that's ice cold, my dude.
Pistoliers belts full of em were used the same way and I totally would recommend it. Just draw, fire, drop, 4 times at fighter level 5 lol
Sounds very appropriate for muskets tbh
not how muskets work ingame
Loading: Because of the time required to load this weapon, you can fire only one piece of ammunition from it when you use an action, bonus action, or reaction to fire it, regardless of the number of attacks you can normally make.
it doesn't take 'a full round' it's just 1 attack per any-action prompt to attack with it.
@@Casino220 Full Edward Kenway style, eh ?
This is one of the most underrated utilities of the dual weilder feat. Being able to sheathe or draw two weapons whenever you could draw or sheathe one means you can switch your loadout on the fly by using a free object interaction to sheathe both weapons, and draw both of your new weapons as part of making your attack. You also get +1 AC whenever you have a weapon in each hand, and you can dual weild weapons that don't have the light property. Spicy times for two weapon fighting specialists.
Eberon Warforged Eldritch Knight (7x Feats at lv20)
Fighting Style: Unarmed Combat
1st Feat: Fighter Initiate - Thrown Weapon Fighting Style
2nd: Dual Wielder
3rd: Crossbow Expert
4th: Warcaster
5th: Eldritch Initiate - Eldritch Blast
6th and 7th: Magic Initiate + Magic Adept
(8th for Variant Human): Tavern Brawler
Almost - you only get one free object interaction as part of your turn, so you could do something like run up to an enemy, attack them, and then sheath your weapons as part of your attack (of course, you lose the AC bonus for having a melee weapon in each hand). Drawing the new weapons could be done as part of your attack next turn but, if you want to sheathe and draw on the dame turn, it'll cost an action regardless of whether you used the free interaction as part of your movement or attack actions.
What it does save you from is requiring a full action, or two rounds of free interactions, just to sheathe both swords. With the other bonuses it's still a great feat, but it doesn't bend time and space to disrupt the action economy in exactly the way you implied.
That fourth wall break. Also, I didn't realize free actions aren't a thing anymore
Fun Fact: A Thief Rogue can Doff and Don a shield as a bonus action. This only becomes useful if they get shield proficiency from something, but I just think its neat.
Non UA Warforged: "I become the SHIELD... And the armor too."
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 And in some cases the weapons too!
@@zufieusagi7509
If you have the extended book for the Warforge (both UA and Eberon), then true... Kind of like the Variant Human extended content.
Otherwise, base form, Eberon Warforged cannot merge or attach themselves with Weapons, unfortunately.
This free object interaction can be quite deadly in the hands of a mage that likes to use wind spells to blow sharp debris everywhere. Imagine caltrops, daggers, vials and flasks that shatter when dropped, nails, tacks, and other pointy bits and bobs tearing through flesh like a rabid goblin at a meat buffet.
Which I think is fine, considering that A, doing such a thing would require the DM to make up a homebrew mechanic anyway, and B, spellcasters already have plenty of strong area of effect damage spells.
considering a literal cloud of spinning daggers is 4d4 slashing damage a round, that’s not a huge deal. wizards can already deal a lot of damage with spells, make sure any improvised damage isn’t exceeding damaging spells of the same level and structure.
Shields are interesting, because they take an action to don/doff but they are "held in one hand" so they're a valid target for Disarming Strike.
If you knock their shield off, it's gone. They have to use their whole action to put it back on.
I’m kind of disappointed that shields can’t also be considered weapons because it means you can’t shield bash in D&D. Unless that exists somewhere and I don’t know about it.
@@thornangel16 The shield master feat allows for a shield bash. Also it can be used as an improvised weapon for a pitiful 1d4 damage. You might convince a DM to boost that by adding spikes along the outer edge or center.
@@thornangel16 Yeah, shields with spikes could be considered improvised qeapons *which happen* to double as shields. Just saying, flavor is free and the DM could always agree with you and change the ruling if its more fun that way
In RAW... The Eberon Warforged can merge with a Shield too, since shields are considered as an Armor and not as a weapon.
@@thornangel16 Aw, but what about the spiked pavise?
Glad to know that I've been running things right.
On top of this when people speak on their turn, i let other people reply immediately if they use their reaction. So if they wanna make more advanced plans they can while still keeping things in character (feel like its important to say that i dont mind if they plan basic strategy out of character, just if they wanna do something special/unique they gotta speak in character)
What's fun about this especially if you are using a component pouch means that you can have one hand free any time you need, BUT have a shield in another hand too. The rare shielded spell caster using one hand is funny
We've ran into this where I was handing a party member a healing potion. I could hand it to them as a free action, but to out it in their mouth was an action.
Uncorking the thing, possibly opening their mouth, and controlling the pour _do_ take a lot more effort than just handing it to them. Fair ruling, in my opinion.
Honestly, I would argue that having two NPC squires to allow you to change your load out between turns makes perfect sense. Is assisting in that kind of thing not part of a squire's job? The downside, of course, is that you now have two (probably pretty weak) NPCs in the middle of combat who the DM is free to target with attacks or AoEs.
A warlock familiar who was invisible so enemies would not see them and had hands could work, though no warlocks need more than one weapon.
@@christophershell7564 Reasonable, though depending on what you were trying to do, a vindictive DM might argue that such a familiar isn't large or strong enough to be able to carry your weapon.
Though like you said, unless you had some really weird build, I can't see why you would need to switch weapons as a Warlock. Eldritch Blast is already the best ranged option, and gishes are usually pretty hyper-specialized to avoid multi-ability dependency.
these specific and stupidly niche rules were what gravitated me and helped me sink my fanaticism into the Thief subclass for rogues
i love that subclass so much for their extra free object interaction and their free climb speed never need a climb check again (not actually, but basically never need one again)
Dropping an item being costless makes sense to me; not only is the absence of any action taken literally *how* to drop something, but dropping prone is also free. It's consistent.
The quick snippet where Zee shows JoCrap swing his sword and shield around. Pretty great to see.
"Shields are armor and always require an action to doff or to don." *Laughs in Custom Shield Homebrew where shields are weapons that come in three size categories*
_love_ that you consider them weapons.
That makes sense, in the real world shields are classified as weapons
@@gavinbrown216, in broad terms - maybe. Dictionaries say it's hand-carried armor which is sensible.
@@a_wild_Kirillian But consider this: smashing board.
@@darienb1127, I don't exactly understand what to consider.
If you're smashing someone with a mail plate it doesn't stop being armor. So, shields are armor that's convenient to bash with
I love the middle finger being a Somatic component
“Why do you have six flintlocks?”
“Reloading takes to long.”
Your ability to make a video about adventurers invading a snake temple and another about holding stuff both such enjoyable viewings is honestly magical. I respect you, your range of skill, and I wish you a good day
I'm in love with the constant content updates!!! Thanks for the great content Zee!
I love how even the cool guy shades at the end were applied by the trusty squires lol
The handing someone something part is new to me, and you are correct about its coolness.
This is great for Eldritch Knights with their Weapon Bond. Allowing them to drop their sword on their turn, cast Shield on enemy's turn, then recall weapon as bonus action on their next turn.
Just wanted to say I really enjoy your style of animation and storytelling in these things. It's all wonderfully engaging, charming, and well explained. Thank you for doing this!
"Shields are armor" Yeah, don't remind me, I'm playing as a hexblade warlock. 😑
You pulling out the camera was hilarious to me. I just love the idea that the necromancer is either so lonely or fucked up on some magic after affects that he’s rambling about different games to no one.
Another thing to remember is that there's a specific ruling for dual wielding. Normally, you can only draw/stow one weapon at a time, but if you have the Dual Wielder feat, you can draw/stow two one-handed weapons at the same time.
Shout out to the Thrown Weapon Fighting style as well, which lets you draw the thrown weapon as part of the attack.
Glad I was able to get here quickly! I love these videos, and have since I started playing D&D back in high school.
I mean, everyone has heard the villager cannon theory once.
Okay.... having a servant on hand that will help you swap out your weapons.... that IS stylish, and I genuinely never thought to do that before. I love it!
Also, weather or not a shield requires an action would depend on the GM I'd say. Depending on the make of the shield, you could reasonably say that just dropping it on the ground is a trivial enough effort to make a free action.
Loving the consistent stream of videos lately 😌 Zee has such a calming voice (when he’s not hollering) would love a longer form podcast-style video or podcast 👀
Thank you! Ive been hoping someone would cover this for a while.
`
(Ive been intending to cover it myself on my own channel but... you know, life and shit. *cries in 7 months since last upload)
This is exactly how I've been ruling things for the past 3 and a half years.
One neat side effect of playing a soulknife, my psychic blades are literally free to draw or dismiss, so I don't actually have to draw one...
"According to JCraw whose rulings we hold holy". Except when they blatantly contradict RaW like his ruling on smite punches.
I hate that one.
And its contradicting raw on every level, not only is the requirement for a smite a melee weapon attack, not a melee attack with a weapon (as is used when a weapon is required), but also because the official stance (by now sadly deleted post, tho its still in a few wotc and crawford tweets of old errata updates) is that Erratas are optional content.
So since the OG print of the PHB includes unarmed strikes in the weapons table, its still a melee weapon attack with a melee weapon.
@@ANDELE3025 if fists aren't weapons why is my monk in a fucking straight jacket while everyone else is in simple chains lmaoooo
Loved this episode! Really great animations, one of my favorites (but nothing beats the delicious Brew of the Coffeelock!)
It takes nothing to drop something:
"Shopkeeper, I would like to buy all of the ball-bearings you have please."
...and drop them directly on the ground in your own space?
The most powerful mechanic in all of D&D!... Holding stuff.
For an Eldritch Knight with Warcaster and other Feats... You could hold two double handed great swords until you feel like using one of it. Then drop one of the two Weapon Bonded greatswords.
And if you're a Warforged (non UA), then you can merge with a Shield for a permanent 2 AC until you cease function...
I don't know if this was a thing in 3.5 e, but in Saga Edition, on top of your free object interaction, you could sacrifice you movement, action, or reaction for another object interaction
"Passing an object is a free action for you, but not for them."
Peasant Railgun? Peasant Railgun
I'm honestly amazed Zee didn't mention the thousand peasant railgun. Put an adventurer with a good BaB at the end of line to aim it, maybe throw in a bard inspiring courage and a cleric with a dash of Cat's Grace and maybe Blessing, just for funzies.
3:12 Really, you only need _one_ NPC squire, seeing as a single squire can use both their free action and their main action to kit you up. Buuut ideally it’d be nice to have 2 squire main actions that the squires can use to take the Dodge action for them, the Help action for you, or cast support spells and/or use Bardic Inspiration, if they have those available.
Zee has a talent for single panel jokes that get shown for half a second and still make me laugh
As a 3.5 player, this “one is free per turn” rule sounds much more like a swift action than a free action.
Swift Actions are the predecessor of bonus Actions iirc.
It's basically the same as having 1 action, 1 bonus action, and 1 reaction.
Talking is also called a free action despite being limited to what you can reasonably get across in 6 seconds.
@@DvirPick Technically the rules don't use the phrase "free action" but they state that, "You can communicate however you are able, through brief utterances and gestures, as you take your turn." This is actually less restricted than your free object interaction which is explicitly tied to your action or movement.
Which means that technically, by RAW you cannot use your free object interaction as part of a bonus action or reaction, nor can you simply use it on it's own without using your action or movement. But that's getting nitpicky and enforcing that might encourage players to start concocting odd combos to get everything out of their action economy they can like moving 1 inch so they can use their object interaction, then bonus action, then action and the rest of their movement...
@@MannonMartin restraints encourage creativity. i love seeing what players will come up with
Free actions do technically exist in 5e (same way how take 10 still exists and is actually the default for all ability checks that aren't a instantaneous and 1 time thing like counterspell or a trap/bomb that explodes on failure to disarm rather than on timer). It are things that require you to be able to act that state (no action required).
Just realized this gives a nice boost to loxodons being able to hold an extra object.
My players are definitely allowed to drop their bow and grab thier sword for free, that's what scabbards are for! They're also allowed to panic when they remember my favorite spell is Catapult.
Could you do a video on the peasant railgun? Wherein you have an absurd number of hirelings pass an object to each other down a line, which thanks to the combat rules always takes 6 seconds thereby accelerating the object to an arbitrary speed determined solely by the number of hirelings you can afford.
Just because it's traveling arbitrarily fast in the middle of the line, doesn't mean that it retains that speed at the end. For the last person in line to grab it, it necessarily must be moving slow enough to grab. At the end of the turn, the last guy is either holding the object, drops it (onto the ground next to him), or makes an improvised ranged weapon attack against an enemy.
Yes please. This sounds utterly insane and I want to know more. Especially in animated form
Peasant Rail Gun annoys me as a DM because it is the biggest example of 'Players will try to apply real world physics to game mechanics only when it benefits them'. Like acceleration is never calculated in any other instance, but now suddenly players want to do a physics equation to justify shenanigans...
Peasant railgun ignores that no matter the speed during the passing, the maximum velocity of the object is capped when thrown thus is its speed, so no matter the amount of peasants, it cant be beyond 60 ft over 6 seconds aka 3.048ms.
Or 5~9 ft (around 0.5ms typically) for a regular peasant in 3e (5+ every 2 above 10 on the the strength roll/check for item throw, attack for weapon throw which due to improvised has a -4 penalty ontop).
Which honestly is quite pathetic and enforces the medieval undernourishment of a setting as typically people can throw regular handheld objects at around 20~33ms when one really means it.
@@kid14346 I won't disagree with you, however given the number of cooperative hirelings required I think this is something that can only ever happen with the dms approval anyway. Shenanigans are entirely appropriate if the tone of the campaign allows.
My rule of thumb for if something more complex is an action or bonus action, comes down to whether of not you need to roll a d20. If you need to roll, it is action.
I would stick to RAW by that scenario instead of adding in complications as a DM.
It bogs down the battle that isn't even terrain changing.
@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Oh this is for things that RAW doesn't cover. Of course things that are stated to be actions and bonus actions are considered as such.
My favourite approach is this: "you provoke opportunity attacks if you try to pick something up with an enemy nearby".
Makes disarming a valid tactic and prevents the drop, cast, pick-up loophole
I knew all of this, but I'm glad more people will know it moving forward. I sometimes list the interact with object alongside the movement, action, and bonus action, as one of the resources you get each turn.
This is why the party made my lizardfolk soldier put dummy strings on his weapons.
Once dropped a wand of magic missiles for my offhand dagger, because I kept failing my use magical item check. Poor choices were made as a turn later the kobold magic user approached it with a sh*t eating grin.
"Dropping your weapons is free!" That's what my bard always very reasonably explains to the enemies.
The remaining ones that weren't slain by the first fireball, that is.
Fun little thing i've been doing since figuring this out, in most typical engagements I have two pistols on me and mainly use a sword and shield. First I engage at range, first gun, fire then drop and engage with my second pistol. After which I would close distance and use my free item interaction on next turn to draw my sword. DM liked my approached to this and allowed me to put lanyards on my little wheellocks so I don't have to collect them afterwards.
Nice little working to this lot, thanks Zee.
Never more had I considered how important the “use an object” action was until I played a thief rogue.
His name was Dr. Alexander Hampton and his background was a failed merchant specializing in medicine.
My “gimmick” was taking the healer’s feat and using medkits mid combat to patch up my allies. As I could do it twice a turn so long as they were within 35 ft of movement.
It wasn’t a great build but it was fun! I gave him the flaw that “he must save everyone” so when he hears screaming he’s the first to run headlong into danger.
The venom in his voice when talking about shields in the end shaved a year off my life.
Thank you for adding the feets-notes regarding shield snagging/plonking. As the video started to wind down for the advertisement, I was just gearing up my skull taffy to start forming an inquiry about the matter -then °boop° Exception: Shields are considered armor with relevant action cost to strap on or yank off.
Thank you for your continued thoroughness, and highly entertaining quality animated antics. I always immediately watch them the moment they show up on my feed -regardless of whatever else I might be watching already.
Is that a friggin' chain hammer? That's some advanced pummelling.
my house rule for holding weapons is rather involved due to several rulings i've had do make regarding this. and goes thusly:
at the beginning of any turn and when you roll initiative, you choose what you are doing with your hands
if you choose to hold one one-handed weapon or one two-hande weapon, you can attack with that weapon and cast spells with somantic components
if you hold two weapons you can attack with both but not do spells with somantic components
if you hold a weapon and a shield you can attack with the weaon but not do spells with somantic components
if you hold a spell casting focus, you can cast spells requireing that focus and spells with somantic components and make unarmed attacks.
if you hold a spell casting focus and a one-handed weapon, you can attack with that weapon and cast spells with somantic components and components that require that spell casting focus.
you can always throw a weapon with the thrown property
shields do not require time to doff
holy symbols do not need to be held. (this one is kinda in the book p.151 holy symbol)
Which is why the Dual Wielder feat states - You can draw or Stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or Stow only one.
If I had a player try to abuse the squire situation, his who the first target would be in battle... but if they were just using them for roleplay flavour, a few rolls may get fudged in order to keep them alive.
Also Eldritch Knight bonus action summoning a weapon.
@@reespewa
Add in Thrown Weapon Fighting Style for... Well... Thrown Weapons.
I think shields being separate from object interactions makes sense when you consider that to don or doff a shield you usually have to go our of your way to strap it to your arm and then hold it. Though this also gets weird with how there are many different TYPES of shields that may function differently
Edit/Addition: Though I'll suggest a small amount of homebrew stolen from a book called The Warrior's Codex if you want to change that.
- Handled shields use a wood or metal handlebar on the inside of a shield. These shields can be doffed or donned with the item interaction you receive as part of your turn and can be dropped freely, but enemies have advantage on checks made to disarm you of them.
- Strapped shields attach the shield to the arms, reinforcing the handle with a series of cloth or leather straps. These shields take an action to don or doff, and enemies have disadvantage on checks made to disarm you of the shield.
The tables that just handwave picking up stuff and drawing them are the best tables. Same goes for tables who do not care about encumbrance unless someone tries to carry a horse on their backpack.
From holding items, we can segway to disarming attacks. It's an attack in which your attack roll is contested by the defender's Athletics. You can target an enemy's shield to lower its AC on a success. However, it the target object is held with 2 or more hands, the defender has advantage on the skill check.
One of my earliest characters, which I remember oh so fondly. (mostly because they were broken beyond all imagination, but I was a noob and didn't realize it at the time, nor did I take full advantage of it due to noobishness as well - it was a campaign with very broad acceptance of homebrew for a bunch of power gamers though, so I fit in well!) -- was a 3.5e swordsage (ToB was cool :p) who animated their armory of weapons one by one, and would just drop them in random places on the battlefield and then use them to retain the ability to attack or AOO creatures within the minefield of animate swords, hammers, and polearms. As I got to higher levels I had to take advantage of the "you can drop without cost" to be able to drop my maximum number of weapons per turn. I also had a stupidly comical setup involving multiple different methods for different weapons for how I would be able to draw/equip enough weapons per turn to feed the rapid-anima machine.
By the end of the campaign I'd honed in primarily on a specific type of sword that could have reach but could also still hit adjacent enemies, to maximize my battlefield coverage. I was carrying around some Attack on Titan style hip-mounted blade carriers that launched swords into my hands quickly. And my character turned into a very frightening battlefield-control-mage style of play as it would gradually set up a bigger and bigger area each round that was uncomfortable for any enemies to be inside, though it was all as a martial :D
BRB strapping squires to my arms and legs. Squiremechsuit let's go. "Reload my crossbow, worm!"
Free weapon switching can get crazy the more attacks/actions you have per turn, such as with haste. Swing a sword, fire a bow, then cast a cantrip then bring your sword back out to start next turn. Major multitasking.