TOPIC: Focus weapon clairification

Per Jeff, the following paragraph has been added to the description of all "Focus" weapons (staves and batons) in the TDb :
Under most circumstances, two hands are required to cast a spell. However, the magic contained within this weapon aids in spellcasting, thus allowing its owner to hold this weapon and cast a spell. However, this weapon does not grant the ability to simultaneously make a physical attack and cast a spell.

Odd that was needed.

Does that mean casting any spell that is not a focus weapon requires the caster to have his hands free? For example a bard has to but down his shield to cast a spell.

I think that this was in response to the discussion about Briano's Bodhrain.

SageSTL wrote: I think that this was in response to the discussion about Briano's Bodhrain.

Can you give me a quick synopsis of what that discussion was because I am confused how a bard's instrument relates to focus weapons?

Here's a link . It comes down to a discussion about what can and can't be done with Briano's; it would seem that the Baton and other Focus items are being identified as an exception to what would appear to be the rule.

Again not certain how it applies. BBB and the bard discussion seems to be about Standard Actions and Free Actions. This is about hands. Maybe I missed something.

The discussion around Briano's Blessed Bodhran (henceforth BBB) was that:

You can't use Shield of the Scholar to cast a spell as a free action when BBB is equipped.

This is because BBB occupies both hand slots, and so you'd need 1 free action to switch from BBB to your Shield of the Scholar, and a second one to read a scroll as a free action using Shield of the Scholar's ability.

Contrarily, you _can_ use Widseth's Mystical Lute to perform a standard action of Bardsong + physical attack, and then _also_ use Shield of the scholar to read a scroll as a free action. This is because Widseth's Mystical Lute allows you to effectively equip the lute, and a mainhand, and an offhand (4 hands total).

That being said, I'm not sure the BBB ruling has anything to do with this announcement.

The BBB ruling is true whether or not it requires 2 free hands to cast a spell, as it relates to whether or not you can equip BBB and Shield of the Scholar at the same time (you can't - that would take 3 hands)


Leaving aside bard instruments, this clarification strikes me as a reasonably large rules change.

Have Wizards and Druids since time immemorial had to spend their free actions on rounds they alternate between casting and attacking equipping and equipping their non-focus weapons?

I don't think so.

Certainly I've never heard: "Free action to drop my Dagger of Arcane Luck and Brawlers mug, cast a spell." on round 1 followed by "Free action to equip my Dagger of Arcane Luck and Brawlers mug" on round 2 in the dungeon.

This ruling would mean a Druid can't wear the Dragonscale set and spellcast at the same time until 2016 - as before 2016 Druid's didn't have focus weapons, and you aren't allowed to unequip a set item (Dragonscale shield). This is clearly not how the rules have worked in the past.

I'm not sure why this was needed, either. I'd never realized that it's supposed to take a free action to switch between casting and physical attacks.

This implies that Clerics and Druids lose armor class, and potentially other effects, when they drop their shields to cast.

Brad Mortensen wrote: I'm not sure why this was needed, either. I'd never realized that it's supposed to take a free action to switch between casting and physical attacks.

This implies that Clerics and Druids lose armor class, and potentially other effects, when they drop their shields to cast.

That is what I am thinking. It would mostly be changing AC for Clerics, Druids and Bards that drop a shield to cast a spell.

However you are also using a Free Action to drop that shield or weapon and another Free Action to pick it back up. This seems very odd to me.

Good points - so...

Templar Set
Defender Set
Dragonscale/hide Set
Might Set involving orb and/or Scepter
Footman set (!)

All interact strangely with this rule. Either Clerics (and others if able) can't wear these sets and cast spells (unles maybe they have a focus weapon? even here it's not clear to me what the implications are - as a non-focus shield is still locking up one of their two hands), or the rules for sets and equipping need to change...

And the 5th level Ranger can't cast Barkskin without dropping their weapons, which they can't do if they are using them to qualify for the Viper Strike set bonus

Matthew Hayward wrote: Good points - so...

Templar Set
Defender Set
Dragonscale/hide Set
Might Set involving orb and/or Scepter
Footman set (!)

All interact strangely with this rule. Either Clerics (and others if able) can't wear these sets and cast spells (unles maybe they have a focus weapon? even here it's not clear to me what the implications are - as a non-focus shield is still locking up one of their two hands), or the rules for sets and equipping need to change...

And the 5th level Ranger can't cast Barkskin without dropping their weapons, which they can't do if they are using them to qualify for the Viper Strike set bonus

Maybe spell casting will become its own mode of combat??? So we will have Melee/Range/SpellCasting??? Then you would be able to have nothing equipped in the SpellCasting mode of combat but still get your set bonuses, but lose your AC bonus and anything else that you would get for having a particular shield or weapon equipped.

Again this is just very odd to me.

I suspect you are reading too much into this. I suspect this was added to prevent the argument about casting a spell through the Rod of Focus and then using it to bash in the same round.

Since the original version D&D, semantic components have been part of spell casting, but those components are not required to be fingers, more specific arm and hand gestures. For objects used to augment spell casting the spell passes through the object to gain the benefit, with the object becoming the focus of the spell. Holding a shield has not been an issue for clerical/druidical casting, as the semantic component is usually related to boldly invoking the power of the deity. Remember for clerical spells, the power actually comes from the deity, not the caster. Mage spells are more intricate as the semantic element weaves a connection to the planes to generate the magic. Hence why mages (in most cases) cannot use shields.

I don't see anything in the new verbage that conflicts with the long standing description. Of course, I have been wrong before.