Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Soceus 06-02-07, 06:39 PM	There's a player in my DnD group, who insists while traveling he always has his sword out, while walking, even if we walk for 3 years, the whole time he says he has his sword out. Now to the rest of us logically this cant happen, you'd get tired out of holding your sword, or whatever weapon your using (he's using a bastard sword in this certain scenario). Any suggestions on how to explain to him it's impossible to always have your weapon out?
Vharuck 06-02-07, 06:40 PM	Double the effects of fatigue and exhaustion on him from walking.
Zaver 06-02-07, 06:48 PM	One of the reasons people keep their weapon in it's scabbard was to protect it from the elements. Have his sword break because he didn't take proper care of it. Also, why does he feel the need to keep his sword out at all times? A weapon can be drawn as a free action as part of a move action so it's not like it's that hard to be ready to fight. He could also just take quick draw.
Salla 06-02-07, 06:51 PM	If you don't even want to get that crunchy, apply a circumstance penalty to any Diplomacy checks that the party might make to otherwise Neutral or Friendly NPCs they encounter. Openly wielded weapons are generally antithetical to overtures of peace. Giving him a minus to-hit or damage for 'arm/hand fatigue' might work ... I'm not sure it warrants a full fatigue/exhaustion. Yeah, his arm is tired, but why would that stop him from running (for example)? :)
Edymnion 06-02-07, 06:52 PM	Give him a -1 Fatigue penalty to attack rolls for every hour he's been holding the sword drawn. His arm is so tired, it makes it difficult to fight.
PhantomTrain 06-02-07, 06:54 PM	Just a little question, here. Why is this a problem, exactly? It seems like a ridiculous little flavor thing to me. He probably thinks it somehow makes his character cooler or something silly like that. Since it affords him practically no mechanical benefit, why worry about it? I mean, having your sword out doesn't let you take 20 on initative checks, automatically detect ambushes, or avoid being flat-footed, so who cares? Let him have his silly little personality quirk. Until he enters a city that demands that all weapons be peacebound. Then kick his ass hard.
allenchan 06-02-07, 06:57 PM	I agree. I really dont see the issue with this. I know barbarians that keep a sword attached (locked gauntlet) nearly all the time, too. They tend to just say they walk with it resting on their shoulder or dragging behind.
KillerGM 06-02-07, 07:01 PM	Just a little question, here. Why is this a problem, exactly? It seems like a ridiculous little flavor thing to me. He probably thinks it somehow makes his character cooler or something silly like that. Since it affords him practically no mechanical benefit, why worry about it? I mean, having your sword out doesn't let you take 20 on initative checks, automatically detect ambushes, or avoid being flat-footed, so who cares? Let him have his silly little personality quirk. Until he enters a city that demands that all weapons be peacebound. Then kick his ass hard. Agreed. Is he trying to get some mechanical benefit for it? If so, just don't let him have the mechanical benefit. Is it in response to *always* getting ambushed? Well, that might be a problem in and of itself... Is it just flavor? Then just let him do it. I don't really see a reason to make a big deal out of it.
Kaldric 06-02-07, 07:08 PM	Or simply tell the character that because his arm is tired from carrying the sword out of the scabbard all the time, you are going to treat him as if the sword was IN the scabbard for how long it takes him to ready it for combat. No free Quick Draw feat. Part of the reason he's doing this is so that he can be instantly ready to take a full attack action, I would imagine. He figures that if there's no reason not to have the sword out, why put it away? Then he doesn't have to take a move action, he's ready to swing at a moment's notice. If he chooses to keep his sword ready in a dungeon-crawl situation, when it is obvious that danger could come at any second, well... that's really just good sense, actually. If he keeps it out of the scabbard for hours and days at a time, start imposing penalties on him that would be appropriate. Make him aware of why people have scabbards in the first place. Definitely give the sword more wear and tear if it's out of the scabbard all the time. Start describing the rust on it, and if that doesn't stop him, start knocking off hardness and hp from the sword for the constant temperature changes and moisture issues. Penalize him on every social skill except for intimidation. Penalize him on every physical skill that has an armor check penalty. You get the idea.
Rerecros 06-02-07, 07:11 PM	I see there is a slight advantage in openly brandishing a weapon where ever you go, it'll make brigands think twice before attacking someone who clearly has a warrior's training. However this is canceled out by the unwanted attention he'll draw from legitimate authority who seem some foreigner brandishing his weapon all the time.
Edymnion 06-02-07, 07:13 PM	It could also be an issue if he has any elemental enchantments, as remember its still a standard action to activate the enchantment, and if he never sheaths the weapon, he never has to turn it off.
KillerVole 06-02-07, 07:16 PM	Make him climb or swim every so often, so he has to put it away. Or just ask him why he's doing it, and see if you can work out a compromise.
allenchan 06-02-07, 07:16 PM	Part of the reason he's doing this is so that he can be instantly ready to take a full attack action, I would imagine. He figures that if there's no reason not to have the sword out, why put it away? Then he doesn't have to take a move action, he's ready to swing at a moment's notice. My question is how often does this come up for it to really be an issue? How often is the adventurer waylayed(sp?) before getting near the dungeon entrance, etc? if it happens enough to have significant in-game consequences, then, as another poster already said, you need to start seeing why the pc is carrying their weapon out, because obviously you are using far too many ambushes. OTOH, if it doesnt happen much, then there's no real concern in the first place.
nameneeded 06-02-07, 07:24 PM	Maybe he pictures himself like the guy in Final Fantasy.....no scabard just a big uh...butt sword. But he does have to set it down. He has changed clothes right? and bathed? and swam? and ate something that was not spoon friendly? Or maybe its not his and he's scarred to set it down as it will return to its owner via a teleport objet type spell!
Kouk 06-02-07, 08:06 PM	Doesn't seem like a real issue. He is voluntarily tying up his hands and preventing himself from doing certain other things. What kind of sword is it? If it is two handed, and this really bothers you, assuming he holds it only with one hand with the blade on his shoulder you could say it takes the same amount of time to ready it as if he had to draw it from the sheath. If it was just a matter of always being armed, a spiked gauntlet would do the job, though it probably isn't as strong as the sword it is something to keep in mind. If he is holding it straight out in front of him because of some kind of paranoia he might eventually get tired, but just holding it like you were transporting it wouldn't take any real effort. You can carry hundreds of pounds 24/7 on your back (or anywhere really) if you have enough strength (in the game at least). The only penalty should probably be to social interactions, like a -5 on any peaceful negotiation (but don't give a bonus to intimidate unless from an RP stand). That and always have people say "Excuse me, could you please put your sword away?", have the guards follow him around etc. If bandits are crazy enough to attack a bunch of armed, armored (and robed) guys that are trudging along in the wilderness I don't think they would care whether one had his sword drawn already. I can see a benefit to sleeping with your weapon in your hand, because it is an extra move action when you have to stand up, but otherwise having it out all the time while you are awake doesn't seem like there is any real benefit. Unless the bandits keep charging straight at the guy holding the sword as their first action, it wouldn't help him get a full attack even if he had it out already.
Andrew 06-02-07, 09:04 PM	A lightning storm could be amusing.
ishpu 06-02-07, 09:40 PM	watch everyone panic as someone enters the city with his sword drawn, then the guards come and ask him to hand over his sword....?
temparus2000 06-02-07, 09:43 PM	do you mean that he even carries it around in towns in such? In taverns? I agree that it is mostly not a big deal, but the local town law enforcement (or bartender) may not appreciate someone just strolling about with a big honkin' sword that isn't sheathed.
Agognon 06-02-07, 09:55 PM	Give him a scabbard of keen edge.
danielinthewolvesden 06-02-07, 09:57 PM	No big deal, do not sweat it, who cares?
Hochiu 06-02-07, 11:42 PM	Two words: Lightning Rod.
Commodore 06-03-07, 02:07 AM	Check to see if he accidentally forgets it somewhere? Or let it get lost in an inn? Let him be cursed by an enemy to lose proficency in bladed weapons? (May be too harsh...)
Archangel62 06-03-07, 09:14 AM	Here's a simple idea, quit making a big deal out of it rather than being a whiny jerk and throwing penalties on him for things not covered. He feels it makes him more intimidating or look more prepared or whatever, fine, let him. I honestly can't see what the big deal is about him having his weapon at the ready, it's more a sign of a control freak DM that wants to regulate this than anything else.
Magrus 06-03-07, 09:42 AM	Here's a simple idea, quit making a big deal out of it rather than being a whiny jerk and throwing penalties on him for things not covered. He feels it makes him more intimidating or look more prepared or whatever, fine, let him. I honestly can't see what the big deal is about him having his weapon at the ready, it's more a sign of a control freak DM that wants to regulate this than anything else. Hmm, I think that's a bit of an over-reaction. Everything has cause and effect, and as the DM, it is your job to determine those things. As has been said above, it's not all that big of a deal outside when threatened. It is a problem if the big guy with a sharp sword is brandishing it when wandering through town to get to the palace at the center of it. Personally, I tend to base common sense around how I run games in a number of situations. Dragons and ogres don't factor into common sense. Big human wandering around with big shiny sword in front of the baker's stand does. That scares people, and the authorities are likely to come up to him and make him put his weapon away, or else. "Else" being the weapon is confiscated, and the ruling class may consider a new law to go into effect to prevent such things happening. They may rule all weapons must be registered by everyone in the city, and only certain weapons are legal for "common citizen" use. Which would give the sword happy adventurer the choice between switching to a quarterstaff or depositing his big shiny sword at the guard tower nearest to the entrance he came into the town through. It isn't a control freak thing, it's a flavor thing. The PC's aren't the only one's who consider flavor. The PC controls the flavor on his character, nothing more. The DM controls the flavor on EVERYTHING ELSE. Hence, the DM has to determine what goes on with everything else. @ OP, If that sword glows, that's open game for a thief. A basic 3rd level rogue should be able to realize the wealth a glowing sword represents. Even just one with continual light put on the blade is worth roughly 200 gp. Which is enough for a thief to purchase a home. A masterwork sword is worth more than that. It could feed him for a few years, if he doesn't mind carrots and water for food. The cost of a MWK Bastard sword could keep him living like a wealthy merchant in taverns for 5 months or so. That is a fun plot hook IMO. One which represents a canny thief to realize a low-level adventurer doesn't have the power to kill him with little effort, and can still provide shiny stuff that is worth a lot.
Archangel62 06-03-07, 12:20 PM	Hmm, I think that's a bit of an over-reaction. Everything has cause and effect, and as the DM, it is your job to determine those things. As has been said above, it's not all that big of a deal outside when threatened. It is a problem if the big guy with a sharp sword is brandishing it when wandering through town to get to the palace at the center of it. Personally, I tend to base common sense around how I run games in a number of situations. Dragons and ogres don't factor into common sense. Big human wandering around with big shiny sword in front of the baker's stand does. That scares people, and the authorities are likely to come up to him and make him put his weapon away, or else. "Else" being the weapon is confiscated, and the ruling class may consider a new law to go into effect to prevent such things happening. They may rule all weapons must be registered by everyone in the city, and only certain weapons are legal for "common citizen" use. Which would give the sword happy adventurer the choice between switching to a quarterstaff or depositing his big shiny sword at the guard tower nearest to the entrance he came into the town through. It isn't a control freak thing, it's a flavor thing. The PC's aren't the only one's who consider flavor. The PC controls the flavor on his character, nothing more. The DM controls the flavor on EVERYTHING ELSE. Hence, the DM has to determine what goes on with everything else. @ OP, If that sword glows, that's open game for a thief. A basic 3rd level rogue should be able to realize the wealth a glowing sword represents. Even just one with continual light put on the blade is worth roughly 200 gp. Which is enough for a thief to purchase a home. A masterwork sword is worth more than that. It could feed him for a few years, if he doesn't mind carrots and water for food. The cost of a MWK Bastard sword could keep him living like a wealthy merchant in taverns for 5 months or so. That is a fun plot hook IMO. One which represents a canny thief to realize a low-level adventurer doesn't have the power to kill him with little effort, and can still provide shiny stuff that is worth a lot. Perhaps I should clarify. If a guy is brandishing a sword in town then yes there might be issues that can come up because of percieved threateningness(word?). But THAT wasn't the OPs main point, it was that he didn't think the fighter should be able to walk around with sword out without penalty and everyone is offering these incredibly banal and asinine (not to mention exceedingly harsh) ways to punish him for what is effectively flavor text. The fact that the DM has to meddle with that is a sign of a control freak, and the fact that he seemed to embrace these people who decided that he should have these idiotic penalties added again makes me see him as a whiny control freak.
CryoSilver 06-03-07, 12:28 PM	I haven't got an issue with this. It isn't quite the same thing, but all of my characters have hidden weapons on their persons at all times, and the first thing I do after a fight is regain psionic focus, reprep maneuvers, etc. I say at some point, let him acquire a Glove of Storing for when discretion is required.
chuff80 06-03-07, 12:30 PM	If the fighter comes under the panic effect, he drops everything (including the sword he's holding in his hands) and runs. In my campaign, this has happened twice to two different party members, and then the encounter became not only about surviving, but also about "how do we get the fighter's sword while we're trying to get away?" Things that cause the panic effect: Yeth Hounds and Shadow Mastiffs howling. There are others too.
CryoSilver 06-03-07, 12:31 PM	Hence locking gauntlets become very useful.
celtredleg 06-03-07, 12:40 PM	There must be some very weak people, and weak swords around somewhere. Most swrods run a bit less than 2lb actual weight. An M-1 gerand is a bit over 11 lbs. Most blackpowder rifles are close to that. So an adventurer was less stamina than an infantryman, or a mountain man?? As for the sword rusting away before your eyes, you cna leave sharp tools laying against the shed for years, pick them up, knock off the rust and go to work. Besides, a rusty sword will kill just as well as a clean one. As for lightning, you dont have anybody in metal armor? Kind of silly to hit the little sword, and miss the big pile of plate. If you want to penalize him, go for it. But do something that makes sense in the world, not just arbitrary crazyness that makes you look like a vengeful DM.
nameneeded 06-03-07, 12:58 PM	see below......it double posted
nameneeded 06-03-07, 01:05 PM	Look, calling the OP and those that offer penatiels and such control freaks isn't helping matters. Lets try to stay away from that shall we. Lets try a different view. Lets look at modern times. How would you feel if a person walked into a school with a knife in hand? Just a small opened pocket knife. Or a Store? Or a bank? Not waving it around or threataning anyone just in his hand. How would you react? Prob call the cops? Run away? Keep you eye on them? How do you think the authorities would react? What if wasn't a knbife but a clibing pick? Or a 2 lbs sledge hammer? or a basball bat but no baseball gear/ uniform? And before you comment on how its different nowdays its not. We have guards (cops/ soldiers) adventures (bounty and treasure hunters, Private investigators, bodyguards etc) and people who carry weapons/ tools. (mostsly pocket knives/ multi tools) Its not illegal as long as the weapon is leagaly able to be carried in the open. The average citizen (commoner) don't carry weapons. By these standards I, and alot of other posters ffeel a penalty of some sort is called for. The OP just would like some sugestions. I think for the most part people are not against the char from doing it just want some cause and effects here. That being said the OP said this happens when the group is travelling. Not resting. So he likes to be prepared?
celtredleg 06-03-07, 01:15 PM	No problem with a penilty, just make it one that makes sense in the context of the world. As far as cruising into a bank armed, it will matter little if the knife is out , or concealed. People will still react negatively. If you are in a place that reacts massively to a sword held in hand, it is not going to react positively to the mass of weaponry the average party carries around. Calling for insane overreactive penalties is not helping either.
Derren S. 06-03-07, 01:20 PM	Everyone who meets the group on the way will asume that they are hostile as they have drawn weapons. Merchants will flee, bodyguards will themself draw their weapons. Unless the group has someone with a good diplomacy skill that will lead to trouble.
The Livewire 06-03-07, 01:34 PM	First thing’s first. Over 24 hours and no innuendo. :D I’d like some additional information myself. Have you asked him why Mr. Pointy is in his hands all the time? Does the sword have some kind of energy enhancement enchantment on it? Even low level adventurers might cast continual flame on Mr. Pointy to use it as a dual purpose weapon/light source. Indeed, this is one of the best reasons for an intelligent weapon is that it can switch itself on and off at will. Just hope it doesn’t develop a sense of humour. When you say all the time, do you mean “All the time when he’s in the dungeon.” Or, “All the time, even when he sits down with the king for a cup of tea?” If the former, it’s no big deal, if it’s the later, then, well, he has issues. Assuming it’s the later; fatigue isn’t automatically the best answer. He’ll likely complain that you’re punishing him, rather than imposing a (reasonable) penalty for his actions. Others have pointed out the problems in social situations; I’d like to mention some others. Riding Grappling Climbing Swimming Many ability checks (trying to push that door open with one hand) After you’ve finally gotten him to sheath his sword, the first time he does it… nothing happens. You’re trying to change his behaviour. Madly cackling “I have you now!” as soon as his hands are empty won’t fix that. As a compromise tell him for 2k he can get an enchantment added to Mr. Pointy that gives him the quick draw feat.
KillerGM 06-03-07, 01:44 PM	That being said the OP said this happens when the group is travelling. Not resting. So he likes to be prepared? The impression I got from the OP was that it was while travelling - not while in a town. The OP's logic is that "you get tired of holding your sword", not "people freak out walking around with a weapon out in town". For the first one (tiredness), I think it's silly to apply penalties because it's really just a style choice. It doesn't provide *that* much of a mechanical benefit, and it in no way justifies some of the more extreme "punishments" suggested here. As for in town, yeah, it makes sense that people would react differently to a guy running around with his sword out. In some towns. But that's not because he's tired of holding his sword, it's because of the game world having realistic reactions to him, which I think is fine. Another suggestion to the OP: talk to the player, find out why he wants to have his sword out. If it's just an issue of "I think it's cool", then what's the harm? Trying to force your sense of coolness on a player by in-game penalties for OOC choices can be heavy-handed. If it's definitely for a mechanical benefit, and you feel that the benefit is overpowering (though I don't think it is), just tell him that it doesn't make much sense to you, and you'll be removing the benefit (meaning, he'll have to make a move action to "draw" his sword, regardless of where it's held). Hope it helps! :D
Mock26 06-03-07, 08:35 PM	As someone pointed out, imagine the effect it would have on diplomacy issues! Just picture the reaction of the town guard when the group comes up to the city gates, but one of them has his sword out! There are a LOT of ways for the guards to take it the wrong way. Or, if the group comes across another band of wandering adventurers, and they see that one of them is acting in an obviously hostile manner by having his sword out, ready for a fight! I don't see the big deal of having his sword out. You can assume that he is taking care of it by oiling it daily or when it gets wet and stuff, and it really won't give much of a bonus. Yet, it can give a lot of "penalties" in the form of negative reactions by just about everyone. Additionally, I don't think he would get fatigued by walking around with his sword out. If a man can get used to walking around with 20 pounds of chainmail or 60 pounds of plate, then I'm fairly sure he can get used to walking around with 7 pounds of sword in his hand. Sure, he might get tired at first, but after a while he'd get used to it and he wouldn't even notice the weight in his hand. Take care and have a great day.... ciao, john.
Soceus 06-03-07, 09:23 PM	Alright, let me put in some clarification as some people seem a little bit confused. He always has the sword out as in, while traveling, he agrees to put it away in town, but he has the tendancy to pull out his sword while in a tavern, and such, for no apparent reason. The sword in question is a bastard sword. He always has it out when traveling so he always threatens squares, and never has to pull out his weapon when combat happens, and he claims since his weapon is out, he's always expecting combat and is not flat footed in the first round of combat, and can never be surprised in a surprise roiund... Currently he's a duskblade... a caster type. Everyone else in the party agree that they're weapons are put away, and can easily draw them. At this level (we're about 4's now), he can easily pull out his weapon while walking with no penalty, yet he still insists it's out all the time while traveling, even for over a week. The other 2 DM's that I play with both agree with me on this one, so, if I'm a control freak, every other person I know is too.
CryoSilver 06-03-07, 09:33 PM	He always has it out when traveling so he always threatens squares, and never has to pull out his weapon when combat happens, True and he claims since his weapon is out, he's always expecting combat and is not flat footed in the first round of combat, and can never be surprised in a surprise roiund False
Zaver 06-03-07, 09:40 PM	You're flat-footed until you take your first action so says the PHB. Now heres the main thing to do. Never mind all our suggestoins about penalties and the like, you're the DM you make the ruling on what is and isn't. Just tell him he's wrong. The rules back you on this one so it isn't even a problem. Next ambush that he gets hit being flat-footed in the surprise round and he complains tell him to bring out the rule that supports his point.
Eerongal 06-03-07, 09:41 PM	having your weapon out and ready has nothing to do with surprise rounds. He still can get caught in a surprise round, and he still be flat-footed during such (thusly unable to make AoO's until his first turn, too) Having your weapon out doesn't change that.
Mystic Lemur 06-03-07, 09:43 PM	Lets try a different view. Lets look at modern times. How would you feel if a person walked into a school with a knife in hand? Just a small opened pocket knife. Or a Store? Or a bank? Not waving it around or threataning anyone just in his hand. How would you react? Prob call the cops? Run away? Keep you eye on them? Well, In Alabama, USA, What you have just described is actually the only legal way to carry a pistol without a permit. The way the law is written you may keep it in your home or carry it openly, but you have to unload it if you put it in a pocket, in your jacket, or if you get into your car. Then it becomes an illegal concealed weapon. Of course, the way the law is written, if you have a permit you can carry your gun, concealed, onto public school campuses as long as you do not possess an 'intent to harm.' I'd like to see someone try to get away with either scenario in practice, however. He always has it out when traveling so he always threatens squares, and never has to pull out his weapon when combat happens, and he claims since his weapon is out, he's always expecting combat and is not flat footed in the first round of combat, and can never be surprised in a surprise roiund... 1) Yes, he would threaten squares which would be a bonus, albeit not a huge one. Even with combat reflexes, how many people are going to provoke AoO in the first round of combat against a guy with a ready sword? 2) Whee! I don't have to take the incredibly useful feat Quick Draw, nor do I have to move more than 5' before I attack! Frankly, I'd rather have Quick Draw. 3) As has been discussed to death elsewhere, it doesn't matter how ready he thinks he is, RAW say he is flat-footed until he acts on his initiative. Even in a surprise round. The only way around this is to make the first attack, thus further lowering his diplomatic ability. He thinks he's a munchkin, isn't that cute? Really, though. He's just not very good at it.
The Livewire 06-03-07, 10:50 PM	He thinks he's a munchkin, isn't that cute? Really, though. He's just not very good at it. That made me laugh out loud. Ok, so he is looking to exploit a mechanical advantage for it. As others have said he's still flatfooted. He doesn't like it, take improved init. As to pulling the blade out in a bar... Yeah, everyone's going to draw on him, well except the barmaid who will be running to get the city watch. One thing one of my fellow DMs is good at enforcing is the rules on combat in the free city. We'd bind wounds and use non-lethal forms of combat to avoid a murder charge. Even if we were attacked. This could lead to an interesting situation with sword-boy. "We were just going to mug them, but he had his sword out and just started cutting into us before we could react..." :D
Johnny_Angel 06-03-07, 11:07 PM	I don't think it's totally unbelievable to have your weapon out at all times. I've been overseas a few times with the military; I literally had to have my weapon on me at all times - even while sleeping, eating, and showering. Granted, I wasn't always holding it in my hand the same way all the time. I would shift it around or switch hands or cradle it with my arms or whatever; then again, he could say he does that with his sword. Perhaps he's from some sort of warrior culture in which your sword becomes part of you. It's definately not impossible to shower, eat, change clothes, and etc while holding a weapon. Is it a pain in the arse? Yeah, it can be, but it's able to be done.
KillerGM 06-03-07, 11:33 PM	1) Yes, he would threaten squares which would be a bonus, albeit not a huge one. Even with combat reflexes, how many people are going to provoke AoO in the first round of combat against a guy with a ready sword? 2) Whee! I don't have to take the incredibly useful feat Quick Draw, nor do I have to move more than 5' before I attack! Frankly, I'd rather have Quick Draw. 3) As has been discussed to death elsewhere, it doesn't matter how ready he thinks he is, RAW say he is flat-footed until he acts on his initiative. Even in a surprise round. The only way around this is to make the first attack, thus further lowering his diplomatic ability. He thinks he's a munchkin, isn't that cute? Really, though. He's just not very good at it. Yup, that's pretty much it. The mechanic benefit he *thinks* he's getting, he shouldn't be, and you as a GM should just tell him "No, you're still flat-footed until your first action. Period." And the other mechanics are really not that big of an issue... If he still wants to walk around with it out, no use of "logic" should be used to discourage it. As for the tavern thing, it depends on the tavern. Some places would call the town guard, some would laugh at his bravado, and in some places, it would start a fight...
danielinthewolvesden 06-03-07, 11:48 PM	I don't think it's totally unbelievable to have your weapon out at all times. I've been overseas a few times with the military; I literally had to have my weapon on me at all times - even while sleeping, eating, and showering. Granted, I wasn't always holding it in my hand the same way all the time. I would shift it around or switch hands or cradle it with my arms or whatever; then again, he could say he does that with his sword. Perhaps he's from some sort of warrior culture in which your sword becomes part of you. It's definately not impossible to shower, eat, change clothes, and etc while holding a weapon. Is it a pain in the arse? Yeah, it can be, but it's able to be done. Indeed there was one Samurai lord widely known for always carrying his blade out, naked. At least in public.
Archangel62 06-03-07, 11:54 PM	There must be some very weak people, and weak swords around somewhere. Most swrods run a bit less than 2lb actual weight. An M-1 gerand is a bit over 11 lbs. Most blackpowder rifles are close to that. So an adventurer was less stamina than an infantryman, or a mountain man?? As for the sword rusting away before your eyes, you cna leave sharp tools laying against the shed for years, pick them up, knock off the rust and go to work. Besides, a rusty sword will kill just as well as a clean one. As for lightning, you dont have anybody in metal armor? Kind of silly to hit the little sword, and miss the big pile of plate. If you want to penalize him, go for it. But do something that makes sense in the world, not just arbitrary crazyness that makes you look like a vengeful DM. THANK YOU
Undrhil 06-04-07, 12:18 AM	Here's the short and simple of it: if he is doing this because he thinks he is getting an advantage without having to have or use a feat, then penalize him or overrule him. If he is doing it just as a character quirk, then make him aware that it *will* make diplomacy difficult in most cases. The first time the city watch stop him on the streets for having his sword drawn should help him to see things properly. And, if it doesn't, he'll end up quickly making enemies of the city watch since they will try to arrest him if he doesn't comply. Remember, D&D towns don't exist as a democracy like present-day cities do. If the local Baron, Lord, etc. has a ruling of "No Drawn Swords in Public" that applies to *anyone* who is passing through town, no matter how brief their stay might be. Of course, it could also be a misunderstanding ... maybe he named his pet Miniature Giant Space Hamster "Sword" and means that he isn't keeping his pet in a cage while travelling. If *this* is the case, a couple of giant hawk attacks on the party should get the thing put up where it belongs. :-D
Undrhil 06-04-07, 12:25 AM	There must be some very weak people, and weak swords around somewhere. Most swords run a bit less than 2lb actual weight. An M-1 gerand is a bit over 11 lbs. Most blackpowder rifles are close to that. So an adventurer was less stamina than an infantryman, or a mountain man?? A sword weighs less than 2 pounds? What the ... ? I believe it was mentioned that the sword in question is a Broadsword. Those would weigh quite a bit more than your average modern-day rifle. As for the sword rusting away before your eyes, you can leave sharp tools laying against the shed for years, pick them up, knock off the rust and go to work. Besides, a rusty sword will kill just as well as a clean one. Yes, you can leave tools out to rust and pick them up years later and use them, but a sword is a precision instrument. If a sword gets rusty, it loses integrity and can break easily, since you are usually hitting it against things, such as trolls or dragons or plate-mail armor. You go take a rusty sword out to the field and whack at a few scarecrow stalks and see how long that sword lasts, ok? As for lightning, you dont have anybody in metal armor? Kind of silly to hit the little sword, and miss the big pile of plate. Yeah, it's not like the sword can act like a *lightning rod* since it's being propped up on his shoulder, with the tip (more than likely) above his head. If you want to penalize him, go for it. But do something that makes sense in the world, not just arbitrary crazyness that makes you look like a vengeful DM. So far, the arguments you have given don't make sense in the world of D&D. Sure they might make sense *now* but not in medieval times.
Zaver 06-04-07, 12:34 AM	A sword weighs less than 2 pounds? What the ... ? I believe it was mentioned that the sword in question is a Broadsword. Those would weigh quite a bit more than your average modern-day rifle. Actually most proper combat swords did only weigh about two pounds. But like you said we're talking about the D&D world and the sword in question is a bastard sword and they weigh six pounds in the PHB.
Undrhil 06-04-07, 12:43 AM	Actually most proper combat swords did only weigh about two pounds. But like you said we're talking about the D&D world and the sword in question is a bastard sword and they weigh six pounds in the PHB. Only 6 pounds? Yikes ... I thought they weighed more. Hmm ... well, I guess 6 pounds is still quite a lot for a sword. Holding something of *any* weight for a length of time can cause fatigue and stress on the arm....
Storymaster 06-04-07, 01:22 AM	As far as sword weights go, here's a quote from the Association for Renaissance Martial Arts: "the average weight of any one [sword] of normal size is between 2.5 lb. and 3.5 lbs. Even the big hand-and-a-half 'war' swords rarely weigh more than 4.5 lbs." http://www.thearma.org/essays/weights.htm
Someone 06-04-07, 01:29 AM	...Miniature Giant Space Hamster :rofl: If only because I got the reference. But yeah, this sounds like a common problem- that by giving a sufficient description, that they would get some sort of game benefit. Stuff like a guaranteed hit, or an instant critical hit, etc. On the other hand, some weapons just can't reasonably be sheathed. Hefting a greataxe (or spear, or polearm) on your shoulder can be somewhat expected.
CroBob 06-04-07, 01:32 AM	I'm about sick of this whole damned argument. Why did I read all this?! The player is doing nothing wrong. Nowhere in the rules does it say holding a sword all day gives you a penalty. How about royal guards who carry around large shields and spears all day? What about just a shield? He can carry a twenty pound shield on his arm all day, but a six pound sword wears him out?! Any penalty imposed upon him will be arbitrary and illogical. What's wrong with having your sword out while traveling? Why punish him? Do his intentions matter, even? Does that first round of combat where he just might get an extra attack or two because he's prepared ruin the fun of the game for you, the DM? This argument is sickening. Why is this an issue at all?! This entire argument is ludicrous.
Warduke 06-04-07, 03:42 AM	I assume it's the "always" bit that is frustrating. Many twinky type players will try the .... I ALWAYS have my sword and shield on and ready (whether they are in a crypt or asleep) I am ALWAYS moving silently and hiding (even while walking down the street in town) I am ALWAYS trying to search for traps There is no room in D&D for always IMO. Just make it clear there are certain places (such as towns) that this behavior has consequences. On the road, in a dungeon, fine...but "always" should just not happen.
Kouk 06-04-07, 03:59 AM	He has it out in the wilderness, for the (hopefully) rare occurrences that something charges him in the first round of combat, or stands himself 5 feet from the guy with the sword, which would allow him a full attack in those 2 specific instances. Rusting is a bad argument, because most party members are wearing metal armor/shields or have at least some bits of iron exposed to the elements that have no chance of rusting (belt buckles is one possibility for a wizard even, though I guess brass might be more common for that). Lightning is just silly. If a greatsword user kept his sword on his back, that would also stick up somewhat wouldn't it? If you go based purely on height of objects there are probably trees closer to the sky anyway. In order to get this "benefit" his hand is always full. If he is also using a heavy shield, both of his hands are always full. This would make it quite difficult to: A. Ride on a horse B. Catch yourself (or a friend) falling from a cliff C. Use any kind of ranged weapon without first clearing a hand (certainly invalidates bows) D. Scratch an itch E. Convince travelers that you are not there to rob them I think if he wants to do this, it is perfectly fine, and maybe a bit stupid on his part (which could be an RP trait). As for "I am never surprised, don't you see I have a sword in my hand?" that is just false, you can show him the definitions in the book. That same logic would mean a Monk is never ever caught flat footed (or a mage with a hand free, or anyone with a spiked gauntlet or armor, or someone with natural attacks etc). If he pulls his sword in anger, or for no reason, or just likes to wave it around at people, then there will be RP repercussions but there should not be any mechanical "penalty" aside from the ones that require free hands. If you want to illustrate that it is not terribly useful to always have a weapon drawn, all you have to do is not have things run right up and attack him all the time (which intelligent opponents presumably would not do anyway). Start with ranged attacks, go for the wizards or other targets first etc, so he will have to at least move more than 5 feet. Don't punish him just for being a bit weird, there is no real benefit to his actions. He could make it harder if he used a reach weapon, but it is just a sword. I would actually consider throwing him a bone once in a while and having an animal charge him, to reward his character trait. But that assumes that monsters charging the large armored man with a sword leading the way would be uncommon at best. It may help him accept the ruling that he is not actually immune to being surprised if you just allow him to keep it out. Some players like to "look cool", so let them.
northern_bear 06-04-07, 07:26 AM	Any suggestions on how to explain to him it's impossible to always have your weapon out? I would imagine that a soldier walking through the jungle in a war zone would always have his rifle in hand. A bastard sword weighs less than a rifle, so I don't think it's that unreasonable. It's corny. But not unreasonable. Shields are a heck of a lot heavier than swords. And you can't rest a shield on your shoulder. A character who wears his shield all day should have his arm get a lot more tired than a character who carries a sword all day. Yet I never see anybody complain about characters who keep their shields on all day. Carying your sword all day: Cheesy. But not unreasonable. And not game unbalancing.
Varia 06-04-07, 07:36 AM	Its just flavor, let him do it. Easy enough to keep it unencumbering by just resting the blade on your shoulder, so there's no fatique involved. Just apply the obvious drawbacks is all- cant do things that involve 2 hands without doing something with the sword first, and its antisocial which may result in poorer reactions from passersby, and orders from guards to put that thing away while youre in our town/bar/fine shopping emporium. Be emphatic the first time he unthinkingly wanders into a bank or jewellery store with it out, as the owner sounds a (hopefully) silent alarm and the guards respond. A few hours being grilled at the cop shop should make him thoughtful... If he decides to just put it down rather than sheathe it when something requiring both hands comes up then perhaps one time a daring street urchin could grab it and flee even. Purse-snatching with a twist! :P
Eaglos 06-04-07, 08:21 AM	why penalise him for carrying hos sword and not his shield? It doesn't make any sense. Not to mention that he can rest the blade on his shoulder. Give him a penalty on diplomacy and charisma when his trying to interact with people in general. Also make the guards more nervous when his is around.
Millennium 06-04-07, 08:58 AM	If a player wants to roleplay someone who always keeps his sword out, that's fine. This will have an effect on how people tend to react to him, but hey; that's the nature of roleplay.
Pwolf 06-04-07, 11:41 AM	was reading this thread since me and my DM are having a similar issue, except the problem is when the party is attacked. He says that even if my sword is out, i'm not "battle ready" so i still have to take a move action to ready myself in the same manner as if i had to draw my weapon from the sheathe. to give you an idea, we are in a dungeon, have been for a long time, and being surprise attacked or coming across a room with monsters in it is a daily if not hourly occurrence. I don't even think the party travels more then 6 hours before calling it a day and resting due to being attacked so often. since this is still somewhat on topic and there havn't been a whole lot replies regarding this particular aspect of the OP's issue, anyone have any comments on it?
Zaver 06-04-07, 12:18 PM	was reading this thread since me and my DM are having a similar issue, except the problem is when the party is attacked. He says that even if my sword is out, i'm not "battle ready" so i still have to take a move action to ready myself in the same manner as if i had to draw my weapon from the sheathe. to give you an idea, we are in a dungeon, have been for a long time, and being surprise attacked or coming across a room with monsters in it is a daily if not hourly occurrence. I don't even think the party travels more then 6 hours before calling it a day and resting due to being attacked so often. since this is still somewhat on topic and there havn't been a whole lot replies regarding this particular aspect of the OP's issue, anyone have any comments on it? Just keep in mind that even monks are flat-footed until they do something, just having your weapon out doesn't really make you battle ready. Though if he is saying you can't make a full attack action against the guy that just jumped out at you on your turn because you weren't in a combat stance, he's wrong.
Eled_the_Worm_Tamer 06-04-07, 12:22 PM	My view. In 'safe' areas such as cites, areas of rural land that are heavily patrolled and other places where it is unreasonable to expect an attack weapons should be sheathed unless you are actively looking for troubles, naked blades attract attention. City watch will at the very least take him aside and have a quite word for casing a public disturbance and explain that this is not the outlands, the laws hold, streets are safe and that an adventure like him has little to fear from street toughs. In wilderness areas, or locality's where they have known enemies, have heard of bandits or are outright looking for a fight (Including dungeons) i would expect all party members to have a weapon in hand baring environmental conditions to the counter such as climbing, carrying fallen comrades or the like. In a hot conflict zone soldiers keep there weapons at the ready at all times, so should adventurers. As part of expected tactical awareness this should carry no penalty. I would like to hear from the OP how often hes ambushed the players as they travel and the like, it sounds like the player in question is tired of inevitably being caught with his pants down and is reacting to that.
Demangel 06-04-07, 05:05 PM	Hi all first post here :) As a sword owner and collector in real life who collects the real thing (not the fancy wall hanger toys or falsely labeled "Battle worthy" ripoffs either) here are some things about swords that people here misunderstand about swords in general (obviously referring to non magical, real world swords anyway). Misconception: Keeping a sword in a sheath protects it from the elements and will keep it from rusting. This is both true and false, the true part is that yes it does help keep it clean from the elements, and also protects the owner from accidental injury from carrying it. The false part relates to rust and other damaging effects, indeed as an owner of REAL swords I can tell you that if you store them in a scabbard and do not take the time every day to clean them, they will degrade within a week to having visible rust and stains... Meanwhile storing them with a light coating of oil and hanging them on the wall, or storing them in a proper display case will keep them much longer (up to 3 months in most cases before you need to reapply oil and clean it free of dust and moisture). The oils in most scabbards and saya (Japanese wooden scabbard) had a corrosive effect on swords, some dyes were indeed dangerous to a blades finish. Misconception #2: A rusty weapon was just as good. I suppose this depends on the level of rust, but any time you get rust to set into a blade, it's bad news... you can't just knock the rust off of a sword and carry on... Rust isn't like dust that builds up, it actually eats into and corrodes the metal in the blade. After the rust builds up to a certain point, moisture can no longer reach the blade metal any more and so rust essentially stops. Rust damage can be both cosmetic, and structurally damaging. Rust could ruin the edge on a blade if left to fester long enough (not as long as you think) and can seriously reduce the useful life span of the weapon... The moral of these two points is that whether it is drawn or sheathed all the time makes no difference if the person isn't caring for the sword daily. If the sword is in the scabbard (as in worn and in use) it must be well oiled (that is cleaned and oiled regularly, as in 1x per day ideally, and soon after every single use...). One does not return a bloody weapon to a scabbard as that will only make the scabbard an even more inhospitable environment for the weapon. So why use a scabbard at all if it's only marginally protective? You will recall many weapons that did not have such scabbards... A scabbard or sheath protects the weapon marginally from immediate hazards (rain, dust, grime), but also protects the user from injury while they do daily activities... (like hiking or running, or riding). As a DM I might have the player suffer a serious injury from a slip and fall that would normally have only injured his sense of pride... Or have him accidentally poke people around him for some damage now and then... Misconception #3 Weapon weight - This is a pet peave of mine. Due in large part to both Hollywood, and less than informed smiths and companies looking to make quick bucks off of unsuspecting fantasy buffs, many potential sword enthusiasts are under the wild misconception that swords weighed a lot. In my collection and in the collection of people I know, there are many examples of different weapons (mine being the smaller by far). Few if any functional (as in REAL swords that would be used in battle, not for ceremony) from any period, and from any region weighed more than 5-6 Lbs. Indeed, a great sword could typically weigh in at around 5-6 Lbs. Not the 10-14 the industry would have most of you believe. This ties into weapon classification, Technically, there is no such thing as a "Bastard" sword... A Long sword or hand and a half sword however can readily be used depending on it's style, as a one or two, or one and a half handed weapon (the half is kind of a misnomer). My own longsword has more than enough room on the hilt, and balance in the overall length to be suitable for both one, or two handed use. This does not make it a bastard sword however, it is technically a LONG SWORD. If you ever held my sword, you would likely remark to yourself "Ok this feels like a toothpick... I bet it would snap like a twig." Well you'd be horrifically wrong... For the record I also own plenty of "Battle Ready" garbage swords which are built like tanks and cannot hold a candle to this light, effective and supremely durable work of art. Do NOT be fooled by what you see in most venues passing for historical swords... this includes even the history channel, unless it is an authenticated antique, or a well made blade from a skilled smith in moder times (which are few and far between). You're simply not seeing a true representation of anything except modern commercialism or misinformation. For more info you can look into companies like Angle Sword, AARMA, and quite a few other smiths and organizations based around the world and the USA. Not with the intent to buy perhaps, but to perhaps instead represent these marvelous works of art correctly in your games. In DM terms more relevant to the OP's problem... As it does sound like the player is being a munchkin, I would try role play solutions first, and if that didn't make him stop, I'd creatively penalize him with realistic effects from carrying the sword that way all the time... It's one thing to sleep with it out... It's still one thing to unsheathe it when walking into the dark woods or deep cave... But it's another entirely to be riding on the high trails with your blade drawn at all times "just in case." Furthermore, as someone else stated, just having it drawn doesn't mean your on guard at all times... And (perhaps most useful of all), If he IS on guard all the time, it would indicate his character has serious emotional issues, anxiety, paranoia etc. If he had the latter, he should be getting negative effects all over the place, both in role play, and in general. I think one example I have seen for people with such emotional quirks is they have a bonus to either initiative or spot (and a negative modifier to the other) as well as having short attention spans (negative modifiers for search). And worse yet, as they are easily paranoid or anxious, they should suffer on saving throws to scare tactics such as fear, and intimidate... Why? Because, in order for someone to be on guard 24/7, and not have it be because of the benefit of some magic, his nerves would have to be quite frayed and he would clearly be a basket case of nerves and anxiety... All that tension might even lead to a heart attack.
mlund 06-04-07, 05:38 PM	People put swords in Scabbards because it is safe and convenient. You have an extra hand free to accomplish day-to-day activities like ride a horse, get things out of your pack, etc. Plenty of warriors carried their weapons without a useful sheath. Heck, trying to keep a pole-arm sheathed or stowed is laughable. On the march you'll carry the silly thing in one hand over your shoulder or in two hands. Don't take your general assumption (weapons aren't ready at the start of an encounter) and try to bully players into conforming to it. If they want to walk around with their sword on their shoulder, let them. The only applicable drawbacks to such a thing is that it might be seen as "looking for trouble" by outside observers, and if a situation suddenly comes up where a PC might need both hands he'll wind up dropping the thing. - Marty Lund
sticks128 06-04-07, 07:19 PM	Marty, shouldn't we be arguing rules on the AEG boards? ;) (This is Reese) To cross-post somewhat, I am the DM from PWolf's message. He would like to say "I have my sword out any time we are in hostile territory". We are playing The World's Largest Dungeon. "Hostile territory" covers about 90% of the time. So he explained that he wants to have his Greatsword (two-handed weapon) out and slung over his shoulder at all times he is in hostile territory (and not doing something with his hands, like searching a room). I am fine with that. My arguement is that just because you have this big, two-handed sword slung over your shoulder, does not mean it is ready to take off an Orc's head. I say, and most people I have talked to seem to agree with me, that he still has to get his weapon ready for the battle. This can happen one of two ways. 1) He uses a move-action his first round (similar to unsheathing your sword) or 2) He can do it as a free action as part of a move (again, similar to unsheathing a sword). I feel this is completely reasonable. My player is trying to circumvent the "unsheathing your weapon" rule without taking the Quick Draw feat by making a blanket, qualifying statement. If he specifically says "I get my weapon ready for combat" because he thinks something lies around the corner or behind the door, I think that is perfectly acceptable. That is different though then simply having his weapon draped over his shoulder.
Nom 06-04-07, 07:39 PM	Rules-wise, if you want to stay "combat ready" the whole time, this is considered equivalent to hustling, and you'll start to suffer serious penalties after an hour (DMG pg 164).
sticks128 06-04-07, 07:46 PM	DMG pg. 164 talks about different Kingdoms and their settings. Do you happen to have the page wrong?
Soceus 06-04-07, 08:49 PM	K, a little more clarification... He's not a Fighter, a Paladin, or any melee type... He's a Duskblade found in the phb2... Basically like a Warmage... Light armor, a few weapons, and a few spells... I never said anything about shields... Actually... no one in our party even uses shields, out of the 5 of us... no one. He walks around in a chain shirt with a bastard sword out all the time, as a semi-caster type. They rarely get attacked while traveling, about 90% of the time they get attacked while CAMPING, which I dont mind if they have their weapon drawn whoever is on watch, considering watch is normally 2 to 4 hours per shift, and I don't belive that is at all physically straining in comparison to the 12 or more hours on the road. And would definately give off the wrong vibe to anything that would have normally been friendly.
CroBob 06-04-07, 09:08 PM	K, a little more clarification... He's not a Fighter, a Paladin, or any melee type... He's a Duskblade found in the phb2... Basically like a Warmage... Light armor, a few weapons, and a few spells... I never said anything about shields... Actually... no one in our party even uses shields, out of the 5 of us... no one. He walks around in a chain shirt with a bastard sword out all the time, as a semi-caster type. They rarely get attacked while traveling, about 90% of the time they get attacked while CAMPING, which I dont mind if they have their weapon drawn whoever is on watch, considering watch is normally 2 to 4 hours per shift, and I don't belive that is at all physically straining in comparison to the 12 or more hours on the road. And would definately give off the wrong vibe to anything that would have normally been friendly. So?
MHolland 06-04-07, 09:08 PM	My player is trying to circumvent the "unsheathing your weapon" rule without taking the Quick Draw feat by making a blanket, qualifying statement. So? Why are you punishing your player for his ingenuity? It honestly sounds to me like he gave a good reason for why he does what he does. You shouldn't be persecuting him for that.
celtredleg 06-04-07, 09:23 PM	Demangel, Stone disagrees with you. In fact he has an interesting write up on it. Unfortunetly, I have my copy of Oakshott put away at this time, but I seem to remeber he does refenrence a bastard sword, although he mostly numbers them as to type, feeling that names change to much from time place and language. Interestingly, Stone has no mention at all of a long sword.It is often considered a modern refenrence term, rather than one used in period. And if I can find my copy of Burton I will add his comments as well. You and I collect them, he used them on people.
sticks128 06-04-07, 09:50 PM	So? Why are you punishing your player for his ingenuity? It honestly sounds to me like he gave a good reason for why he does what he does. You shouldn't be persecuting him for that. We seem to be finding a resolution, but to answer your question, I submit this. If the Rogue doesn't ever want to fall into a trap, is it ok with you for him to just say "I am always looking for traps"? Thats a pretty good reason for the Rogue to do what he does, still doesn't mean he should be allowed to do it. "Always" statements are generally not good things to allow in your campaign.
Demangel 06-04-07, 09:54 PM	Demangel, Stone disagrees with you. In fact he has an interesting write up on it. Unfortunetly, I have my copy of Oakshott put away at this time, but I seem to remeber he does refenrence a bastard sword, although he mostly numbers them as to type, feeling that names change to much from time place and language. Interestingly, Stone has no mention at all of a long sword.It is often considered a modern refenrence term, rather than one used in period. And if I can find my copy of Burton I will add his comments as well. You and I collect them, he used them on people. Good deal, the term Long sword MAY not have been in use, so I may stand corrected on that bit and thus perhaps also the bit about the name of Bastard swords. Though in general, the concept of a Bastard sword I am pretty sure is a modern way to describe a "Kind" of what we would call a Long sword. I may need to ask my ever so much more in depth collector friends on the Angel sword pages to clarify this as well as I'd hate for my otherwise fine points to look bad because of my own misunderstandings of sword terms. (names and terms I was always bad at in everything else, why not swords too LOL).
KillerGM 06-05-07, 12:05 AM	We seem to be finding a resolution, but to answer your question, I submit this. If the Rogue doesn't ever want to fall into a trap, is it ok with you for him to just say "I am always looking for traps"? Yes. There are built-in mechanics that reflect "always looking for traps". Meaning: it takes 6 seconds to search a 5ft square. "Taking 10" on Search = 6 seconds per square. "Taking 20" on Search = 120 seconds (2 minutes) per square. Basically, it just wears on the spells and timing of things, but I have rogue players who do search every square when in a dungeon and such. So? Why are you punishing your player for his ingenuity? It honestly sounds to me like he gave a good reason for why he does what he does. You shouldn't be persecuting him for that. Agreed. Bypassing the Quick Draw feat is not that big of a deal, especially with all the things he can't do with his weapon always drawn (climb, use a ranged weapon, etc). And the fact that he's a Duskblade has nothing to do with anything - is he proficient with the weapon? Then he knows how to use it, and should be able to carry it anyway he wants to. If the Elf Wizard wanted to run around with his bow or longsword out, I wouldn't have a problem with that at all (all Elves are proficient with them). ALL adventurers are martial people, by the nature of their jobs (silly pacifistic builds aside - those guys have about as much reason to be adventurers as my left toe). :D
maharai23 06-05-07, 12:32 AM	Rules-wise, if you want to stay "combat ready" the whole time, this is considered equivalent to hustling, and you'll start to suffer serious penalties after an hour (DMG pg 164). Wrong. If you want to move at 30ft per round, you're hustling. If you're cautiously advancing through a dungeon with your sword out, you're prepared for trouble, at the expense of looking like you're itching for a fight. The rule on drawing weapons exists for many reasons, but if the intent were to make everyone waste a move action at the start of combat, it would say so. Quick Draw is most useful for rapid throwers, and people who want to start combat point blank, wailing away with attacks. It's used for SURPRISE. Talking with someone, and in the blink of an eye, your weapon is in its hand aiming for the heart. It's not used to handicap players who are obviously expecting trouble.
Archangel62 06-05-07, 10:47 AM	We seem to be finding a resolution, but to answer your question, I submit this. If the Rogue doesn't ever want to fall into a trap, is it ok with you for him to just say "I am always looking for traps"? Thats a pretty good reason for the Rogue to do what he does, still doesn't mean he should be allowed to do it. "Always" statements are generally not good things to allow in your campaign. If he wants to keep making search checks as the party is moving along that's fine. The fact is that there is a mechanic for it.
Mandarbgrim 06-05-07, 12:29 PM	I don't think it's totally unbelievable to have your weapon out at all times. I've been overseas a few times with the military; I literally had to have my weapon on me at all times - even while sleeping, eating, and showering. Granted, I wasn't always holding it in my hand the same way all the time. I would shift it around or switch hands or cradle it with my arms or whatever; then again, he could say he does that with his sword. Perhaps he's from some sort of warrior culture in which your sword becomes part of you. It's definately not impossible to shower, eat, change clothes, and etc while holding a weapon. Is it a pain in the arse? Yeah, it can be, but it's able to be done. That doesn't rule out the degree to which that is socially acceptable. I have had a such an experience. There was a noted difference between how foreign civilians acted around me with my weapon slung behind my back and attached to my RBA with my hand resting on the grip. It affected their behavior a great deal with that change..so..I'm sure the weapon itself had a huge effect. He is being silly with attempting to argue away rules using his own logic. It is interesting that nobody tries to argue about such rules during say...monopoly.
ThatGuyThere 06-05-07, 12:53 PM	Reading the thread at first, I thought, "He's doing it for one of two reasons. Either it's flavour - which could be Cool for some people, I could easily see that - or it's mechanical advantage, which means he's misunderstood the rules." If it HAD been for flavour, inflicting penalties would make you a Jerk. He just likes his character to be "Cool". If he had constantly-rippling-muscles, a Sean Connery accent, or twirled his mustache, you wouldn't penalize him; don't penalize him here, either. If he's doing it for mechanical advantage (which he is / was), then he misunderstands. "Being flat-footed" is more than "not expecting a fight". If your opponent attacks from hidden, having your sword out doesn't help. If they just get it "off the hop" before you, they'll stab you before you bring your in-hand sword up into position. He's trying to gain Uncanny Dodge by carrying a sword. He can - if it's a magic sword of uncanny dodging. But otherwise, no benefits. ((Note: If you give him benefits for it - "You're right, you're ready so you're not flat-footed" - then of *course* he'll do it. In fact, then it's perfectly reasonable for him and every other armed character in your universe to do it. Making it a trade-off ("a character with a drawn weapon isn't flat-footed, but fatigues more quickly") is fine, but consider (depending your your game) it might be a trade-off he considers worth it.))
Mock26 06-05-07, 01:54 PM	If it HAD been for flavour, inflicting penalties would make you a Jerk. He just likes his character to be "Cool". If he had constantly-rippling-muscles, a Sean Connery accent, or twirled his mustache, you wouldn't penalize him; don't penalize him here, either. So, if, for flavor, I want to walk around and spit in people's faces as a form of greeting then my character should be allowed to get away with it and not have any consequences? It matters not if you do something for flavor, it still has to conform to the rules, be they game rules or rules of "reality." The DM has an obligation to make sure the game is as real as possible. If he is inflicting penalties because the cool flavor would cause problems, then that is what the DM should be doinng. If the DM felt that carrying a sword would cause fatigue, and as such assigning fatigue penalties. But, these penalties would not be against the cool flavor aspect. It would be against the negative results of this cool flavor. What if I wanted to walk around with a 100' long wood pole because a 10' pole is dull and boring and isn't cool. Should I be allowed to take that pole into a 20' square room? Or around corners in a dungeon? Of course not. Generally speaking, the pole still has to obey the laws and rules of reality. The pole should suddenly become magically endowed because I think it is cool.
cypherx 06-05-07, 02:54 PM	make him hold a 12 pound weight in his hand for your entire game session every time. oh wait, you would have to increase the weight proportionate to game time. ex:3 hours of dnd, 3 days game time, that is a factor of 24. if he is carrying a longsword, 8lbs, then multiply 8 by 24 and make him hold that much crap every night!;)
Downtym 06-05-07, 03:42 PM	There's a player in my DnD group, who insists while traveling he always has his sword out, while walking, even if we walk for 3 years, the whole time he says he has his sword out. Now to the rest of us logically this cant happen, you'd get tired out of holding your sword, or whatever weapon your using (he's using a bastard sword in this certain scenario). Any suggestions on how to explain to him it's impossible to always have your weapon out? Is this a problem besides "It's impossible to always have your weapon out"? I have a funny feeling he either does this because A) He thinks it looks cool; which shows an aggressive personality so if he's going down that road, fine. B) He's gotten jumped way too much in the past; in which case you should stop piling the ambushes on his head.
Downtym 06-05-07, 03:45 PM	make him hold a 12 pound weight in his hand for your entire game session every time. oh wait, you would have to increase the weight proportionate to game time. ex:3 hours of dnd, 3 days game time, that is a factor of 24. if he is carrying a longsword, 8lbs, then multiply 8 by 24 and make him hold that much crap every night!;) 1. People who play D&D are not the same people as people that would carry a sword around all day long unsheathed. 2. People do carry exposed weapons all day long and they seem to do fine. Specifically, I'm talking about soldiers who make very little effort to holster their rather large assault rifles or submachine guns when they're walking around. "But, hah! They have slings on those weapons!", you might respond. And I would ask, "What keeps him from having such a thing on a sword or crossbow?"
solbergb 06-05-07, 04:22 PM	any PC that uses a pole arm has it out all the time. Many people keep a missile weapon in hand. I'm not sure what the big deal is here, aside from the social consequences (a naked blade that can be sheathed might get a worse reaction than a pole arm that can't be sheathed) PC's don't get this kind of behavior unless getting jumped on the robe IS a common occurrance. My monk considers roads extremely dangerous, much more so than wilderness. He's been attacked a LOT on open roads.
celtredleg 06-05-07, 04:27 PM	Good deal, the term Long sword MAY not have been in use, so I may stand corrected on that bit and thus perhaps also the bit about the name of Bastard swords. Though in general, the concept of a Bastard sword I am pretty sure is a modern way to describe a "Kind" of what we would call a Long sword. I may need to ask my ever so much more in depth collector friends on the Angel sword pages to clarify this as well as I'd hate for my otherwise fine points to look bad because of my own misunderstandings of sword terms. (names and terms I was always bad at in everything else, why not swords too LOL). Not trying to pick on you, I dont get to argue real weapons on DnD boards much. I have never been that happy with bastard as it is very general. Even my spatha has enough hilt that I could get part of my off hand onto it, if I had any reason to do so. I doubt it was used that way very much in history. Try to find a copy of Stone if you can. He covers a lot of ground, and doesnt seem to make to many mistakes. Oakshott (hope I spelled him right) is more authoratative, but hard to find, and extremely expenmsive. I gave over $100 for my copy of Record of the Middevil Sword over 20 years ago. I doubt it has gotten cheaper. One thing to remember about weapon and armor weights in DnD is that they are not meant to just be a dead weight, but also how much encumberance they are to a user. Yes 2 handers are not that heavy, but they can be damned awkward. Other things are less so. I used to go rollerskateing in my chainmail, with an extra shirt over the top. Nobody ever noticed.
TrashCrap 06-05-07, 04:35 PM	It seems like many think this player is trying to get the benefits of the quick draw feat without having to actually burn a feat to do it. What you have to realize though, is that Quick Draw really shines when you have a seemingly un-hostile area become suddenly hostile (ambush). The point of an ambush is the defending party is not prepared. I think all this character is doing, is being paranoid of an ambush. It probably is a flavor he wants for his character to be extremely wary. I know I played a Barbarian nicknamed Shag-nasty who was paranoid of the same thing and did the same thing as this character but took it to the extreme that he wouldnt even bathe figuring "thats when they'll getcha" (hence the nickname). I know I wasnt trying to mimick the effects of Quick Draw. It may happen that its advantageous in some situations, but if the DM has a problem with giving the benefits of the feat, then you can always treat it as if it were sheathed for suprise round combat purposes (as others have suggested)
celtredleg 06-05-07, 04:35 PM	any PC that uses a pole arm has it out all the time. Many people keep a missile weapon in hand. I'm not sure what the big deal is here, aside from the social consequences (a naked blade that can be sheathed might get a worse reaction than a pole arm that can't be sheathed) PC's don't get this kind of behavior unless getting jumped on the robe IS a common occurrance. My monk considers roads extremely dangerous, much more so than wilderness. He's been attacked a LOT on open roads. There is an old Army rule about roads and patrols. There are only 2 things on a road, dead men and ambushes. You definately treat dnager areas diferent. But, unless you only want to travel a mile or 2 a day, you cant stay at high alert all the time. It is a very slow way to travel.
mlund 06-05-07, 05:24 PM	Marty, shouldn't we be arguing rules on the AEG boards? ;) (This is Reese) Oh, that's High Comedy right there. Good to "see" you, as it were. :) To cross-post somewhat, I am the DM from PWolf's message. He would like to say "I have my sword out any time we are in hostile territory". We are playing The World's Largest Dungeon. "Hostile territory" covers about 90% of the time. So he explained that he wants to have his Greatsword (two-handed weapon) out and slung over his shoulder at all times he is in hostile territory (and not doing something with his hands, like searching a room). I am fine with that. My arguement is that just because you have this big, two-handed sword slung over your shoulder, does not mean it is ready to take off an Orc's head. For the most part, it is far more ready than scabbarded across your back - especially a weapon that large. More to the mechanics end of D&D, though, the Move Action is specifically "Draw a weapon," not "ready a weapon for combat." The act of getting a weapon freed and in your hand is at question. If the weapon is already in your hand, even if resting on your shoulder, you do not need to "draw" it. Moreover, there is no mechanic requiring that all weapons be "readied" or "drawn." Spiked Gauntlets, Spiked Armor, and most Pole-arms can't be "drawn." The idea of "readying" a Spiked Shield already in hand, a Spiked Gauntlet already worn, or Spiked Armor already worn would just be silly. There is no "must ready / draw all weapons at the start of combat," rule. I'd say the weapon is quite ready to take off an Orc's head, but the character is not. Unless he's aware of an enemy and has taken his first round in initiative order he's going to be Flat-Footed and won't be making any Attacks of Opportunity without Combat Reflexes. Further, he has no option to Ready an Action to attack or some such outside of Initiative Rounds anyway. I feel this is completely reasonable. My player is trying to circumvent the "unsheathing your weapon" rule without taking the Quick Draw feat by making a blanket, qualifying statement. While the iconic image is of a fighter-type pulling a steel blade from a leather scabbard and such an image provokes a notion of "how it ought to be," that's simply not the rules mechanic for any and all weapons. Many weapons are always carried "at the ready," across hostile territory, as noted above. The limitation is not that the weapon is not available, but rather that the adventurer in question isn't going to be able to attack with it until he or she gets to act in initiative order - because he is Flat-footed and can't Ready an Action outside of Initiative. - Marty Lund
solbergb 06-05-07, 06:06 PM	pwolf - does he rule that way for reach weapons? What about with reach weaopons held by somebody with combat reflexes? (if it takes a move action to activate your pole-arm, you have just significantly nerfed the combat reflexes feat) ask the same question for a bow in a locked gauntlet. it's kind of absurd. The penalties to holding a weapon is that the hand (or hands for larger weapons) are not free, it imposes a weight penalty (that must include awkwardness/leverage to some extent, eg the 6 lb weapon that in real life was 4 lb at most) and it modifies social reactions and perhaps enemy targeting choices. That's enough. As long as the PC doesn't say he's somehow magically avoiding surprise and flatfooted by virtue of having a weapon out. For that you need class abilities (uncanny dodge), feats (combat reflexes) to mitigate some penalties or stuff like high spot/listen and imp initiative to actually not be surprised.
solbergb 06-05-07, 06:21 PM	We seem to be finding a resolution, but to answer your question, I submit this. If the Rogue doesn't ever want to fall into a trap, is it ok with you for him to just say "I am always looking for traps"? Sure, if he's willing to reduce his movement to 5'/round, 5' per two rounds if he isn't at "hustle" speeds. I just ask "are you taking 10, or do you want me to roll" and "what is your + search modifier"? most time, parties want to move faster than that. The game provides sufficient mechanical penalties to some actions, it isn't necessary to add more.
Kaldric 06-05-07, 06:25 PM	He saves drawing his sword if he gets into melee combat before he needs to move on his first turn of combat. That's the only mechanical benefit. (he can draw the sword as part of a move action towards an enemy, he only gets a benefit if the enemy is within melee range on the player's first turn, before movement) To pay for this admittedly small benefit: He takes penalties on every skill that requires using both hands. He takes penalties on every skill that requires friendly social interaction. He runs the risk of losing his sword if he is hit by a trap or fear effect. Notify him of these penalties. He may still want to keep his sword out during dungeon crawls. Unless an enemy pops up within striking distance without the character needing to move more than five feet... holding the weapon has had no effect. If an enemy pops up within five feet, he can make a full attack since he doesn't need to spend a move action to get to it or draw his weapon. If your player wants to have his out in dangerous situations, let him.
solbergb 06-05-07, 06:27 PM	There is an old Army rule about roads and patrols. There are only 2 things on a road, dead men and ambushes. You definately treat dnager areas diferent. But, unless you only want to travel a mile or 2 a day, you cant stay at high alert all the time. It is a very slow way to travel. yeah, well, the monk has combat reflexes and a reach weapon and negative spot/listem modifiers. His strategy is to walk down the road in a zen state and if anything leaps out at him, whack/trip/etc them with his combat reflexes. I don't think he finds roads stressful - he just makes sure he has a reach weapon prepared so that if something hostile does disturb his calm, it won't hurt him or anyone else in the party without at least paying for it. I suspect in his case it is considerably more relaxing being "ready for a fight" than my archer with stealth skills, massive alertness skills and quickdraw. The latter copes with the danger of roads by being super-observant. On the other hand he's an elf, who lives hundreds of years, so an 8 hours stroll through the swamp doesn't seem like as much to him as it would to me, relative to his lifespan. Maybe it only seems like 15 minutes of concentration to him, which is part of why his skills at noticing things are so high. my point is these heroes are NOT ordinary people. And given that there is no penalty for lugging a 50lb tower shield on your arm all day, it seems silly to add any mechanical penalties to having a weapon out.
Soceus 06-05-07, 09:33 PM	So let's see, to all those that say it's fine to walk around with your sword all day, and not have any penalties... How about the wizard that readies quickened fireball, or readies gate for the first time they see something while walking? Would this be legal as well? and if they cant do this in intiative order, they take an unarmed swing at the air or the ground, that's combat and now they are in initiative order. How would you feel about that?
glacialcat 06-05-07, 10:15 PM	There is a serious difference here. Readying actions can only be done in an encounter. The ground is not an encounter, it cannot attack you, there is no challenge rating, there is no EXP gained from defeating the ground, thus it is not an encounter, and thus you can't ready actions. And they'll want to be more specific with a readied action like that anyway! Next time they "see something"? Trees? Grass? THE GROUND! Its your enemy after all, since when you attacked it combat was initiated! Carrying a sword does almost NOTHING to give you a mechanical benefit. If your enemy starts battle 5 feet or less away from you, then, yea, you get a full attack. Not like a monk can't do this anyway, or anyone with shield spikes on their shield.
KillerGM 06-05-07, 10:21 PM	So let's see, to all those that say it's fine to walk around with your sword all day, and not have any penalties... How about the wizard that readies quickened fireball, or readies gate for the first time they see something while walking? Would this be legal as well? and if they cant do this in intiative order, they take an unarmed swing at the air or the ground, that's combat and now they are in initiative order. How would you feel about that? Um, it's called memorizing spells. No one here (I think) is arguing that the guy with the sword would not be flat-footed. He most definitely would be flat-footed, and would continue to be so until he acted, and the enemy would even get a surprise round on him if he failed his Spot vs an ambush. The *only* benefit carrying your sword gives you is not having to draw it. This is relatively minor, because if you have a +1 BAB, you can draw a weapon as a free action while moving up to your movement, and ambushes usually don't occur with all the combatants within 5ft of each other. At least, they shouldn't... How about an archer? Can he walk around with his bow in his hand? Or someone with a longspear? Or a quarterstaff? A crossbow? How about a dagger? Or a longsword? Or a halberd? I don't see why not. They'd all still be flat-footed until they acted in the combat. Same goes for the Wizard, and any other character. If the player is arguing that he'd never be flat-footed because he had his sword out, he's just wrong, and that's it. But there is no need to add extra penalties for it - just inforce the rules that are there... he's still flat-footed until he acts in combat.
Archangel62 06-05-07, 11:02 PM	So let's see, to all those that say it's fine to walk around with your sword all day, and not have any penalties... How about the wizard that readies quickened fireball, or readies gate for the first time they see something while walking? Would this be legal as well? and if they cant do this in intiative order, they take an unarmed swing at the air or the ground, that's combat and now they are in initiative order. How would you feel about that? They actually can cast a spell and hold it, that rule is also in the DMG, they have to mainatain a concentration check to hold the spell under control but they can have it readied and launch it when the time comes. I think part of your problem here is that you're realizing that you're view is rather irrational and more than a little vindictive, and when called on it you try to come up with some comparison (one that is actually radically different) that you can try to use to prop up your deflating plans.
Kouk 06-06-07, 12:46 AM	So let's see, to all those that say it's fine to walk around with your sword all day, and not have any penalties... How about the wizard that readies quickened fireball, or readies gate for the first time they see something while walking? Would this be legal as well? and if they cant do this in intiative order, they take an unarmed swing at the air or the ground, that's combat and now they are in initiative order. How would you feel about that? Hmm... technically you have to be in some kind of combat to "ready" an action. So, if you allow him to take a swing at the ground as a surprise round and then proceed to roll initiative for him and the ground so they can duke it out, then sure. I can tell you from experience you better kill the ground fast because it is tough to get away from it once it sees you. As for actually allowing a wizard to be prepared to cast a quickened fireball at the first thing he sees out of combat sure... A rabbit crosses the road in from of them *blam*, a bird flies in the sky *blam*, the city guard patrol walks around the corner *blam*, a polymorphed Gold Dragon that is touring the countryside says hello... He would be out of spells really soon, and quite possibly end up damaging himself or his allies and not getting along too well with the local constabulary. I think the spiked gauntlet and dagger arguments are good too. Especially the unarmed strike one. "Oh no, my arm feels like it is about to fall off, I've been holding this dagger for hours". It's not worth it. Just don't have the enemies ambush the party by raising out of a trap door adjacent to that fighter, and you will never have a problem with it.
Xykon 06-06-07, 01:24 AM	A lightning storm could be amusing.LOL :D
CroBob 06-06-07, 02:32 AM	make him hold a 12 pound weight in his hand for your entire game session every time. oh wait, you would have to increase the weight proportionate to game time. ex:3 hours of dnd, 3 days game time, that is a factor of 24. if he is carrying a longsword, 8lbs, then multiply 8 by 24 and make him hold that much crap every night!;) 1. A bastard sword is 6 pounds, and so a 12 pound weight would be a poor comparison for the wear on your arm. Also, a Long sword is 4 pounds. 2. Multiplying the weight of a thing is a horrible attempt at comparing for time held. Why is the multiplier 24 hours, instead of the twelve waking hours? How does holding a 6 pound sword for a day equal holding a 144 pound sword for one hour? 3. The sword is out. That means it's not in his scabbard. A weight cannot rest against your shoulder as a sword can, it cannot be rested upon the ground when you stop walking, and it's very awkward to use in two hands, something the bastard sword can do by design. 4. The player is not the character. The player is a nerd. The character is a rough adventurer, trained in the ways of fighting and using swords. 5. Your silly little game does nothing to solve the mystery of how people hold shields all day. Shields, after all, are much heavier than swords, and cannot as easily be rested against the body or on the ground.
Steely_Dan 06-06-07, 07:24 AM	I honestly can't see what the big deal is about him having his weapon at the ready, it's more a sign of a control freak DM that wants to regulate this than anything else. I don't agree; it comes off to me, as the player just wants an excuse to never have to draw his weapon. If one of the players in my group said that his character always had his sword in hand we would all laugh and him and tell him how ridiculous it is on so many levels (visually, socially etc).
maharai23 06-06-07, 07:36 AM	Difference between having weapon out and not having weapon out. Assume both sides of a combat stumbled on each other without any awareness. Example, PC's swing open a door, and see orcs inside, as the orcs look up and see PCs. Thus, by D&D rules, there is no surprise round. Initiative Order: Orc 1 Orc 2 Bob the fighter Orc 3 Joe the mage Without Bob's sword drawn: Orc 1 moves to the doorway, drawing his sword in the move, attacking once, catching bob flat footed. Orc 2 moves to the doorway, and attempts to grapple bob. Bob does not get an attack of opportunity, as he is flat footed w/o combat reflexes (and doesn't threaten), but he wins the opposed strength and pushes off the grapple. Bob the fighter draws his blade. Bob then attacks the armed orc, killing him. Orc 3 runs out a side door, looking for reinforcements. Joe the mage casts magic missile, killing orc 2. With sword drawn: Orc 1 moves to the doorway, drawing his sword in the move, attacking once, catching bob flat footed. Orc 2 moves to the doorway, and attempts to grapple bob. Bob does not get an attack of opportunity, as he is flat footed w/o combat reflexes, but he wins the opposed strength and pushes off the grapple. Bob the fighter makes a full attack, attacking each orc, and killing them. Orc 3 runs out a side door, looking for reinforcements. Joe the mage moves to the side door, and casts magic missile at Orc 3, killing it. At BAB below 6, There is no functional difference between the two. You're still flat footed until your initiative comes, but in situations where hostile acts are imminent, it makes perfect sense. (dust clouds on the horizon, travelling through forest at night, moving through the slums at dusk) At BAB of 6 or higher, it's the difference between a full attack and a single attack. EDITED: To correct error pointed out by Steely Dan below.
Steely_Dan 06-06-07, 08:07 AM	Bob the fighter draws his blade, provoking an AOO from the one armed orc Drawing a weapon does not provoke an AoO.
Archangel62 06-06-07, 01:08 PM	I don't agree; it comes off to me, as the player just wants an excuse to never have to draw his weapon. If one of the players in my group said that his character always had his sword in hand we would all laugh and him and tell him how ridiculous it is on so many levels (visually, socially etc). Now, since I have to assume that you never actually read my earlier posts I did agree that him brandishing his blade in town could create issues. My point is that he can rest the blade against his shoulder, most of the arguments here are unnecessarily punitive and frankly again bespeak a control freak. So the player has the weapon out, big friggin whoop, you would all laugh at a person who has a weapon prepared, I imagine you would do the same to a soldier who keeps a weapon at the ready when they are on patrol?
CroBob 06-06-07, 01:58 PM	I don't agree; it comes off to me, as the player just wants an excuse to never have to draw his weapon. If one of the players in my group said that his character always had his sword in hand we would all laugh and him and tell him how ridiculous it is on so many levels (visually, socially etc). So then he would get laughed at for being ready. "Teehee, that's so silly! He's ready to fight while we're in dangerous territory! He has no idea how stupid that is, regardless guards and soldiers do exactly the same thing!"
The Livewire 06-06-07, 07:53 PM	to the original poster and his group. You said you're travelling in the World's Largest Dungeon? I can see the broadsword/greatsword/chainsaw out all the time. As others have said, it looks to be more a matter of wanting to always be ready vs style. Point out to him that it only gives the narrow advantage, doesn't negate being flat footed and offer to drop your 'take a move action to ready' Then everyone's happy. Or, if that fails, the monsters start being ready the same way. "Yes, I know you rolled a nat 20 on your initiative, but the cloud giant had his chain out and ready and pounds on you as you close."
Mock26 06-06-07, 08:52 PM	I wonder how old this player is.
Voran 06-06-07, 09:31 PM	Maybe he's stuck in an old CRPG mode, you know back in the day where your toons ran across the screen with weapons drawn because the game mechanics didn't really allow you to change weapons in combat, or easily switch to a 'unarmed' sprite?
Geraturatu 06-06-07, 10:26 PM	Just treat it as the game Fable would. People seeing you with the weapon drawn react negatively and will be very cautious, while if you have the sword sheathed they get better reactions. Some towns will even ask for a persons weapons before they enter the gate. It really shouldn't be that big of a problem. Sure, he doesn't have to spend some time drawing the weapon, but he wouldn't have to anyways if he took the feat Quick-draw.
Steely_Dan 06-07-07, 03:20 AM	So then he would get laughed at for being ready. "Teehee, that's so silly! He's ready to fight while we're in dangerous territory! He has no idea how stupid that is, regardless guards and soldiers do exactly the same thing!" Of course having a weapon in hand in a hazardous area is not silly, but what I'm getting from the OP is that the character has a weapon in hand at all times, and that is silly. What if he's a dual wielder, it would certainly make wiping your tush a bit of a performance…
Leilond 06-07-07, 05:04 AM	I think that it is an obvious rule abuse and metagame issue Having a sword in hand cannot prevent to be catch "flat-footed" in any way The DM tell the players when it's time to roll for initiative The DM tell the players when it's a surprise round and who is "unaware" of the opponent The players have not the power to say "I attack the ground and roll for intitative". They cannot do it because only the DM can tell when it's time to roll for initative If someone say something like that in my games, me and all the other players will have a bit of fun for the nice joke and tell him "Funny guy, very funny, now let's continue to play D&D please"
CroBob 06-08-07, 04:57 PM	Of course having a weapon in hand in a hazardous area is not silly, but what I'm getting from the OP is that the character has a weapon in hand at all times, and that is silly. What if he's a dual wielder, it would certainly make wiping your tush a bit of a performance… while traveling How is it silly to keep your sword out while traveling? It would be silly to keep it out while sleeping, sure, but why make a rule to stop him from doing it? What's the point? Is there something wrong with being a tad silly once in a while? It's not ludicrous, or anything. Just a tad odd. What's the big deal? Why impose a mechanical penalty for eccentric behavior? Who are they going to meet, while traveling, who wouldn't understand why someone would be ready for a fight? The person would be cautious at first, sure, but they're also in a dangerous area. Once it becomes obvious they're simply traveling and not robbing the person, why would he be offended that one of them has a sword out?
Kaldric 06-09-07, 03:51 AM	What's the big deal? The Player is trying to get the benefit of Quick Draw without actually taking Quick Draw. That's pretty much the whole point. If he is in a situation where common sense would dictate that he would keep his sword out, he keeps his sword out. If he's not in such a situation, and he keeps his sword out anyway, ridicule him unmercifully. Make constant references to his "sword" and how he always has his hand on it because he's not man enough to find a "scabbard" to stick it in.
CroBob 06-09-07, 07:09 AM	The Player is trying to get the benefit of Quick Draw without actually taking Quick Draw. That's pretty much the whole point. If he is in a situation where common sense would dictate that he would keep his sword out, he keeps his sword out. If he's not in such a situation, and he keeps his sword out anyway, ridicule him unmercifully. Make constant references to his "sword" and how he always has his hand on it because he's not man enough to find a "scabbard" to stick it in. Quick draw is not a feat usable exclusively for drawing your primary weapon. He cannot suddenly have a second weapon, he cannot suddenly have another weapon if his first is sundered, he cannot suddenly have a different weapon with different and cool magical abilities that would benefit him to have in a certain situation. No, he has to wait. What about when he might need more than one hand for something? Too bad. He might be trying to benefit from Quick Draw without taking the feat, sure, but he's failing badly at it. Mostly, why does it matter? He's doing a **** poor job of emulating a feat by not putting his sword in his scabbard. It's not a big deal. Make fun of him, sure, that would be funny. But that doesn't mean his little ploy is in the least bit game breaking.
Crust 06-09-07, 11:22 AM	I don't see it as a problem rules wise. Let the bonehead carry his sword around, but make sure that others let him know that it's at best not polite and at worst illegal. Certain cities and towns might insist that weapons are sheathed (Cormyr insists on peace-bonding all weapons, having them tied down to the sheath), and the PC in question could be fined or arrested for not complying. Townsfolk might be put off by an unsheathed weapon, not willing to speak to a slayer who insists on brandishing weapons even when there is no real danger (supposedly). Such behavior says, "You'll talk, or I'll cut you down, dog!" Law must be maintained in most civilizations, and people walking around with weapons at the ready… that’s a recipe for chaos. As DM, I would make life very difficult for the PC who insists on having his/her sword out at all times, certainly while within the boundaries of any city/town/village/etc. It's rude, ridiculous to behold, and contrary to most law-abiding civilizations.
Cantankerous 06-09-07, 01:34 PM	Your best bet whenever dealing with any issue of this kind is to simply apply common sense. Don't throw in game penalties about that focus on the mechanical side of things. Simply have the world react as it would. No person in their right mind will deal with an armed man in an offensive pose (and having the sword out IS directly offensive) in any way that is amiable. No merchants will deal with him. No farmers will talk to him, unless it is crouched behind a pitchfork warning him off, no one at all will want to deal with him at all unless it is to take advantage of his obviously deranged mental state. City, town, or village guards will deny him entrance or simply tell him to move on or will escalate the proceedings immediately. No one will trust that someone so mentally unbalanced as to believe that they must always walk about with their swords drawn. Those folk who don't feel threatened by him will likely be condescending, as one might be dealing with a person who is very obviously retarded or drunken into imbecility. The point is to simply let the world and the people in it react in a normal and rationale manner to what the PC does. LIKEWISE... make sure that the Player isn't reacting to some obvious weirdness on your part. If your guardsmen are always alert, always vigilant, if your ambushers are always making the best choices of terrain, if you're whatever is always acting in optimized manners, expect it from your players. In such an instance it is YOU the DM who are teaching them to act in such manners... so always look to thy self first. Isshia
Rogue Elendae 06-09-07, 07:01 PM	I'll agree with those who say that there's a certain logic to this (though I think the effective utilization of Quick Draw without the feat is sort of cheating the system), and agree with the fact that you should outright tell him (and show him in the PHB) that his concept does not render him unable to be caught flat-footed. I'll even agree with those people who mention that it's somewhat inconvenient to do what he's doing at all times. I wouldn't necessarily say it's enough to force in-game penalties such as fatigue on him (he's playing a character who's likely to be used to using that sword, and therefore isn't likely to be unable to bear its weight even for prolonged periods), but I would say that he's putting himself in a bit of danger. I mean, toting around a big, sharp blade at all times means you've got something to injure yourself if you trip, makes it bloody awkward to tumble or anything (I know for a fact that it's far harder to do even a shoulder roll to blunt a fall, if you've got something preventing you from tucking your body properly, and a sword would do it), and essentially rendering one hand useless by keeping it occupied. It could get awkward, and lead to things that could otherwise have been avoided (if you're the sort who'd make such things happen). Try making the player understand this, and ask him if he wants to continue this thread of behavior. However, I will say, for those who've said it'd make riding a mount more difficult, I can disprove it. I rode horses for over eight years, and always rode Western (stock-seat) style. That means you typically ride with the reins latigo-style, where the reins are often only split to go over the horse's head, and the part you'd actually hold is joined into a single strap; you're controlling the horse with only one hand, the other left free to do whatever. A cowboy would've needed that hand to use a lariat, and even in earlier times, a knight or other mounted fighter would've needed a free hand to use a weapon from horseback. Never mind that there's mounted archers, who wouldn't be using their hands at all until they're done firing (various "barbarian" hordes were known for their mounted archers, hence the creation of the "horsebow"). A properly trained horse would be capable of responding to nothing more than a rider's legs and weight in the saddle, and I would assume a trained warhorse, or even a typical mount in a D&D medieval-fantasy setting should have that sort of training, especially if the rider had enough ranks in the Ride skill to handle mounted combat. But I digress. I do think that this player is doing something that seems impractical and is trying to bend the rules a bit too far; he might need to have them snap back in his face a bit, y'know? And as for the fact that it's mentioned that the PC will sheathe the blade in town, but is quick to draw in taverns and other such places, I wonder about something. Is it because people are getting aggressive with him first, starting brawls in general, or is his PC the one starting things? If he's just playing a naturally aggressive character, then he might need to understand that sooner or later, he'll run into someone who can whoop up on him something nasty. What happens when he picks a fight with that big half-orc who happens to casually sling around a great club that could crush the PC's skull, and who has an ugly temper about little punks starting things with him? And if he's not the one starting it, he's still going to provoke even more of a reaction from other people; a simple argument or scuffle might turn into something far worse thanks to one person drawing steel in the establishment Anyway, just my thoughts on the logic of this. I don't so much see a mechanical problem (minus the "I'm not flat-footed!" theory), as a problem with his character's behavior potentially being awkward or dangerous in the long run, as he could draw massive trouble their way.
Nova Fujit 06-09-07, 07:12 PM	perhaps he's just clumbsy and feels the need to treat his sword like a drummers do and holds/tapes it to their hand to get a feel of it...=P