Post/Author/DateTime	Post
MasterOfPsychic 03-07-06, 05:09 AM	When you are a cleric, you are often required to hold a divine focus... Would that require one arm to hold the DF, and the other one free to do somatics?
Doopliss 03-07-06, 05:13 AM	I doubt it, considering most clerics wouldn't be caught dead without a mace in hand. I imagine you gesture with the Divine Focus hand, or the gestures are simple enough that you can do them while holding items. One of divine magic's big edges over arcane is casting in armor, It would be kind of counterproductive if you had a sheathe a weapon.
MasterOfPsychic 03-07-06, 05:23 AM	You have to sceathe a weapon in order for the DF to be drawn forth.... So the mace is going down... But by RAW, what?
Doopliss 03-07-06, 05:25 AM	Wait a minute, Divine focuses are small, taking up one hand, and maces are one-handed weapons. How do you need to sheathe the mace?
Morwen 03-07-06, 05:28 AM	You don't even need to hold the Divine Focus, it just needs to be available for you to focus on (in your belt, for instance). However, many spells require somatic components, which means you'll need a hand free (using a buckler or light shield allows you to use your hand for somatic components). The other hand can hold a Mace just fine, as you only need one hand for the S component.
Wargamer 03-07-06, 07:04 AM	I generally assume that any Semantics require a free hand. However, if you are using your god's favoured weapon, your hand counts as free for this purpose. After all, your god intends you to fight, not stand around waving at people!
Eerongal 03-07-06, 07:11 AM	You don't even need to hold the Divine Focus, it just needs to be available for you to focus on (in your belt, for instance). However, many spells require somatic components, which means you'll need a hand free (using a buckler or light shield allows you to use your hand for somatic components). The other hand can hold a Mace just fine, as you only need one hand for the S component. correct Somatic (S) A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component Focus (F) A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell component pouch. Divine Focus (DF) A divine focus component is an item of spiritual significance. The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character’s faith. If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash). Material (M) A material component is one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don’t bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch. Nowhere does it say a focus/DF OR material component requires a free hand, only somatic components
Millennium 03-07-06, 10:07 AM	I'd argue that divine casters don't necessarily need to hold their holy symbols, but do need to have them clearly on display in some fashion. Most clerics wear their holy symbols as a belt buckle or pendant, and this would suffice. Some paladins might incorporate the symbol into their weapons or armor, and that would also be good enough as long as the symbol was on display. Alhandra the iconic paladin is said to have the symbol of Heironeous branded into her forearm as a symbol of her devotion. If it were appropriately blessed, then I'd allow that to work as a divine focus too, as long as it's clearly visible. It would make a rather poor choice of divine focus in most cases, since magic bracers would hide it, but it could come in handy if your equipment were to be stolen.
Hobbun 03-07-06, 02:01 PM	I don't have a rulebook in front of me, so I can't quote anything. But from my understanding, if it is a spell that just requires a DF and not somatic, then you can cast whatever you may have or not have in your hand. However, if the spell does require somatic, then you would need both hands (i.e., holding no weapons). But again, I may be wrong. However, I think one of the balancing factors with spells and weapons (or anything you may hold in one hand, like a wand) is you cannot attack and then cast without having dropping the weapon or sheath it. That's why most spells are somatic.
MasterOfPsychic 03-07-06, 02:10 PM	Well you cannot have the symbol imbedded in your arm... Unless you acually graft it in... And that would be pinfull
Doopliss 03-07-06, 02:13 PM	except, it's been said, you don't need to hold it. Just focus on it. Your shield could be a giant holy symbol of Pelor and it would still qualify. You could have it fastened on your belt and it would still qualify.
R2 03-07-06, 02:55 PM	Although using a holy symbol as a shield may very well be disrespectful -- shields get beaten up pretty bad. Pelor wouldn't have a nose or any whiskers and sunbeams by the time your average fight was over.
Eerongal 03-07-06, 09:08 PM	by the RAW, you have to use the holy symbol detailed in the equipment section of the players handbook, however, i personally see no problem with replacing it with an equally functional and blessed holy symbol. And for somatic, you only need one hand free, not both, a weapon and a buckler are both equipable while still letting you use spells
Skysoar 03-09-06, 04:01 AM	Why not make a holy symbol out of a ring? Get a ring fashioned after your deity's symbol, have a high-ranking cleric bless it, and there you have it. Assuming it's otherwise nonmagical the thing shouldn't interfere with your magical rings in any way and leave your hands free.. plus it's not nearly as pricey, obvious or damage-sensitive as say, a shield or a chestplate. A blessed tattoo in an obvious location such as the forehead, back of the hand or palm would probably work too, depending on the deity. On a sidenote, assume that a wizard is using a quarterstaff (two-handed weapon) and wants to cast a spell with somatic and material components. Doesn't this mean he'd have to put the staff away first? Personally, I'm willing to rule that a caster can make the required gestures with the same hand he's holding the components it, or that some types of weapons can be used to draw the gestures with (daggers and staves, mostly) Hmh. A weapon such as a claw bracer (3rd Ed Arms and Equipment Guide) could be pretty nifty for a spellcaster since they effectively have one hand free for casting.
MasterOfPsychic 03-09-06, 04:55 AM	I've acually heard that the cleric could take the weapon in the shieldhand for the brief period he needs to cast the spell... Hmm...
Millennium 03-09-06, 07:15 AM	Although using a holy symbol as a shield may very well be disrespectful -- shields get beaten up pretty bad. Pelor wouldn't have a nose or any whiskers and sunbeams by the time your average fight was over. That might be a problem for some clerics, but I could see most paladins going along with it. Incorporating your holy symbol into your shield could be seen as a statement that you are under your deity's protection. Your average paladin would probably dig that.
ThorGuy 03-10-06, 01:38 AM	I've always thought of the Cleric Spells as less of spells, and more of prayers. For example, a cleric casting Bless would sink to their knees, clutching his mace and asking Pelor for guidance. Plus, it's great for flavor: Generic Way: I cast Bless Prayer Way: Guide my hand, and stay my shield, oh Pelor Prayer Way In Celestial: Deos Beria Annos Sie Manala De Noma
Kerri_Evanwood 03-10-06, 03:14 AM	I don't see a problem with a spellcaster using a two-handed weapon momentarily holding it in one hand to cast a spell with somatic components. This thread does remind me of something. One of my players once asked me, "What's so good about using a light shield?" The answer lies in this thread. You can hold something in your shield hand if you're using a light shield. If you're using a heavy shield, you can't. It's very useful for divine spellcasters.
Eerongal 03-10-06, 05:15 PM	I don't see a problem with a spellcaster using a two-handed weapon momentarily holding it in one hand to cast a spell with somatic components. If you did this i would have to say that you would lose the benefit of your weapon for the rest of the round (ie, cant make AoO with it, considered unarmed, etc) but thats just IMHO :cool:
Lina_Inverse 03-10-06, 07:58 PM	Your weapon and shield are holy symbols last i checked. They are right?
Callista 03-10-06, 08:59 PM	No; a holy symbol can be put onto your shield or weapon, but usually it's an independent object. Check the PHB for prices for holy symbols of various materials. Getting a holy symbol put onto a shield really only needs Arcane Mark or Prestidigitation, then permanence... Or you could get a shield made with the symbol on it. Or you could buy such a shield from a temple that had paladins or warrior-clerics... You mightn't need to hold all the components at the same time. Maybe a clerical spell would, instead, go something like: 1. Pray briefly to deity, holding holy symbol 2. Sprinkle material component into the air 3. Point towards enemy to be affected Sounds about right... and only needs one hand to do. At any rate, I'd rule that you only need one hand free for spellcasting, arcane or divine. Having the wizard drop his quarterstaff all the time gets kind of annoying. And when you have an Eldritch Knight or other magic/combat combination character in the party, it just gets ridiculous... because if you neede two hands free to cast an arcane spell, you'd have to face the choice of either dropping a weapon or using a turn to sheathe it; and in either case you'd have to spend yet another move action or standard action to get your weapon back into your hand again... talk about losing your effectivity! Even Quick Draw really only removes half the problem... A two-handed weapon can be held in one hand; but you can't use it (properly) in just one hand. Holding a quarterstaff or greatsword or whatever in your off hand while you do somatic components with your other hand should be fine. The only combination that doesn't allow spellcasting would be gauntlets, or a large shield and weapon combination. Of course there's still the spell failure chance for things like bucklers, but you can still *try* to cast the spell. (Actually, IIRC the spell failure chance for a buckler is pretty low... 5% or something. So a melee/spellcaster type might actually want to use one.)
DaMullet 03-11-06, 03:19 PM	And regardless, that's an arcane spell failure chance. Divine spells disregard this.
Callista 03-11-06, 03:50 PM	Yes, you're right, of course--I was talking about both sorts of spells, though.