Clerics, Holy Symbols, Free Hands. - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 DemoMonkey Aug 28, 2014 11:52:11	Q: Can a Cleric holding a weapon in one hand and a shield emblazoned with their Holy Symbol in the other hand, cast a spell with Somatic Components without releasing/dropping/stowing/whatever other adjective you want, either of them? Relevant rules: Basic Rules Pg 22/PHB Pg 58 "Spellcasting Focus You can use a holy symbol (found in chapter 5) as a spellcasting focus for your cleric spells." Basic Rules Pg 49/PHB Pg 151 "Holy Symbol. A holy symbol is a representation of a god or pantheon. It might be an amulet depicting a symbol representing a deity, the same symbol carefully engraved or inlaid as an emblem on a shield, or a tiny box holding a fragment of a sacred relic. The Player’s Handbook lists many gods in the multiverse and their typical symbols. A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield." Basic Rules Pg 79/PHB Pg 203 "Somatic (S) Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures. Material (M) Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell. If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell. A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." Discuss.
#2 KarlB Aug 28, 2014 12:33:41	Yeah, I'm wondering that myself. Arcane Focus users don't get that added text. It could be be the exception to the rule of holding a focus or component bag in your hand. Mind you, Clerics and Paladins are also ambassadors of their respective dieties, so perhaps the diety expects them to prominently show off their symbol for said diety to grant them any power. Mind you, that same blatant display could work against them in the social sense when dealing with cultures that dislike them.
#3 DemoMonkey Aug 28, 2014 12:46:30	My specific concern is "If I am holding a shield with my Holy Symbol on it in one hand and a spear in the other, can I cast Sacred Flame and still have the spear in my hand in case I need to make an opportunity attack?." But I'm sure there are larger implications.
#4 Eldren73 Aug 28, 2014 12:55:24	As always, it comes down to DM ruling, but I've yet to hear a DM rule that the Cleric just having a holy symbol (say, around their neck) was insufficient to cast a spell requiring one. It's one thing if you want to hold it forth while turning undead, but for general spellcasting? There's a decreasing focus on the meaningful rules-based importance of material components (for which I'm grateful)... I'd personally be inclined to say that if a Cleric has a holy symbol displayed in some fashion, they're good for spellcasting.
#5 OrwellianHaggis Aug 28, 2014 13:12:02	Agreed, as long as the cleric's symbol is visible it should be okay for him/her to cast cleric spells. But if they tried to cast wizard spells they'd need a separate implement/spare hand.
#6 Kalani Aug 28, 2014 14:47:03	DemoMonkey wrote:
#7 DemoMonkey Aug 28, 2014 13:46:22	"I do not see how a shield would allow for such somatic gestures to be made, as such - you would be able to use somatic components while holding a spear and shield by a strict interpretation of the RAW. YMMV" Kalani, did you intend there to be a "not" between "would" and "be"? Because otherwise that sentence is contradictory.
(Reply to #4) Shiroiken	Eldren73 wrote:
#9 Kalani Aug 28, 2014 14:47:35	DemoMonkey wrote:
#10 spelley Aug 28, 2014 14:54:19	I'd allow it, just as I'd allow Gandalph to cast spells while holding his Staff in one hand and his Sword in the other.
#11 Devils-Advocate Aug 28, 2014 15:10:28	Seems like you would not be able to by RAW. Personally, I would rule that you can perform somatic components with the hand that holds your spell focus, therefore even though a cleric's spell focus may also function as a shield, he/she can use the hand that holds it to perform somatic components. But honestly that ruling would be twisting the RAW to support Rule of Cool rather than to support logic.
#12 Mirtek Aug 28, 2014 15:18:20	Shiroiken wrote:
#13 ChristopherGroves Aug 28, 2014 16:40:24	Cleric / Paladin is a specific rule, right? So that over-rides the general.
(Reply to #12) Shiroiken	Mirtek wrote:
#15 Angry_Steak Aug 29, 2014 6:22:23	Q: Can a Cleric holding a weapon in one hand and a shield emblazoned with their Holy Symbol in the other hand, cast a spell with Somatic Components without releasing/dropping/stowing/whatever other adjective you want, either of them?
#16 FFSAA Aug 29, 2014 7:42:52	DemoMonkey wrote:
#17 frbelanger Aug 29, 2014 7:49:53	Holy symbol can bear wear as an amulet so no hand is required. but S somatic spell still require a free hand. A war cleric with shield and sword cant cast cure wound or bless without droping or sheathe his sword. page 190 state that you can draw or sheathe a sword in tandem with your movement and action. So he is ok. Just silly to constantly draw-sheathe weapon. I would prefer that they remove all somatic component. also silly that you dont provke opportunity attack to sheathe your weapon in front of a ennemy.
#18 Unit_39 Aug 29, 2014 8:24:28	FWIW (knowing that mentioning RAI in these parts can be like bringing a toothpick to a greatsword fight), Mike Mearls weighed in on RAI here (and somatics would presumably still matter when a cleric is tied up or otherwise able to take actions but not move freely).
#19 autolycus Aug 29, 2014 8:24:51	frbelanger wrote:
(Reply to #19) Brightmantle	autolycus wrote:
#21 frbelanger Aug 29, 2014 9:21:28	But a better example of how silly is all this somatic bug. at level 7the eldritch knight can cast a cantrip and make a weapon attack as a bonus action. If he is equiped with shield and sword he must sheathe his sword to cast his cantrip then draw his sword to make his melee attack. all this make the war caster feat a kind of feat taxe to these melee caster. unless you state dont bother with that he is an eldritch knight he can cast a cantrip in melee and strike. the rules intent are well hidden in this new edition.
#22 Brightmantle Aug 29, 2014 9:39:44	Yes, War caster deals with this problem. Alternately, the Eldrich Knight might be better served by using a weapon that has the Versatile property so he can use it in one hand when casting in combat and then two handed for his attacks and do more damage. I don't think strapping a shield on him is the best tactic actually. I'd build him as a heavy hitter. Use magic to bolster his a.c. What you call a feat tax I'd say clearly allows him to overcome a rule that others must follow. I.E. not a tax at all.
#23 DemoMonkey Aug 29, 2014 10:22:01	Here's my logic on it. I understand there are disagreements, but I want to know what step in my logic is the faulty one. Verbatim rules quotes are in italics. Any bolding for emphasis is mine. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or *bear it on a shield.* Conclusion: A Holy Symbol emblazoned on a shield counts as a spellcasting focus, and therefore counts as the material component for the spell. *A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these* *components,* *but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components* Conclusion: The hand the focus/components are in can be the same hand making the somatic gestures, so holding the focus – whatever it is, a wizards wand or orb or a component pouch or a holy symbol or a shield with a holy symbol – does not preclude that hand being the “somatic hand”. Assuming you come to a different conclusion, where have I gone off the rails here?
(Reply to #15) XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek	Angry_Steak wrote:
#25 XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek Aug 29, 2014 11:14:29	Just wear the symbol around his neck. I'm sure it would take up a slot for an amulet but at least he doesn't have to hold it.
#26 Brock_Landers Aug 29, 2014 11:19:23	Can you draw or sheathe a weapon as part of your Action and Move, or just one?
#27 DemoMonkey Aug 29, 2014 11:25:01	"Just wear the symbol around his neck. I'm sure it would take up a slot for an amulet but at least he doesn't have to hold it." That wouldn't actually help. in fact it would be substantially worse, because the shield would no longer count as an arcane focus. In THAT situation, there would be no question you would need to sheathe the weapon. I don't have my PHB with me, can someone please quote the exact text of "Warcaster"? Thank you.
(Reply to #27) XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek	DemoMonkey wrote:
(Reply to #23) Shiroiken	DemoMonkey wrote:
#30 Unit_39 Aug 29, 2014 13:57:46	DemoMonkey wrote:
#31 Brock_Landers Aug 29, 2014 12:22:04	XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#32 Atheosis Aug 29, 2014 14:30:51	frbelanger wrote:
#33 Unit_39 Aug 29, 2014 14:45:09	Atheosis wrote:
#34 Atheosis Aug 29, 2014 15:49:36	Unit_39 wrote:
#35 DemoMonkey Aug 30, 2014 13:39:49	I'm wondering whether the "Your focus is a shield" thing is causing the hiccup. Lets look at a different example Lets say a Wizard, is holding a torch in one hand (they never learned "Light" because REASONS!) , and a wand in the other, that acts as their spellcasting focus. Without dropping or stowing either of those items - torch in one hand, arcane focus that substitutes for their inexpensive material components in the other (which can be the same hand used for Somatic gestures see relevant rules in OP) - can that Wizard cast Fireball? If not, why not? And if so, how is that any different from the Cleric with a weapon in one hand and their holy symbol (on a shield) in another?
#36 RKVM Aug 30, 2014 14:32:50	frbelanger wrote:
#37 pedro2112 Sep 01, 2014 0:19:08	DemoMonkey wrote:
#38 Jenks Sep 01, 2014 3:10:46	Does the holy symbol allow you to bypass somatic components? If not, then no.
(Reply to #38) AaronOfBarbaria	Jenks wrote:
#40 Plaguescarred1 Sep 01, 2014 6:19:05	A spellcaster must normally have a free hand for either the somatic or material components but if the spell has both components, he can use the same hand though. If the spell foci is a holy symbol, it doesn't need a free hand for his trivial material component but he still needs a free hand for somatic component otherwse. In other words, not having to use a free hand for your material component doesn't remove the need to have one for your somatic components. PHB203 Somatic (S): If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures. PHB203 Material (M): A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
#41 arderkrag Sep 01, 2014 7:00:07	I've never been the type to bookkeep over whether everyone has their components/symbols or whatever. If you've got it on your sheet, you can cast, unless you are specifically tied up and gagged with all your stuff taken away. So I would have to say that a shield with the holy symbol on it would work fine in my games.
(Reply to #40) arderkrag	Plaguescarred wrote:
#43 Kazadvorn Sep 01, 2014 7:12:56	I think we've got a couple of points here... 1. The intent seems to be that spells can't be cast (ones with a material or somatic req) if the caster is bound in such a way as to be unable to gesture with a free hand, access material components and/or gesture with a focus that replaces the material component. 2. Prevent the three handed caster situation... ie, torch in one hand, wand in the other hand and dagger in the other-other hand. From everything I've seen so far, I'd allow a Cleric with an emblazoned shield to consider that his focus and use it to replace a simple material component, and serve as his gesturing hand for the somatic component of the spell. However, if the Cleric's focus was some other item (like for instance, a small statue of her chosen diety), I might be inclined to say that the cleric has to drop either the weapon or the shield in order to present the focus for the purpose of spell casting.
(Reply to #42) Shiroiken	arderkrag wrote:
#45 arderkrag Sep 01, 2014 10:19:42	DM's discretion. That's the way it's gonna work in my games.
#46 Drewboy74 Sep 01, 2014 10:23:55	DemoMonkey wrote:
#47 Brock_Landers Sep 01, 2014 10:42:28	Drewboy74 wrote:
#48 Zardnaar Sep 01, 2014 19:39:20	Just means gish characters are a bit sub optimal I suppose. I like Brightmantles idea of using a longsword as a two handed weapon and using it with one hand while casting. Otherwise put your weapon away. Mike Mearls did say the game was designed around having a 16 in your primary stats. I thinik peple want -3 feats but do not want to have to give up stat buffs to do it. Gish with battlecaster feat, heavy armor and polearm mastery by level 6 human would still be a powerful PC but the price of that is a 20 strength. Its more or less a trade off. Most of my PCs do seem to be moving away from buff stats at all times except for dex based characters and wizards.
#49 RKVM Sep 01, 2014 20:06:54	Brock_Landers wrote:
#50 Youngy Sep 01, 2014 23:09:29	Drewboy74 wrote:
(Reply to #50) RKVM	Youngy wrote:
#52 Drewboy74 Sep 01, 2014 23:39:08	Youngy wrote:
(Reply to #39) Jenks	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#54 Brock_Landers Sep 02, 2014 0:12:20	RKVM wrote:
#55 Eric888 Sep 02, 2014 0:22:10	It doesn't work. It is a little nuance, so I will try to explain it a couple of ways. Basically it is saying you can similtaniously hold a shield and a holy symbol (by puting the symbol on the shield) and you can simultaniously have a hand free for casting spells and hold a holy symbol in that hand, but nowhere does it say that holding a shield counts as having a hand free. A shield with a holy symbol essentially counts as both, but it doesn't lose the penalties that come with holding a shield. If it did, then characters who can't wear shields but can use holy symbols could use a shield that is also a holy symbol, but they cannot. It is still a shield, and a hand holding a shield is not a free hand. That is why it says "and otherwise free". A hand that is holding both a holy symbol and a shield (even if the two are the same object like a shield with a symbol on it), is not "otherwise free" because it also holding a shield. Hopefully that makes sense. I am not always good at explaining things.
(Reply to #55) Jenks	Eric888 wrote:
#57 Quietpaw Sep 02, 2014 3:59:03	Some really great responses here, thanks everyone! It's helped me and my group figure out how to handle this situation. I agree with the arguments that someone with a weapon + shield has to stow one of them to get a hand free for Somatic spells. You trade getting an AOO that round for getting to cast a spell. But I am worried about the example of Divine Favor that got listed. That's a Bonus Action most certainly intended to go along with attacking that round. So what? Are you supposed to stow your shield and take a -2 AC penalty that round? I have another question regarding this situation. Isn't there an incidental action cost when needing a specific Material? Don't you have to fish it out of your backpack or pouch? If so, then you're required to take 2 incidental actions to cast a spell. 1) stow your weapon or shield to free your hand and 2) get the material out of your bag. You can't do both on 1 turn. I notice they didn't include "retrieving material from your spell component pouch" in the incidental action list. Oversight? Or intentional because it isn't an incidental action? The same question kinda holds true for other spellcasters. What if a Druid with a weapon + shield wants to cast a spell with an M requirement? How does she, in 1 turn, stow her weapon then draw her focus from her belt or materials from her pouch? She can't both stow a weapon and draw an item. That's 2 incidentals. The way around it is to just drop your weapon (totally free) then retrieve the material or focus. And that's just silly, imho. I can't imagine playing like that. Our group plans on letting the "getting a Material out" part of a spell be free. What do you think? I think the Material section of the spellcasting rules simply needs a little clarification.
#58 Zardnaar Sep 02, 2014 4:34:35	Quietpaw wrote:
#59 RKVM Sep 02, 2014 7:04:14	Brock_Landers wrote:
#60 Ravenmancer Sep 02, 2014 11:39:11	Having a holy symbol on your shield makes your shield a holy symbol in the same way that having a hat on your head makes your head a hat.
#61 DemoMonkey Sep 02, 2014 12:07:29	So, I'm still trying to figure out the implications of this. Thanks to everyone for their patience, let me walk you through another example and let's see where it goes. 1) We have a cleric - let's call him "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and nothing in the other. On his belt is a component pouch. Without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components. If not, why not? If so, lets go to the next example. 2) We have the same cleric - let's still call him "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and a small silver amulet of a forge in the other - his holy symbol/arcane focus. He has no component pouch. Again, without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components. If not, why not? If so, let's go to the next example. 3) We have the same cleric – who still stubbornly insists on the silly name "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and his holy symbol/arcane focus in the other. That holy symbol/arcane focus is a shield, emblazoned with a silver forge. He has no component pouch. Again, without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components. If not, why not? Now, one of the answers that keeps coming up is "You don't have a free hand to make somatic gestures." Fair enough; but can someone who does think thats the definitive answer please break down for me what they think the rule "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components" ACTUALLY means if it DOESN'T mean "You can have your material components/arcane focus held in your casting hand.". Again, thank you all for helping me explore this.
#62 Jenks Sep 02, 2014 15:46:43	Final answer accoring to RAW. 1. You CAN use a shield as a holy symbol allowing you to bypass material components. 2. Somatic components require a free hand to use. 3. Normally components (or a spell focus) can be used in the same free hand as your comatic components. However... 4. A shield is a shield, holy symbol or not. A shield is taking that hand slot whilst it is being held. Ergo this is not a free hand. 5. Opposite hand must be free to perform somatic components. You may change the rules or interpret them however you'd like, but accoring to RAW this is the answer. Other than OA's I don't see a reason why it's even a big deal. The class abilities don't require somatic components and if you cast a spell then that is your action most of the time. Edited to clarify #1 as material components.
#63 DemoMonkey Sep 02, 2014 12:57:35	Jenks That is an excellent summary of one side of the argument. Thank you. Point 4, clearly, is the one I disagree with. I don't think whether the arcane focus is a wand or an orb or a silver trinket or an emblazoned shield or a banana makes the slightest difference to the rules. It's a focus, or it's not a focus. Whereas you (and I believe others) think that it's "shieldness" trumps it "focusness". "Other than OA's I don't see a reason why it's even a big deal." OA's are the big reason. Though, I'm fairly certain I could drop the weapon (no action) cast a spell, and then pick the weapon up off the ground as my free "use an object" to be ready for OA's, though that seems a bit silly. I do genuinely believe the shield as focus argument incidentally, in case anyone thinks i'm being argumentative for no reason.
(Reply to #63) Jenks	DemoMonkey wrote:
#65 Ravenmancer Sep 02, 2014 14:11:06	My point of contention is 1. Your holy symbol is not the shield. It's the thing painted on the shield. Painting it on your shield has no mechanical advantage over embroidering it onto your cloak.
#66 frbelanger Sep 02, 2014 14:55:29	After many years of 4th edition this thread make me sick!
#67 DemoMonkey Sep 02, 2014 14:55:58	I understand Ravenmancer. However my point of contention is I believe if the cleric character held a weapon in one hand and that embroidered cloak you mention in the other, they could cast spells with V,S,M requirements. It doesn't matter if the holy symbol/arcane focus is a ring or a bowling ball or a cloak or a shield or a boat oar, holding the focus - regardless of size shape or weight - does not prevent that hand being used for somatic gestures.
#68 Ravenmancer Sep 02, 2014 15:13:14	If you're holding it by the symbol, maybe. But if you're holding a shield by the part that's supposed to be facing the enemy, then you're not going to be able to block with it.
#69 Jenks Sep 02, 2014 15:47:29	Edited #1 in my list to clarify the symbol lets you bypass material components, not all.
(Reply to #66) arderkrag	frbelanger wrote:
(Reply to #67) Jenks	DemoMonkey wrote:
(Reply to #61) Shiroiken	DemoMonkey wrote:
#73 AaronOfBarbaria Sep 02, 2014 19:51:27	Here's my question: The rules say that I can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus if I "bear it on a shield"... where in the rules does it say that such is treated as being any different from right next to that very text where it says I can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus if I "hold it in hand"?
(Reply to #73) RKVM	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #74) AaronOfBarbaria	RKVM wrote:
#76 RKVM Sep 02, 2014 21:45:40	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #73) Shiroiken	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#78 lawrencehoy Sep 02, 2014 23:56:44	The description (rule) for a Holy Symbol distinguishes between the symbol itself and the shield it is engraved or inlaid upon. The shield is not the holy symbol; the holy symbol is on the shield. Holding a shield with a holy symbol on it is not the same as holding a holy symbol. There are mechanical benefits to holding a shield; benefits that preclude using that hand for somatic components. Just as holding any other object granting its own mechanical benefits (benefits not provided solely by a spellcasting focus) precludes using that hand, the one holding the object, from being used for somatic components.
#79 Quietpaw Sep 03, 2014 0:33:06	lawrencehoy wrote:
(Reply to #76) AaronOfBarbaria	RKVM wrote:
(Reply to #57) Kazadvorn	Quietpaw wrote:
(Reply to #80) Shiroiken	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#83 Chaosmancer Sep 03, 2014 13:34:03	This arguement is only one section of the craziness of focuses and verbal and somatic components. I'd allow clerics to cast witha weapon and shield, that seems to be the intent. The bigger problem with "but realistically it can't work" comes when you look at Bards. Bard focuses are musical intruments, and they are supposed to be wielded in one hand, the off-hand while a bard is wielding a weapon in the main hand. The idea is they play the instrument. Ever tried playing a flute with your left-hand? A flute pretty much requires two hands to play properly, ame with Lyres, dulcimers, lutes, shawms, and viols. Heck, think you can even hold let alone attempt to play bagpipes with only one-hand. About the only two that could work would be drums or pan flutes. Or, as some DMs expect, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff in their main hand and their arcane focus staff in the other. Could they use spells with somatic components? Honestly? This is such a minor thing with so few balance issues that as a DM I'm just going to wave it. The other option is to try and memorize whether or not any particular spell has somatic components. I've already got to figure out verbal components for the silence spell. And yea, I'll probably avoid silence or make it more powerful because I'll forget the details of the spell components.
(Reply to #82) AaronOfBarbaria	Shiroiken wrote:
(Reply to #84) Shiroiken	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#86 Wuzzard Sep 03, 2014 19:23:49	I guess the cleric's somatic gesture is just to thrust his holy symbol forward while invoking the power to the god.
#87 Zardnaar Sep 03, 2014 20:44:47	At least you can cast cleric spells using a shield and holding a weapon. This is how it worked in 3rd ed IIRC.
#88 lawrencehoy Sep 03, 2014 23:00:48	Well then, my druid or arcane caster will just have to attach their foci to their shields; done.
(Reply to #88) AaronOfBarbaria	lawrencehoy wrote:
(Reply to #85) arderkrag	Shiroiken wrote:
#91 lawrencehoy Sep 04, 2014 3:52:52	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#92 DemoMonkey Sep 04, 2014 7:10:26	This has been a good thread and I'd like to thank everyone for their civil and enlightening contributions on both sides of the debate. See? The internet does work sometimes! Thank you to Shroiken for the link to the closest thing we will get for an "answer".
#93 spelley Sep 04, 2014 7:20:08	lawrencehoy wrote:
#94 spelley Sep 04, 2014 7:21:22	DemoMonkey wrote:
#95 Hurin88 Sep 04, 2014 9:05:26	The rules clarification in the recent article makes no sense. If a cleric can emblazon his emblem on his shield, why can't a Druid do the same on his shield? Don't get me wrong-- I like some of the rules clarifications (I like that moving through an ally's square counts as difficult terrain). But this ruling has no logic to it.
(Reply to #95) AaronOfBarbaria	Hurin88 wrote:
(Reply to #61) thehobb	DemoMonkey wrote:
#98 DemoMonkey Sep 04, 2014 10:07:20	thehobb Two things: 1) Check out this. You can feel free to not accept it as "official", but I think it does the job for now. http://dmdavid.com/tag/9-more-fifth-edition-dd-rules-questions-answered-by-the-designers/ 2) "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." In response to your added example 4, isn't that a direct contradiction of the above rules quote?
#99 spelley Sep 04, 2014 10:10:44	Hurin88 wrote:
(Reply to #98) thehobb	DemoMonkey wrote:
#101 DemoMonkey Sep 04, 2014 12:07:41	I think you are missing the fact that a "component pouch" is not just a pouch, in which you keep components. (Bear with me) It is ALSO a spellcasting focus, which can be used in the same hand as the one making somatic gestures. So you don't have to open it, any more than you have to open a wand or a holy symbol. Basic Rules page 79: Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell. If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell. A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components. So you don't need a second hand to hold it. Holding it in your "somatic hand" is perfectly legal.
(Reply to #101) thehobb	DemoMonkey wrote:
#103 DemoMonkey Sep 04, 2014 14:01:46	"If you're using a spellcasting focus, your other hand must be free in order to perform the somatic components." No. The focus is the components, which are in the somatic hand. All the relevant text of the rules is in the very first post of this thread. If you disagree with all of those, *and* with the answer of someone who actually asked this question of the designer, I'm not really sure what to tell you. Unless you are trying to make the ancillary point that the rules are written badly in this instance? In which case sure, I will agree to THAT without argument.
(Reply to #103) thehobb	DemoMonkey wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

DemoMonkey

Aug 28, 2014 11:52:11

Q: Can a Cleric holding a weapon in one hand and a shield emblazoned with their Holy Symbol in the other hand, cast a spell with Somatic Components without releasing/dropping/stowing/whatever other adjective you want, either of them?

Relevant rules:

Basic Rules Pg 22/PHB Pg 58

"Spellcasting Focus
You can use a holy symbol (found in chapter 5) as a
spellcasting focus for your cleric spells."

Basic Rules Pg 49/PHB Pg 151

"Holy Symbol. A holy symbol is a representation of
a god or pantheon. It might be an amulet depicting a
symbol representing a deity, the same symbol carefully
engraved or inlaid as an emblem on a shield, or a tiny
box holding a fragment of a sacred relic. The Player’s
Handbook lists many gods in the multiverse and their
typical symbols. A cleric or paladin can use a holy
symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter
10. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must

hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield."

Basic Rules Pg 79/PHB Pg 203

"Somatic (S)
Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful
gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell
requires a somatic component, the caster must have free
use of at least one hand to perform these gestures.

Material (M)
Casting some spells requires particular objects,
specified in parentheses in the component entry.
A character can use a component pouch or a
spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of
the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is
indicated for a component, a character must have that
specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
If a spell states that a material component is
consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this
component for each casting of the spell.
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these
components, but it can be the same hand

that he or she uses to perform somatic components."

Discuss.

KarlB

Aug 28, 2014 12:33:41

Yeah, I'm wondering that myself. Arcane Focus users don't get that added text.

It could be be the exception to the rule of holding a focus or component bag in your hand.

Mind you, Clerics and Paladins are also ambassadors of their respective dieties, so perhaps the diety expects them to prominently show off their symbol for said diety to grant them any power. Mind you, that same blatant display could work against them in the social sense when dealing with cultures that dislike them.

DemoMonkey

Aug 28, 2014 12:46:30

My specific concern is "If I am holding a shield with my Holy Symbol on it in one hand and a spear in the other, can I cast Sacred Flame and still have the spear in my hand in case I need to make an opportunity attack?."

But I'm sure there are larger implications.

Eldren73

Aug 28, 2014 12:55:24

As always, it comes down to DM ruling, but I've yet to hear a DM rule that the Cleric just having a holy symbol (say, around their neck) was insufficient to cast a spell requiring one.

It's one thing if you want to hold it forth while turning undead, but for general spellcasting? There's a decreasing focus on the meaningful rules-based importance of material components (for which I'm grateful)... I'd personally be inclined to say that if a Cleric has a holy symbol displayed in some fashion, they're good for spellcasting.

OrwellianHaggis

Aug 28, 2014 13:12:02

Agreed, as long as the cleric's symbol is visible it should be okay for him/her to cast cleric spells. But if they tried to cast wizard spells they'd need a separate implement/spare hand.

Kalani

Aug 28, 2014 14:47:03

DemoMonkey wrote:

DemoMonkey

Aug 28, 2014 13:46:22

"I do not see how a shield would allow for such somatic gestures to be made, as such - you would be able to use somatic components while holding a spear and shield by a strict interpretation of the RAW. YMMV"

Kalani, did you intend there to be a "not" between "would" and "be"? Because otherwise that sentence is contradictory.

(Reply to #4)

Shiroiken

Eldren73 wrote:

Kalani

Aug 28, 2014 14:47:35

DemoMonkey wrote:

#10

spelley

Aug 28, 2014 14:54:19

I'd allow it, just as I'd allow Gandalph to cast spells while holding his Staff in one hand and his Sword in the other.

#11

Devils-Advocate

Aug 28, 2014 15:10:28

Seems like you would not be able to by RAW. Personally, I would rule that you can perform somatic components with the hand that holds your spell focus, therefore even though a cleric's spell focus may also function as a shield, he/she can use the hand that holds it to perform somatic components. But honestly that ruling would be twisting the RAW to support Rule of Cool rather than to support logic.

#12

Mirtek

Aug 28, 2014 15:18:20

Shiroiken wrote:

#13

ChristopherGroves

Aug 28, 2014 16:40:24

Cleric / Paladin is a specific rule, right? So that over-rides the general.

(Reply to #12)

Shiroiken

Mirtek wrote:

#15

Angry_Steak

Aug 29, 2014 6:22:23

Q: Can a Cleric holding a weapon in one hand and a shield emblazoned with their Holy Symbol in the other hand, cast a spell with Somatic Components without releasing/dropping/stowing/whatever other adjective you want, either of them?

#16

FFSAA

Aug 29, 2014 7:42:52

DemoMonkey wrote:

#17

frbelanger

Aug 29, 2014 7:49:53

Holy symbol can bear wear as an amulet so no hand is required.

but S somatic spell still require a free hand.

A war cleric with shield and sword cant cast cure wound or bless without droping or sheathe his sword.

page 190 state that you can draw or sheathe a sword in tandem with your movement and action.

So he is ok. Just silly to constantly draw-sheathe weapon. I would prefer that they remove all somatic component.

also silly that you dont provke opportunity attack to sheathe your weapon in front of a ennemy.

#18

Unit_39

Aug 29, 2014 8:24:28

FWIW (knowing that mentioning RAI in these parts can be like bringing a toothpick to a greatsword fight), Mike Mearls weighed in on RAI here (and somatics would presumably still matter when a cleric is tied up or otherwise able to take actions but not move freely).

#19

autolycus

Aug 29, 2014 8:24:51

frbelanger wrote:

(Reply to #19)

Brightmantle

autolycus wrote:

#21

frbelanger

Aug 29, 2014 9:21:28

But a better example of how silly is all this somatic bug.

at level 7the eldritch knight can cast a cantrip and make a weapon attack as a bonus action.

If he is equiped with shield and sword he must sheathe his sword to cast his cantrip then draw his sword to make his melee attack.

all this make the war caster feat a kind of feat taxe to these melee caster.

unless you state dont bother with that he is an eldritch knight he can cast a cantrip in melee and strike.

the rules intent are well hidden in this new edition.

#22

Brightmantle

Aug 29, 2014 9:39:44

Yes, War caster deals with this problem. Alternately, the Eldrich Knight might be better served by using a weapon that has the Versatile property so he can use it in one hand when casting in combat and then two handed for his attacks and do more damage. I don't think strapping a shield on him is the best tactic actually. I'd build him as a heavy hitter. Use magic to bolster his a.c. What you call a feat tax I'd say clearly allows him to overcome a rule that others must follow. I.E. not a tax at all.

#23

DemoMonkey

Aug 29, 2014 10:22:01

Here's my logic on it. I understand there are disagreements, but I want to know what step in my logic is the faulty one.

Verbatim rules quotes are in italics. Any bolding for emphasis is mine.

A character can use a component pouch or a
spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of
the components specified for a spell.
A cleric or paladin can use a holy
symbol as a spellcasting focus
To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
Conclusion: A Holy Symbol emblazoned on a shield counts as a spellcasting focus, and therefore counts as the material component for the spell.
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these
components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components
Conclusion: The hand the focus/components are in can be the same hand making the somatic gestures, so holding the focus – whatever it is, a wizards wand or orb or a component pouch or a holy symbol or a shield with a holy symbol – does not preclude that hand being the “somatic hand”.

Assuming you come to a different conclusion, where have I gone off the rails here?

(Reply to #15)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Angry_Steak wrote:

#25

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Aug 29, 2014 11:14:29

Just wear the symbol around his neck. I'm sure it would take up a slot for an amulet but at least he doesn't have to hold it.

#26

Brock_Landers

Aug 29, 2014 11:19:23

Can you draw or sheathe a weapon as part of your Action and Move, or just one?

#27

DemoMonkey

Aug 29, 2014 11:25:01

"Just wear the symbol around his neck. I'm sure it would take up a slot for an amulet but at least he doesn't have to hold it."

That wouldn't actually help. in fact it would be substantially worse, because the shield would no longer count as an arcane focus. In THAT situation, there would be no question you would need to sheathe the weapon.

I don't have my PHB with me, can someone please quote the exact text of "Warcaster"? Thank you.

(Reply to #27)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

DemoMonkey wrote:

(Reply to #23)

Shiroiken

DemoMonkey wrote:

#30

Unit_39

Aug 29, 2014 13:57:46

DemoMonkey wrote:

#31

Brock_Landers

Aug 29, 2014 12:22:04

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:

#32

Atheosis

Aug 29, 2014 14:30:51

frbelanger wrote:

#33

Unit_39

Aug 29, 2014 14:45:09

Atheosis wrote:

#34

Atheosis

Aug 29, 2014 15:49:36

Unit_39 wrote:

#35

DemoMonkey

Aug 30, 2014 13:39:49

I'm wondering whether the "Your focus is a shield" thing is causing the hiccup. Lets look at a different example

Lets say a Wizard, is holding a torch in one hand (they never learned "Light" because REASONS!) , and a wand in the other, that acts as their spellcasting focus.

Without dropping or stowing either of those items - torch in one hand, arcane focus that substitutes for their inexpensive material components in the other (which can be the same hand used for Somatic gestures see relevant rules in OP) - can that Wizard cast Fireball?

If not, why not?

And if so, how is that any different from the Cleric with a weapon in one hand and their holy symbol (on a shield) in another?

#36

RKVM

Aug 30, 2014 14:32:50

frbelanger wrote:

#37

pedro2112

Sep 01, 2014 0:19:08

DemoMonkey wrote:

#38

Jenks

Sep 01, 2014 3:10:46

Does the holy symbol allow you to bypass somatic components? If not, then no.

(Reply to #38)

AaronOfBarbaria

Jenks wrote:

#40

Plaguescarred1

Sep 01, 2014 6:19:05

A spellcaster must normally have a free hand for either the somatic or material components but if the spell has both components, he can use the same hand though. If the spell foci is a holy symbol, it doesn't need a free hand for his trivial material component but he still needs a free hand for somatic component otherwse.

In other words, not having to use a free hand for your material component doesn't remove the need to have one for your somatic components.

PHB203 Somatic (S): If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures.

PHB203 Material (M): A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

#41

arderkrag

Sep 01, 2014 7:00:07

I've never been the type to bookkeep over whether everyone has their components/symbols or whatever. If you've got it on your sheet, you can cast, unless you are specifically tied up and gagged with all your stuff taken away. So I would have to say that a shield with the holy symbol on it would work fine in my games.

(Reply to #40)

arderkrag

Plaguescarred wrote:

#43

Kazadvorn

Sep 01, 2014 7:12:56

I think we've got a couple of points here...

1. The intent seems to be that spells can't be cast (ones with a material or somatic req) if the caster is bound in such a way as to be unable to gesture with a free hand, access material components and/or gesture with a focus that replaces the material component.

2. Prevent the three handed caster situation... ie, torch in one hand, wand in the other hand and dagger in the other-other hand.

From everything I've seen so far, I'd allow a Cleric with an emblazoned shield to consider that his focus and use it to replace a simple material component, and serve as his gesturing hand for the somatic component of the spell. However, if the Cleric's focus was some other item (like for instance, a small statue of her chosen diety), I might be inclined to say that the cleric has to drop either the weapon or the shield in order to present the focus for the purpose of spell casting.

(Reply to #42)

Shiroiken

arderkrag wrote:

#45

arderkrag

Sep 01, 2014 10:19:42

DM's discretion. That's the way it's gonna work in my games.

#46

Drewboy74

Sep 01, 2014 10:23:55

DemoMonkey wrote:

#47

Brock_Landers

Sep 01, 2014 10:42:28

Drewboy74 wrote:

#48

Zardnaar

Sep 01, 2014 19:39:20

Just means gish characters are a bit sub optimal I suppose. I like Brightmantles idea of using a longsword as a two handed weapon and using it with one hand while casting. Otherwise put your weapon away.

Mike Mearls did say the game was designed around having a 16 in your primary stats. I thinik peple want -3 feats but do not want to have to give up stat buffs to do it. Gish with battlecaster feat, heavy armor and polearm mastery by level 6 human would still be a powerful PC but the price of that is a 20 strength. Its more or less a trade off. Most of my PCs do seem to be moving away from buff stats at all times except for dex based characters and wizards.

#49

RKVM

Sep 01, 2014 20:06:54

Brock_Landers wrote:

#50

Youngy

Sep 01, 2014 23:09:29

Drewboy74 wrote:

(Reply to #50)

RKVM

Youngy wrote:

#52

Drewboy74

Sep 01, 2014 23:39:08

Youngy wrote:

(Reply to #39)

Jenks

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#54

Brock_Landers

Sep 02, 2014 0:12:20

RKVM wrote:

#55

Eric888

Sep 02, 2014 0:22:10

It doesn't work. It is a little nuance, so I will try to explain it a couple of ways.

Basically it is saying you can similtaniously hold a shield and a holy symbol (by puting the symbol on the shield) and you can simultaniously have a hand free for casting spells and hold a holy symbol in that hand, but nowhere does it say that holding a shield counts as having a hand free.

A shield with a holy symbol essentially counts as both, but it doesn't lose the penalties that come with holding a shield. If it did, then characters who can't wear shields but can use holy symbols could use a shield that is also a holy symbol, but they cannot. It is still a shield, and a hand holding a shield is not a free hand. That is why it says "and otherwise free". A hand that is holding both a holy symbol and a shield (even if the two are the same object like a shield with a symbol on it), is not "otherwise free" because it also holding a shield.

Hopefully that makes sense. I am not always good at explaining things.

(Reply to #55)

Jenks

Eric888 wrote:

#57

Quietpaw

Sep 02, 2014 3:59:03

Some really great responses here, thanks everyone! It's helped me and my group figure out how to handle this situation. I agree with the arguments that someone with a weapon + shield has to stow one of them to get a hand free for Somatic spells. You trade getting an AOO that round for getting to cast a spell.

But I am worried about the example of Divine Favor that got listed. That's a Bonus Action most certainly intended to go along with attacking that round. So what? Are you supposed to stow your shield and take a -2 AC penalty that round?

I have another question regarding this situation. Isn't there an incidental action cost when needing a specific Material? Don't you have to fish it out of your backpack or pouch? If so, then you're required to take 2 incidental actions to cast a spell. 1) stow your weapon or shield to free your hand and 2) get the material out of your bag. You can't do both on 1 turn. I notice they didn't include "retrieving material from your spell component pouch" in the incidental action list. Oversight? Or intentional because it isn't an incidental action?

The same question kinda holds true for other spellcasters. What if a Druid with a weapon + shield wants to cast a spell with an M requirement? How does she, in 1 turn, stow her weapon then draw her focus from her belt or materials from her pouch? She can't both stow a weapon and draw an item. That's 2 incidentals.

The way around it is to just drop your weapon (totally free) then retrieve the material or focus. And that's just silly, imho. I can't imagine playing like that. Our group plans on letting the "getting a Material out" part of a spell be free.

What do you think? I think the Material section of the spellcasting rules simply needs a little clarification.

#58

Zardnaar

Sep 02, 2014 4:34:35

Quietpaw wrote:

#59

RKVM

Sep 02, 2014 7:04:14

Brock_Landers wrote:

#60

Ravenmancer

Sep 02, 2014 11:39:11

Having a holy symbol on your shield makes your shield a holy symbol in the same way that having a hat on your head makes your head a hat.

#61

DemoMonkey

Sep 02, 2014 12:07:29

So, I'm still trying to figure out the implications of this. Thanks to everyone for their patience, let me walk you through another example and let's see where it goes.

1) We have a cleric - let's call him "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and nothing in the other. On his belt is a component pouch.

Without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components.

If not, why not? If so, lets go to the next example.

2) We have the same cleric - let's still call him "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and a small silver amulet of a forge in the other - his holy symbol/arcane focus. He has no component pouch.

Again, without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components.

If not, why not? If so, let's go to the next example.

3) We have the same cleric – who still stubbornly insists on the silly name "Tyrsdig" - who has a Light Hammer in one hand, and his holy symbol/arcane focus in the other. That holy symbol/arcane focus is a shield, emblazoned with a silver forge. He has no component pouch.

Again, without stowing or dropping what he currently has in his hands, can he cast "Hold Person" - a spell requiring Verbal, Somatic, and (inexpensive) Material Components.

If not, why not?

Now, one of the answers that keeps coming up is "You don't have a free hand to make somatic gestures." Fair enough; but can someone who does think thats the definitive answer please break down for me what they think the rule "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components" ACTUALLY means if it DOESN'T mean "You can have your material components/arcane focus held in your casting hand.".

Again, thank you all for helping me explore this.

#62

Jenks

Sep 02, 2014 15:46:43

Final answer accoring to RAW.

1. You CAN use a shield as a holy symbol allowing you to bypass material components.

2. Somatic components require a free hand to use.

3. Normally components (or a spell focus) can be used in the same free hand as your comatic components. However...

4. A shield is a shield, holy symbol or not. A shield is taking that hand slot whilst it is being held. Ergo this is not a free hand.

5. Opposite hand must be free to perform somatic components.

You may change the rules or interpret them however you'd like, but accoring to RAW this is the answer.

Other than OA's I don't see a reason why it's even a big deal. The class abilities don't require somatic components and if you cast a spell then that is your action most of the time.

Edited to clarify #1 as material components.

#63

DemoMonkey

Sep 02, 2014 12:57:35

Jenks

That is an excellent summary of one side of the argument. Thank you.

Point 4, clearly, is the one I disagree with. I don't think whether the arcane focus is a wand or an orb or a silver trinket or an emblazoned shield or a banana makes the slightest difference to the rules. It's a focus, or it's not a focus. Whereas you (and I believe others) think that it's "shieldness" trumps it "focusness".

"Other than OA's I don't see a reason why it's even a big deal."

OA's are the big reason. Though, I'm fairly certain I could drop the weapon (no action) cast a spell, and then pick the weapon up off the ground as my free "use an object" to be ready for OA's, though that seems a bit silly.

I do genuinely believe the shield as focus argument incidentally, in case anyone thinks i'm being argumentative for no reason.

(Reply to #63)

Jenks

DemoMonkey wrote:

#65

Ravenmancer

Sep 02, 2014 14:11:06

My point of contention is 1. Your holy symbol is not the shield. It's the thing painted on the shield. Painting it on your shield has no mechanical advantage over embroidering it onto your cloak.

#66

frbelanger

Sep 02, 2014 14:55:29

After many years of 4th edition this thread make me sick!

#67

DemoMonkey

Sep 02, 2014 14:55:58

I understand Ravenmancer. However my point of contention is I believe if the cleric character held a weapon in one hand and that embroidered cloak you mention in the other, they could cast spells with V,S,M requirements. It doesn't matter if the holy symbol/arcane focus is a ring or a bowling ball or a cloak or a shield or a boat oar, holding the focus - regardless of size shape or weight - does not prevent that hand being used for somatic gestures.

#68

Ravenmancer

Sep 02, 2014 15:13:14

If you're holding it by the symbol, maybe. But if you're holding a shield by the part that's supposed to be facing the enemy, then you're not going to be able to block with it.

#69

Jenks

Sep 02, 2014 15:47:29

Edited #1 in my list to clarify the symbol lets you bypass material components, not all.

(Reply to #66)

arderkrag

frbelanger wrote:

(Reply to #67)

Jenks

DemoMonkey wrote:

(Reply to #61)

Shiroiken

DemoMonkey wrote:

#73

AaronOfBarbaria

Sep 02, 2014 19:51:27

Here's my question:

The rules say that I can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus if I "bear it on a shield"... where in the rules does it say that such is treated as being any different from right next to that very text where it says I can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus if I "hold it in hand"?

(Reply to #73)

RKVM

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #74)

AaronOfBarbaria

RKVM wrote:

#76

RKVM

Sep 02, 2014 21:45:40

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #73)

Shiroiken

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#78

lawrencehoy

Sep 02, 2014 23:56:44

The description (rule) for a Holy Symbol distinguishes between the symbol itself and the shield it is engraved or inlaid upon.

The shield is not the holy symbol; the holy symbol is on the shield.

Holding a shield with a holy symbol on it is not the same as holding a holy symbol. There are mechanical benefits to holding a shield; benefits that preclude using that hand for somatic components. Just as holding any other object granting its own mechanical benefits (benefits not provided solely by a spellcasting focus) precludes using that hand, the one holding the object, from being used for somatic components.

#79

Quietpaw

Sep 03, 2014 0:33:06

lawrencehoy wrote:

(Reply to #76)

AaronOfBarbaria

RKVM wrote:

(Reply to #57)

Kazadvorn

Quietpaw wrote:

(Reply to #80)

Shiroiken

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#83

Chaosmancer

Sep 03, 2014 13:34:03

This arguement is only one section of the craziness of focuses and verbal and somatic components.

I'd allow clerics to cast witha weapon and shield, that seems to be the intent.

The bigger problem with "but realistically it can't work" comes when you look at Bards.

Bard focuses are musical intruments, and they are supposed to be wielded in one hand, the off-hand while a bard is wielding a weapon in the main hand. The idea is they play the instrument. Ever tried playing a flute with your left-hand? A flute pretty much requires two hands to play properly, ame with Lyres, dulcimers, lutes, shawms, and viols. Heck, think you can even hold let alone attempt to play bagpipes with only one-hand.

About the only two that could work would be drums or pan flutes.

Or, as some DMs expect, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff in their main hand and their arcane focus staff in the other. Could they use spells with somatic components?

Honestly? This is such a minor thing with so few balance issues that as a DM I'm just going to wave it. The other option is to try and memorize whether or not any particular spell has somatic components. I've already got to figure out verbal components for the silence spell. And yea, I'll probably avoid silence or make it more powerful because I'll forget the details of the spell components.

(Reply to #82)

AaronOfBarbaria

Shiroiken wrote:

(Reply to #84)

Shiroiken

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#86

Wuzzard

Sep 03, 2014 19:23:49

I guess the cleric's somatic gesture is just to thrust his holy symbol forward while invoking the power to the god.

#87

Zardnaar

Sep 03, 2014 20:44:47

At least you can cast cleric spells using a shield and holding a weapon. This is how it worked in 3rd ed IIRC.

#88

lawrencehoy

Sep 03, 2014 23:00:48

Well then, my druid or arcane caster will just have to attach their foci to their shields; done.

(Reply to #88)

AaronOfBarbaria

lawrencehoy wrote:

(Reply to #85)

arderkrag

Shiroiken wrote:

#91

lawrencehoy

Sep 04, 2014 3:52:52

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#92

DemoMonkey

Sep 04, 2014 7:10:26

This has been a good thread and I'd like to thank everyone for their civil and enlightening contributions on both sides of the debate. See? The internet does work sometimes!

Thank you to Shroiken for the link to the closest thing we will get for an "answer".

#93

spelley

Sep 04, 2014 7:20:08

lawrencehoy wrote:

#94

spelley

Sep 04, 2014 7:21:22

DemoMonkey wrote:

#95

Hurin88

Sep 04, 2014 9:05:26

The rules clarification in the recent article makes no sense. If a cleric can emblazon his emblem on his shield, why can't a Druid do the same on his shield?

Don't get me wrong-- I like some of the rules clarifications (I like that moving through an ally's square counts as difficult terrain). But this ruling has no logic to it.

(Reply to #95)

AaronOfBarbaria

Hurin88 wrote:

(Reply to #61)

thehobb

DemoMonkey wrote:

#98

DemoMonkey

Sep 04, 2014 10:07:20

thehobb

Two things:

1) Check out this. You can feel free to not accept it as "official", but I think it does the job for now.

http://dmdavid.com/tag/9-more-fifth-edition-dd-rules-questions-answered-by-the-designers/

2) "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these
components, but it can be the same hand

that he or she uses to perform somatic components."

In response to your added example 4, isn't that a direct contradiction of the above rules quote?

#99

spelley

Sep 04, 2014 10:10:44

Hurin88 wrote:

(Reply to #98)

thehobb

DemoMonkey wrote:

#101

DemoMonkey

Sep 04, 2014 12:07:41

I think you are missing the fact that a "component pouch" is not just a pouch, in which you keep components. (Bear with me)

It is ALSO a spellcasting focus, which can be used in the same hand as the one making somatic gestures. So you don't have to open it, any more than you have to open a wand or a holy symbol.

Basic Rules page 79:

Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.

If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell.

A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.

So you don't need a second hand to hold it. Holding it in your "somatic hand" is perfectly legal.

(Reply to #101)

thehobb

DemoMonkey wrote:

#103

DemoMonkey

Sep 04, 2014 14:01:46

"If you're using a spellcasting focus, your other hand must be free in order to perform the somatic components."

No. The focus is the components, which are in the somatic hand.

All the relevant text of the rules is in the very first post of this thread.

If you disagree with all of those, and with the answer of someone who actually asked this question of the designer, I'm not really sure what to tell you.

Unless you are trying to make the ancillary point that the rules are written badly in this instance? In which case sure, I will agree to THAT without argument.

(Reply to #103)

thehobb

DemoMonkey wrote: