So, when you tell someone to 'hold onto' something, they might put it in their pocket.
When an item says: "You gain the following benefits while you hold the dagger:"
Does that mean as long as you have it in your possession, or do you have to be actually weilding it in your hand?
To me, holding onto something and holding can be quite different. I think they mean actually holding the dagger in this case.
I agree with Lucas.
You're not telling the person to hold the item, when you tell them to "hold onto" the item. Otherwise, you could have the item at home, in a locked chest, and still be "holding onto" it.
lawrencehoy wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
The generally accepted term of "hold" means to grasp or carry in your arms or hands.
When someone is holding something, it's in their arms or hands.
It can also mean to keep from moving, like Hold Person, or holding a door.
It has other meanings, but those are the two most common.
Of course, context matters, and from context we can hopefully determine which of its many definitions is being used. So while the standard may be "I am holding a dagger [in my hand(s)]", one could say "I am holding a dagger in my pouch." This is more specific, but it's also considered to be one of the other definitions of the term: to keep in a container.
There's also a difference between holding and wielding. Wielding means you're using the dagger, not just holding it.
When an item says: "You gain the following benefits while you hold the dagger:"
Does that mean as long as you have it in your possession, or do you have to be actually weilding it in your hand?
This means you're holding the dagger in your hand, but you don't have to be wielding it. Of course, some benefits may only be mechanically beneficial when making an attack...
But consider something like "While you hold the dagger, it sheds light in a 30 ft radius." If you hold it in your hand, it will shed light. You never have to attack with the dagger though. You're effectively using the dagger like a torch, as a tool, to light an area around you.
Coredump00 wrote:
Hold means holding in your hand.
Yeah... okay. I felt the same way, but was hoping folks had some clever insight to convince me otherwise. (We found a magic dagger that has a 'while holding' benefit that I like... but only worth it if I can keep it sheathed and benefit.) I was just hoping...... not really expecting much.... 
See if the dm will let you hold it in your teeth, understanding that it keeps your character from speaking. I'd go for it.
jaelis wrote:
Don't forget the cleavage. With the right support I can hold a potion bottle with mine. It probably wouldn't work for the dagger in question if it had to be unsheathed (pointy end up or down, that's a bad scene either way), but for a sheather dagger or for other items, it behooves us not to forget the cleavage.
There are really a lot of possibilities beyond the hand. You could hold it between your arm and body, toes, elbows, knees, buttocks, shoulder and ear (cellphone style), chin and neck, or just about any other two bodily surfaces you can push against each other. The less said about some of what you might call "concealed carry" options, the better.
But then what about having it stabbed into you? If I stab a dagger through my hand or into my leg, am I considered to be holding it? How about if I glue it in place? Can I be a kind of Edward Scissorhands with a dagger stuck to each finger?
You hold with your hand.
Primarchx wrote:
Primarchx wrote:
Primarchx wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Slagger_the_Chuul wrote:
Yunru wrote:
In hand might be a little too specific. Holding to me means effectively wielding, or actively employing. You can't effectively wield a dagger with your teeth or armpit. I just I say hand is too specific, because some creatures don't have any, but can still manipulate tools. Consider tentacles for arms holding a magic weapon, I think it should gain the effects.
It's a shame you can only attune to 3 objects. I'm picturing a druid wildshaped into a giant octopus with 8 magic staffs and rods. Not that he could activate them all at once, but options, man.
Coredump00 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
For those who say they can hold an object in their mouth (or under their armpit, etc). Do you think you could continue to do so while playing soccer? Because that's approximately the level of exertion you expend in combat.
You aren't just standing around your kitchen temporarily holding something while you pick something else up. You are dodging attacks, sprinting around the battlefield, getting hit or hitting all at the same time.
There are exceptions to every rule of course, like tentacles, pseudopods, etc that are the equivalent of hands for certain creatures.
I was really just thinking of the silly possibilities. There might be a few cases where you could reasonably hold some magical item (like a glowing dagger) without any apparent need to properly use it in the normal fashion, but those are probably okay.
On the other hand, there's another thing to consider here that Nevvur touched upon. Can you actually wield a weapon in an abnormal way, like holding it in your teeth or the like? Sure, there might be disadvantage, or you might be unable to wield it proficiently, but there could be cases in which it's validly applicable, like a character with one hand chopped off strapping their sword to the stump. Adventurers can end up in all sorts of weird situations.
Orethalion wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Yunru wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Yunru wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
I think the problem was someone going 'I am totally following the rules by gripping the dagger with my eyelashes and everyone has to accept that'
People who are arguing that groups could decide to interpret the words in various ways to their genre pleasure are just agreeing with each other and arguing over a different subject entirely.
For example, the other night one player slid through the legs of enemies (halfling so he can move through their spaces) and a second player asks 'are they surprised by that'. I charitably understood him to mean does the player get attack from stealth - so I said yes. Next moment the players rolling his assassin 'sneak attack' bonus - when weve been in combat for several rounds now. The second player started acting like what he'd asked was legit (as if you get surprise rounds in combat)*, then pulled the other player into it to boot. Thats the sort of player who isn't asking anyone else whether they want to go with a certain interpretation for genre reasons.
* this guy has torn all the pages out of his rulebook and set them in a folder for easy reference. I'm pretty sure he knows surprise only happens at the start of combat, but he went and asked anyway.