Is the feat War Caster, which perform the somatic components of spells even when you have weapons or a shield in one or
both hands, necessary for using War Magic, a feature of EK (Eldritch Knight; a Fighter Archetype), using a bow and casting a cantrip with a somatic component as a bonus action (so action is to shoot an arrow) ?
The way I see it, as soon as the bow is released, one could use a bonus action, which I assume to be real quick, to use the hand that was holding the arrow but is now free. However a bow (both long & short) has for property two-handed which definition mention it requires two hands to use. Now I wonder if they've used that property only so people wouldn't use a shield at the same time, which would have no resemblance to reality, or did they also think of bonus actions requiring 1 hand to be free? The latter meaning even if in reality if one would release a bow, one could possibly do something real quick with 1 hand free with the remaining part of a 6-seconds period, in D&D there would be some reason why that couldn't be, perhaps one would feel compelled to put the free hand on the bow right away ready to defend oneself (ie: use the bow to parry melee attacks).
So to me it's logic than after the few seconds it take to get an arrow, put it on the cord, pull the cord, release the arrow, that the hand that held both cord & arrow would be free for a very short time until the next 6-seconds period begin, from what I assume is enough to do a bonus action; but perhaps the system has it so that a bow is two-handed no matter what, and the only way to do what I think is logic is to have the feat War Caster which wouldn't require a free hand while whatever the hand that released the arrow is doing.
Please let me know if the feat War Caster is necessary to use the EK feature War Caster with a cantrip having a somatic component as bonus action while the action (not bonus) is to shoot an arrow (using a bow; which have for property two-handed).
Thank you kindly for your help
As for the bow being a two-handed weapon, the rules don't strictly allow for your hand to be "free" while you're using it. Flat RAW says no.
But reality would suggest what you're talking about. The "two-handed" property indicates that you need a hand to be free to draw arrows and pull the bowstring, so it can't be continuously occupied in some other way, like holding a weapon or shield, or separated from your body, or grappling someone. But the devs have stated things before to the effect that you can take a hand off a two-handed weapon to do anything you can do with one hand, then grab the weapon again after, as long as you don't make attacks with it in that time. (I cannot cite this. You'll just have to believe me, which is okay, because I'm never wrong about anything.) So you shouldn't need War Caster to cast cantrips with a bow, unless your DM is a real Scrooge about it.
blindhamster wrote:
Macv12 wrote:
Action: cast a cantrip
move: if desired
Interaction: draw bow
Bonus action: single attack with bow.
You follow the rules exactly as written and likely as intended. No need for warcaster in turn 1
Turn 2 though...
You're looking at: Interaction: let go of bow with one hand (means you can't use it to make attacks)
Action: cast cantrip
Move: if needed
You can't make a bonus action, as taking hold of the bow again would require the use of your action.
Warcaster let's you effectively repeat turn 1s sequence every turn.
So... It may be that you've been unknowingly cheating if you've been using a bow with war magic without warcaster.
either way, keep in mind you can't attack with the bow before casting the cantrip. It's casting the cantrip that triggers the bonus action to make a single attack.
Somatic components just need one free hand, you don't need to drop the bow... just take one hand off to cast the spell. The War Caster feat is useful for its other two parts, useful for when you want to cast a spell that has both somatic and material components, and useful for casting spells with a 1 hand weapon + shield or two 1 hand weapons. It is not required to cast a spell with Somatic components while using a bow though.
slumgum wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
The bow has the two handed rule which specifies you must use both hands to use the weapon.
casting a spell with material and/or somatic components also requires a hand free.
There are no allowances made for taking hands off and back on again as free actions.
There are object interactions which allow you to do a single thing with a single object per turn.
however common sense(and maybe RAI) probably does indicate that releasing a weapon with one hand and clasping it again in the same turn probably should be fine :P
This (and similar things) have been argued before. In my opinion you only need two hands for a bow when using it to attack. You can easily hold it in one hand and to say that you need an action to "stop" holding it in both hands is just ... silly. I would rule that you can cast a bonus aciton spell while using a bow during the same turn is fine.
Some people don't think real world should inform our in-game decision making at all, which I disagree with.
So ask you DM. A bonus action just needs to be cast sometime during your turn and you only need a single hand free for your somatic components. A bow can be easily held in one hand.
quick note, it's the attack that's the bonus action, not casting the spell, although it doesn't matter too much.
blindhamster wrote:
slumgum wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
If your using a bow in combat, then your generally using the off-hand to reload so the bow is ready to attack again.
Bait-hammer wrote:
slumgum wrote:
Orethalion wrote:
Bait-hammer wrote:
HA! Oh, I am such a tease.
can you cast a spell that uses somatic components if you weild a 2 handed weapon or a vertile weapon in 2 hands?
nope. -M
Even Crawfords comment says he's allow it, not that it's how the rules are worded, I agreed a while back that RAI it'd probably be fine and common sense it should probably be allowed too. But RAW doesn't make allowances for taking your hand off and on things again, that's purely down to the common sense factor again.
I play at the table with a rogue that regularly tries to move, fire a cross bow, bonus action hide, put the crossbow away and draw two short swords in one turn. At level 3 before gaining any feats. They also try drawing two swords, moving hiding then attacking with both. So I guess it's made both myself and my table very tetchy on action economy and how it works.
if we go with your way of doing things, the bow user cannot attack with his bow
Bait-hammer wrote:
The amusing part is that Warcaster lets you skip the somatic element, but not the material element, which means you still have to have a free hand to use the material components for the spell.
blindhamster wrote:
page 203 of the PHB
blindhamster wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
I know it's been said but it bears repeating.
Attacking/using/wielding a two handed weapon requires two hands but holding one does not.
Releasing something from your grasp is NOT an item interaction. Crawford said as much in one of his tweets.
Drawing ammo is part of the attack and does not use up your one free item interaction.
Not 100% on the spell stuff but I thought grabbing the material components was part of casting the spell and also doesn't use up your one free item interaction.
OoftaMeg wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
Bait-hammer wrote:
Macv12 wrote:
If you play in AL you have no choice but to go with the RAW of the PHB. That's because it's a sanctioned event and DM interpretation is limited. Every DM basically should be ruling on things that are answered in the PHB by the answer in the PHB. Furthermore in light of the fact that you play in a santictioned event (or a league of some kind) the comment that you would rather not voice your concerns in the hope that no one notices what basically amounts to potentially cheating in a group game is even more questionable. If your goal is to go to AL and cheat with your character, why even bother going to AL? Just play at home and cheat all you want.
As for the discussion at hand, using a bow requires 2 hands. The two-handed property says so. However if you're going to cast a spell and require a hand to do so because of somatic components, letting go of the bow to cast shouldn't be an issue. However going from holding to using a bow and wielding it 2 handed would be an object interaction. You only get a limited number of those during your turn before it costs you an Action (believe it's 1). So sure, you can let go of your bow (note the DM can rule this is an object interaction) to cast a spell then use an object interaction to wield your bow again but you can't do this over and over.
Orethalion wrote:
Bait-hammer wrote:
As a general rule you're probably best off with the most conservative interpretation possible when play AL.
I think the rules are clear. There's no restriction to holding a bow (or any other object) in one hand. You need to use two hands when attacking, but while you are not attacking your can hold the bow in one hand.
If you get someone that's really an 
and insists you must have your hands glued to the bow for your entire turn, try this. During your turn drop your bow, cast your spell and then pick it back up to attack. Totally silly and useless but within RAW. Just make sure you tie your bow to your waist so no one can steal it.
ObeseBoyWonder wrote:
Talreign wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
bonethug0108 wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
The bike analogy isn't perfect, since that's a case where you know you're committing a crime, and talking to the police means turning yourself in. You're not "turning yourself in" to the DM, you're being courteous and fair. If you go in knowing that it's possibly illegal according to that DM, and trying not to call attention to it for that reason, then that is essentially lying. I'm not saying you're a bad person or whatever, just that I disagree with the way you're going about it.
What I'm advising against is starting the game and just hoping that they don't notice what you're doing and have an objection to it; it's too late to do anything about it then. Just be up front with them, say "we've been running it this way, does that sound fair to you?" I understand your caution - it didn't occur to me that you were preparing to play under several different strictly rules-adherent DMs in AL.
This is the most comprehensive case I can make for the legality of using cantrips along with a bow:
- A bow has the Two-Handed property. According to PHB 147, this means it requires two hands to use, not hold. When you're not actively using it, you may hold it in two hands, or in one, leaving a hand free.
- Jeremy Crawford, the head honcho of all things rules in 5e, agreed with this in the tweet I cited before; the difference between "use" and "hold" is relevant, and lets a person cast spells with a two-handed weapon. The Two-handed property is relevant because it prevents your hand from being continuously occupied doing something else, such as holding a shield. It doesn't mandate that your hands are always glued to the weapon.
- As per PHB 203, to fulfill Somatic components, the caster needs "free use of at least one hand." Material components also only require a free hand. The same free hand can be used for both of these things. So, whenever you're not actively using your bow and holding it in one hand, the other hand is free, allowing you to cast any spell you want.
- One might complain that letting you cast spells and hold a two-handed weapon makes War Caster irrelevant. That feat allows you to fulfill Somatic components "when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands." It's still valuable to dual-wield and sword-and-shield characters, so allowing casting while holding a two-handed weapon doesn't devalue the feat. According to my reading, and Crawford's, War Caster isn't there to help two-handers, it's for other styles.
It's still possible a DM won't agree with you, and there's not much you can do about that. You have to finely parse what the rules do and don't say to conclude that you can cast while using a two-handed weapon. I guess all I can say in that case is, 1) carry a hand crossbow (one of the few times it's useful for anything without Crossbow Expert), or 2) get the War Caster feat anyway, find a good concentration spell to keep active, and enjoy OAing with a cantrip instead of nothing.
Macv12 wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
Macv12 wrote:
blindhamster wrote:
WilliamCQ wrote:
An example of when the war caster feat is useful: when the caster is holding a shield and an activated magic item, where letting go of the item cancels the magic. If you let go of the item to free up a hand to cast, the effect ends and you have to spend an Action to start the effect again.
For example, the Lightbringer mace from LMoP.