I noticed that instead of 'wielding a shield', characters 'wear' them. Does that mean when I'm wielding a two-handed weapon that I wear my shield over my arm or back?
To the best of my knowledge if you're using a 2-handed weapon you will be unable to use your shield at the same time. The shield would be considered in your off-hand, as such you're limited to using a versatile or one-handed weapon with the shield. However, if you were to stow your shield, you would then be able to use the 2-handed weapon but you'd lose the ac bonus from the shield as it is no longer in use.
If you want the advantages of a Shield (+2 AC), then it uses up that hand. This means you can't use that hand for somatic components (Warcaster feat negates this limit) This means you can't use this hand to hold a weapon or attack with a two-handed weapon.
You can carry a Shield as equipment, on your back, but you don't benefit from the AC bonus. To gain or lose the AC bonus you need to spend an Action to Don/Doff it.
I noticed that instead of 'wielding a shield', characters 'wear' them. Does that mean when I'm wielding a two-handed weapon that I wear my shield over my arm or back?
Shields are actually wielded, not worn.
Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
There is something to be said about reading too deep into simple words, generally go with what is common usage. When you start getting into the whole "but it doesn't actually say ---" arguments, it can lead down a rabbit hole that usually degrades many constructive debates.
A cleric or paladin with an emblem on their shield as their holy symbol can use the shield hand for the somatic component of spells, can't they?
The somatic components equate to hand gestures and movement, the holy symbol/emblem only acts as an alternative for certain material components. Hence the need for the WarCaster feat if wanting to cast and wield a shield (unless you keep your other hand free for this reason)
It'd be great if the two-weapon fighting action would take whether or not you've got a shield equipped into consideration -- hopefully that'll get included.
A cleric or paladin with an emblem on their shield as their holy symbol can use the shield hand for the somatic component of spells, can't they?
The somatic components equate to hand gestures and movement, the holy symbol/emblem only acts as an alternative for certain material components. Hence the need for the WarCaster feat if wanting to cast and wield a shield (unless you keep your other hand free for this reason)
Right, but the rules say the hand holding the material components can be used for the somatic portion of the spell, so I've been allowing it. Though I admit that it doesn't make a lot of sense to be waiving you arm around with a shield attached
With an emblem, "A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in the Spellcasting section. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield."
The discussion of material components in the spellcasting section says: "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components."
So, my reading is, an emblem can be used as a spellcasting focus if it is born on a shield. The same hand holding the spellcasting focus (here, the shield) may be used to perform the somatic components.
You're also using the wording to make your point valid when it isn't. Let's look at the assumptions here:
When you don a shield you are unable to use that hand for somatic gestures. You may use a shield as a spell casting focus. A spell casitng focus may replace many of the material components of a spell. Holding the spell focus does not prevent the caster from somatic gestures.
Your line of thought presumes that the first assumption is invalidated by the last, however there is one last thing that you're missing:
You must have the War Caster feat to cast spells while donning a shield.
You are holding a shield, not a spell casting focus, the spell casting focus is a trinket, emblem, or other piece of embellishment that is attached to the shield.
What’s the amount of interaction needed to use a spellcasting focus? Does it have to be included in the somatic component?
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
What’s the amount of interaction needed to use a spellcasting focus? Does it have to be included in the somatic component?
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
Thanks. Looks like DMThac0 and I were both partially right.
That said, that Sage Advice yields the somewhat bizarre result that a spell with both somatic AND material components is less cumbersome to cast than a spell that just has somatic ones. In any case, I guess it doesn't make any difference mechanically since you can stow the mace as a free action and cast the spell in round 1, then draw it again as a free action in round 2.
What’s the amount of interaction needed to use a spellcasting focus? Does it have to be included in the somatic component?
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
Thanks. Looks like DMThac0 and I were both partially right.
That said, that Sage Advice yields the somewhat bizarre result that a spell with both somatic AND material components is less cumbersome to cast than a spell that just has somatic ones. In any case, I guess it doesn't make any difference mechanically since you can stow the mace as a free action and cast the spell in round 1, then draw it again as a free action in round 2.
Might not make a big difference, but there is a difference: at the very least, the character can't make Opportunity Attacks until they re-draw their weapon.
But yes, it's a "known issue" that the current rules weirdly make casting spells with S/M components often less burdensome that those with simply S components. Then again, by RAW, Burning Hands is uncastable, since you need both a free hand for the somatic component, and both hands for the actual gesture (thumbs together, fingers spread). At the very least, uncastable with a focus (you could argue that, if using a component pouch, the components disappear as you cast and then you can bring your thumbs together, etc.), unless that focus is a Hat of Wizardry. :D
It'd be great if the two-weapon fighting action would take whether or not you've got a shield equipped into consideration -- hopefully that'll get included.
It already does - if you are wearing a shield you can't use a two-handed weapon.
It'd be great if the two-weapon fighting action would take whether or not you've got a shield equipped into consideration -- hopefully that'll get included.
It already does - if you are wearing a shield you can't use a two-handed weapon.
Unless you are a thri-keen. :-)
I believe pocketmouse is talking about fighting with two weapons, not wielding a weapon with two hands. Still, the shield is not a weapon, and even if it is used as an improvised weapon, it still doesn't have the light property. So the shield cannot normally be used to attack as part of two-weapon fighting.
What’s the amount of interaction needed to use a spellcasting focus? Does it have to be included in the somatic component?
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
Thanks. Looks like DMThac0 and I were both partially right.
That said, that Sage Advice yields the somewhat bizarre result that a spell with both somatic AND material components is less cumbersome to cast than a spell that just has somatic ones. In any case, I guess it doesn't make any difference mechanically since you can stow the mace as a free action and cast the spell in round 1, then draw it again as a free action in round 2.
Might not make a big difference, but there is a difference: at the very least, the character can't make Opportunity Attacks until they re-draw their weapon.
But yes, it's a "known issue" that the current rules weirdly make casting spells with S/M components often less burdensome that those with simply S components. Then again, by RAW, Burning Hands is uncastable, since you need both a free hand for the somatic component, and both hands for the actual gesture (thumbs together, fingers spread). At the very least, uncastable with a focus (you could argue that, if using a component pouch, the components disappear as you cast and then you can bring your thumbs together, etc.), unless that focus is a Hat of Wizardry. :D
Burning Hands is not uncastable with out both hands free.
The listed material and somatic components are there mearly for flavor back in the old editions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I noticed that instead of 'wielding a shield', characters 'wear' them. Does that mean when I'm wielding a two-handed weapon that I wear my shield over my arm or back?
To the best of my knowledge if you're using a 2-handed weapon you will be unable to use your shield at the same time. The shield would be considered in your off-hand, as such you're limited to using a versatile or one-handed weapon with the shield. However, if you were to stow your shield, you would then be able to use the 2-handed weapon but you'd lose the ac bonus from the shield as it is no longer in use.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/equipment#ArmorandShields
https://www.dndbeyond.com/compendium/rules/basic-rules/equipment#Shield
If you want the advantages of a Shield (+2 AC), then it uses up that hand.
This means you can't use that hand for somatic components (Warcaster feat negates this limit)
This means you can't use this hand to hold a weapon or attack with a two-handed weapon.
You can carry a Shield as equipment, on your back, but you don't benefit from the AC bonus. To gain or lose the AC bonus you need to spend an Action to Don/Doff it.
So paladins and fighters don't get the bonus unless it's a one-handed weapon?
Nobody gets the bonus of a shield, regardless of class, unless they are actively using it, which occupies one hand.
If you are actively using a shield, you may not use that hand for anything else.
Wielding a two-handed weapon requires both hands.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
Shields are actually wielded, not worn.
Shields. A shield is made from wood or metal and is carried in one hand. Wielding a shield increases your Armor Class by 2. You can benefit from only one shield at a time.
Feature Requests || Homebrew FAQ || Pricing FAQ || Hardcovers FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources
When I equip a shield in this app I notice it says 'wear' instead of 'wield'. Just want to be sure
There is something to be said about reading too deep into simple words, generally go with what is common usage. When you start getting into the whole "but it doesn't actually say ---" arguments, it can lead down a rabbit hole that usually degrades many constructive debates.
A cleric or paladin with an emblem on their shield as their holy symbol can use the shield hand for the somatic component of spells, can't they?
The somatic components equate to hand gestures and movement, the holy symbol/emblem only acts as an alternative for certain material components. Hence the need for the WarCaster feat if wanting to cast and wield a shield (unless you keep your other hand free for this reason)
It'd be great if the two-weapon fighting action would take whether or not you've got a shield equipped into consideration -- hopefully that'll get included.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
Right, but the rules say the hand holding the material components can be used for the somatic portion of the spell, so I've been allowing it. Though I admit that it doesn't make a lot of sense to be waiving you arm around with a shield attached
To be more specific:
With an emblem, "A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in the Spellcasting section. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield."
The discussion of material components in the spellcasting section says: "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components."
So, my reading is, an emblem can be used as a spellcasting focus if it is born on a shield. The same hand holding the spellcasting focus (here, the shield) may be used to perform the somatic components.
You're also using the wording to make your point valid when it isn't. Let's look at the assumptions here:
When you don a shield you are unable to use that hand for somatic gestures.
You may use a shield as a spell casting focus.
A spell casitng focus may replace many of the material components of a spell.
Holding the spell focus does not prevent the caster from somatic gestures.
Your line of thought presumes that the first assumption is invalidated by the last, however there is one last thing that you're missing:
You must have the War Caster feat to cast spells while donning a shield.
You are holding a shield, not a spell casting focus, the spell casting focus is a trinket, emblem, or other piece of embellishment that is attached to the shield.
Per Sage Advice Compendium Version 1.14
Thanks. Looks like DMThac0 and I were both partially right.
That said, that Sage Advice yields the somewhat bizarre result that a spell with both somatic AND material components is less cumbersome to cast than a spell that just has somatic ones. In any case, I guess it doesn't make any difference mechanically since you can stow the mace as a free action and cast the spell in round 1, then draw it again as a free action in round 2.
Might not make a big difference, but there is a difference: at the very least, the character can't make Opportunity Attacks until they re-draw their weapon.
But yes, it's a "known issue" that the current rules weirdly make casting spells with S/M components often less burdensome that those with simply S components. Then again, by RAW, Burning Hands is uncastable, since you need both a free hand for the somatic component, and both hands for the actual gesture (thumbs together, fingers spread). At the very least, uncastable with a focus (you could argue that, if using a component pouch, the components disappear as you cast and then you can bring your thumbs together, etc.), unless that focus is a Hat of Wizardry. :D
It already does - if you are wearing a shield you can't use a two-handed weapon.
Unless you are a thri-keen. :-)
I believe pocketmouse is talking about fighting with two weapons, not wielding a weapon with two hands. Still, the shield is not a weapon, and even if it is used as an improvised weapon, it still doesn't have the light property. So the shield cannot normally be used to attack as part of two-weapon fighting.
A surprise, to be sure, but a welcome one.
Burning Hands is not uncastable with out both hands free.
The listed material and somatic components are there mearly for flavor back in the old editions.