the character should already be Dual Wielding two weapons when you start the Attack action to benefit from things related to two weapon fighting
While it's cited as example, the Light Property isn't worded to require it like Two-Weapon Fighting in 5E14 that's the thing.
Light: For example, you can attack with a Shortsword in one hand and a Dagger in the other using the Attack action and a Bonus Action, but you don’t add your Strength or Dexterity modifier to the damage roll of the Bonus Action unless that modifier is negative
I know, mate, it's me against RAW, and RAW's always beating me :(
My last hope lies with my good friends Errata or Updated-SAC.
I have a question about handling a spellcasting focus while dual-wielding as a Fighter 1 / Bard 2. At this level of Bard, I still need a musical instrument as my focus, which must be held to cast spells.
The spellcasting focus rules state that you need to hold it while casting a spell, but the Magic Action does not specify (as the Attack Action does) whether you can take the focus into your hand as part of the action. So, my questions are:
Is grabbing your focus a free action?
How does this interact with stowing a weapon, given the description and limitations of free "Interaction with Things"?
To clarify how I think this plays out, here is an example of my intended combat rotation without war caster feat or without the valor bard weapon as a focus feature. Please help me and my table understand if this is correct or needs adjustments.
Round 1 (Start with Focus in Main Hand, Light Weapon in Off-Hand)
✅ Action: Cast spell (Bane). ✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the focus. 🔚 End of Turn: Main hand is now empty, off-hand still holds weapon.
Round 2 (Weapon Swap and Attack Action)
✅ Attack Action: Draw weapon as part of the Attack Action, make attacks. ✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the weapon. 🔚 End of Turn: Main hand is empty again.
Round 3 (Retrieve Focus and Cast Spell)
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Draw the focus. ✅ Magic Action: Cast spell (Sleep). 🔚 End of Turn: Focus in main hand, weapon in off-hand.
Round 4 (Swap Again for Attack)
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the focus. ✅ Attack Action: Draw the weapon, make attacks. 🔚 End of Turn: Dual-wielding again.
Round 5 (Reset to Spellcasting)
✅ Attack Action: Make attacks, stow weapon. ✅ Free Interaction with Things: Draw focus. 🔚 End of Turn: Ready to cast again.
Rule-wise, that seems in line with how to juggle items 3/2 hands while using free item interactions and equip/unequip weapons as part of the Attack action.
Note that if your character use Nick Mastery, you can make the extra attack from the Light Property, as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action and thus make additional equip/unequip.
2024 rules. Time-limited interactions - one free interaction. Additional requires an action to utilise.
One draw or stow as part of an (not each) action [during an attack action]. So, the free draw IS the one free interaction. A second attack from extra attack doesn't grant you another free interaction/draw/stow.
e.g., if you kick a door shut (free object interaction), thrust your sword at an enemy (attack), you can't then stow your sword, since you already used up your one free interaction.
2024 rules. Time-limited interactions - one free interaction. Additional requires an action to utilise.
One draw or stow as part of an (not each) action [during an attack action]. So, the free draw IS the one free interaction. A second attack from extra attack doesn't grant you another free interaction/draw/stow.
e.g., if you kick a door shut (free object interaction), thrust your sword at an enemy (attack), you can't then stow your sword, since you already used up your one free interaction.
A fundamental principle of D&D is that specific beats general. In other words, if a rule says you can do a thing under specific circumstances, you can do that thing, despite other rules saying you cannot.
So, yes, you get one free general-purpose object interaction during your turn.
But, the attack action says:
Equipping and Unequipping Weapons. You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action.
So. You kick open the door. (Free interaction)
You then take the attack action.
You make an attack as part of this action, like one does. You may draw or stow a weapon as part of this attack, because you have made an attack as part of the attack action.
Now, because you have Extra Attack, you can make another attack. This is also an attack made as part of the attack action, so it comes with another weapon interaction.
Because you attacked with a Light weapon, and have Nick Mastery, you can make that extra attack. It is explicitly part of the attack action, so you get a third weapon interaction if you want it.
Finally, because you had a Scimitar of Speed, you can make a bonus action attack. This is not part of the Attack action, so you do not get a free weapon interaction.
Then you take the rest of your move, and reach another door. You cannot open it, because you used your free general object interaction right at the start. If you hadn't opened the first door, you could open this one, because none of those Attack action weapon interactions were your free interaction.
Thanks for the thoughtful response! I can see where you're coming from, but I’d like to clarify why I still believe the intent and wording of the 2024 rules support the position that you only get one weapon draw or stow per turn, even when making multiple attacks as part of the Attack action.
Let me break it down:
🔹 1. Only One Free Interaction per Turn
The rules are explicit:
“One free interaction per turn. That interaction must occur during a creature’s movement or action.” — Time-Limited Object Interactions, PHB 2024
This rule governs all object interactions—whether it’s opening a door or drawing a weapon. The one free interaction is per turn, not per action or attack.
🔹 2. Attack Action Allows One Equip/Unequip—Not One Per Attack
Under Attack [Action]:
“You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action.”
Importantly:
It says “when you make an attack”, not “each time” or “whenever” you make an attack.
"as part of this action", was specifically added.
The singular phrasing suggests it's a one-time option tied to taking the Attack action—not something that triggers for every attack within that action.
It reads as a clarification that this draw/stow can happen as part of the Attack action (i.e. bundled into the flow), not as a separate, repeatable interaction.
If the intent was to allow one equip/unequip per attack, the wording would likely use plural forms or mimic phrasing like that found in Extra Attack (e.g., “each time you…” or “whenever you make an attack”).
🔹 3. Dual Wielder Feat Supports This Interpretation
Quick Draw: “You can draw or stow two weapons [...] when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.”
This feat would be meaningless if everyone could already draw or stow multiple weapons during a multi-attack action. The fact that this feat exists—and is framed as a special exception—strongly implies that the normal rule is a single draw/stow per turn.
🔹 4. "Specific Beats General" Doesn't Apply Here
This isn't a case of a specific rule overriding a general one. The Attack action rule doesn’t override the “one interaction per turn” rule—it’s merely specifying how and when you can integrate that single interaction into an attack. There's no indication that it grants additional interactions beyond the per-turn limit (e.g., it doesn't override multiplicity).
🔚 Conclusion
So to summarize:
You get one object interaction per turn.
The Attack action lets you fold that interaction into the action itself—but it doesn't multiply it based on the number of attacks.
Drawing/stowing more than once would require either a feat like Dual Wielder (Quick Draw) or the Utilize action.
Thanks again for the conversation! It's a nuanced rule, and I appreciate the chance to dive into the details with fellow players. 😊
PS: I don't expect this will convince you - though I do hope you enjoy the debate.
Thanks for the thoughtful response! I can see where you're coming from, but I’d like to clarify why I still believe the intent and wording of the 2024 rules support the position that you only get one weapon draw or stow per turn, even when making multiple attacks as part of the Attack action.
Let me break it down:
🔹 1. Only One Free Interaction per Turn
The rules are explicit:
“One free interaction per turn. That interaction must occur during a creature’s movement or action.” — Time-Limited Object Interactions, PHB 2024
This rule governs all object interactions—whether it’s opening a door or drawing a weapon. The one free interaction is per turn, not per action or attack.
This is true, as far as it goes, but this rule in no way prohibits additional interactions if some other part of the rules creates them. This is the free interaction. It simply is, with no prerequisites.
For instance, thrown weapons. You can draw a Thrown weapon as part of the attack. It says so in the property description.
Similarly, attacking creates additional interactions because it says it does.
Now, neither of these are the general-purpose object interaction you are granted by default. They are a specific type of interaction, limited in time and scope, to assist you in doing the other action.
D&D 5 is structured as an exception-based system. When it says "you can do X under Y circumstances", that is an explicit exception to rules that say "You can't do X", or that limit how often you can do X.
🔹 2. Attack Action Allows One Equip/Unequip—Not One Per Attack
Under Attack [Action]:
“You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action.”
Importantly:
It says “when you make an attack”, not “each time” or “whenever” you make an attack.
"as part of this action", was specifically added.
The singular phrasing suggests it's a one-time option tied to taking the Attack action—not something that triggers for every attack within that action.
It reads as a clarification that this draw/stow can happen as part of the Attack action (i.e. bundled into the flow), not as a separate, repeatable interaction.
If they wanted to clarify or remind, they must phrase it as such. By phrasing it "you can X when Y", this is a new rule.
If they wanted to restrict it to once per attack, they should have phrased it as "You may draw/stow once during this action". You always attack during an attack action. The additional clause would be unnecessary.
As for the claim of singular phrasing, do barbarians only get to do rage damage once per attack action?
Rage Damage.When you make an attack using Strength—with either a weapon or an Unarmed Strike—and deal damage to the target, you gain a bonus to the damage that increases
Indeed, a quick search of the class chapter would reveal:
They use "when" and "whenever" interchangeably. (Which is perfectly consistent with English usage, though it is poor rules templating.)
When they wish to restrict usage of a "when X you can Y" ability, they do so explicitly
To achieve what you claim the rules say, they would have to say something like "during your attack action, you may use your free object interaction to draw or stow a weapon".
Or they could just not even mention it, since the free interaction explicitly says that it happens during your movement or action, and drawing or stowing a weapon is interacting with an object.
🔹 3. Dual Wielder Feat Supports This Interpretation
Quick Draw: “You can draw or stow two weapons [...] when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one.”
This feat would be meaningless if everyone could already draw or stow multiple weapons during a multi-attack action. The fact that this feat exists—and is framed as a special exception—strongly implies that the normal rule is a single draw/stow per turn.
Drawing or stowing two instead of one is a considerable upgrade. It also simplifies your life, and gets more style points.
Also, not everyone gets a multi-attack action. If your Rogue with dual wielder needs to draw down and get to the stabbing, they need this feature. (Yes, they can work around it with Nick. If they have Nick active, and if they want to use only light weapons. The rules do not only provide support for "optimal" builds.)
🔹 4. "Specific Beats General" Doesn't Apply Here
This isn't a case of a specific rule overriding a general one. The Attack action rule doesn’t override the “one interaction per turn” rule—it’s merely specifying how and when you can integrate that single interaction into an attack. There's no indication that it grants additional interactions beyond the per-turn limit
The counterargument is simply that it says it gives object interactions. A major point of the meta-rule is that you don't need to specify it's an exception, merely that you can do it.
Without textual support that the Attack action's statement about weapon draws is a reminder, this is a circular argument -- it's not an exception because it's a reminder, and it's a reminder because it's not an exception.
And there's no textual evidence it's a reminder -- it's just a flat statement that you can draw/stow when you make an attack. Even if you were correct on the number of interactions you get from an attack action, it would still be above and beyond the default interaction.
There's also an example in the PHB that I think is possible because it mixes the "Time-Limited Object Interactions" and the "Equipping and Unequipping Weapons" rules:
Russell: I drop my sword and pull out my warhammer [...]
Vulnerability. An attack that deals bludgeoning damage is deadly to skeletons. Shreeve knows this from past experience, which is why she drops her sword and switches to a Bludgeoning weapon. [...]
EDIT: CyborgStorm, here are some related threads if you're interested in more opinions about this topic:
I know, mate, it's me against RAW, and RAW's always beating me :(
My last hope lies with my good friends Errata or Updated-SAC.
I have a question about handling a spellcasting focus while dual-wielding as a Fighter 1 / Bard 2. At this level of Bard, I still need a musical instrument as my focus, which must be held to cast spells.
The spellcasting focus rules state that you need to hold it while casting a spell, but the Magic Action does not specify (as the Attack Action does) whether you can take the focus into your hand as part of the action. So, my questions are:
To clarify how I think this plays out, here is an example of my intended combat rotation without war caster feat or without the valor bard weapon as a focus feature. Please help me and my table understand if this is correct or needs adjustments.
Round 1 (Start with Focus in Main Hand, Light Weapon in Off-Hand)
✅ Action: Cast spell (Bane).
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the focus.
🔚 End of Turn: Main hand is now empty, off-hand still holds weapon.
Round 2 (Weapon Swap and Attack Action)
✅ Attack Action: Draw weapon as part of the Attack Action, make attacks.
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the weapon.
🔚 End of Turn: Main hand is empty again.
Round 3 (Retrieve Focus and Cast Spell)
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Draw the focus.
✅ Magic Action: Cast spell (Sleep).
🔚 End of Turn: Focus in main hand, weapon in off-hand.
Round 4 (Swap Again for Attack)
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Stow the focus.
✅ Attack Action: Draw the weapon, make attacks.
🔚 End of Turn: Dual-wielding again.
Round 5 (Reset to Spellcasting)
✅ Attack Action: Make attacks, stow weapon.
✅ Free Interaction with Things: Draw focus.
🔚 End of Turn: Ready to cast again.
I will greatly appriciate your feedback and help.
Rule-wise, that seems in line with how to juggle items 3/2 hands while using free item interactions and equip/unequip weapons as part of the Attack action.
Note that if your character use Nick Mastery, you can make the extra attack from the Light Property, as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action and thus make additional equip/unequip.
The way you explained your intent was marvelous Nelfein :)
2024 rules.
Time-limited interactions - one free interaction. Additional requires an action to utilise.
One draw or stow as part of an (not each) action [during an attack action]. So, the free draw IS the one free interaction. A second attack from extra attack doesn't grant you another free interaction/draw/stow.
e.g., if you kick a door shut (free object interaction), thrust your sword at an enemy (attack), you can't then stow your sword, since you already used up your one free interaction.
A fundamental principle of D&D is that specific beats general. In other words, if a rule says you can do a thing under specific circumstances, you can do that thing, despite other rules saying you cannot.
So, yes, you get one free general-purpose object interaction during your turn.
But, the attack action says:
So. You kick open the door. (Free interaction)
You then take the attack action.
You make an attack as part of this action, like one does. You may draw or stow a weapon as part of this attack, because you have made an attack as part of the attack action.
Now, because you have Extra Attack, you can make another attack. This is also an attack made as part of the attack action, so it comes with another weapon interaction.
Because you attacked with a Light weapon, and have Nick Mastery, you can make that extra attack. It is explicitly part of the attack action, so you get a third weapon interaction if you want it.
Finally, because you had a Scimitar of Speed, you can make a bonus action attack. This is not part of the Attack action, so you do not get a free weapon interaction.
Then you take the rest of your move, and reach another door. You cannot open it, because you used your free general object interaction right at the start. If you hadn't opened the first door, you could open this one, because none of those Attack action weapon interactions were your free interaction.
Thanks for the thoughtful response! I can see where you're coming from, but I’d like to clarify why I still believe the intent and wording of the 2024 rules support the position that you only get one weapon draw or stow per turn, even when making multiple attacks as part of the Attack action.
Let me break it down:
🔹 1. Only One Free Interaction per Turn
The rules are explicit:
This rule governs all object interactions—whether it’s opening a door or drawing a weapon. The one free interaction is per turn, not per action or attack.
🔹 2. Attack Action Allows One Equip/Unequip—Not One Per Attack
Under Attack [Action]:
Importantly:
It says “when you make an attack”, not “each time” or “whenever” you make an attack.
The singular phrasing suggests it's a one-time option tied to taking the Attack action—not something that triggers for every attack within that action.
It reads as a clarification that this draw/stow can happen as part of the Attack action (i.e. bundled into the flow), not as a separate, repeatable interaction.
If the intent was to allow one equip/unequip per attack, the wording would likely use plural forms or mimic phrasing like that found in Extra Attack (e.g., “each time you…” or “whenever you make an attack”).
🔹 3. Dual Wielder Feat Supports This Interpretation
This feat would be meaningless if everyone could already draw or stow multiple weapons during a multi-attack action. The fact that this feat exists—and is framed as a special exception—strongly implies that the normal rule is a single draw/stow per turn.
🔹 4. "Specific Beats General" Doesn't Apply Here
This isn't a case of a specific rule overriding a general one. The Attack action rule doesn’t override the “one interaction per turn” rule—it’s merely specifying how and when you can integrate that single interaction into an attack. There's no indication that it grants additional interactions beyond the per-turn limit (e.g., it doesn't override multiplicity).
🔚 Conclusion
So to summarize:
You get one object interaction per turn.
The Attack action lets you fold that interaction into the action itself—but it doesn't multiply it based on the number of attacks.
Drawing/stowing more than once would require either a feat like Dual Wielder (Quick Draw) or the Utilize action.
Thanks again for the conversation! It's a nuanced rule, and I appreciate the chance to dive into the details with fellow players. 😊
PS: I don't expect this will convince you - though I do hope you enjoy the debate.
The rules would be too restrictive if they weren't also allowing for:
If a weapon has the Thrown, you can throw the weapon to make a ranged attack, and you can draw that weapon as part of the attack.
Each attack expends one piece of Ammunition. Drawing the ammunition is part of the attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon).
This is true, as far as it goes, but this rule in no way prohibits additional interactions if some other part of the rules creates them. This is the free interaction. It simply is, with no prerequisites.
For instance, thrown weapons. You can draw a Thrown weapon as part of the attack. It says so in the property description.
Similarly, attacking creates additional interactions because it says it does.
Now, neither of these are the general-purpose object interaction you are granted by default. They are a specific type of interaction, limited in time and scope, to assist you in doing the other action.
D&D 5 is structured as an exception-based system. When it says "you can do X under Y circumstances", that is an explicit exception to rules that say "You can't do X", or that limit how often you can do X.
If they wanted to clarify or remind, they must phrase it as such. By phrasing it "you can X when Y", this is a new rule.
If they wanted to restrict it to once per attack, they should have phrased it as "You may draw/stow once during this action". You always attack during an attack action. The additional clause would be unnecessary.
As for the claim of singular phrasing, do barbarians only get to do rage damage once per attack action?
Indeed, a quick search of the class chapter would reveal:
To achieve what you claim the rules say, they would have to say something like "during your attack action, you may use your free object interaction to draw or stow a weapon".
Or they could just not even mention it, since the free interaction explicitly says that it happens during your movement or action, and drawing or stowing a weapon is interacting with an object.
Drawing or stowing two instead of one is a considerable upgrade. It also simplifies your life, and gets more style points.
Also, not everyone gets a multi-attack action. If your Rogue with dual wielder needs to draw down and get to the stabbing, they need this feature. (Yes, they can work around it with Nick. If they have Nick active, and if they want to use only light weapons. The rules do not only provide support for "optimal" builds.)
The counterargument is simply that it says it gives object interactions. A major point of the meta-rule is that you don't need to specify it's an exception, merely that you can do it.
Without textual support that the Attack action's statement about weapon draws is a reminder, this is a circular argument -- it's not an exception because it's a reminder, and it's a reminder because it's not an exception.
And there's no textual evidence it's a reminder -- it's just a flat statement that you can draw/stow when you make an attack. Even if you were correct on the number of interactions you get from an attack action, it would still be above and beyond the default interaction.
IMO, Plague and jl8e are right.
There's also an example in the PHB that I think is possible because it mixes the "Time-Limited Object Interactions" and the "Equipping and Unequipping Weapons" rules:
EDIT: CyborgStorm, here are some related threads if you're interested in more opinions about this topic:
Weapon swapping and the 2024 PHB
Equip or Unequip a weapon - once per attack or once per Attack [Action]?
2024 switching weapons in combat
Help Equipping/Unequipping
Equipping a weapon when not taking the Attack action eg for True Strike [2024]