it is probably intentional, it was mentioned when they first changed it, and has been possible in two versions. They want throwing weapons to benefit from light weapon property, and they want the rule to be more about light weapons than fighting with two hands.
It's pretty clear that the intent is to use it for dual wielding, otherwise they'd just make it an unrestricted extra attack (the way crossbow expert works in 2014) rather than requiring doing it with a different weapon.
no, that's not clear, thats an assumption, they actively removed the holding of weapon in the other hand which appeared in the first rules. They changed the name from being about TWF to being about light weapons. At first I thought it was an error, but it stayed around ober multiple wording rewrites. I don't think its an accident at this point.
there is nothing that indicates this is unintended. It may change or not go through, Its fine to say you think its a bad idea, but I think they want people to test it this way and take feedback on it.
So I examine it on the merits and demerits of the system. I think this should work for throwing weapons, or throwing weapons becomes non viable.
That’s not how I read it. It says “You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action. You do so either before or after the attack.” It doesn’t say “one weapon per attack,” or “whenever you make an attack.” I think it still limits you to only drawing/stowing 1 weapon per Attack action.
If it meant that it would say "when you take this action". The requirement is "make an attack as part of this action".
I think the real intent was to make throwing weapons function better and the rest of the weapon juggling is a side effect.
Then they should just make it part of the Thrown property. I’m not allowing all that juggling.
its intended for throwing and juggling, its also to allow fighters to be able to be the best with masteries and be able to fully utilize it, by making it be scaling based on the number of attacks. Which makes sense. If you can attack 6 times, you would be able to change weapons more than once.
regular martials can only swap weapons once, unless they are throwing, or have dual wielder feat. fighters can do more, the equip rule and swapping is totally intentional. DM can ignore it, (like all rules) but they are nerfing fighter's intended gameplay
That’s not how I read it. It says “You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action. You do so either before or after the attack.” It doesn’t say “one weapon per attack,” or “whenever you make an attack.” I think it still limits you to only drawing/stowing 1 weapon per Attack action.
If it meant that it would say "when you take this action". The requirement is "make an attack as part of this action".
I think the real intent was to make throwing weapons function better and the rest of the weapon juggling is a side effect.
Then they should just make it part of the Thrown property. I’m not allowing all that juggling.
its intended for throwing and juggling, its also to allow fighters to be able to be the best with masteries and be able to fully utilize it, by making it be scaling based on the number of attacks. Which makes sense. If you can attack 6 times, you would be able to change weapons more than once.
regular martials can only swap weapons once, unless they are throwing, or have dual wielder feat. fighters can do more, the equip rule and swapping is totally intentional. DM can ignore it, (like all rules) but they are nerfing fighter's intended gameplay
That’s stupid. A round is 6 seconds. It takes at least 1 second to draw or stow a weapon. There would be no time to actually, y’know, attack. It’s 💩 game design.
Makes total sense. Just walk around with a belt with 3 short swords dangling off and attack, drop, draw, attack, attack, drop, draw, attack, attack drop.... round two just bend over to grab a weapon each attack while you hold up one finger asking the enemy to wait a sec and while you sort the pile. I think what we have here (along with the nick means I get 4 attacks now not three camp) is a very favorable interpretation that ignores listed examples of how the property plays out in order to bump a player's power level every little bit possible. That probably indicates they need to be more explicit about how exactly the rule is meant to play out and about why they altered wording. Maybe they altered it because a sensitivity reader pointed out that not everyone has two arms, but they didn't think about the interactions with shields and dueling fighting styles that light weapons could be interpreted as having now. Maybe they did mean to allow it to allow that power bump. Who knows. Only the designers do.
If they did intend for the juggling though, they just made wielding two weapons at once strictly inferior to the shield/dueling feat/juggling combo.
The wording of this rule has evolved over time. It first appeared in UA2 and read as follows:
UA2 (Expert Classes): "EQUIPPING WEAPONS You can equip or unequip one Weapon before or after any attack you make as part of this Action, even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike."
Then we got the UA3 version which was the clearest imo.
UA3 (Cleric and Species): "EQUIPPING WEAPONS You can equip or unequip one Weapon before or after each attack you make as part of this Action, even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike."
The "each attack" wording stayed in UA4 - all they added at that point was the definitions of "equip" and "unequip":
UA4 (Druid and Paladin): EQUIPPING WEAPONS You can equip or unequip one weapon before or after each attack you make as part of this action. If you equip a weapon before an attack, you don’t need to use it for that attack. Equipping a weapon includes drawing it from a sheathe, picking it up, or retrieving it from a container. Unequipping a weapon includes sheathing, stowing, or dropping it.
UA5 and onward is where they went from "each attack" to "an attack." But as mentioned, "an attack" is not as clear as far as their intent - it could be parsed as still meaning "each" or it could mean "one and only one (of your choice.)"
Personally I view the fact that they specifically said "each attack" as being their true intent, because it would have been easiest for them to simply not mention Attack at all, thus leaving us with the 2014 PHB version, if that's what they had wanted.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Makes total sense. Just walk around with a belt with 3 short swords dangling off and attack, drop, draw, attack, attack, drop, draw, attack, attack drop.... round two just bend over to grab a weapon each attack while you hold up one finger asking the enemy to wait a sec and while you sort the pile. I think what we have here (along with the nick means I get 4 attacks now not three camp) is a very favorable interpretation that ignores listed examples of how the property plays out in order to bump a player's power level every little bit possible. That probably indicates they need to be more explicit about how exactly the rule is meant to play out and about why they altered wording. Maybe they altered it because a sensitivity reader pointed out that not everyone has two arms, but they didn't think about the interactions with shields and dueling fighting styles that light weapons could be interpreted as having now. Maybe they did mean to allow it to allow that power bump. Who knows. Only the designers do.
If they did intend for the juggling though, they just made wielding two weapons at once strictly inferior to the shield/dueling feat/juggling combo.
dual wielding needs to be addressed regardless, Dual wielding is no better if 1handers have this functionality. Dual wielding should be competitive with two handers, its currently not. This rule just makes one handers better, it doesnt make dual wielders worse. removing it won't put dual wielding where it needs to be.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
I mean, by the time you can do half a dozen regularly you're a Hasted 20th-level Fighter using Nick weapons, or failing that you're a 5th-level Fighter with Nick weapons burning your 1/rest emergency button. You should be beyond guy at the gym by that point imo, at least a little.
Pity that it's not actually juggling weapons. I've always liked the image of a jester character juggling three or four short swords and stabbing people with them.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon. you also will only be able to swap weapons 3 times with 6 attacks. unless you are throwing, in which case throwing 6 weapons in six seconds is extremely doable.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon.
Yes, and maces, and warhammers, and greataxes oh my. The bigger the list the more ridiculous it gets.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon.
Yes, and maces, and warhammers, and greataxes oh my. The bigger the list the more ridiculous it gets.
they didnt want to have 10 different rules, based on weapon weight and handling, its not a simulation, and much is simplified for playability, or gameplay
Pity that it's not actually juggling weapons. I've always liked the image of a jester character juggling three or four short swords and stabbing people with them.
Haha! You know, if a player wanted their fighter with the Two-Weapon Fighting and Dueling styles to fight with a shield and actually juggle Light weapon with one hand, I'd be down for that character concept.
Outside of that amazing image, I really don't think the Light weapon property should allow for shield in one hand and rapidly swapping between shortswords with the other hand to make extra attacks. Mechanically, it could still be balanced. Narratively, it makes no sense and I've been giving feedback in the Other Comments section of every PH UA survey since it appeared that way. 😅
Pity that it's not actually juggling weapons. I've always liked the image of a jester character juggling three or four short swords and stabbing people with them.
Haha! You know, if a player wanted their fighter with the Two-Weapon Fighting and Dueling styles to fight with a shield and actually juggle Light weapon with one hand, I'd be down for that character concept.
Outside of that amazing image, I really don't think the Light weapon property should allow for shield in one hand and rapidly swapping between shortswords with the other hand to make extra attacks. Mechanically, it could still be balanced. Narratively, it makes no sense and I've been giving feedback in the Other Comments section of every PH UA survey since it appeared that way. 😅
I think the juggling of weapons is fine just not while you are holding a shield. The purpose of the shield is to grant a bonus to defense at the sacrifice of offense. The only thing you are sacrificing if you can do it with a shield equipped is the potential to attack with a non light weapon with your bonus action and/or nick attack which also requires a feat investment.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon.
Yes, and maces, and warhammers, and greataxes oh my. The bigger the list the more ridiculous it gets.
they didnt want to have 10 different rules, based on weapon weight and handling, its not a simulation, and much is simplified for playability, or gameplay
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon.
Yes, and maces, and warhammers, and greataxes oh my. The bigger the list the more ridiculous it gets.
they didnt want to have 10 different rules, based on weapon weight and handling, its not a simulation, and much is simplified for playability, or gameplay
There's a lot of evidence for the D&D team being more interested in 'what cool things can we enable' than 'how can people exploit these rules'. The single object interaction rule did cause problems so allowing multiples if you have multiple attacks is an obvious fix, it just has side effects.
Letting people draw thrown weapons as part of the attacks makes sense. Letting people draw/stow a weapon as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction makes sense. Letting people swap warhammer for greatsword for halberd for longbow all as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction is just gamist 🐂💩.
Letting people draw thrown weapons as part of the attacks makes sense. Letting people draw/stow a weapon as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction makes sense. Letting people swap warhammer for greatsword for halberd for longbow all as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction is just gamist 🐂💩.
You wouldn't get that many weapon swaps by my reading:
Each attack comes with one Equip/Unequip interaction, which can be taken before or after that attack. So if you start with the Warhammer already in hand, you get to attack and stow it after. Then your next attack in the sequence you use your equip to draw the greatsword before your attack, and hit with that. Then for your third attack you might stow the greatsword, but you don't have another "equip" to pull the halberd, so you'd need to use your object interaction for that, and then you're completely out before you make it to the longbow.
In short the sequence would be: Warhammer(Attack -> Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip -> Attack) -> Greatsword(Unequip) and that's where you'd run out of free ones. You can at most do one more swap by burning your OI, like so: Warhammer(Attack -> Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip->Attack) -> Greatsword(Unequip) -> Halberd(OI Equip->Attack). Now you're out of equips and OIs and can't do the longbow part of that, unless you Action Surge or something.
If you don't start with the Warhammer already in hand you have even less. Now it becomes Warhammer(Equip->Attack->OI Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip->Attack) and then you're out, unless you start throwing punches into the mix.
TL;DR this rule is great if you're fighting with 2 weapons. If you're trying to juggle a whole golf bag of them in one attack sequence however you're going to run out after 3.
Thrown weapons meanwhile already get around this because you don't have to spend your unequips on them - getting them out of your hands is baked into the attack, because you're literally tossing them instead of stowing them.
no, that's not clear, thats an assumption, they actively removed the holding of weapon in the other hand which appeared in the first rules. They changed the name from being about TWF to being about light weapons. At first I thought it was an error, but it stayed around ober multiple wording rewrites. I don't think its an accident at this point.
there is nothing that indicates this is unintended. It may change or not go through, Its fine to say you think its a bad idea, but I think they want people to test it this way and take feedback on it.
So I examine it on the merits and demerits of the system. I think this should work for throwing weapons, or throwing weapons becomes non viable.
its intended for throwing and juggling, its also to allow fighters to be able to be the best with masteries and be able to fully utilize it, by making it be scaling based on the number of attacks. Which makes sense. If you can attack 6 times, you would be able to change weapons more than once.
regular martials can only swap weapons once, unless they are throwing, or have dual wielder feat. fighters can do more, the equip rule and swapping is totally intentional. DM can ignore it, (like all rules) but they are nerfing fighter's intended gameplay
That’s stupid. A round is 6 seconds. It takes at least 1 second to draw or stow a weapon. There would be no time to actually, y’know, attack. It’s 💩 game design.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Makes total sense. Just walk around with a belt with 3 short swords dangling off and attack, drop, draw, attack, attack, drop, draw, attack, attack drop.... round two just bend over to grab a weapon each attack while you hold up one finger asking the enemy to wait a sec and while you sort the pile. I think what we have here (along with the nick means I get 4 attacks now not three camp) is a very favorable interpretation that ignores listed examples of how the property plays out in order to bump a player's power level every little bit possible. That probably indicates they need to be more explicit about how exactly the rule is meant to play out and about why they altered wording. Maybe they altered it because a sensitivity reader pointed out that not everyone has two arms, but they didn't think about the interactions with shields and dueling fighting styles that light weapons could be interpreted as having now. Maybe they did mean to allow it to allow that power bump. Who knows. Only the designers do.
If they did intend for the juggling though, they just made wielding two weapons at once strictly inferior to the shield/dueling feat/juggling combo.
The wording of this rule has evolved over time. It first appeared in UA2 and read as follows:
UA2 (Expert Classes): "EQUIPPING WEAPONS
You can equip or unequip one Weapon before or
after any attack you make as part of this Action,
even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike."
Then we got the UA3 version which was the clearest imo.
UA3 (Cleric and Species): "EQUIPPING WEAPONS
You can equip or unequip one Weapon before or
after each attack you make as part of this Action,
even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike."
The "each attack" wording stayed in UA4 - all they added at that point was the definitions of "equip" and "unequip":
UA4 (Druid and Paladin): EQUIPPING WEAPONS
You can equip or unequip one weapon before or
after each attack you make as part of this action.
If you equip a weapon before an attack, you don’t
need to use it for that attack.
Equipping a weapon includes drawing it from
a sheathe, picking it up, or retrieving it from a
container. Unequipping a weapon includes
sheathing, stowing, or dropping it.
UA5 and onward is where they went from "each attack" to "an attack." But as mentioned, "an attack" is not as clear as far as their intent - it could be parsed as still meaning "each" or it could mean "one and only one (of your choice.)"
Personally I view the fact that they specifically said "each attack" as being their true intent, because it would have been easiest for them to simply not mention Attack at all, thus leaving us with the 2014 PHB version, if that's what they had wanted.
drawing a weapon and attacking are literally the same action for many weapons and fighting style, and it doesnt take a second to draw a weapon for every weapon or martial art. Note that the rule also includes dropping weapons, you think it takes a second to drop weapons?
the idea of action surge is the fighter is literally twice as fast for that round, yes it makes game design sense for you to be able to either draw, or drop a weapon on every attack.
dual wielding needs to be addressed regardless, Dual wielding is no better if 1handers have this functionality. Dual wielding should be competitive with two handers, its currently not. This rule just makes one handers better, it doesnt make dual wielders worse. removing it won't put dual wielding where it needs to be.
Yes, drawing a weapon as part of attacking is a thing, but chaining iaijutsu moves with a half a dozen swords in 6 seconds all as part of a single “attack action” is ridiculous.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I mean, by the time you can do half a dozen regularly you're a Hasted 20th-level Fighter using Nick weapons, or failing that you're a 5th-level Fighter with Nick weapons burning your 1/rest emergency button. You should be beyond guy at the gym by that point imo, at least a little.
Pity that it's not actually juggling weapons. I've always liked the image of a jester character juggling three or four short swords and stabbing people with them.
this isnt just for swords, this is also knives, daggers, or just dropping a weapon. you also will only be able to swap weapons 3 times with 6 attacks. unless you are throwing, in which case throwing 6 weapons in six seconds is extremely doable.
Yes, and maces, and warhammers, and greataxes oh my. The bigger the list the more ridiculous it gets.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
they didnt want to have 10 different rules, based on weapon weight and handling, its not a simulation, and much is simplified for playability, or gameplay
Haha! You know, if a player wanted their fighter with the Two-Weapon Fighting and Dueling styles to fight with a shield and actually juggle Light weapon with one hand, I'd be down for that character concept.
Outside of that amazing image, I really don't think the Light weapon property should allow for shield in one hand and rapidly swapping between shortswords with the other hand to make extra attacks. Mechanically, it could still be balanced. Narratively, it makes no sense and I've been giving feedback in the Other Comments section of every PH UA survey since it appeared that way. 😅
I think the juggling of weapons is fine just not while you are holding a shield. The purpose of the shield is to grant a bonus to defense at the sacrifice of offense. The only thing you are sacrificing if you can do it with a shield equipped is the potential to attack with a non light weapon with your bonus action and/or nick attack which also requires a feat investment.
It’s still stupid, ridiculous, and bad design.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
eh, subjective.
There's a lot of evidence for the D&D team being more interested in 'what cool things can we enable' than 'how can people exploit these rules'. The single object interaction rule did cause problems so allowing multiples if you have multiple attacks is an obvious fix, it just has side effects.
Letting people draw thrown weapons as part of the attacks makes sense. Letting people draw/stow a weapon as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction makes sense. Letting people swap warhammer for greatsword for halberd for longbow all as part of the attack action in addition to their 1 free item interaction is just gamist 🐂💩.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
You wouldn't get that many weapon swaps by my reading:
Each attack comes with one Equip/Unequip interaction, which can be taken before or after that attack. So if you start with the Warhammer already in hand, you get to attack and stow it after. Then your next attack in the sequence you use your equip to draw the greatsword before your attack, and hit with that. Then for your third attack you might stow the greatsword, but you don't have another "equip" to pull the halberd, so you'd need to use your object interaction for that, and then you're completely out before you make it to the longbow.
In short the sequence would be: Warhammer(Attack -> Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip -> Attack) -> Greatsword(Unequip) and that's where you'd run out of free ones. You can at most do one more swap by burning your OI, like so: Warhammer(Attack -> Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip->Attack) -> Greatsword(Unequip) -> Halberd(OI Equip->Attack). Now you're out of equips and OIs and can't do the longbow part of that, unless you Action Surge or something.
If you don't start with the Warhammer already in hand you have even less. Now it becomes Warhammer(Equip->Attack->OI Unequip) -> Greatsword(Equip->Attack) and then you're out, unless you start throwing punches into the mix.
TL;DR this rule is great if you're fighting with 2 weapons. If you're trying to juggle a whole golf bag of them in one attack sequence however you're going to run out after 3.
Thrown weapons meanwhile already get around this because you don't have to spend your unequips on them - getting them out of your hands is baked into the attack, because you're literally tossing them instead of stowing them.