One-handed weapons?

[Little Brother]

Is there any reason to ever just wield a single one-handed weapon without a second one or a shield? Is there any good reason to do so?

[Zarake]

So your off hand can do stuff like cast, use wands, hold holy symbols?

[Togath]

well, I suppose holding a torch in the other, but you could also simply tie a lantern or sunrod to yourself for light, or cast light on your weapons, there is also a feat in phb2(though I have yet to figure out what that feat actually does, it's called einhander if I rememeber correctly, and seems useless)

edit; you could also tie holy symbols to you, and I didn't think it actually says anywhere you need hands free in order to cast, even less so if you’re a divine caster(as you wouldn't have to worry about spell failure from a shield)

[DonDuckie]

The Pathfinder Magus can cast a spell in addition to attacks if he has a free hand.

You can also hold scrolls, potions, wands, etc.

Maybe you only have one arm.

In short: yes, many reasons...

[gkathellar]

No, not really. There's some subpar feat and prestige class support for single-weapon fighting, but what it really hammers out to is: no, it sucks and there's no good options to take with that.

Personally, I just let players refluff TWF or THF when they want to do single-weapon fighting. They get to keep the better set of mechanical bonuses and look the way they want like that.


So your off hand can do stuff like cast, use wands, hold holy symbols?

You can do that with a light shield. Or a two-handed weapon, since you only have to hold it with two hands while attacking.


The Pathfinder Magus can cast a spell in addition to attacks if he has a free hand.

Is that above-and-beyond the norm? Because Duskblades can do that without a free hand.

[Eldariel]

Best support for it is the Balance in the Sky-stance from ToB...which is only relevant if you're playing low magic or something since it's otherwise replaced by simple flight items.

And yeah, Einhander needs some serious love.

[Salbazier]

You can do that with a light shield. Or a two-handed weapon, since you only have to hold it with two hands while attacking.


Not that I against this, but doesn't that means giving player with TWF refluffed into 1HF advantage over actual TWF player, since said player don't need to buy two weapons?



And yeah, Einhander needs some serious love.

I completely agree.

I also want to add that it is vexing that some of the support for this fighting style are tend to be tied with rapier or other finesse weapon (ex:PF duelist). Yes, yes, I know that's how its commonly done and maybe I just watch too much anime/play JRPG but I still want to swing my longsword/katana/whateversword Einhander style dammit!

[jackattack]

If the DM only runs combat independently of anything else that could be going on, then no.

But if you have a DM who combines combat with traps, skill checks, or other action, then having a hand free is a good thing. If you need to pull a lever, open a door or trunk, search a body, accept an item from an NPC, get something out of your inventory, or any other action that requires a free hand, you will want a free hand.

Sheathing your weapon or dropping your shield (then getting it back) in the middle of combat is going to waste time and may leave you vulnerable in some circumstances.

[gkathellar]

Not that I against this, but doesn't that means giving player with TWF refluffed into 1HF advantage over actual TWF player, since said player don't need to buy two weapons?

I'm generally inclined to treat WBL as an abstraction, or just to come to an understanding with the player that I'm doing them a favor and they can accept a little less WBL in return.

You can also refluff sword and board, and turn the shield's pricing into a magical gauntlet or bracer or special enchantment on the hilt of the blade.

And of course I'm always open to player's homebrewing solutions to these kinds of problems.


But if you have a DM who combines combat with traps, skill checks, or other action, then having a hand free is a good thing. If you need to pull a lever, open a door or trunk, search a body, accept an item from an NPC, get something out of your inventory, or any other action that requires a free hand, you will want a free hand.

Which, again, THF and light shields allow for. And since THF is the dominant combat style in the game ...

[Curmudgeon]

Is there any reason to ever just wield a single one-handed weapon without a second one or a shield? Is there any good reason to do so?
Yes, if:

You want to hold onto your bow (rather than drop it) when you draw a melee weapon.
Your class abilities don't work, or are impaired, if you use a shield.
You can't afford the TWF penalties for using a second weapon.
You want a free hand for Sleight of Hand, or disarm attempts.
You want to cast spells.
You want to present a holy symbol.

[Incanur]

And yeah, Einhander needs some serious love.

Why? As late-sixteenth-century English martial artist George Silver wrote, "That all manner of double weapons, or weapons to be used with both hands, have advantage against the single rapier or single sword, there is no question to be made." The flavor of fighting with sidearms would be better served by a game world in which folks didn't carry battlefield weapons and wear armor constantly.

[Hazzardevil]

Most of what people have said so far about having a free hand is true, although unless you need the free hand for more than a round during combat, then two-handing does the same thing due to how you can switch between one-handing and two-handing it.

Honestly, I think that einhanding is something that needs a buff, such as a +2 bonus to-hit and have it be equal to two-handing when power attacking.

[Eldariel]

Why? As late-sixteenth-century English martial artist George Silver wrote, "That all manner of double weapons, or weapons to be used with both hands, have advantage against the single rapier or single sword, there is no question to be made." The flavor of fighting with sidearms would be better served by a game world in which folks didn't carry battlefield weapons and wear armor constantly.

Alright, let me rephrase: "Provided we wish to enable one-handing as a viable fighting style, it should get some love."

D&D combat is only distantly related to real combat anyways. Two-handed charging was not the be-all end-all of medieval combat; and men were generally fighting men rather than ogres, liches and dragons. As such, it's completely plausible to enable combat styles that are not as viable in real life.

Of course, we could also not enable one-handing which is fine; it probably improves verisimilitude. There are very few advantages to not using both of your hands in combat somehow, at any rate. But enabling one-handing doesn't seem like a terrible stretch with how abstract combat is in the first place, and enables some character archetypes that are otherwise subpar.

[Little Brother]

Alright, let me rephrase: "Provided we wish to enable one-handing as a viable fighting style, it should get some love."

D&D combat is only distantly related to real combat anyways. Two-handed charging was not the be-all end-all of medieval combat; and men were generally fighting men rather than ogres, liches and dragons. As such, it's completely plausible to enable combat styles that are not as viable in real life.

Of course, we could also not enable one-handing which is fine; it probably improves verisimilitude. There are very few advantages to not using both of your hands in combat somehow, at any rate. But enabling one-handing doesn't seem like a terrible stretch with how abstract combat is in the first place, and enables some character archetypes that are otherwise subpar.What about rapiers? Who would wield a rapier 2-handed? Then again, who would actually wield a rapier against someone in full-plate? Nevermind.

[Spiryt]

What about rapiers? Who would wield a rapier 2-handed? Then again, who would actually wield a rapier against someone in full-plate? Nevermind.

No one would wield rapier 2 handed, as well as many other weapons, but rapier falls at the category of "sidearm" so not something to be maximally efficient, but portable and relatively handy.

As mentioned though, D&D anyway doesn't even try to be rough simulation, for most part.


You want to hold onto your bow (rather than drop it) when you draw a melee weapon.
Your class abilities don't work, or are impaired, if you use a shield.
You can't afford the TWF penalties for using a second weapon.
You want a free hand for Sleight of Hand, or disarm attempts.
You want to cast spells.
You want to present a holy symbol.

What about grapple attempts?

Again, 'realistically" that would be reason for single rapier, instead of supplementing it with, say, dagger - to be able to grab opponent/his clothes/weapon when there was opportunity.

[Greenish]

Why?For fun.


Again, 'realistically" that would be reason for single rapier, instead of supplementing it with, say, dagger - to be able to grab opponent/his clothes/weapon when there was opportunity.If grapple rules worked like that, they'd probably be an even bigger mess. Shame, that.

There are a few feats for armed grappling, but none particularly supports "free hand approach".


Though, now that I think of it, I believe that's a valid tactic for a 4e fighter.

[Loki_42]

Don't you need to be wielding just a one-handed weapon for Snowflake Wardance? That's a pretty good feat for bards.

[Eldariel]

Don't you need to be wielding just a one-handed weapon for Snowflake Wardance? That's a pretty good feat for bards.

It works with two-weapon fighting; generally far better than with one-handing, especially with Inspire Courage/Dragonfire Inspiration applying to every attack without limitations.

[Prime32]

As for having a free hand, you can still hold a two-handed weapon in one hand, you just can't attack with it. And you can change your grip as a free action.

[herrhauptmann]

Personally I prefer to fight with a one hander held in 2 hands. It gives me the option to fight 1 or 2 handed as I desire.
There's very little damage difference between a longsword and a greatsword when both are held in 2 hands. (4 vs 7 points of damage when rounding down) And since I'm likely to be power attacking, I already know where the majority of my damage is going to come from.

If playing with random loot, then 'common' melee weapons are 7 times more likely than than uncommon melee weapons.
On the common melee table, only 2 of them are specifically 2 handed weapons (Q-staff and greatsword). 2 more are exotic in 1 handed, but martial in 2 handed combat.
So, sticking with 1 handed weapons held in 2 hands seems to be the best choice if using random loot. (Longsword ftw)

In terms of supported game mechanics, fighting 2 handed is the way to go.

fixed a math error.

[Incanur]

There's very little damage difference between a longsword and a greatsword when both are held in 2 hands. (4 vs 6 points of damage on average)

It's actually 4.5 versus 7, but I agree 2.5 points of damage don't matter too much - especially at higher levels.

[Othniel Edden]

Is that above-and-beyond the norm? Because Duskblades can do that without a free hand.
Thats not exactly true, the duskblade needs to take his hand off his sword in order to cast, but then can put their hand back on the sword, so this works for two handed weapon fighting, but not with a shield or second weapon.

[Loki_42]

It works with two-weapon fighting; generally far better than with one-handing, especially with Inspire Courage/Dragonfire Inspiration applying to every attack without limitations.

Huh, guess I've always been reading it wrong, that changes things.

[Thurbane]

As for having a free hand, you can still hold a two-handed weapon in one hand, you just can't attack with it. And you can change your grip as a free action.
Is this RAI or RAW? Do the rules specifically support this, and if so, where would I find the relevant section?

[meto30]

I haven't come up with anything that does make enough of a difference between having a free hand and not having one, other than some PrCs like bladesinger from CW. That said, my campaign also has some very heavy houseruling on melee combat, which had to be done as there was just so many things we disagreed with in RAW, and three of us (including myself) are medieval combat enthusiasts.

[Incanur]

Is this RAI or RAW? Do the rules specifically support this, and if so, where would I find the relevant section?

It comes from a Rules of the Game article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20041102a):


Although the rules don't mention it, letting go of a two-handed weapon with one hand or putting a free hand back on the weapon is a free action for you.

[hex0]

If you have Quick Draw you can then theoretically cast while wielding two weapons.

[gorfnab]

And yeah, Einhander needs some serious love.
Here you go.

Human
1. Cobra Strike (UA) Deceptive Strike (PHBII) Monk - Camendine Monk, Combat Expertise, B: Dodge
2. Cobra Strike (UA) Monk - B: Mobility
3. Swashbuckler - Deadly Defense, B: Weapon Finesse
4. Swashbuckler
5. Swashbuckler
6. Thief Acrobat - Combat Reflexes
7. Thief Acrobat
8. Thief Acrobat
9. Thief Acrobat - Einhander
10. Thief Acrobat
11. Warblade
12. Warblade or Duelist - Ironheart Aura
13. Duelist
14. Duelist
15. Duelist - Robilar's Gambit
16. Duelist
17. Duelist
18. Duelist - Stormgaurd Warrior
19. Duelist
20. Duelist

Levels 10 through 12 can be rearranged depending on your needs. The current setup gives you Improved Evasion and Uncanny Dodge at these levels. However if you don't need Improved Evasion take one less level of Thief Acrobat and move the first level of Warblade to level 10. If you don't need Uncanny Dodge don't take the 2nd level of Warblade and instead go into Duelist a level early. If you don't need either abilities take Warblade at level 10 and enter Duelist at level 11.

If flaws are available pick up EWP: Broadblade Shortsword (pre-errata version if possible) or Versatile Unarmed Strike and Snap Kick (may need to rearrange later feats). If traits are available pick up Cautious.


Human
1. Cobra Strike (UA) Deceptive Strike (PHBII) Monk - Camendine Monk, Combat Expertise, B: Dodge
2. Cobra Strike (UA) Monk - B: Mobility
3. Swashbuckler - EWP Broadblade Shortword (pre-errata version) B: Weapon Finesse
4. Swashbuckler
5. Swashbuckler
6. Thief Acrobat - Deadly Defense
7. Thief Acrobat
8. Thief Acrobat
9. Thief Acrobat - Einhander
10. Thief Acrobat
11. Duelist
12. Duelist - Combat Reflexes
13. Duelist
14. Duelist
15. Duelist - Robilar's Gambit
16. Duelist
17. Duelist
18. Duelist - Karmic Strike, Improved Combat Expertise, or Snap Kick
19. Duelist - B: Deflect Arrows
20. Duelist

If you can't get or don't want EWP: Broadblade Shortsword, move Combat Reflexes to 3rd level and add Snap Kick (best option) or Improved Combat Expertise (decent option) to 12th level.

If flaws are available pick up Versatile Unarmed Strike. If traits are available pick up Cautious.

[ericgrau]

You can still cast with a two handed weapon because letting go and gripping are free actions. Besides the Skip Williams clarification we have quarterstaff wielding mages as an example. Both considering that the game rules would be strange if not and if you picture it in your head. You can hold a torch and so on in the same hand as a light shield or buckler, you just can't swing the item around.

The only reason to fight with a one handed weapon and an empty off hand is for a class feature or some such that requires it.


If you have Quick Draw you can then theoretically cast while wielding two weapons.
Alas, you only get quick draw not quick sheathe. Though if you spend your move action on sheathing every round then ya it works.

[Incanur]

That build is pretty sweet and probably about as much mileage as one can get from duelist. However, I suspect focusing on just warblade or swordsage with standard-action strikes would give you a generally superior combatant. Elaborate Parry, the only exciting duelist ability, doesn't come online until level 19. Early on you've just got a monk with dubious feats.

[Hazzardevil]

I haven't come up with anything that does make enough of a difference between having a free hand and not having one, other than some PrCs like bladesinger from CW. That said, my campaign also has some very heavy houseruling on melee combat, which had to be done as there was just so many things we disagreed with in RAW, and three of us (including myself) are medieval combat enthusiasts.

What Houserules are these? You might want to post them in the homebrew section.

[ericgrau]

That build is pretty sweet and probably about as much mileage as one can get from duelist. However, I suspect focusing on just warblade or swordsage with standard-action strikes would give you a generally superior combatant. Elaborate Parry, the only exciting duelist ability, doesn't come online until level 19. Early on you've just got a monk with dubious feats.
Ya if that build is going to take duelist at all it should do it earlier. Even at the minimum level elaborate parry comes a bit late.