Martial casters & and the War Caster feat

[Lorsa]

I will make this short. I have a question regarding the more "martial" spellcasters such as for example Eldritch Knights and Paladins.

It seems to me as those are restricted to two options; either get no spells with Somatic components, or get the War Caster feat.

Both of these options feels a bit restricting for a class that, by the looks of it, is meant to implement their spellcasting with their fighting. Did I miss something or is 5e really forcing all these characters to get the War Caster feat?

[hymer]

It seems to me as those are restricted to two options; either get no spells with Somatic components, or get the War Caster feat.

Other possibilities do present themselves. Springing to my mind:

Fight with a two-handed weapon. Unless your DM decides you must have both hands on the weapon at all times.

Sheathe your weapon when you cast a spell. You can sheathe as part of the action you use to cast a spell, then draw it as part of the action you use to attack with it.

Use spells that can be cast between fights.

[Joe the Rat]

Another option here is "Don't use a shield." You should be able to hold your Great Weapon or Polearm in one hand while casting. An EK archer is golden in this regard, as he or she has a free hand when not shooting.
Or drop* your weapon, cast, and use your free object interaction to pick up your weapon.

Paladins have less of a burden here, given that many of their combat spells are Verbal only. Eldritch Knights have their weapon bond, which can summon their weapon to hand as a Bonus Action - so you can drop your weapon, cast, and poof it back to hand even if you're flying. This does break down after War Magic kicks in (now you can use that Bonus action to attack). Again, shooty Fighters have an advantage here, since they have that free hand for pulling ammo.

So no, you aren't forced to take War Caster, though it does enable more options.

* - Any configuration where you are not in control of your weapon is as good as dropped, so sticking it in the ground or resting against your shield arm - any situation where a readied action could be used to snag it - should be fine, and look a bit less clumsy.

[Lorsa]

Other possibilities do present themselves. Springing to my mind:

Fight with a two-handed weapon. Unless your DM decides you must have both hands on the weapon at all times.

Sheathe your weapon when you cast a spell. You can sheathe as part of the action you use to cast a spell, then draw it as part of the action you use to attack with it.

Use spells that can be cast between fights.


Another option here is "Don't use a shield." You should be able to hold your Great Weapon or Polearm in one hand while casting. An EK archer is golden in this regard, as he or she has a free hand when not shooting.
Or drop* your weapon, cast, and use your free object interaction to pick up your weapon.

Paladins have less of a burden here, given that many of their combat spells are Verbal only. Eldritch Knights have their weapon bond, which can summon their weapon to hand as a Bonus Action - so you can drop your weapon, cast, and poof it back to hand even if you're flying. This does break down after War Magic kicks in (now you can use that Bonus action to attack). Again, shooty Fighters have an advantage here, since they have that free hand for pulling ammo.

So no, you aren't forced to take War Caster, though it does enable more options.

* - Any configuration where you are not in control of your weapon is as good as dropped, so sticking it in the ground or resting against your shield arm - any situation where a readied action could be used to snag it - should be fine, and look a bit less clumsy.


If I remember correctly, War Caster says "...cast a spell while holding a weapon with one or two hands". This seems to imply you can not hold a weapon in ANY hand while using Somatic components. So getting around it with temporarily holding your two-handed weapon with one hand doesn't seem to work.

The "sheate-draw" or "drop-pick up" method seems to me as something that would simply look horribly laughable in combat. Sure, the rules might allow you to do it, but it doesn't make any sense from an intuitive standpoint.

The EK War Magic feature does seem be made so that EKs can cast cantrips while attacking. However, in order to do this in a way that doesn't involve constant drop-pick up of weapons, they are required to get this feat. I'm not really sure I understand this design philosophy, and if I can do anything to get around it.

[hymer]

If I remember correctly, War Caster says "...cast a spell while holding a weapon with one or two hands". This seems to imply you can not hold a weapon in ANY hand while using Somatic components. So getting around it with temporarily holding your two-handed weapon with one hand doesn't seem to work.

The rules under somatic components, however, are explicit: You need 'at least one hand' free.


The "sheate-draw" or "drop-pick up" method seems to me as something that would simply look horribly laughable in combat. Sure, the rules might allow you to do it, but it doesn't make any sense from an intuitive standpoint.

Ever played a first-person shooter, where you have multiple weapons to choose from? That never bothered me. But if you don't like it... *shrug*

[Tenmujiin]

Paladins can have their holy symbol engraved on their shield by RaW so as long as a spell has materiel components they should be fine and most people seem to be fine with allowing somatic components with the holy symbol/shield when there aren't material components since it doesn't really make sense you can sub the holy symbol in for SM but no S. Personally I allow EKs (and any arcane caster) to integrate their arcane focus with a weapon (such as having an orb as the pommel on a sword) but there are other options as previous posters stated.

[jas61292]

Or drop* your weapon, cast, and use your free object interaction to pick up your weapon.

It's important to note that this method is very much DM dependant. Dropping something being free may have been clarified as RAI, but RAW it is not covered anywhere in the rules, and a DM is well within their rights to rule otherwise. Personally, while I don't care too much, as a DM, I never allow someone to do something via dropping and picking back up that they wouldn't be able to do via sheathing and unsheathing.

That said, as you mentioned, there are many other ways around this problem and it is not hard to find one that will work for you.

[Lorsa]

The rules under somatic components, however, are explicit: You need 'at least one hand' free.

Alright. That means that dual wielders are the ones that only really need the War Caster feat.

[Tanarii]

Sheath the weapon when you don't need it. The cost: You can't make OAs. Personally I don't see sheathing a weapon when you don't need it and you do need your hand free as gimmicky, but I can see where some would. TWF have an advantage here: they can sheath one weapon to cast, and still have a weapon out for OAs.

Use a Holy Symbol emblazoned on your Shield. Then you only need to sheath your weapon when you have spell that has an S component but not an M component.

Use a Two-handed weapon. Personally I don't like that switching between holding your weapon in two hands vs one hand isn't an object interaction, but this appears to be the correct rules interpretation. This is why almost all my martial casters tend to use two handed weapons. Especially EKs & Valor Bards. Cleric, Paladin and Ranger spells tend to have less component conflicts. And bladelocks basically default to two-handed weapons anyway.

[Joe the Rat]

If hand-switching is a sticking point for a DM, the versatile property will get some use.

[jas61292]

Sheath the weapon when you don't need it. The cost: You can't make OAs.

Technically, you still can make OAs. They would just have to be with an unarmed strike (or improvised weapon, I guess, depending on what is in your other hand). The rules on OAs only say you need to make a melee attack. It doesn't say it has to be with a weapon. Yeah, that is still worse than having a weapon, but it doesn't make it so you can't actually do it.

[Tanarii]

Technically, you still can make OAs. They would just have to be with an unarmed strike (or improvised weapon, I guess, depending on what is in your other hand). The rules on OAs only say you need to make a melee attack. It doesn't say it has to be with a weapon. Yeah, that is still worse than having a weapon, but it doesn't make it so you can't actually do it.Huh. I feel like there's a rule somewhere saying you can't do that, but it's entirely possible I'm remembering something from a different edition. Or just wrong. :)

[RavensLand]

War caster lets you AoO with a spell that has a cast time of one action.

[Telok]

War caster lets you AoO with a spell that has a cast time of one action.

Eh, that's icing on the cake. The biggest benefit is that sword&board or TWF don't have to do the weapon juggle every round or two and end up losing options or looking like idiots.

[Tanarii]

War caster lets you AoO with a spell that has a cast time of one action.If that was addressed at me, totally aware. I was talking about if you didn't have Warcaster.


Eh, that's icing on the cake. The biggest benefit is that sword&board or TWF don't have to do the weapon juggle every round or two and end up losing options or looking like idiots.Not really. Both the "no weapon juggle" and the "cast spells as OAs" are icing on the cake after Advantage on Concentration checks. Which icing matters more to you depends on if you're a primary S&B/TWF melee, or a primary caster. A warlock or wizard or sorc probably doesn't care about the hands full situational aspect of the Feat very often.

[Vogonjeltz]

If I remember correctly, War Caster says "...cast a spell while holding a weapon with one or two hands". This seems to imply you can not hold a weapon in ANY hand while using Somatic components. So getting around it with temporarily holding your two-handed weapon with one hand doesn't seem to work.

It's actually when you have weapons or a shield in one or both hands. The implication being that you don't have to worry about somatic components while sword and boarding.

Two-Handed weapons only require two hands to use. When not using them, they could just be carried in one hand with the other hand free for somatic components.

Warcaster is important for anyone who has their hands full of things they can't put down (i.e. Sword and Shield; Two-Weapon Fighting; Grappling someone and holding a weapon, etc...)

[djreynolds]

Just give a section of the feat for free and then again at another level. Seriously, 1st, 2nd & 3rd you get one line of the feat.

And then give a free feat to the other players.

Casters get the war caster

Non-casters get sentinel, I don't know.

Or just stow your sword and cast. And if an AoO is lost, that just is how is goes, flippem the bird at least.

Does the bird exist in D&D? Flippem the phoenix?

[Corran]

Alright. That means that dual wielders are the ones that only really need the War Caster feat.
If you are playing a dual wielder (especially in the case of an EK), you have more important things to worry other than having a hand free to cast spells. Anyway, I did have the same opinion about warcaster being a tax feat, though after the scag cantrips (more specificaly BB), the value of the feat went up in my eyes, as it offers some soft battlefield control, which suits a tank (since S&B) well.

[NewDM]

If I want a weapon using caster, I'll usually go with a mountain dwarf in scalemail with a battleaxe with the wizard class. Then I'll get Green-Flame Blade or Booming Blade (or both) and load up on defensive buffs like shield, mirror image, false life, stoneskin, and others. I'll split my stats up between Str, Dex, and Int. If I have a few points left I'll throw it in Con. I always grab Warcaster as my first feat when I do this. I like to throw out a Flaming Sphere to force enemies near me to move away so they either take 2d6 (or more) from the Flaming Sphere or I get to make a Booming Blade opportunity attack.

Its really powerful to do it this way. So to answer the OP: yes, warcaster is a must for melee casters.

[mephnick]

I just don't pay attention to that **** and let them cast any spell they want. I'm so past caring about somatic components and which hand is doing what.

Seems fine so far.

[Telok]

Ah, I'd forgotten about the save advantage. My current bard character has taken to carrying multiple longswords and wands because of the limit of one free item interaction per round. He usually goes around the battlefield after the fight and picks them up.

[Serket]

The EK War Magic feature does seem be made so that EKs can cast cantrips while attacking. However, in order to do this in a way that doesn't involve constant drop-pick up of weapons, they are required to get this feat. I'm not really sure I understand this design philosophy, and if I can do anything to get around it.

You don't need to get around it - BB and GFB are V,M and the "M" is "the weapon that you use to attack". So basically those at least work fine without the feat.

[Pex]

Advantage on concentration checks is a big deal in itself, so even if War Caster is a feat tax it's worth the money.

[PeteNutButter]

I agree with others on that it is a great feat, and it is also a feat tax. There are a lot of things like this in 5e, unfortunately. Things that are both strong and necessary are what become non-choice options, and that's how we end up with a ton of the same builds. What gets me is for the arcane gish types the feat still doesn't solve your problems. That sword and board paladorc can't quicken a fireball with his hands full, even with the feat.

For those that are ok with dropping and drawing...

Counterspell is somatic only.

DMs might be ok with you sticking your sword in the ground and drawing it again, but dropping it in time to reaction cast counterspell... when it's not even your turn...