What kind of an action is it to swap two objects you have in your hands?

[Catarang]

What kind of action does it take to swap the object you have in your left hand with the one you have in your right hand and vice versa? I ask because the glove of storing in pathfinder only will ever affect one hand and I need to know if it takes a move action or not to move an item to the gloved hand

[Doctor Despair]

If it is any action at all and not a free action, I'd imagine it'd be a move action.

[tyckspoon]

Picking up or manipulating items is typically a Move action. IMO, that would be appropriate for most actions of this type, where you presumably don't want to actually drop either of the items while you are exchanging them, so the time taken by a Move action would represent the care needed to switch the items. For a quicker action, the Sleight of Hand skill may qualify - there is a rule for performing Sleight of Hand as a free action at a significant penalty, and things like juggling are given as examples of what the skill is for (in case you want to, for example, flamboyantly switch your main and off-hand weapons.) Feats like Quickdraw could potentially also give a benefit to this kind of activity, or it could be a benefit of a fairly minor magical item. You might also rule that you could perform the changeover during part of a different Move action, similar to how one can draw a weapon while moving.

Strictly RAW, it's probably just a Move action with the possibility to use Sleight of Hand as a free action for small items. There might be a Skill Trick or expanded skill usage that covers it in one of the books as well.. probably still Sleight of Hand related.

[Bakkan]

I'm curious when the question would come up. As far as I know, D&D doesn't have handedness, and so generally anything you can do with one hand you can do with the other.

[grarrrg]

I'm curious when the question would come up. As far as I know, D&D doesn't have handedness, and so generally anything you can do with one hand you can do with the other.

There are items and spells and such that only affect one hand/arm.
The Locked Gauntlet comes to mind. It's sold by the single and only cares about the one hand (granted it's kind of a bad example for the purposes of this question, but it's the first thing to come to mind).

[Catarang]

This is probably a good time to mention that I’m really talking about pathfinder, and the reason is the pathfinder glove of storing only affects one hand. I will edit the OP to bring this up from the start.

[Captain Kablam]

Way I'd rule it for your glove then is that only the hand wearing the glove can access the items stored therein, it then boils down to either a sleight of hand check rendered moot by the quick draw feat.

[Catarang]

Way I'd rule it for your glove then is that only the hand wearing the glove can access the items stored therein, it then boils down to either a sleight of hand check rendered moot by the quick draw feat.

To clarify, I wasn’t asking if the hand not wearing the glove could pick up the stored item, but what kind of an action it is to take the item from the gloved hand and swap it with an item from the non-gloved hand so now each hand holds the item previously held by the other hand.

[Mordaedil]

Switching hands holding items is a free action, but switching what hand the glove is on is anywhere between a full-round action to a move action depending on what items you are wielding.

[Zombimode]

To clarify, I wasn’t asking if the hand not wearing the glove could pick up the stored item, but what kind of an action it is to take the item from the gloved hand and swap it with an item from the non-gloved hand so now each hand holds the item previously held by the other hand.

Well, taking one hand off a 2h-weapon is a free Action, putting the hand back on is a free Action. Thus you can swap an item like a Greatsword with two free actions.
Taking this as precedent, I would rule that swaping items just for the purpose of swaping them* is has action cost not higher then free actions.

*There is an action provided by the Einhander feat that results in swaping a weapon from one hand to the other. The action, of course, does more then just the swap and so the action cost is uneffected by the above ruling. Likewise for any other cases like this.

[Lvl 2 Expert]

So the question is: "If due to complicated reasons only one of my hands has access to the quick draw feat, can I still switch/store and draw two weapons?" Is that how i should read this?

As a GM I would probably allow it until the player asks if that means he can also switch his hat for free, and his jacket, and his shoes, and his horse, and...

[Catarang]

So the question is: "If due to complicated reasons only one of my hands has access to the quick draw feat, can I still switch/store and draw two weapons?" Is that how i should read this?

As a GM I would probably allow it until the player asks if that means he can also switch his hat for free, and his jacket, and his shoes, and his horse, and...

No, I’m sorry if the glove of storing is confusing the issue. I just want to know if it’s a free action to move an item from my left hand to my right hand and whether it’s the same action or multiple actions to then also move an item from my right hand to my left

[tyckspoon]

No, I’m sorry if the glove of storing is confusing the issue. I just want to know if it’s a free action to move an item from my left hand to my right hand and whether it’s the same action or multiple actions to then also move an item from my right hand to my left

That situation, I would say is a free action - as long as at each step the item is being moved to an open/free hand. That works with the commonly accepted precedence that you can take a hand off a two-handed item as a free action to do something else or be handed an object by somebody else without taking your action to receive it. It gets complicated if you need to hold two items at once without either dropping or Storing them - that's the situation where I would charge a Move action or require special skills to pull it off.

[grarrrg]

if you need to hold and exchange two items at once without either dropping or Storing them

^This^

Both hands are full.
Want the stuff currently in hands to be in the other hand from where it is now.
Aware that "handedness" is not a thing, but there are situations where specific hand DOES matter.


RAW does not have this specific scenario.
It is at least a Free Action > based on switching only 1 item from hand-to-hand
It is at most a Move Action > Free action drop left hand, Free action switch right-to-left, Move action pick up dropped item

Picking up a dropped item does provoke an AoO, so potentially Move action that does not provoke? Possibly get away with burning a Swift?

[Thurbane]

The official FAQ says this (and a lot of people treat the FAQ with complete disdain as a RAW source):


The rules don’t state what type of action is required to switch hands on a weapon, but it seems reasonable to assume that it’s the equivalent of drawing a weapon (a move action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity).

The Rules Compendium also back this up on page 8 (Actions in Combat Table), under Move Actions says "Switch hands with an item, AoO: no".

...although I have a feeling there is something in the Rules of the Game Archive (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg) that contradicts this, but I can't find it right now.

[Telonius]

I think it would depend a bit on how big the item is. If it's something where you could reasonably have both objects in one hand at the same time, I'd probably call it a move action. If it's something big enough that you couldn't reasonably carry both of them in one hand, I'd probably call for a Sleight of Hand or Perform (Juggling) check; either would be a standard action per the Sleight of Hand description.

[Psyren]

RAW does not have this specific scenario.
It is at least a Free Action > based on switching only 1 item from hand-to-hand
It is at most a Move Action > Free action drop left hand, Free action switch right-to-left, Move action pick up dropped item


This is what I'd go with. If one hand is empty when you try to swap, swapping is a free action; if both hands are occupied, it's a move action.


The official FAQ says this (and a lot of people treat the FAQ with complete disdain as a RAW source):



The Rules Compendium also back this up on page 8 (Actions in Combat Table), under Move Actions says "Switch hands with an item, AoO: no".

...although I have a feeling there is something in the Rules of the Game Archive (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg) that contradicts this, but I can't find it right now.

To clarify - 3.5's FAQ is treated with disdain; PF FAQ is RAW. Unfortunately, it also doesn't have an entry dealing with this specific situation.

[BearonVonMu]

Something about this makes me think it might be about two-weapon fighting.
Have one regular weapon and one heavily enchanted weapon and just keep swapping them from hand to hand, and you get rid of the cost of having to enchant two weapons?
You could have a mix of Quick Draw and Quick Sheathe to help with such shenanigans, explicitly making it a free action to draw and sheathe a weapon so you can draw it with your right hand, strike, sheathe it, draw it with your left, strike, and sheathe it.

[Telonius]

Something about this makes me think it might be about two-weapon fighting.
Have one regular weapon and one heavily enchanted weapon and just keep swapping them from hand to hand, and you get rid of the cost of having to enchant two weapons?
You could have a mix of Quick Draw and Quick Sheathe to help with such shenanigans, explicitly making it a free action to draw and sheathe a weapon so you can draw it with your right hand, strike, sheathe it, draw it with your left, strike, and sheathe it.

Unfortunately the wording of Two-Weapon Fighting (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#twoWeaponFighting) (in the Combat section, not the feat) refers to the weapon specifically and not just the hand:


If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.

So you need to actually be wielding two separate weapons.

[Psyren]

Something about this makes me think it might be about two-weapon fighting.
Have one regular weapon and one heavily enchanted weapon and just keep swapping them from hand to hand, and you get rid of the cost of having to enchant two weapons?
You could have a mix of Quick Draw and Quick Sheathe to help with such shenanigans, explicitly making it a free action to draw and sheathe a weapon so you can draw it with your right hand, strike, sheathe it, draw it with your left, strike, and sheathe it.

You can already choose which weapon (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf) to use on your iteratives. All this would affect is the single bonus attack gained from TWF. But if you're only going to enchant one weapon anyway, you should probably avoid a TWF strategy to begin with.

[BearonVonMu]

With the introduction of a second weapon, would it be possible to do the same trick, always striking with the better weapon?
The same concept could be followed if you encountered a foe with damage reduction that only one of your weapons was effective against.
It seems immensely shady and something I'm not doing (even with a character equipped to do it), but it seemed an interesting idea to investigate.

[grarrrg]

With the introduction of a second weapon, would it be possible to do the same trick, always striking with the better weapon?
The same concept could be followed if you encountered a foe with damage reduction that only one of your weapons was effective against.
It seems immensely shady and something I'm not doing (even with a character equipped to do it), but it seemed an interesting idea to investigate.

????
Did you not read the last couple replies?
If you are using Two Weapon Fighting, you must actually use two weapons.

[Thurbane]

To clarify - 3.5's FAQ is treated with disdain; PF FAQ is RAW. Unfortunately, it also doesn't have an entry dealing with this specific situation.

Ah, missed that this was PF in the OP.

I think the forum needs better tags.

[Psyren]

Ah, missed that this was PF in the OP.

I think the forum needs better tags.

Not your fault, he edited that in later.