When in wolf form using Wild Shape, can you wield a sword in you mouth?

I think it's possible. As long as the sword's not too big it won't weigh down the head, and the strength of a wolf is strong enough to use one. Nowhere does it say that the animal cant interact with an object that it has the capability to wield.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The reason we need to know is that the first and second editions of Pathfinder are completely different and separate games each with their own set of rules. An answer about the rules for one is meaningless for the other. Therefore, knowing which edition of Pathfinder you are actually playing is important. \$\endgroup\$
    – Sdjz
    Sep 12, 2019 at 16:16
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I pritty sure were using 2nd edition \$\endgroup\$
    – Wolfblade
    Sep 12, 2019 at 19:00
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ Some of your comments indicate that you may be actually playing Pathfinder-1e. Can you verify for sure what edition you are playing? If it helps, Pathfinder 2e officially came out at the beginning of last month, so if you have been playing your system longer than that, then you are likely playing PF-1e. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 13, 2019 at 18:19

1 Answer 1


Rule-wise: no

A wolf can carry a sword in its mouth no problem, but 'wielding' is a specific term in Pathfinder, and distict from carrying.

I can carry a greatsword in one hand, holding it, having it with me, all that good stuff. If I wish to wield it (hold it in such a way that I can use it for the intended purpose), I will need a second hand.

So your wolf form can carry the weapon around, and perhaps even hit someone with it like a club, but you won't have the grip and manual dexterity to use it as a sword.

  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolfblade As you just said, one-handed weapons require at least one hand to wield. A mouth is zero hands. (Presumably, a mouth doesn’t have the dexterity or correct grip to hold or use right, or to compensate for shocks during hits.) \$\endgroup\$ Sep 13, 2019 at 14:33
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolfblade I think SevenSidedDie's point is that, even if the wolf has the necessary strength and dexterity, a mouth is still a mouth and not a hand. Though I'm not familiar with Pathfinder rules, it sounds like a one-handed weapon specifically requires at least one hand to use, or possibly an equivalent appendage, and a wolf's mouth probably doesn't count as being equivalent. Feel free though to run this by your GM. They might like the idea enough to let you use it. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 13, 2019 at 15:08
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolfblade try putting a broomstick into your mouth and see how well you can hit things with it. A wolf will have a stronger bite yes, but you'll note that bite strength isn't the limiting factor here, it's the fact you can't get a proper grip on it or move it in a way even vaguely resembling a strike because your head or neck doesn't have the mobility required. This doesn't work in any way. \$\endgroup\$
    – Cubic
    Sep 13, 2019 at 15:16
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolfblade It seems you feel very strongly that creatures should be able to wield weapons in their mouths, which is a really neat idea! However, the only thing we can tell you is what the rules say about that (which is what ThisIsMe is explaining in their answer). Have you tried asking your DM what they think? Your DM can always make rulings outside the rules if they think it is appropriate. \$\endgroup\$ Sep 13, 2019 at 16:21
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ @Wolfblade hold up - are you playing Pathfinder 1e or Pathfinder 2e? The question is tagged as Pathfinder 2e, but you're using a whole lot of terms in these comments that don't exist in Pathfinder 2e - light weapons, the weapon size category stuff isn't mentioned, Wildshape doesn't change stats around, Slashing Grace doesn't exist... And in general things aren't easily transferable between the editions. \$\endgroup\$
    – Delioth
    Sep 13, 2019 at 16:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .