So as the title states I’d like to get clarification on if a soulknife rogue can use their second psychic blade if holding a weapon. More specifically, is there anything that prevents said rogue from utilizing a psychic blade while holding a weapon, switching the weapon to another hand then using the now free hand to utilize the second psychic blade?

Tasha’s Cauldron of Everything states (emphasis mine) in part:

After you attack with the blade, you can make a melee or ranged weapon attack with a second psychic blade as a bonus action on the same turn, provided your other hand is free to create it. The damage die of this bonus attack is 1d4, instead of 1d6.

Again, it seems that the answer to this question will come from whether or not the literature (and action economy) would allow the second attack.


1 Answer 1


You can

Psychic Blades work like this (TCoE, p. 64):

Whenever you take the Attack action, you can manifest a psychic blade from your free hand and make the attack with that blade. [...] The blade vanishes immediately after it hits or misses its target, and it leaves no mark on its target if it deals damage.

That is, your hand has to be free to use the feature, and you manifest the blade as you make the attack. ("manifest ... and make the attack"). You cannot use the feature if you hold a weapon in your hand.

You could hold a weapon in your other hand while you manifest the blade, there is no restriction against that. If you then pass that weapon to your original hand, you later could use the bonus action to manifest and use another blade in that other hand, because it now is free. The only requirement is that you attacked with the first blade, and that the bonus action comes after that.

The bonus action can be used at any time on the same turn after the attack with the first blade, it is not immediately after the first attack, or when you make the first attack. It also does not require that your other hand was free when you made the first attack, only that it is free when you use it.

That means you could pass the weapon from your other hand were you first held it to your hand with which you used the feature first with a free object interaction, so action economy wise, this should be no problem.

Comparison to two-weapon fighting

This is different from two weapon-fighting (p. 195) that says

When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand.

Here, the condition is that you have to hold both weapons at the same time. This has been confirmed by Sage Advice

Can I make an attack with one weapon, then draw a second weapon with my other hand and qualify to use two-weapon fighting? To use the two-weapon fighting bonus action (PH, 195), you must have both weapons in hand when you make the first attack.

The language is slightly different. Still, to be safe I would check with my DM. It may be that they rule this should work like two-weapon fighting in that both your hands need to be free to use two psychic blades.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ We should generally avoid the language of “main hand” and “second hand/offhand” since 5e makes no distinction. I’ve seen a tremendous amount of confusion come from reading the rules assuming that they treat your hands differently. \$\endgroup\$ Jan 7 at 7:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ThomasMarkov I removed the language using main/second. I‘d used it as a kund of shorthand, an the answer is functioning without, there is no need for it. \$\endgroup\$ Jan 7 at 7:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ Would be nice if the downvoters could explain why they think this is not right. Or provide sn alternative answer outlining their logic. Thx. \$\endgroup\$ Jan 7 at 8:09
  • \$\begingroup\$ I initially found it legitimately confusing with the main/offhand language. It makes sense now, so I’ve upvoted. \$\endgroup\$ Jan 7 at 12:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ I actually think the language for this ability used in UA was clearer than Tasha's. "you can manifest a psychic blade from your free hand" to me implies that your other hand is not free. I think they should have said "a free hand" or even better but lengthy, "you can manifest a psychic blade from either hand, provided it is free" \$\endgroup\$
    – Kirt
    Jan 7 at 16:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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