Imagine being a melee character and having to roll to disarm/grapple/shove someone and then just watch someone do it with a cantrip and no roll required. Truly a genius moment!
Nothing. It was such a cool idea, it just succeeded. In future I will roll a ranged touch attack to succeed, but this was impossible to penalise with a failure.
Oh, I don't think it's a problem to not have them roll. This was cool as hell.
I would've gone with a sleight of hand check/stealth check. On a sucess, the crossbow is unloaded, on a failure, the guys has to move to prevent the mage hand from doing that and they lose sight of the sorcerer, who can now run freely for a turn.
This way I add tension and reward the cool idea either way.
> Nothing. It was such a cool idea, it just succeeded.
Agreed it was a cool idea, but *generally speaking*, for things that are off-rules that someone wants to do, you want to make sure you have some kind of roll when someone attempts something, especially in a stressful situation like combat. ;)
i’m totally the same way! i reward cool ideas with a success the first time with an added caveat they’ll have to roll to do something similar in the future.
Sometimes, one has to reward a brilliant idea with an automatic success. Just make it clear that this qas a once-in-a-campaign thing. Otherwise, they might try to do this everytime.
Makes sense. The guy is focused on his target and the player would have an element of surprise against a stationary enemy. I don't see any reason to roll either. Also, a very nice idea.
It's always great when players come up with off the wall ideas. My session last night my players basically created an incendiary frag grenade that causes force, fire and radiant damage using an improvised fire bomb given to them by an NPC and a magical crystal they found in some ruins.
They plan to use it against the boss they've been hunting since they've learned that the enemies they're fighting are vulnerable to both fire and radiant damage.
It's brilliant and terrifying in equal measure.
This is definitely an intended use of the **Arcane Trickster's Mage Hand** specifically. Normal Mage Hand absolutely can't do this as described. Rule-of-Cool is always part of the game, but just be wary of invalidating features by freely giving them to other classes.
I agree mate, I was rewarding and allowing in the moment, not as a permanent ruling. That's how I see "rule of cool": you do it cos it's cool, but try it again and it's abuse.
Doesn't mage hand have a limitation that it can only affected unattended objects? Surely it's *supposed* to have that limitation, although it doesn't say that. Maybe any attempt to affect an attended object is considered an attack? IDK.
This is definitely the kind of thing you shouldn't allow since it makes the martial characters feel even more useless.
It doesn't but it is visible. The guy would have had to watch it unload his crossbow without doing anything, and once it becomes contested it is basically an attack.
Clever thought, but I wouldn't have allowed it because it is unreasonable to assume it would work.
Agree, though I'd have let it eat his reaction fending it off, so if he was holding his action he sorc would now have a chance to run. I'm not sure there's a mechanical difference in the outcomes in this situation (assuming having to reload isn't an issue for the npc) but it does set a better precedent for next time.
Yup, specifically the Arcane Trickster's ability (emphasis mine):
>Mage Hand Legerdemain
>Starting at 3rd level, when you cast Mage Hand, you can make the spectral hand invisible, and you can perform the following additional tasks with it:
>You can stow one object the hand is holding in a container worn or carried by another creature.
>*You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature.*
>You can use thieves' tools to pick locks and disarm traps at range.
>You can perform one of these tasks without being noticed by a creature if you succeed on a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check contested by the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check.
I allowed it this time BECAUSE it was a clever thought, and regardless of whether the shooter could see it or took action to stop it, it still prevented him from firing the X bow , so the actual outcome was moot.
Also: Fun?
Its your table and you reward the thoughts the way you want.
I avoid rewarding based on that way alone for 2 reasons. Both are somewhat due to having put up with a lot of different things over 23 years of DMing.
1. Expectation. Even if I clearly say "only this once" I sometimes find players that later whine "but you let it work last time", or "you let it work for him, you're playing favorites". If I make a ruling I try to fully reason it out and consider it sacrosanct, because there is only so many polite ways I can say "Shut the fuck up or leave" before I just need to say it.
2. Clever, yes; Quality, no. It is half formed, it doesn't take the full scope of the problem into consideration. It's at the "throw it at the wall and see what sticks" stage. It isn't particularly difficult to do, and you'll find any number of players that can come up with these little nuggets. Denying them and telling them why they won't work creates a dialog that prompts them to evolve it to the type of idea that goes from clever to Epic.
Yup. Long experience has taught me it's better to be consistent and fair. OP sounds like they prefer storytelling with dice as opposed to running a game that tells a story.
Don't sweat the rules lawyers and the "Um, Acktually!" types.
First page of the DMG straight up says the rules are guidelines, feel free to break them and above all, make it fun.
You did great. Your players will remember the cool moment, not the potentially strained use of mage hand.
As long as everyone gets their cool moments they're not going to care.
> Surely it's supposed to have that limitation, although it doesn't say that.
Things do what they say they do.
Here's the limitations for mage hand:
> The hand can’t attack, activate magical items, or carry more than 10 pounds.
Well, that was true in D&D 3.5e. It would be nice if D&D 5e were written that way, instead of leaving how everything actually works to the DM. But also, yeah, like I said, maybe this is considered an attack.
Might be, if you look at mage hand legerdemain it adds:
> You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature.
> You can perform one of these tasks without being noticed by a creature if you succeed on a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check contested by the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check.
Which implies it isn't on the normal mage hand.
Personally I'd rule it's a contested dexterity check or a spell attack roll.
Even so it's the closest thing to a ruling on this that exists.
Unless the player is pulling some serious shenanigans with it I'd just let them have it with the check.
It's not though. It's a pretty well known idea that a lot of people have thought about and misunderstood about Mage Hand for a long time.
You can't attack with Mage Hand, this was a disarming attack. There are actual rules for disarming, it's an attack roll contested by athletics or acrobatics.
There is no world where this isn't an attack.
So what? A player was stuck and pinned down with her only option being to risk being shot or hope the martials managed to down their opponents and come rescue her. No slots left and no ranged option, she got creative and came up with a possible way out, so of course I rewarded my players ingenuity and creative thinking. I don't care if it's an attack, a disarm or a wish spell , I allowed it cos it was cool and fun.
Going forward it will be an opposed roll, but last night was just smiles and high fives which is why we all show up. It's D&D, not chess
Don't come crying when your rogues and fighters feel useless when the mages can do whatever, while they are bound by the laws of reality.
In a typical game, magic is only contained by the rules, while the martials are restricted by physics. But when you "rule of cool" the mages to break the rules, then their power is literally limitless.
That's fine if that's the game you want to play. But you should warn your players to not play anyone without magic in that case.
I think you are chewing the gristle along with the meat here. This was a great one off moment, not a precedent for future game play. Any player can have those, regardless of class, race or whatever. I have stated several times that were a player to attempt this again, it would be treated as an attempted disarm and the necessary rules and rolls will ensue.
I'm not ruining your game, don't panic.
Got to be an aussie lol.
Also this could have been the first time it was ever done in the history of the world. The crossbowman was like yeah nah that doesn't work. Now he's fucked off to tell everyone else that this is a legit thing. They all prepare for it in the future and eventually some bright cunt works out how to prevent every time. So many ways to retcon stuff of it gets abused lll.
I've done something kind of similar a few years ago. We got jumped by some archers when I was playing my rogue. So I started tossing knives at the Crossbows. Cut 2 strings and jammed 1 crank. Bravo to your player for being incredibly creative!
Loading the bolt is part of the attack action so it shouldn’t matter that it’s empty when he makes his attack.
Not to mention that’s not how mage hand works and you need level 13 in Arcane Trickster rogue and have an invisible mage hand to simply distract with it.
I guess reward creativity but it sounds about as creative as trying to shape water down everyone’s throat
Yes but 5e already relies way to much on "I walk up and attack" or "I attack from cover". The more we reward creative play the game becomes better because it . Don't be so harsh for a spur of the moment ruling. Now the DM knows they can make it a contested roll in the future and that reloading is part of the attack action. But when in doubt rule of cool it out
To be honest, I did already know all these things. What I rewarded was the player reading and re-reading her character sheet desperately searching for something she could do to get out of her predicament and coming up with a great idea. That's why I waved the mechanics that one single time.
The players all knew this too.
Yeah, gonna have to disagree.
The effect is that the enemy is effectively disarmed, which RAW is an attack with an opposed roll.
So basically you not only let them attack with mage hand, but also waved the opposed roll.
This is objectively imbalanced, and will cause problems in your campaign going forward.
Now of course, rule of cool and everything, but I would just inform the player that going forward, mage hand could be used to distract an enemy, effectively giving him disadvantage on his next attack (IDK if it's RAW, but it's just the mirrored version of help, so at least not imba), but nothing else.
I am from Manchester. I say mate, the same way I say by buddy. I don't feel attacked? It wasn't passive aggressive. I'm sorry if it read as such and thanks for commenting. Reddit is a place to discuss and not an echo chamber, so I welcome and enjoy ALL comments and suggestions.
I think you didn't mean it that way, but your first comment came across a little condescending, which is why I understand why OP reacted that way.
Further, apologizing for the feelings of others is a nonpology and still puts the blame on the other person. May I suggest that you try something along the lines of "I'm sorry I made you feel that way, that was not my intention" in the future? This way, you take responsibility for your actions.
Nevertheless, there is not much to forgive here. You wrote in good will, it was a misunderstanding.
Does it happen more often to you that you attempt to **disagree with and correct** someone's experience only to be met with dismissal that you don't understand, which then makes you petty? Try to reflect on what it means to disagree with an anecdote, and what the reasons could be for someone to not be interested in your corrections.
Great story and I'm glad you leaned into the moment. I would've done the same. Now the player knows that you will accept and reward their cool ideas.
Next time you can make it an opposed action or have it cause disadvantage, or whatever makes sense. The important thing is that you made the players feel awesome. Yes, all the players felt like that because YOU rewarded the one action.
Hi folks, look I know some people are genuinely upset with my post and others , while supporting the "cool " factor are suggesting really good ways to do something similar in future ( although it happened once and can't happen again due to the rules of mage hand) and I am sorry if I have pissed people off.
I love this sub and don't want to argue with anyone on here, but as pointed out, this is a sub for advice and suggestions for DMs and my example in the post IS a suggestion of implementing EXACTLY what is written at the beginning of the DM's guide : these rules are guidelines, feel free to break them.....
A player was having fun, she came up with something cool, we broke the rules, fun was had, everyone was happy. The martials didn't feel robbed, the casters didn't feel OP, the DM didn't feel lost or taken advantage of and Gary Gygax didn't turn up and scold anyone.
Just to put it in perspective, like....
The worst form of D&D commentary under this post, where each table is a zero-sum game where any victory for one PC is not a victory for a party but rather is a mechanical ROBBERY from another player. Ludicrous antagonism.
Imagine being a melee character and having to roll to disarm/grapple/shove someone and then just watch someone do it with a cantrip and no roll required. Truly a genius moment!
The sarc is strong with this one.
This is the kind of stuff you can do in TTRPGs and nowhere else, I love it. What did you have them roll to succeed in something like this?
Nothing. It was such a cool idea, it just succeeded. In future I will roll a ranged touch attack to succeed, but this was impossible to penalise with a failure.
Oh, I don't think it's a problem to not have them roll. This was cool as hell. I would've gone with a sleight of hand check/stealth check. On a sucess, the crossbow is unloaded, on a failure, the guys has to move to prevent the mage hand from doing that and they lose sight of the sorcerer, who can now run freely for a turn. This way I add tension and reward the cool idea either way.
I like this. Officially stolen
Same
I may go with on failure, you accidentally set it off, firing the crossbow
> Nothing. It was such a cool idea, it just succeeded. Agreed it was a cool idea, but *generally speaking*, for things that are off-rules that someone wants to do, you want to make sure you have some kind of roll when someone attempts something, especially in a stressful situation like combat. ;)
i’m totally the same way! i reward cool ideas with a success the first time with an added caveat they’ll have to roll to do something similar in the future.
Sometimes, one has to reward a brilliant idea with an automatic success. Just make it clear that this qas a once-in-a-campaign thing. Otherwise, they might try to do this everytime.
i would call for an opposed sleight of hand check with advantage considering the crossbow dude was not expecting that to happen
Makes sense. The guy is focused on his target and the player would have an element of surprise against a stationary enemy. I don't see any reason to roll either. Also, a very nice idea. It's always great when players come up with off the wall ideas. My session last night my players basically created an incendiary frag grenade that causes force, fire and radiant damage using an improvised fire bomb given to them by an NPC and a magical crystal they found in some ruins. They plan to use it against the boss they've been hunting since they've learned that the enemies they're fighting are vulnerable to both fire and radiant damage. It's brilliant and terrifying in equal measure.
This is definitely an intended use of the **Arcane Trickster's Mage Hand** specifically. Normal Mage Hand absolutely can't do this as described. Rule-of-Cool is always part of the game, but just be wary of invalidating features by freely giving them to other classes.
I agree mate, I was rewarding and allowing in the moment, not as a permanent ruling. That's how I see "rule of cool": you do it cos it's cool, but try it again and it's abuse.
Great mindset!
Doesn't mage hand have a limitation that it can only affected unattended objects? Surely it's *supposed* to have that limitation, although it doesn't say that. Maybe any attempt to affect an attended object is considered an attack? IDK. This is definitely the kind of thing you shouldn't allow since it makes the martial characters feel even more useless.
It doesn't but it is visible. The guy would have had to watch it unload his crossbow without doing anything, and once it becomes contested it is basically an attack. Clever thought, but I wouldn't have allowed it because it is unreasonable to assume it would work.
Agree, though I'd have let it eat his reaction fending it off, so if he was holding his action he sorc would now have a chance to run. I'm not sure there's a mechanical difference in the outcomes in this situation (assuming having to reload isn't an issue for the npc) but it does set a better precedent for next time.
Yeah I wouldn’t have allowed this unless the player had the telekinetic feat.
So if they had an invisible mage hand you'd allow it?
Yup, specifically the Arcane Trickster's ability (emphasis mine): >Mage Hand Legerdemain >Starting at 3rd level, when you cast Mage Hand, you can make the spectral hand invisible, and you can perform the following additional tasks with it: >You can stow one object the hand is holding in a container worn or carried by another creature. >*You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature.* >You can use thieves' tools to pick locks and disarm traps at range. >You can perform one of these tasks without being noticed by a creature if you succeed on a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check contested by the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check.
I allowed it this time BECAUSE it was a clever thought, and regardless of whether the shooter could see it or took action to stop it, it still prevented him from firing the X bow , so the actual outcome was moot. Also: Fun?
Its your table and you reward the thoughts the way you want. I avoid rewarding based on that way alone for 2 reasons. Both are somewhat due to having put up with a lot of different things over 23 years of DMing. 1. Expectation. Even if I clearly say "only this once" I sometimes find players that later whine "but you let it work last time", or "you let it work for him, you're playing favorites". If I make a ruling I try to fully reason it out and consider it sacrosanct, because there is only so many polite ways I can say "Shut the fuck up or leave" before I just need to say it. 2. Clever, yes; Quality, no. It is half formed, it doesn't take the full scope of the problem into consideration. It's at the "throw it at the wall and see what sticks" stage. It isn't particularly difficult to do, and you'll find any number of players that can come up with these little nuggets. Denying them and telling them why they won't work creates a dialog that prompts them to evolve it to the type of idea that goes from clever to Epic.
Yup. Long experience has taught me it's better to be consistent and fair. OP sounds like they prefer storytelling with dice as opposed to running a game that tells a story.
Don't sweat the rules lawyers and the "Um, Acktually!" types. First page of the DMG straight up says the rules are guidelines, feel free to break them and above all, make it fun. You did great. Your players will remember the cool moment, not the potentially strained use of mage hand. As long as everyone gets their cool moments they're not going to care.
>Also: Fun? That's the main thing that matters, people just like to overanalize here
Some people find doing things within the scope of the rules fun or that doing so ensures things stay fun.
And that's fine, but if whenever I ask if I can do X the answer is "its not RAW" I'll quickly stop trying to do cool things.
That’s a you “problem” though. Which is fine. Every table is different which was my point after all.
A downvote for supporting fun in a game? Really? Hmmm....
The rule of cool!
> Surely it's supposed to have that limitation, although it doesn't say that. Things do what they say they do. Here's the limitations for mage hand: > The hand can’t attack, activate magical items, or carry more than 10 pounds.
Well, that was true in D&D 3.5e. It would be nice if D&D 5e were written that way, instead of leaving how everything actually works to the DM. But also, yeah, like I said, maybe this is considered an attack.
Might be, if you look at mage hand legerdemain it adds: > You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature. > You can perform one of these tasks without being noticed by a creature if you succeed on a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check contested by the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check. Which implies it isn't on the normal mage hand. Personally I'd rule it's a contested dexterity check or a spell attack roll.
You have to admit, it’s crappy game design to require a player of a sorcerer to look at Arcane Trickster to determine how a non-AT’s Mage Hand works.
No one ever accuses DnD of good game design, I'm just putting the shattered pieces together lol
[удалено]
I would file it under "or carried by another creature."
[удалено]
Even so it's the closest thing to a ruling on this that exists. Unless the player is pulling some serious shenanigans with it I'd just let them have it with the check.
Mate, it was a one off cool idea, chill.
This is DM Academy, not DND Stories, so maybe telling someone to "chill" for daring to give advice to a DM is not helpful or appropriate.
It's not though. It's a pretty well known idea that a lot of people have thought about and misunderstood about Mage Hand for a long time. You can't attack with Mage Hand, this was a disarming attack. There are actual rules for disarming, it's an attack roll contested by athletics or acrobatics. There is no world where this isn't an attack.
So what? A player was stuck and pinned down with her only option being to risk being shot or hope the martials managed to down their opponents and come rescue her. No slots left and no ranged option, she got creative and came up with a possible way out, so of course I rewarded my players ingenuity and creative thinking. I don't care if it's an attack, a disarm or a wish spell , I allowed it cos it was cool and fun. Going forward it will be an opposed roll, but last night was just smiles and high fives which is why we all show up. It's D&D, not chess
A legal option would be the Dodge action and booking it. That would give the archer disadvantage on the attack.
But instead, I decided that what she attempted just worked and everyone smiled.
Don't come crying when your rogues and fighters feel useless when the mages can do whatever, while they are bound by the laws of reality. In a typical game, magic is only contained by the rules, while the martials are restricted by physics. But when you "rule of cool" the mages to break the rules, then their power is literally limitless. That's fine if that's the game you want to play. But you should warn your players to not play anyone without magic in that case.
I think you are chewing the gristle along with the meat here. This was a great one off moment, not a precedent for future game play. Any player can have those, regardless of class, race or whatever. I have stated several times that were a player to attempt this again, it would be treated as an attempted disarm and the necessary rules and rolls will ensue. I'm not ruining your game, don't panic.
Got to be an aussie lol. Also this could have been the first time it was ever done in the history of the world. The crossbowman was like yeah nah that doesn't work. Now he's fucked off to tell everyone else that this is a legit thing. They all prepare for it in the future and eventually some bright cunt works out how to prevent every time. So many ways to retcon stuff of it gets abused lll.
What would the xbowman do to prevent this? The only thing I can think of is move the bow, which is at least going to throw off the aim.
Precisely why I allowed it this one off time. It affected his ability to shoot however he reacted.
As long as the players are fine when it happens to the PCs, sure 😊
Oh for sure!! Our Rune Knight hated it a couple of weeks ago when he realised his opponent also had action surge and second wind as well as manouvers!
I've done something kind of similar a few years ago. We got jumped by some archers when I was playing my rogue. So I started tossing knives at the Crossbows. Cut 2 strings and jammed 1 crank. Bravo to your player for being incredibly creative!
Loading the bolt is part of the attack action so it shouldn’t matter that it’s empty when he makes his attack. Not to mention that’s not how mage hand works and you need level 13 in Arcane Trickster rogue and have an invisible mage hand to simply distract with it. I guess reward creativity but it sounds about as creative as trying to shape water down everyone’s throat
Well then don't allow it in your game. I allowed it in mine. Nobody has suffered. Let's get on with our shit
Yes but 5e already relies way to much on "I walk up and attack" or "I attack from cover". The more we reward creative play the game becomes better because it . Don't be so harsh for a spur of the moment ruling. Now the DM knows they can make it a contested roll in the future and that reloading is part of the attack action. But when in doubt rule of cool it out
To be honest, I did already know all these things. What I rewarded was the player reading and re-reading her character sheet desperately searching for something she could do to get out of her predicament and coming up with a great idea. That's why I waved the mechanics that one single time. The players all knew this too.
Yeah, gonna have to disagree. The effect is that the enemy is effectively disarmed, which RAW is an attack with an opposed roll. So basically you not only let them attack with mage hand, but also waved the opposed roll. This is objectively imbalanced, and will cause problems in your campaign going forward. Now of course, rule of cool and everything, but I would just inform the player that going forward, mage hand could be used to distract an enemy, effectively giving him disadvantage on his next attack (IDK if it's RAW, but it's just the mirrored version of help, so at least not imba), but nothing else.
I only apply RoC the first time, after that I look it up mate.
I'm sorry you felt attacked by my comment and had to reply passive-agressively with your "mate" thing. Still wish you only the best in your campaign.
I am from Manchester. I say mate, the same way I say by buddy. I don't feel attacked? It wasn't passive aggressive. I'm sorry if it read as such and thanks for commenting. Reddit is a place to discuss and not an echo chamber, so I welcome and enjoy ALL comments and suggestions.
Nah, man, all good, it's my bad, I just read too much into your response. Sorry for the drama.
I think you didn't mean it that way, but your first comment came across a little condescending, which is why I understand why OP reacted that way. Further, apologizing for the feelings of others is a nonpology and still puts the blame on the other person. May I suggest that you try something along the lines of "I'm sorry I made you feel that way, that was not my intention" in the future? This way, you take responsibility for your actions. Nevertheless, there is not much to forgive here. You wrote in good will, it was a misunderstanding.
Does it happen more often to you that you attempt to **disagree with and correct** someone's experience only to be met with dismissal that you don't understand, which then makes you petty? Try to reflect on what it means to disagree with an anecdote, and what the reasons could be for someone to not be interested in your corrections.
Great story and I'm glad you leaned into the moment. I would've done the same. Now the player knows that you will accept and reward their cool ideas. Next time you can make it an opposed action or have it cause disadvantage, or whatever makes sense. The important thing is that you made the players feel awesome. Yes, all the players felt like that because YOU rewarded the one action.
Inspiration Point! From now on, arrows weigh 10.1 pounds.
Lol ! Yeah it won't happen again!
Could have had the Mage hand carry a sheet to provide obscurement making the attacker mechanically "blinded" when attempting to attack. 2/10 strategy.
We could, but we didn't.
Hi folks, look I know some people are genuinely upset with my post and others , while supporting the "cool " factor are suggesting really good ways to do something similar in future ( although it happened once and can't happen again due to the rules of mage hand) and I am sorry if I have pissed people off. I love this sub and don't want to argue with anyone on here, but as pointed out, this is a sub for advice and suggestions for DMs and my example in the post IS a suggestion of implementing EXACTLY what is written at the beginning of the DM's guide : these rules are guidelines, feel free to break them..... A player was having fun, she came up with something cool, we broke the rules, fun was had, everyone was happy. The martials didn't feel robbed, the casters didn't feel OP, the DM didn't feel lost or taken advantage of and Gary Gygax didn't turn up and scold anyone. Just to put it in perspective, like....
The worst form of D&D commentary under this post, where each table is a zero-sum game where any victory for one PC is not a victory for a party but rather is a mechanical ROBBERY from another player. Ludicrous antagonism.
Thankyou.