D&D 5E Can you locate multiple objects of the same type with "locate object"?

Just what the subject says. If you cast locate object to find, say, strawberries, and there are various bunches of strawberries within 1000 feet, can you find them all?

I will add a corollary. Lets say you find the first batch. Then walk away so a second batch is now closer, do you get a sudden "ding" for the second batch? (And then do this for a third batch, etc).

My reading is that if finds the nearest object when you cast the spell.

the spell can locate the nearest object of a particular kind, such as a certain kind of apparel, jewelry, furniture, tool, or weapon.

Click to expand...

from the SRD.

So the spell finds the nearest bunch of strawberries. I'd rule that the only batch it finds even if you move is the one the spell first located even if after moving another batch becomes the nearest.

http://engl393-dnd5th.wikia.com/wiki/Locate_Object said:

Alternatively, the spell can locate the nearest object of a particular kind, such as a certain kind of apparel, jewelry, furniture, tool, or weapon.

Click to expand...

I think the text pretty clearly says the answer to your first question is "no, it will merely point to the closest bunch". What isn't so clear is, after you've gathered the berries from the first bush, if the spell would now point to your pouch.

I am thinking that is right, you just find that first one. But I do have some ambiguity in this case (maybe a particular strawberry was seen and maybe it wasn't).

But I think I will just have to deal with that.

I think I disagree here. While concentrating on the spell and you are asking it to find an object of a particular kind, it points you to the nearest example *at that time*. The spell says it points you to the nearest, and what constitutes the nearest can change over time.

Incidentally, I think you need to go with this interpretation because of other changes that could impact items during concentration. For example, let's say that I ask the spell to look for a round ball and it detects one 800 feet away. I continue to concentrate on the spell and start walking towards it. You, being the person you are, pop the ball and it deflates. At that time, it is no longer a round ball. If you think that the spell should detect the "original" target regardless of whether you change distance, you'd also argue I should still detect that deflated ball even if it is not a round ball anymore... but what if I toss it in a Sphere of Annihilation?

Also, asking it to find strawberries or a bunch of strawberries appears to be illegal. You can have it search for *a* strawberry, or *a* basket containing strawberries, but you must look for a singular object. Minor point, but it clears up other ambiguities (what is a bunch?).

Regardless, if you ask it to find a strawberry and the nearest one is 50 feet, but there is another one 60 feet away from you in the opposite direction, once you walk more than 5 feet towards the further strawberry it becomes the closest strawberry and you "switch" to detecting that strawberry.

jgsugden said:

I think I disagree here. While concentrating on the spell and you are asking it to find an object of a particular kind, it points you to the nearest example *at that time*. The spell says it points you to the nearest, and what constitutes the nearest can change over time.

Click to expand...

I guess thats the question. The more conservative interpretation is that once you home in on 1 object, the closest at the casting, and thats it. Even if it moves, or another moves closer, or you just walk the wrong towards another one, and so forth

But it could be interpreted that you can switch. I don't think thats explicit though.

TerraDave said:

I guess thats the question. The more conservative interpretation is that once you home in on 1 object, the closest at the casting, and thats it. Even if it moves, or another moves closer, or you just walk the wrong towards another one, and so forth

But it could be interpreted that you can switch. I don't think thats explicit though.

Click to expand...

You could certainly rule it that way. I'd view it as the spell allows you the locate an object and lead you to it. Once it's found an object, that object creates sympathy between the casters and that specific object. As it's only second level, I'm comfortable that is all it does. I don't want the spell to be used to sort through a series of objects and for example, be used to consecutively find all the great axe wielders in an area.

TerraDave said:

I guess thats the question. The more conservative interpretation is that once you home in on 1 object, the closest at the casting, and thats it. Even if it moves, or another moves closer, or you just walk the wrong towards another one, and so forth

But it could be interpreted that you can switch. I don't think thats explicit though.

Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, the notion that you can't switch is also an interpretation.

TerraDave said:

I am thinking that is right, you just find that first one. But I do have some ambiguity in this case (maybe a particular strawberry was seen and maybe it wasn't).

But I think I will just have to deal with that.

Click to expand...

If you choose the you-can't-switch ruling, then I would assume that if I cast the spell and there are no strawberries within 1000 ft. then the spell finds nothing, even if I move within 1000 ft of a strawberry later within the duration. Is that the way you would do it? That seems the most consistent, though perhaps a little disappointing to the caster.

Personally, I play it the other way - that which object is located updates throughout the spell's duration.

Vymair said:

You could certainly rule it that way. I'd view it as the spell allows you the locate an object and lead you to it. Once it's found an object, that object creates sympathy between the casters and that specific object. As it's only second level, I'm comfortable that is all it does. I don't want the spell to be used to sort through a series of objects and for example, be used to consecutively find all the great axe wielders in an area.

Click to expand...

That seems like a slightly odd example, but disregarding that, I don't really understand what the objection is. In order to be effective at doing that, the targets would have to all be stationary throughout the search process and unless all the potential targets are visible it might be hard to devise a search pattern that would find all instances. For example, if the target objects are small and hard to see or hidden, it would be easy to miss some if several were clustered close together.

Harzel said:

That seems like a slightly odd example, but disregarding that, I don't really understand what the objection is. In order to be effective at doing that, the targets would have to all be stationary throughout the search process and unless all the potential targets are visible it might be hard to devise a search pattern that would find all instances. For example, if the target objects are small and hard to see or hidden, it would be easy to miss some if several were clustered close together.

Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make is that my understanding of the purpose of the spell is to find an object and track it. If you are allowing it to change objects throughout, it could be a pretty effective tool for avoiding groups of monsters who are known to carry a specific weapon type (orcs - greataxes, drow- hand crossbow, etc.). I don't think that is the intended purpose of the spell, but you are free to rule it works that way as the language isn't clearly stated, so it's the DMs call.