Activating magic items while grappling

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Activating magic items while grappling

Or DMG p175.

The SRD leaves out a crucial passage.

I didn't quote out of the SRD. I quoted out of the DMG.

Wands are spell trigger items; spell trigger items require "a single word that must be spoken".

The activation description of wands specifically states that it only requires the holding of the wand in the hand and pointing in the general direction of the target or area. It does not state that a word must be spoken. Staffs do not state this either.

Is your viewpoint that the "holding" in the activation descriptions are in addition to the activation description for all spell-trigger items? I could accept that, and if I'm remembering correctly, that was the basis of one side of the fence's argument during the last big discussion about this.

By the way, while your viewpoing makes perfect sense, it destroys your Vile Damage argument.

 

[dcollins]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Activating magic items while grappling

Is your viewpoint that the "holding" in the activation descriptions are in addition to the activation description for all spell-trigger items?

That's my reading as well.

The activation description of wands specifically states that it only requires the holding of the wand in the hand and pointing in the general direction of the target or area.

Well, the clause on DMG p. 206 doesn't actually have the word "only" in it. To be perfectly precise one could say "The activation description of wands only specifically states that it requires the holding of the wand in the hand and pointing in the general direction of the target or area."

Note that staffs have basically the exact same language as you quoted. Since wands & staffs comprise all the spell trigger items in the core rules, saying that the "single word" requirement doesn't apply implies that the "spell trigger" description is entirely erroneous.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Activating magic items while grappling

Well, the clause on DMG p. 206 doesn't actually have the word "only" in it. To be perfectly precise one could say "The activation description of wands only specifically states that it requires the holding of the wand in the hand and pointing in the general direction of the target or area."

One could also be precise by saying...

"The only requirement specifically stated in the activation description of wands is that it be held in hand and pointed in the general direction of the target or area."

...or...

"The requirements of holding the wand in hand and pointing it in the general direction of the target or are are the only ones stated in the activation description of wands."

...or...

"Holding the wand in hand and pointing it in the general direction of the target or area are the only requirements stated in the activation description of wands."

...or, quite simply...

"It doesn't say anything about speaking anything."

Semantics. Fun game.

Note that staffs have basically the exact same language as you quoted.

Yup. Actually, it was the wording in the staffs that made me first think that the activation description for staffs and wands was indeed in addition to the activation description for all spell-trigger items. Staffs stated nothing about pointing in the general direction of the target or area, only holding it forth in at least one hand.

 

[mkletch]

Helm of Teleportation - instant anti-grapple.

-Fletch!

 

[Hypersmurf]

Helm of Teleportation - instant anti-grapple.

Only if the DM allows you to activate it, which is the point of the thread

-Hyp.

 

[dcollins]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Activating magic items while grappling

Semantics. Fun game.

I agree with #1 and #3, but not #2 and #4 (subject to edits).

 

[Rel]

This came up in our game last night.

The Cleric was being grappled by a Tojanida under water. It was very unlikely that he could break the grapple due to his low Strength. Instead, he wanted to use the Wand of Cure Light Wounds in his hands to try and heal himself until the Barbarian could aid him.

IDNHMBWM, but under the grappling section it said that casting a spell was allowed but required a Concentration check to avoid AoO's. Based on that we figured that you could activate a Spell Trigger item since they don't provoke AoO's.

I should probably mention that the Cleric had cast Water Breathing so (according to our GM's interpretation of that spell) the command word was not a problem.

Hopefully we resolved this in accordance with the rules. Regardless, I don't recommend fighting a Tojanida under water.

 

[Barcode]

In the original case, the PC's (including Marcus) are infiltrating an asylum for insane sorcerers. Therefore beefy, bull-strengthed orderlies (including Vincent and Jules) use grapple a lot and need to keep the inmates from casting spells they oughtn't.

FWIW, here is the response I gave to the player. Thanks for the feedback!

-Snip-

Unless I do find something contradictory, I think I will allow it in the future on the following basis:

a) You can attack your grappler with a light weapon, which includes a light mace, implying sufficient freedom of movement to point something at someone.

b) You can cast spells with verbal components, indicating the ability to utter a command word.

The same will go for worn magic items, which can also be activated while pinned (wands cannot).

-Snip-

You are also allowed to grapple for a specific item. The grab roll is the same as for striking a held object. In this case, Vincent had Marcus already grappled. If Jules wishes to simply join the grapple as normal, his grab attempt is an automatic success, and he makes a normal grapple check to hold. However, if Jules wishes to instead take a dangerous item, like a light weapon or a wand, out of the action, he makes a grab check (melee touch attack) against the item. The wand does not get Marcus' dex bonus to AC cuz he's grappled, but it does get the +5 "waving it around" AC bonus. Jules then makes the opposed grapple check to hold the arm with the weapon/item, and if successful, removes that limb/item as a threat.

If Marcus subsequently escapes the hold with Vincent, he is no longer considered grappled with Jules for Dex/AC and threatened area purposes, though Jules is grappled with him. He can attack Jules (or anyone else he now threatens) with his other hand, even if it holds a heavier weapon (though two weapon fighting penalties apply). This result would be the same as if Marcus had taken -20 on the grapple check and succeded in grappling Jules with only one hand (see the FAQ for the details on this option).

If there are sufficient grapplers, they can also use the same technique to grapple your mouth, so to speak, jamming hands/arms/tentacles/whatever into your mouth or holding your jaw to keep you from intelligibly speaking command words. The maximum four grappler per person rule still applies.

-B-

 

[Barcode]

I think I will amend this to allow for still using the wand, even when it is specifically grappled, but having the opposed grapple check determine who it hits...

Thx,

-B-