D&D 5E Hex Shenanigans

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Meanwhile in my actual games, the Warlock can just move the Hex to another enemy, and does not need a pet to "store" the hex.

In normal play, during combat and then into the next combat after, it is not a problem. Some people here are specifically talking about the exploit of the PC waking up in the morning, casting Hex on a chicken, then having their own little short rest to regain the spell slot, before killing the chicken and holding concentration on Hex until a real enemy comes along to transfer it to.

 

[Helldritch]

In normal play, during combat and then into the next combat after, it is not a problem. Some people here are specifically talking about the exploit of the PC waking up in the morning, casting Hex on a chicken, then having their own little short rest to regain the spell slot, before killing the chicken and holding concentration on Hex until a real enemy comes along to transfer it to.

Now I see why so many DM are against this shenanigan. It would not happen at my table.

PC Warlock: I cast Hex on my chicken.
Me: Ok. Done. What's next?
PC Warlock: I take a short rest to recover my spell slot.
Other PCs: NO!!!!!!
PC Warlock: Why? It is perfectly legal to do so...
Other PCs: No. He'll roll on the random encounter table. You don't want that. Ever. No way. We go right now as it is supposed to be.
PC Warlock: What is so bad about a random roll?
Other PC: You don't want to know. You don't want to risk it unless absolutely necessary.
Me: I simply smile and say: You're sure now you don't want to take a small ipsy tiny short little rest?
Other PCs: No! We press on. If he wants to rests, may he die alone.

In my game, any rest below the four to six encounters per day means a random encounter roll. The more encounter you had, the less dangerous the encounters are. They all know it from the start. It is not an auto encounter but starting with a deadly encounter at the start of the day is not a good idea at my table. This is why the problem never occurs.

As I said earlier, maintaining concentration on the spell does not requires it to have a target. Only the initial casting needs one.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

Now I see why so many DM are against this shenanigan. It would not happen at my table.

PC Warlock: I cast Hex on my chicken.
Me: Ok. Done. What's next?
PC Warlock: I take a short rest to recover my spell slot.
Other PCs: NO!!!!!!
PC Warlock: Why? It is perfectly legal to do so...
Other PCs: No. He'll roll on the random encounter table. You don't want that. Ever. No way. We go right now as it is supposed to be.
PC Warlock: What is so bad about a random roll?
Other PC: You don't want to know. You don't want to risk it unless absolutely necessary.
Me: I simply smile and say: You're sure now you don't want to take a small ipsy tiny short little rest?
Other PCs: No! We press on. If he wants to rests, may he die alone.

In my game, any rest below the four to six encounters per day means a random encounter roll. The more encounter you had, the less dangerous the encounters are. They all know it from the start. It is not an auto encounter but starting with a deadly encounter at the start of the day is not a good idea at my table. This is why the problem never occurs.

As I said earlier, maintaining concentration on the spell does not requires it to have a target. Only the initial casting needs one.

Another qualifier to all this is also when the spell is upcast in a higher slot, it can last up to either 8 or 24 hours. And that is the only way they can do it and have a short rest in the mix, since the normal length is only an hour. So it is not like this is a low level Warlock pulling this trick.

 

[Fanaelialae]

But it isn't gaming the system! It's just how the spell works, both in the world and in the mechanics. You can hex a creature, and then the spell just lasts the duration barring losing concentration. That is, in the world that we are pretending is real while in character, how the spell works.

I'd be completely baffled if I started the day using my survival skill (i make weird characters okay? sometimes you wanna play a rogue/warlock who was a horse thief and is now a knight of the queen of nocturne, the fey city of eternal moonlight) to hunt down some food for the party, and I sacrificed my kill according to tradition, giving the power of the kill to my patron as part of using my power, and the DM interjects into that roleplaying scene to tell me that I can't do it because they think that hexing a non-combat target and killing it at the start of the day is "cheesy" or whatever.

Let me put it another way. If I say that's fine but the fey queen expects you to drop concentration on the hex once the sacrifice is made (because it is for the sacrifice), is that still good by you? If it is, then we don't have an issue, you do your thing! I don't even have an issue with you taking a short rest to recover the slot. I'll even probably throw in a bit of extra RP XP.

If on the other hand you hem and haw (or worse, outright argue) about how that's not how you envisioned it working, then as I see it you were trying to pull one over on the DM using RP to cover your true intentions. Because if it was done for a cool, evocative RP moment, it shouldn't matter whether you get to maintain concentration after it is done. That only matters if you are trying to game the system and squeak out a tiny extra advantage that I'd let you have for free if you'd just talked to me about it instead of trying to pull a fast one.

 

[Helldritch]

Another qualifier to all this is also when the spell is upcast in a higher slot, it can last up to either 8 or 24 hours. And that is the only way they can do it and have a short rest in the mix, since the normal length is only an hour. So it is not like this is a low level Warlock pulling this trick.

Rightly so. That is why I see no problem with that. It would not be done at my table (for reasons in my previous post) but I would not tear up my shirt if a DM allowed or disallowed it. Only a high level warlock would like to pull this off. For what little gain it offers... I know that if I were to be the warlock trying to pull this off, I would abide by the DM's decision.

 

[MGibster]

How many D&D campaigns feature a strong relationship between Warlock and patron? Because thus far I haven't witnessed such a thing myself.

 

[Helldritch]

Not a lot. Not a lot.

But how many DM enforce the Ethos of a god onto the player playing a cleric or a paladin?
The answer is: "Not a lot". Again...

The warlock is not a very popular class in my games just because of that. I do insist on character creation that the Warlock writes exactly what he wanted from his patron (usually power) and I write the contract, terms, duration and whether or not the contract is renewable and on which conditions (if any). I once had a warlock which had a 10 year terms for his contract and I said: "Ok, 3 years passe between the end of your adventure and the beginning of the next one". The warlock was not happy about it. Then I had a warlock suffer a total loss of power because he hadn't respected his contract, the player complained that her character was not a cleric. I said, worse, you bargained with a power that does not even care one iota about you, your race and your goals. She (the Winter Queen) cares only about herself and her feys. (She had harmed a fey in self defense but it was written in her contract that she would never harm a fey under any conditions. Not even to save her life...).

So yep, not a lot. And if you're the kind of DM that does, the class loses a lot of its appeal.

 

[Xetheral]

When I see some weird case like that, I would refer to the preface of the PHB:
« playing DnD is an exercice in collaborative creation. »
So the question is now: do the bag of rats trick help create a good happening satisfying for everybody?

When hexes and chickens came up in one of my games it led to the players having great fun describing what they were making for breakfast each morning, and looking forward to the Wis (Chef's Tools) check to find out how tasty it was. They also spent a lot of time and energy protecting their donkey that carried all the high-quality foodstuffs (including the live chickens). My experience is unavoidably anecdotal, but my experience says the answer to your question is yes, the "bag of rats" led to "a good happening satisfying for everybody".

 

[Helldritch]

Hey what's for breakfast today?

Answer: "Hexed Chicken! Same as yesterday!"

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Let me put it another way. If I say that's fine but the fey queen expects you to drop concentration on the hex once the sacrifice is made (because it is for the sacrifice), is that still good by you? If it is, then we don't have an issue, you do your thing! I don't even have an issue with you taking a short rest to recover the slot. I'll even probably throw in a bit of extra RP XP.

If on the other hand you hem and haw (or worse, outright argue) about how that's not how you envisioned it working, then as I see it you were trying to pull one over on the DM using RP to cover your true intentions. Because if it was done for a cool, evocative RP moment, it shouldn't matter whether you get to maintain concentration after it is done. That only matters if you are trying to game the system and squeak out a tiny extra advantage that I'd let you have for free if you'd just talked to me about it instead of trying to pull a fast one.

To me, that would be you as the DM finding RP loopholes to arbitrarily nix a perfectly reasonable action.

Also, I don’t play warlocks at tables where the DM expects total control over what the patron-warlock relationship is and how the patron acts and all that. I’d be playing a rogue or something at your table, if that sort of thing was within the norm of play for you as the DM. That type of play leads me to play characters with no family, no strings, no debts, little backstory. Can still be fun, but that isn’t what makes TTRPGs awesome, for me.