D&D 5E Mage Hand and the No Good, Low Down, Dirty Rotten Arcane Trickster

[Dausuul]

I had been mulling about allowing ATs to sneak attack with spells in some fashion. Cantrips only, maybe? Only within 30ft? Certainly only spells with attack rolls, not saves. Single target spells, or only one of the targets in an area effect spell. Arcane tricksters are mercifully short on suitable attack spells and slots, and reliance on Int would be MADdening. Firebolt + sneak attack is powerful, but sort of a one-trick pony; with a range restriction it might even be balanced.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this as potential alternative class feature for Arcane Tricksters, as per your suggestion, @Saeviomagy?

Sneak Attack on spell attacks seems like a workable option, though you would need to pump Int over Dex in order to fully take advantage of it. Do keep in mind that the benefits change over the level range. At levels 3 and 4, you're better off with a crossbow. From 5-10, the cantrip offers a modest (5-10%) damage advantage over the crossbow, at the cost of having to pump Int over Dex. From level 11 onward, the cantrip is giving you a damage boost of 20% or more.

From levels 1-10, a rogue would be better off with Assassinate. At 11+, it's an open question.

 

[77IM]

Is this mage hand causing a problem at your table? Try it as written, and if it is messing up your game, then address it. Don't preemptively Nerf based on armchair analysis.


I like the idea of compensating with spell sneak attacks because that sounds cool. But cantrip damage scales with character level and that shouldn't stack with sneak attack. So limit cantrip damage to that of a 1st-level character.

 

[Dausuul]

I like the idea of compensating with spell sneak attacks because that sounds cool. But cantrip damage scales with character level and that shouldn't stack with sneak attack. So limit cantrip damage to that of a 1st-level character.

That ability would be just about worthless. Compared to a light crossbow, you get substantially less damage, of a much more commonly resisted damage type, and you have to invest in Int (the least useful stat in the game) over Dex (the most useful stat in the game) in order to use it effectively. Why bother?

Whatever ability you hand out to replace Mage Hand Legerdemain, it should be comparable to Assassinate. In fact, it could simply be Assassinate. Swap one for the other.

 

[Aldarc]

Nerfing the arcane trickster's mage hand legerdemain is definitely too harsh of a houserule, especially for an essential subclass feature.

 

[doctorhook]

Sneak Attack on spell attacks seems like a workable option, though you would need to pump Int over Dex in order to fully take advantage of it. Do keep in mind that the benefits change over the level range. At levels 3 and 4, you're better off with a crossbow. From 5-10, the cantrip offers a modest (5-10%) damage advantage over the crossbow, at the cost of having to pump Int over Dex. From level 11 onward, the cantrip is giving you a damage boost of 20% or more.

From levels 1-10, a rogue would indisputably be better off with Assassinate. At 11+, it's an open question.

Yeah, it definitely has a different power curve than a utility feature like mage hand legerdemain. I want to be able to include this ability in my game; thematically, the idea of sneak attacking with magic is pretty cool, but only really suits the arcane trickster (it would be an offense to ATs to give such an ability to any other existing class or subclass). The only catch is balancing it so that it doesn't end up absolutely superior to all other options.

I think @771M correctly points out that it's problematic that such an attack (with a cantrip--spells aren't common enough to matter for this character, I think) scales due to sneak attack and cantrip base damage, but I agree that flatly ignoring cantrip scaling isn't appropriate either. This is part of the reason I was thinking about a range limitation, although the vast majority of combat happens within 30 feet anyway, so choosing an appropriate range would be tricky too. This hypothetical feature has to be balanced to function appropriately with fire bolt (the mostly likely cantrip to get used with it) as well as potential future cantrips of similar power-level.

This whole business is leading me to consider another new alternative feature: "mage knife", the ability to simply allow magical melee sneak attacks within 30 feet, as though by a different type of superior mage hand, albeit without your weapon leaving your actual hand. This option is thematically appropriate and bypasses the "double-scaling" problem with cantrips; the downside is that it still wouldn't be combat-competitive with assassinate, and is only marginally (if at all) superior to just using a ranged weapon. Actually, now I'm sorta wondering why ATs can't just do this, period.

...And there my thoughts go, down that rabbit hole of trying to fix an entire system that isn't broken.

Whatever ability you hand out to replace Mage Hand Legerdemain, it should be comparable to Assassinate. In fact, it could simply be Assassinate. Swap one for the other.

Balanced in principle, but it's a slippery slope once we start cherry-picking class features. Next thing I know, a player could be asking for a rogue with Circle of the Moon wildshaping lol.

 

[pepticburrito]

Firebolt + sneak attack is powerful, but sort of a one-trick pony

Sneak attack requires a finesse or ranged weapon for a reason. Allowing attack spells to do sneak attack damage would make the rogue severely overpowered.

 

[MrMyth]

Thanks for all the input gang! I'm not entirely convinced (I still think the ability to perform the checks at distance is powerful enough), but I do appreciate all the insight. I shall mull it over some more...

Class Features like "Set Off Traps from 30' away" or "Spend 2 minutes trying to Unlock a Door at range" don't sound particularly compelling to me.

I'm chiming in with the rest that tihs ruling is way too harsh. Intentionally crippling one of the defining abilities of a character should really only happen if it is having an immediate, negative impact on the game. Rogues being good at dealing with traps is kinda their thing. Arcane Tricksters being able to do so at range is kinda their thing. If you really plan on taking that away from them, then you really need to offer something compelling to make up for it. (Also, yes, making them terrible at it is not much different than just removing the feature entirely.)

 

[doctorhook]

Outright, certainly, but that's why we're discussing potential limitations to counterbalance that hypothetical ability.

 

[Mouseferatu]

The problem with all the suggestions for replacement abilities, and the problem with thinking "It's good enough even with disadvantage," is that both of them fail to take into account perhaps the most important aspect:

It's not what the player wanted when he chose his character.

The thief-stuff at range is one of the primary aspects of the arcane trickster. If the player chose that subclass, there's a good chance it's because this is specifically something he was looking for. No replacement ability's going to make up for that if this was a thematic/character choice.

Either allow the subclass or don't. Or discuss changing it for future campaigns. But letting the player take something as-written and then telling him you're nerfing or changing it, when there's not yet even been any in-play reason to think it's unbalanced, is just going nowhere good for anyone concerned.

 

[doctorhook]

The problem with all the suggestions for replacement abilities, and the problem with thinking "It's good enough even with disadvantage," is that both of them fail to take into account perhaps the most important aspect:

It's not what the player wanted when he chose his character.

You're right, and I posted my agreement upthread, prior to discussing what could be a mechanically suitable replacement feature. I figured we'd already sorted the main topic out, and we could move on; I'm just threadcrapping, I guess.