D&D 5E Mage Hand and Trap Avoidance

[Horwath]

Ooooh if you hate that, wait until they get arcane eye.

It just kills dungeon exploration. Had a player use it to map out an entire dungeon, and then afterwards he said, "this kinda feels like I'm cheating".

I don't think it's cheating, but it is incredibly boring. Why is this spell in the game?

I used that spell for one session, it kills any suspense in the game, changed it for next session at my own request.

there are uses for the spell like having a drone to spy on an army, but it kills dungeon crawls.


@OP;

wait till players realize that they can throw corpses of enemies on a rope infront of them to activate traps, hehehe.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Now I'm wandering, how many sorts of traps are there that can be set off with mage hand but not mundane means? I used to have a character throw a handful of rocks when thought there might be a trap, which would deal with proximity triggers. The 10-foot pole was mentioned, as tying a rope around the trigger.

It sort of is seeming to me like me mage hand is in a similar utility to the light spell. It doesn't really let you do much you couldn't do without it (at least as far as traps), but saves you from carrying around some gear you might otherwise need. At the price of a cantrip, sometimes it's worth it to you and sometimes it isn't.

To the idea about players vs characters interacting with a simple trap, that's definitely a play style thing. It's exactly the same consideration as players needing to have a conversation with the DM portraying various NPCs versus just wanting a skill check or statement of intent to cover it, and all the same factors apply. Just as some players aren't as socially adept as their high Charisma characters, some players aren't as clever at problem solving a their high Intelligence characters.

Now the real old school approach treats the experience as a game for the players to win, and therefore character skill isn't relevant. But honestly, playing that way with modern D&D makes those stats and skills on your sheet kind of "trap options". Another way of playing is to not treat social or edploration any differently from combat, since they all have PC stats. If I wouldn't expect a player to have to describe an effective means of swinging their sword to counter the defensive stance I described the opponent taking (since one assumes their character knows how to fight and the attack rolls covers it), it doesn't make a lot of sense to expect the player to have to be the one to sweet talk the count, or describe how they move the tumblers of a lock (since one would assume their skill check covers exactly that).

Now even in that more typical modern D&D style, there are elements where the players are the ones who have to provide the skill. Like where wil you move and who will you attack. Exactly what that is analogous to in social and exploration pillars is play style dependent, but generally something you want players and DMs on the same page about.

Personally I prefer a mix. If you can think of a goud description of how to resolve something, it works without a check, or maybe grants advantage, but if you can't you can fall back on a skill check. Usually I or the other players think up a quick description of what you did based on whether it succeeded or not, so it's not like it entirely bypassed the fiction, it just moved it to after the check. The auto-success element of this (In early 5e I told my 3e players that asking to roll is asking to fail, so just tell me what you are attempting and I'll let you know if a check is required) applies more frequently in non-combat pillars, but that stands to reason since the game rules are mostly built around combat with the other pillars an afterthought.

For me the mix works best for allowing different types of players to explore different types of characters (including ones that might not be like them). I also will interpret their actions in light of their stats to a degree. So if a player describes how they try to persuade an NPC to do something, and it is clear that that would be a horrible way to attempt that, and it should be completely clear to the character with their stats, I would likely either let the player know why (I think) that might not get the result they think it would, or just interpret the results of the roll to fit the player intent. So if they say exactly the wrong thing, but still get a great roll (and I know the reason they said the wrong thing is more player skill than character), I might spin it that the NPC took it as humor and enjoyed it, or something like that. I like to encourage in-character dialogue and descriptions of exploration details without punishing it.

 

[SkidAce]

Then you’ve removed any uncertainty in the outcome, and a dice roll isn’t necessary to resolve the action. The DM should just describe the (certain) results.

Unless your hand slips, etc.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is just a little rant:

Last night, I was running the second full session of my new 5E 2024 campaign (this isn't tagged 2024 because I don't think it is relevant) and the 2nd level PCs did the old standard of setting off a trap with mage hand. It is a common tactic, but I had forgotten about it since it has been a while since it has happened in game.

I hate it. It is so boring.

Note: I was running a published adventure, and I just introduced the trap as the module presented it, and the mage hand solution was perfectly reasonable and made sense for the PCs that did not want to get poison gassed.

But I still hate it.

My feelings on traps have evolved over the years and ultimately they boil down to this: if the trap can be easily bypassed with mage hand, it is a bad trap. Full stop.

I love the fictional idea of Mage Hand, but I really don't like how ubiquitous it is, and how many challenges it renders non-challenging. If I had my way it would only be available to psionic characters.

 

[Charlaquin]

You're right, it's the point of the spell.

I'm saying it's a bad spell, because that's a bad point.

Arcane Eye gives one player the spotlight, and the gameplay looks like one of two ways:

Option 1:

• DM: Okay, you see a long hallway, with one door at the far end, a hole in the wall on the left, and a door on the right.
• Player with Arcane Eye: Okay, I go through the door on the right. Through the key hole.
• DM: You see x, y, z, plus a, b, c.
• Arcane Eye: Okay, now the hole on the left.
• DM: You see a trap. Also d, e, f.
• Arcane Eye: Nice. Now the door in the center.
• DM: [to the rest of the party: "yeah, go ahead and grab some snacks. We'll be here awhile"]. This looks like an armory. You see g, h, and i. Opposite this room are two more doors...

ad infinitum until the player gets bored, the party (or the DM) revolts, or the dungeon is fully mapped out.

Option 2:

• DM: not this again. Look, here's the map. Let's just say you know where everything is. Let's move on.

Fundamentally, it's a spell that encourages boring gameplay. The fact that boring gameplay 'is the point' doesn't make it any better.

to me this doesn’t sound significantly different than exploring the dungeon with the characters physically present. And, if it isn’t interesting for your group… just skip the process of walking through each step and give the players a map. “After thoroughly exploring the dungeon with Arcane Eye, you determine that this is its layout.” Now looking over the map, interpreting it, and deciding on a plan for how to reach whatever their goal is becomes a whole group activity.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

Besides pulling leavers and taking a tankard from the bar to impress the commoners, what is mage hand even good for?

I kind of thought the whole point of it was to do dangerous things from a distance

It’s probably more problematic now that it’s at-will.

Cantrips are a problem in my opinion ONLY because they are at will.

 

[Charlaquin]

Unless your hand slips, etc.

Eh, I put that in the same category of “what if you accidentally tie your shoes wrong?” Sure, it’s a possibility, but it’s not an interesting enough possibility to bother accounting for in the system.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Besides pulling leavers and taking a tankard from the bar to impress the commoners, what is mage hand even good for?

Getting the ring of keys from the dog in your tropey jailbreak adventure.

 

[SkidAce]

Eh, I put that in the same category of “what if you accidentally tie your shoes wrong?” Sure, it’s a possibility, but it’s not an interesting enough possibility to bother accounting for in the system.

I hear yah, but feel its more like that.s reason for the roll, its uncertain. Indianna Jones had the right idea, but failed his roll.

 

[TiQuinn]

I hear yah, but feel its more like that.s reason for the roll, its uncertain. Indianna Jones had the right idea, but failed his roll.

View attachment 398204

Perfect example of a good trap.

He fails the roll and what happens next is a series of obstacles that are triggered that he must outrun and dodge rather than immediately take damage from.