D&D 5E Non-Combat use of Combat spells

[Unwise]

I used to be C, then around half way through 3.5 I switched to A...

Does your username have something to do with that?

I'm pretty lenient and let people use spells for different but less powerful effects. E.g. use Cone of Cold to freeze the first few inches of a pond into an ice bridge. I also say that if you have a spell prepared, then you can use a less powerful version of it in a lower spell slot. E.g. If you have fireball prepared and you just want to set a bookshelf on fire, fine, just spend a 1st level spell slot and it erupts into flame.

Out of combat, I let casters do all sorts of things that are within their niche and tropes. For instance a diviner can use some divination to help the farmer pick the right wife, or tell a woman the sex of his unborn child. There are no spells for that sort of stuff, at least not at low levels, but it is something you expect a diviner to be able to do. We had a level 9 priest of a harvest god who could bless a villages crops and see them have a bumper harvest. We had a Satyr bard who was a 'priest' of the goddess of festivals, I let him turn water into wine during a religious celebration. I tend to hand wave a lot of stuff for non-casters too.

Magic Missle is a tricky one, as it is unerringly accurate. Casting it to hit the chain on the amulet around the lich's neck, or hitting the rope of the chandelier etc seem reasonable but becomes very powerful. Why can't you just hit the enemy in the eye every time if you can do that? What about hitting the top of a lever on the other side of a portcullis and pushing it down. That seems reasonable too. It becomes a very good utility spell that mimics a more powerful magehand if you let it be that accurate.

 

[Lyxen]

I'm usually pretty lenient, but I still think that you have to be careful, because creativity out of combat very often creativity in combat where spells are already very powerful. Also, OK for real creativity, not OK for just parroting things that you can find on the net, most of which are clear abuse, such as 100 uses for minor illusion. mold earth or shape water...

 

[clearstream]

So was just musing on this. As a DM, how do you handle purely combat spells used in non-combat applications. As in, the use of a spell that its description or concept may support, but its mechanics either don't specify or clearly, rules as written, doesn't work that way. Simplest example would be say using Magic Missile to sever the rope of a chandelier, or Cone of Cold to freeze over a portion of a pond so the heroes can race across it.

A) RAW only. No such uses permitted.
B) Willing to listen when the players make the case.
C) Actively encourage players to come up with clever uses of spells.
D) Other.

I'm A/B.

My players can rely on the spell doing what the text says it does.

I conservatively allow spells to impact on the game-world in ways the text strongly indicates. I prioritise consistency so I'm not interested in cases that I wouldn't be willing to consistently allow under the same conditions.

Magic Missile targets creatures, not ropes. Burning Hands ignites flammable objects, which may include dry ropes. Acid Arrow can target ropes.

 

[Professor Murder]

Does your username have something to do with that?

I'm pretty lenient and let people use spells for different but less powerful effects. E.g. use Cone of Cold to freeze the first few inches of a pond into an ice bridge. I also say that if you have a spell prepared, then you can use a less powerful version of it in a lower spell slot. E.g. If you have fireball prepared and you just want to set a bookshelf on fire, fine, just spend a 1st level spell slot and it erupts into flame.

Out of combat, I let casters do all sorts of things that are within their niche and tropes. For instance a diviner can use some divination to help the farmer pick the right wife, or tell a woman the sex of his unborn child. There are no spells for that sort of stuff, at least not at low levels, but it is something you expect a diviner to be able to do. We had a level 9 priest of a harvest god who could bless a villages crops and see them have a bumper harvest. We had a Satyr bard who was a 'priest' of the goddess of festivals, I let him turn water into wine during a religious celebration. I tend to hand wave a lot of stuff for non-casters too.

Magic Missle is a tricky one, as it is unerringly accurate. Casting it to hit the chain on the amulet around the lich's neck, or hitting the rope of the chandelier etc seem reasonable but becomes very powerful. Why can't you just hit the enemy in the eye every time if you can do that? What about hitting the top of a lever on the other side of a portcullis and pushing it down. That seems reasonable too. It becomes a very good utility spell that mimics a more powerful magehand if you let it be that accurate.

Good points on the dangers of Magic Missile. For your examples, I would probably rule that targeting a held object defaults to targeting the object holder, that spells that don't roll to attack can't target specific body parts when regards the eyes, and that for the lever example, you would need LoS.

 

[el-remmen]

Put me in the camp of I am all for it - make your case - but the spell is still limited by its description.

 

[ECMO3]

So was just musing on this. As a DM, how do you handle purely combat spells used in non-combat applications. As in, the use of a spell that its description or concept may support, but its mechanics either don't specify or clearly, rules as written, doesn't work that way. Simplest example would be say using Magic Missile to sever the rope of a chandelier, or Cone of Cold to freeze over a portion of a pond so the heroes can race across it.

A) RAW only. No such uses permitted.
B) Willing to listen when the players make the case.
C) Actively encourage players to come up with clever uses of spells.
D) Other.

A and C

RAW, you can't use magic missile to sever a rope because it has to be targeted at a creature. You could use firebolt or chill touch and you as DM would make a decision on AC and then use it.

The most common use of this is Hex in my games. Using it from afar or with subtle spell or using if you are still concentrating on it, just put it on someone to give disadvantage.

The next common use I have seen is Minor illusion with an intimidation, Deception or performance check, for which I have given advantage if they were descriptive and what they said made sense.

I have seen burning hands used to start a fire to burn down a stable, but I have only seen that once.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Pretty much A.

Magic in D&D has always been powerful enough without allowing other uses for spells. It is bad enough in 5E, and in prior editions it was downright broken IMO.

That being said, I would be all for C IF magic was much more limited in how much a caster could cast and could learn. For instance, I see no issue with magic missile targeting anything really, but if by 5th level you only knew 5 spells and could cast each one once a day, outside-the-box uses would only be done if no other solution presented itself.

In other words, I don't mind B/C but it is too prone to abuse. See any of the numerous threads on the "clever use of spell X", etc.

 

[Yaarel]

So was just musing on this. As a DM, how do you handle purely combat spells used in non-combat applications. As in, the use of a spell that its description or concept may support, but its mechanics either don't specify or clearly, rules as written, doesn't work that way. Simplest example would be say using Magic Missile to sever the rope of a chandelier, or Cone of Cold to freeze over a portion of a pond so the heroes can race across it.

A) RAW only. No such uses permitted.
B) Willing to listen when the players make the case.
C) Actively encourage players to come up with clever uses of spells.
D) Other.

If the reuse of a spell for noncombat requires modification of the spell, such as to target an object or to prevent it from dealing damage, I require an Arcana skill check, and adjudicate it similar to physical stunt.

I consider this a RAW use of skill checks, and a normal part of DM discretion.

 

[Lyxen]

Duplicate.

 

[Lyxen]

If the reuse of a spell for noncombat requires modification of the spell, such as to target an object or to prevent it from dealing damage, I require an Arcana skill check, and adjudicate it similar to physical stunt.

I consider this a RAW use of skill checks, and a normal part of DM discretion.

And do you also allow the same thing in combat ? Because while the above is absolutely fine, the second for me - and apparently for many others here - can easily cause problems of balance.

As for this being part of the RAW skill checks, it's clearly not. If you think it is, please show us where it is. That being said, of course yes it's part of the DM's discretion.