D&D (2024) Thief Rogue / True Strike

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Mmm. Still firmly in the 'ask your GM ahead of time to know how your features work' camp. Kind of expected that.
I really dislike that kind of table variance on principle. I really feel bad for table hoppers or someone who plays in AL, not being sure how a given ability is meant to function in the first place.

The fact that you have to infer rules from things like "well, the feature is called Fast Hands" is extra obnoxious.

It's funny that WotC had this solved at one point, when there were categories for things like this- spell completion, spell trigger, command word, and use-activated items.

But somehow that's too complex for 5e? Pfui!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ad_hoc

(she/her)
I really dislike that kind of table variance on principle. I really feel bad for table hoppers or someone who plays in AL, not being sure how a given ability is meant to function in the first place.

The fact that you have to infer rules from things like "well, the feature is called Fast Hands" is extra obnoxious.

It's funny that WotC had this solved at one point, when there were categories for things like this- spell completion, spell trigger, command word, and use-activated items.

But somehow that's too complex for 5e? Pfui!

I think the opposite is true.

In order for this to work you need to work backwards from the point of casting the spell to the activation and then say it is a magic action now.

Nothing in the item says magic action to activate.

If you don't want to worry about how different tables will be just don't try pulling shenanigans by stretching rules.
 

James Gasik

We don't talk about Pun-Pun
I think the opposite is true.

In order for this to work you need to work backwards from the point of casting the spell to the activation and then say it is a magic action now.

Nothing in the item says magic action to activate.

If you don't want to worry about how different tables will be just don't try pulling shenanigans by stretching rules.
Ok, so think about this. Player gets the new PHB. Reads the subclass. Sees "can activate magic items as a bonus action".

They immediately think "oh cool, so I can use any magic item as a bonus action!". Only to later be told "well, actually..."

I mean, it's 2014 all over again, when people thought that the ability to "use an object" as a bonus action would include magic items, only for the DMG to come along and say "actually, magic items don't use the Use an Object action".

It would not have been very hard to define exactly what the ability is meant to do so players will grok it without having to dig into a book for DUNGEON MASTERS.
 

ad_hoc

(she/her)
Ok, so think about this. Player gets the new PHB. Reads the subclass. Sees "can activate magic items as a bonus action".

They immediately think "oh cool, so I can use any magic item as a bonus action!". Only to later be told "well, actually..."

I mean, it's 2014 all over again, when people thought that the ability to "use an object" as a bonus action would include magic items, only for the DMG to come along and say "actually, magic items don't use the Use an Object action".

It would not have been very hard to define exactly what the ability is meant to do so players will grok it without having to dig into a book for DUNGEON MASTERS.

I only have 1 friend who spoke to me about this and I said "you've been reading the internet haven't you?" And yes, he hadn't thought about it until he read it on the internet.

I'm sure there will be some well-intentioned players who assume they can be used like that but they will also likely just quickly get why they aren't.

The magic action is defined as being used for 1 of 3 things, 1 of which is activating a magic item and another is casting a spell. They'll get it. Heck, most of them probably won't even think of casting a spell as using a magic action.

If spell scrolls and other enspelled items were written the same way now as they were in 2014 then yes, they would work but that is why they changed the wording.

Most players will get that casting a spell using an item and using the magic action to activate the item are different things. The item is activated requiring no action, and then you cast a spell.

For all the threads arguing about the 2014 rules I encountered very few misunderstandings in actual play and when I did they were easy to clear up.
 

MarkB

Legend
Ok, so think about this. Player gets the new PHB. Reads the subclass. Sees "can activate magic items as a bonus action".

They immediately think "oh cool, so I can use any magic item as a bonus action!". Only to later be told "well, actually..."

I mean, it's 2014 all over again, when people thought that the ability to "use an object" as a bonus action would include magic items, only for the DMG to come along and say "actually, magic items don't use the Use an Object action".

It would not have been very hard to define exactly what the ability is meant to do so players will grok it without having to dig into a book for DUNGEON MASTERS.
Still seems like people are overcomplicating this. The criteria for Fast Hands are:

1. Is magic item.
2. Using it takes a magic action.

There's nothing complicated about it, and the linguistic technicalities being used to rule out certain items are doing nobody any favours. I honestly think the designers didn't put in further clarifications because they never considered that people would try to declare scrolls and enspelled staffs / wands ineligible.
 

pemerton

Legend
I honestly think the designers didn't put in further clarifications because they never considered that people would try to declare scrolls and enspelled staffs / wands ineligible.
The D&D designers don't write their rules with very much technical precision.

People who are trying to read these rules as if they are comparable to technical drafting in statutes, or even the sloppier drafting one sees in some contracts, are presupposing a degree of precision that just isn't there.

I mean, look at the range of different phrasings, the casual use of the words "use" and "activate"/"activation", the lack of clear articulation of the relationship between "casting a spell" from an item - which presumably is a mode of activation that brings with it an extra bundles of requirements (ie all the rules for successful spell casting) - and the concept of "activation" more generally.

From a technical point of view this is all terribly drafted.

For what it's worth, I agree with you (and others) that Fast Hands seems obviously to extend to scrolls. Because no one can be intending the tortured parsings of this poorly drafted text in order to come to the alternative conclusion.

In the fiction, the Thief's fast hands permit them to unroll the scroll more quickly, to bring it up to eye level to proclaim from, etc.
 

The D&D designers don't write their rules with very much technical precision.

People who are trying to read these rules as if they are comparable to technical drafting in statutes, or even the sloppier drafting one sees in some contracts, are presupposing a degree of precision that just isn't there.

I mean, look at the range of different phrasings, the casual use of the words "use" and "activate"/"activation", the lack of clear articulation of the relationship between "casting a spell" from an item - which presumably is a mode of activation that brings with it an extra bundles of requirements (ie all the rules for successful spell casting) - and the concept of "activation" more generally.

From a technical point of view this is all terribly drafted.

For what it's worth, I agree with you (and others) that Fast Hands seems obviously to extend to scrolls. Because no one can be intending the tortured parsings of this poorly drafted text in order to come to the alternative conclusion.

In the fiction, the Thief's fast hands permit them to unroll the scroll more quickly, to bring it up to eye level to proclaim from, etc.
It also seems clear that the ready an action rule is not thought to be used to trigger on crearure starts their turn.

Starting a turn is not a perceivable trigger. Still people try to exploit that.
Same goes for emanations.

So I had no problem allowing scrolls to be used woth fast hands, if the person did not try to use it to double thief damage by exploiting rules.

If optimizers try to gain more damage because technically it is allowed, I as a DM start being technical too to shut it down.
 

pemerton

Legend
It also seems clear that the ready an action rule is not thought to be used to trigger on crearure starts their turn.

Starting a turn is not a perceivable trigger. Still people try to exploit that.
Same goes for emanations.

So I had no problem allowing scrolls to be used woth fast hands, if the person did not try to use it to double thief damage by exploiting rules.

If optimizers try to gain more damage because technically it is allowed, I as a DM start being technical too to shut it down.
I've got no view about the balance issue.

Just a view about drafting and interpretation, which is something I know a fair bit about.
 



Remove ads

Top