D&D 5E Using Manacles in Combat

[trentonjoe]

Little Jimmy knows he is outclassed by Andre Gnollkin. He didn't want to have come down to trading blows. He knows his one chance is to fake left and try to slap his manacles on the brute the second after he swings his sword at him. Swings and misses that is....

Any suggestions on how you would resolve the attempt to put manacles on an unwilling opponent during combat?

Use an Object Action? Opposed check? Sleight of Hand vs Athletics or Acrobatics with the defender having advantage and the attacker having disadvantage? It should be hard but not impossible right?

Should it provoke an Opportunity Attack?

 

[iserith]

Based on the fiction you offered, it sounds like an action the uncertainty of the outcome of which can be resolved with Little Jimmy's Dexterity check versus Andre Gnollkin's Strength or Dexterity check. If the check succeeds, Andre Gnollkin's hands are manacled. If the check fails, either Andre Gnollkin fully rebuffs the attempt to manacle him (failure) or one hand is manacled while the other cuff is free and wrested from Little Jimmy's grip (progress combined with a setback).

This presumes that the manacles are more or less the equivalent of modern handcuffs and can be locked into place with similar ease. Manacles of old tended to be more complicated affairs.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Little Jimmy knows he is outclassed by Andre Gnollkin. He didn't want to have come down to trading blows. He knows his one chance is to fake left and try to slap his manacles on the brute the second after he swings his sword at him. Swings and misses that is....

Any suggestions on how you would resolve the attempt to put manacles on an unwilling opponent during combat?

Use an Object Action? Opposed check? Sleight of Hand vs Athletics or Acrobatics with the defender having advantage and the attacker having disadvantage? It should be hard but not impossible right?

Should it provoke an Opportunity Attack?

"Are you wrestling him into position and then slapping on the manacles by main force, or are you trying to sneak them onto him? If the latter it will cost you two successful grapples (two attacks + two Athletics contests as usual for two grapples). If the latter it will cost you your action and a successful Sleight of Hand contest vs. Perception, but if you have Fast Hands you can use your bonus action instead. Which way do you want to try?"

Edit: I reserve the right to adjust this on-the-fly ruling over time, e.g. giving a boost to the enemy perception check or requiring one Sleight of Hand contest per manacled limb. But this is how I would rule on the fly at the table the first time it came up, or if a player was asking about it in advance. The final ruling would probably be pretty close to this anyway, I would just need to think about the appropriate difficulty and how this interacts with nets as weapons.

 

[Sunseeker]

Opposed grapple check, with Jimmy making his check via "use tool" of the manacles while Andre will make a strength or dexterity check to avoid getting his hands caught. I like the idea of two checks, one for each hand really, though I'd wave the second check if either party fumbles (nat 1) or crits.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I would make it a Strenght contest and would give the defender advantage and the attacker disadvantage.

 

[jaelis]

Gotta admit, in this case I'd probably just say no.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I would allow sleight of hand check vs dex or str.
Maybe only when you have combat advantage, or the enemy already grappled.

As a rogue(thief) I would allow making a bonus action use of sleight of hand, as you use an object.
Of course, you only have one hand shackled, not both. The second one is practically impossible to also shackle, probably only when you already pinned the enemy (grappled and prone).

Edit: the first part can be used with manacles already fixed to your arm, so effectively both you and the enemy have grappled each other and nothing can easily break the grapple by merely shoving one of the participants.

 

[Quickleaf]

Gotta admit, in this case I'd probably just say no.

[MENTION=304]trentonjoe[/MENTION] I am with [MENTION=60210]jaelis[/MENTION], that narrative is just plain whack and smells like power-gaming.

These are manacles...

Do they look like something easily slapped on?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The only way I can conceive of manacles (or shackles) bing used in combat is as an improvised chain/flail or garrote. IOW, you can hit with them, and you can choke with them, and you may even be able to trip or disarm with them, but you can't use them for their original purpose unless & until the target has been brought under some level of control in some way.

 

[wedgeski]

[MENTION=304]trentonjoe[/MENTION] I love your sig.

I would require the attacker to be in a position where he would normally have advantage to attack. I would then require him to make a Dex-based attack with no proficiency bonus and at disadvantage. If successful, I would grant disadvantage to all the defender's attack rolls until the manacles were released (and maybe deny shield bonus to AC).

Even with all those obstacles, I might consider this overly generous given more thought.