D&D 5E Warlock, Hex, and Short Rests: The Bag of Rats Problem

[Undrhil]

I thought "bag of rats" was covered in the rules? Am I mistaken? At any rate, I wouldn't allow "bag of rats". I wouldn't allow the Hex to be cast first thing, since it is already a bonus action to cast it; just cast it first in combat. Maintaining concentration during a short rest: sure, as long as you don't fall asleep, since that makes you stop concentrating instantly.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I genuinely don't understand why this is a problem, in any way. It looks like it's RAW, possibly RAI, and...not overpowered.

And thematically, why is it even a messed up thing to do? Literally eat or preserve the meat of the thing you sacrifice for power, roleplay it as a ritual sacrifice that fuels your magic. Is killing a rabbit for food fine, but killing a rabbit to make your magic more powerful not? Why?

Even if it is, to you, is it still messed up if you also cook the animal like you would have anyway?

What would be messed up, but totally doable if you're a bad person, is doing this with your familiar. Every day, possibly multiple times a day. Poor little crow buddy...

But yeah, I'll definitely be allowing this, because I can't find a single thing wrong with it.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

There's no rule saying I can't play a dragon. It says "many other fantastical species", so woot! It does say "Not every intelligent race is appropriate", but it doesn't specifically exclude dragons. So by some of the logic being used here, that means RAW I can play a dragon as my PC. Raaaaarrrwwwwlllll! Pew! Pew! (I'm a dragon with lasers, also not explicitly denied in the rules).

Moreover, it doesnt say in the rulebook that a dog can't play D&D! Coming in 2017... Nerd Bud 2: This time he's leveling in dog levels!

 

[Ratskinner]

Personally,

As either a GM or player, this is best handled in play. Ridiculous things are ridiculous and carry their own penalties:

CAMPAIGN DIARY, DAY 2
...We were about 20 seconds from completely escaping the ogres when the some of Warlock's damn rats decided that now was a good time to have a screeching fight over rule of the sack and blow our cover. Fight ensued, we survived, barely. Once we revived Rogue, we had to restrain him from killing Warlock and endure 20 minutes of explanations on why the bag of rats was actually a tactical benefit. A second Ogre patrol sent us back into the catacombs for cover.....

CAMPAIGN DIARY, DAY 3
....and after the third wave of those tentacled wolf-things, we were totally spent, another one would have done us in for sure. We decided to make hasty camp and sealed ourselves into a small side-chamber with a sturdy door. Woke up this morning to find the damned rats had eaten their way out of the Warlock's bag and through half of our rations, fouling the rest with their feces. Cleric lectured Warlock long and hard about how useful spells other than Create Food and Water are. Thief argued long and hard for Warlock to surrender half his treasure share. Warlock spent an hour and three spells recovering the remaining 6 rats and fixing the sack.

CAMPAIGN DIARY, DAY 4
Rat-sack now reeks of rat. Rat-blood, rat-urine, rat-feces, do rats sweat? In other news, tentacled wolf-things have very good sense of smell and are not distracted by rats-as-missiles (1 rat only takes up one tentacle). Wizard now has strange curse-disease that Cleric can't cure. We had to drop that treasure chest to climb up an embankment while Fighter covered our retreat. Long may he party hard in Valhalla. We're out of scrolls and potions, and have been driven further down into the catacombs. Wizard and Cleric can't identify the runes on the walls, but cleric thinks he recognizes one of the holy symbols. Hopefully whatever power it represents will protect us from the rising level of exhaustion.

CAMPAIGN DIARY, DAY 5
Last night, Warlock, apparently overwhelmed by guilt, committed suicide. At least, so says the note that he dictated to Rogue and then pinned to his chest with Rogue's dagger. He also kindly left a meal of roast rat cooking on a spit. We can already hear the wolf-things clawing at the door...

 

[Ratskinner]

Moreover, it doesnt say in the rulebook that a dog can't play D&D! Coming in 2017... Nerd Bud 2: This time he's leveling in dog levels!

View attachment 81441

Is it weird that I feel like I can guess what class each dog would play?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Why does your character know that if they kill a critter first thing in the morning and then sit on their rear end for an hour they can then have this spell last all day and have their magic back? Because that's what the game mechanics have allowed... not the actual physics and story of the world have allowed. Because odds are pretty close to 100% that if you were to ask your DM "Hey, how do the magic physics of your world work?" and the DM didn't have game mechanics to explain it... they wouldn't come back with...


There's no story reason for why these spells get to break the DM's magic physics. The DM wouldn't have even thought of doing it this way if they were designing their world without game rules behind it. It's only the game rules that clue the DM and the players in to the idea that the physics of the world can be broken. So with that being the case... then just accept it. Own it. You are all breaking the logical manifestation of magical physics in this world for no other reason that the game rules allow you to do so. Which is fine! If that's how you want to play, then go for it! Your game, your world! Enjoy it!

But don't then bother coming come here on the boards trying to justify it to the rest of us. As though you're looking for absolution. Because if you feel as though you need other people to agree with you on how you're playing... then that right there tells us you're feeling a little guilty for playing it that way. And that is an even bigger indication that you know deep down as well as the rest of us that what you're doing isn't how you think the game is really meant to be played.

This post makes no sense to me.

Of course the Warlock can experiment and figure out different ways to use their abilities.

As for in world explanations of this game element, there are plenty. Literally just, you sacrifice an animal (as part of your rest) while channeling energy to prepare your spell, and that allows you to use the animal's life force, instead of your limited supply of magical energy, to fuel the spell. Some spells work that way, while others don't.

Seems pretty straitforward.

The character might examine what is different, in character, about those spells, or might just accept that their magic won't always make sense to them, because they gain if from their patron, depending on how the player views their character's relationship with their magic.

Either way, your weird attempt to "guilt trip" people who play differently than you is wildly inappropriate.

Taking your comment at face value, I think this is where the whole debate hinges; is it intended that warlocks with hex (and rangers with hunter's mark) should be able to short rest while maintaining concentration on the spell AND that this leads to having the spell still running while having rested to regain slots?
...
I find it inconceivable that they want you to lose this 24 hour spell every time you have a short rest, without bothering to tell us that the rules are different for this combo.

Right. Why wouldn't it be intentional? Why wouldn't it make sense inside the game world?

I mean, that spell last as long as it does, regardless of resting...so, I assume that any Warlock spell that last multiple hours is intended to last beyond resting and getting your spells back, and that is why Warlocks don't have a ton of long concentration spells. Mearls has even said on twitter that it was intentional to not give warlocks a lot of concentration spells, as part of a discussion of swapping spell lists, and how it's usually fine, but you need to be careful with the warlock.

 

[zaratan]

You tend to have more fun if you are looking at the process than the result. Otherwise, you just end up arguing about arguing.

I think is more constructive when we discuss why the yes or no (and if need to be so manichean).
How I see there is two options for that:

1- What I do and why (house rules).
2- "officially" how it is and why.

In that case I was just focusing on the second part. RAW is really openned for one more interpretation, with little low chance to be true (since this is the type of thing that would be written if was true, because affect many game mechanics, the game developers had the chance to do, but didn't). RAI, to me, it's preatty clear that bag of rats work, I don't like, I don't use, but work.
I would just like to see if I missed some important part to not consider this possible by RAI. In 13 pages I didn't see any real evidence to say that RAI bags of rats shouldn't work.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[doctorbadwolf]

If a player tried to do this in my game, myself and all the other players would look at them strangely. They probably have a mindset that wasn't conducive to playing with us and so wouldn't likely be invited back.

Even if the player was compatible with your group in every other way, or are you just assuming that they wouldn't fit in other ways, if they thought to do this?

What if they expressed that they assumed it was as intended, because it makes sense to them in game, and in terms of how the warlock is built? Ie, what if I was that player, and made the argument that I've made in this thread?

Actually it does worl with any spell. Provided you're using Pact Magic and it has a long enough duration.

Hell, other spellcasters can do it with the longer duration spells and a long rest.

There's no rub, some spells are simply long enough you've time to recharge your magic before they expire. Warlock magic just regains quicker.

Yep. And that is entirely as intended, and is not a purely gamist thing. It is part of the game world. Some spells last a long time, and maintaining them for days or whatever doesn't stop you regaining your magical energy when you rest.

I genuinely don't understand this thread, at all. Why is this a problem, in any way?

How on earth does this not fit the in world narrative?​

Also, just want to point out that one could use rabbits, instead, or whatever. and you don't need to keep one around, just...ya know, go hunting. Only need to keep them is if you go into a place where you expect to not be able to find an animal to kill. And you don't even have to be the one to kill it. It just has to die.

But seriously, it's hard to imagine a warlock or his pals trapping a rabbit, putting it in a cage, and letting the warlock sacrifice it in the morning, and then cook the thing? Seems pretty simple and reasonable to me. Or the ranger setting traps at night, bringing the warlock along to check them, and since the ranger is super good at the whole foraging thing, it mostly likely works, and so the warlock Hexes the animal, ranger puts it out of it's misery, bingo bango, breakfast.

If your DM isn't nice about the chances of trapping animals, you capture some rabbits, keep them in cages. Or, most areas have birds.

Or you train your warlock to hunt.

Depending on what counts as a sacrifice, sometimes you can do this, sometimes you can't. No big deal. Even if you can't, you hex the first thing you fight that day, hope you can take a short rest after, and go on your way.

ANd yes, in my homebrew setting that began as a setting for novels, before I ever played an RPG*, Warlocks sacrifice animals to regain magic, and to make their magic more powerful or last longer without burning through their own energy as quickly.

And yes, maintained magic can last through long period, even through sleeping, if the caster prepares for it. Some can keep a spell going for days or weeks, but doing so without sacrificing something, or burning through some kind of magically brewed resource, etc, is exhausting. Most Warlocks, and really most magic users, keep animals for this purpose, and eat their sacrifices, setting aside the best parts of the animal, and some part of it's bones, blood, and brain, for the being(s) to whom the animal is being sacrificed.

The ethical vegans hate it, and argue that it's unacceptable because magical reagents can be used instead, but casters argue that reagents are expensive, and come with side effects (mostly a hrder crash later, and excessive hunger and thirst, and in extreme cases, susceptibility to illness), and they would have eaten a meal with meat anyway.

Many vegan casters preserve the meat and feed it to their pet animals or offer the whole animal to the spirits. No additional benefit comes with doing so, but the spirits like it.



*((when I was a kid. just found a story I wrote and illustrated set in this world from 3rd grade, when everyone in the school had to write a story and draw pictures for it and put it in a spiral book thing)

 

[zaratan]

Interpretation is the key. Let me posit the following-

The school, or mode, of interpretation will likely impact, if not dictate, the results that you receive.

Let us say that you prefer a "optimizing," or "any thing not expressly prohibited, is allowed, and can be used," method of play. In such a case, you would likely place great weight on MM's tweets (for example) for the RAI. You would state that since nothing prohibits the Bag of Rats, and the limited information you have (although not authoritative) appears to allow it through a combination of rules, you can therefore do it.

OTOH, let us say that you prefer an approach to interpretation that views the rules as imperfect guidelines to playing a social game. In that case, you would likely place great emphasis on the dicta in the Sage Advice regarding the "intent" of the hex spell. You would note that, given the uncertainty in the rules, the dicta in the official guidance (sage advice) regarding the intent of hex would preclude its use on random rats; a sacrificial rat is not the target of a curse.

There isn't a right answer here- just extrapolating based on known information without a clear answer. In both cases, however, it is reasoning toward an answer which the person has likely decided upon already based upon (1) - what they want to do.

what I get is 3 tweets from the one game designer with almost 3 years and another one from the "official ruller" Jeremy Crawford with 1,5 year that say it work. Some old tweets was incorrect, but NONE from 2014 wasn't corrected later (I got some proves, the onus of counter prove isn't with me). Those 4 tweets stay, until now, how the "true".

By the other hand I saw:
- "I don't like it"
- "I don't think your argument is enought, but I can't give one single solid reason why it's the exact opposite"
- "if concentration is more stressful than tending wouds?", but this statament is going against that the game designers said.

yeah, based on that scenario, I would say that until Jeremy Crawford don't correct the old posts (how he did with others), I know how works by RAI.