I've recently started a campaign, and while I am new to DMing, it is still frustrating to have a player try to reach outside the descriptions of things to get his way continuously, and the biggest contender of this is "mage hand legerdemain"
So far he has asked if he can: 1. Cover someones mouth 2. Stuff the mage hand in someones mouth 3. Pants someone 4. Hold something in front of an enemies eyes so they can't see him and he can hide 5. Leave mage hand near an enemy so he can get sneak attack.
Most of these I've told him no as they would requite a form of attack, which the hand cannot do. I've also mentioned that the hand is "non-threatening" so it cannot be used to trigger sneak attack.
Now the thing with holding paper in front of something, I don't see it being effective.
What are some thoughts on this spell, and how to deal with players like this?
Regarding mage hand, it can’t attack, so the hostile uses are right out. I can see a use where he might be using it to distract an enemy to temporarily gain some sort of advantage to stealth, though. I’d let that one through. As long as the action is reasonably plausible, it’s ok. E.g. the hand grabs a colourful silky handkerchief and waves it about a metre in front of the enemy’s face as a distraction. The effectiveness of the chosen plausible action should be judged not on whether you like the idea or not. Ideally, it’s either prima facie effective or you roll for it. Maybe, it turns out that colourful silky clothes are like a red rag to this enemy? Or maybe the enemy doesn’t want to be reminded about the dozen twenty page forms he has to fill out to get reimbursed for the damage these adventurers are causing? You won’t know until you roll abysmally on the perception check.
Regarding the play style, it depends on the attitude. Are they trying to apply things creatively? That’s ok, it’s a roleplaying game. Apply the rule of cool. I actually want that to happen. If it’s a matter of “power gaming” and rules lawyering, however, i’d discourage that. The question is, which is it? You make it sound like the latter. I’ve not had to deal with either such player type for some time, so perhaps other posters can chime in on how they dealt effectively with thus.
The player himself knows that he is being a very large pain, as when I finally state my point as DM such as, "The mage hand cannot threaten, so it cannot be used to give sneak attack" or even when talking about how it can't cover someone's mouth, it's continuous arguing. I very much want to reward creativity, but I am also trying to balance creativity vs it's strength. He is essentially wanting to make an enemy blind for his turn so he can stealth, which sounds like a slippery slope before he starts arguing that it is "blinding" the enemy.
This is my first time really DM'ing, it's a new system to me (5e) when I played 3.5 for 7 years. The player in this case, I'm worried that if I give an inch, he will try to take everything he can get.
Regardless of the answers to my following questions, arguing is a thing which needs to be stopped during the session time. It's one thing to spend some time hashing out the details between sessions, but interrupting everyone's chance to be playing the game is unacceptable behavior.
What tone do the arguments your player makes take on? Are they wounded, as if you are being unfair to them, or perhaps just competitive and trying to win the argument even though they don't actually feel like they are right? Or is there no real emotional investment to the arguing, they just keep at it? The solution for each differs slightly in the fine details.
As for the particulars of what they are trying to do with mage hand, stand your ground - the feature that lets them have mage hand is not intended to make them able to do things like get sneak attack without being unseen or aided by another character, or to effectively apply conditions (especially not ones like blinded which normally require a more potent spell to achieve. Though really, getting to make a stealth check because your mage hand is holding a bit of paper in front of someone's face isn't even going to be helpful in the first place - you'd either be seen regardless of your result as soon as they move their head to look around the paper or pull it out of their face because the hand isn't even kind of capable of stopping anyone from doing that, or you'd be sneaking off to get behind something that blocks line of sight well enough you could have rolled stealth anyways.
Though really, getting to make a stealth check because your mage hand is holding a bit of paper in front of someone's face isn't even going to be helpful in the first place - you'd either be seen regardless of your result as soon as they move their head to look around the paper or pull it out of their face because the hand isn't even kind of capable of stopping anyone from doing that, or you'd be sneaking off to get behind something that blocks line of sight well enough you could have rolled stealth anyways.
This. So yeah, he can cast mage hand and hold something like a paper or handkerchief or whatever in front of his targets eyes, but the target can easily (a) move their head (remember medium creatures occupy a 5'x5' space, your paper/handkerchief isn't that big and thus the target can "move" around it without actually moving); (b) swipe it away. If a piece of paper floats into my face, first thing I'm doing is swatting it. Since mage hand can't be used to attack, and you're using something that has to be less than 10 lbs, it can be easily moved out of the way.
It can be a distraction for sure, maybe he does it on the side opposite of where he is, so the target is distracted and facing away, but it can't effectively blind someone (this isn't a video game where you can glitch out an NPC). It's up to you if the distraction does anything, perhaps gives the target a disadvantage to passive perception/perception for a moment, maybe it gives advantage to the tricksy PC sneaking about, maybe it poses a disadvantage to the PC because now the target is more alert.
If it weren't for the arguements, this situation would be far less stressful. The ideas he has are fun and inventive, but that doesn't make them effective. Instead of telling him so, let him try and fail. Maybe having the game be the one to tell him dangling a hanky in someone's face won't blind them rather than you telling him the same would help. If he's asking if it would work or if it's possible, just leave it as, "your character doesn't know, but he can try if he likes."
If it weren't for the arguements, this situation would be far less stressful. The ideas he has are fun and inventive, but that doesn't make them effective. Instead of telling him so, let him try and fail. Maybe having the game be the one to tell him dangling a hanky in someone's face won't blind them rather than you telling him the same would help. If he's asking if it would work or if it's possible, just leave it as, "your character doesn't know, but he can try if he likes."
It's worth mentioning that for some people this will work, as their perspective will separate being told "no" from "I tried, but it didn't work". But other people will be even more upset by this practice, as their perspective will be "You could have just said no, instead of making me waste my character's action."
Now the thing with holding paper in front of something, I don't see it being effective.
What are some thoughts on this spell, and how to deal with players like this?
The mage hand doesn't instantly appear next to the foe with a piece of paper. It has to pick it up (from the caster's hand, maybe) and then carry it through the air to the foe. Any aware foe is going to see this (the hand is visible) and take steps to avoid it, just as they would if the mage themself walked up to them with a piece of paper in hand and tried to cover their eyes.
As to the pantsing, I'd allow that for arcane trickster rogues, as part of their special abilities with mage hand.
As to the arguing, well, you have to put your foot down. As a GM you have to worry about the fun of all the people at the table. Arguing with player A means players B, C and D are not having fun.
The way I play it: If a player thinks I've made a bad ruling then they have 60 seconds to make their case. At the end, I rule, and we use that ruling for the rest of the evening. We revisit it after the session (in my case, via Facebook) to see if the call was good or not. If the call was bad then I make a note to do it differently, but the night's play still stands. No retconning bad calls unless the call was really, horribly, awfully, catastrophically bad.
Make the call quickly, spend the time at the table doing fun stuff.
Thank you all for the feedback! Honestly, it's also just very nice to not feel like I am going insane here. I want to allow people to try things, have fun, but I also don't want to get burned later on with a, "You let me do 'blah' before".
I spoke to him and mentioned that he needs to respect when I say no as well, as I have put thought into whether or not it truly makes sense, or if it might be too strong.
I am definitely going to think on a lot of what you guys have said, thank you all again!
I know this is rather late to the topic, but I did want to state my positive experience with a compromise and rule bending. In a one-shot my DM ran recently, I asked if I could use my mage hand to essentially open hand slap a talking cat who insulted my group. It was a flavor thing, as I did state that I realised I couldn't use it to attack for damage, but my character is a very temperamental little lady and didn't take kindly to being insulted. He graciously allowed it, and it was hilarious because what my character wasn't paying attention to at the time was that the cat was double crossing us, and as it tried to escape through an open window, my character ended up using mage hand to pour the contents of an unknown bottle of potion over him, turning him into a huge monster. We laughed so hard as we struggled through the fight with this thing and my character maintained she was doing everyone a favor!
My point being here, if you feel like the player is asking in a respectful way, and being creative and trying to aid the story rather than themselves, it can be beneficial to have those kinds of rule bending. You can give a flavor effect that makes the story better as a compromise, and if they try to eek out damage , just say that you are allowing what you are as a flavor thing, not for actual advantage. It is important to set an expectation of respect for the DM, and I am so lucky to have a group as a whole who seems to be very good with that, but sometimes you can do small compromises to help foster the overall feeling of a mutual respect relationship in the players so they don't feel like they are always hearing "no".
Another suggestion would be to have this player develop homebrew rules for casting it as a spell at higher levels and work with them to make it solid. You'll still be in charge of the rules and can enact a cost effect, but working together can foster a good relationship with the player and you guys would both have the satisfaction of surprising the other players with this new development. Hope this gives you hope about the positives of player creativity and gives you some ideas in the current dealing with the negatives of it. As an excessively creative player myself, and now a DM, I know how difficult the bad side can be.
Well, I have a few more things to bring into this. I am trying my best to be fair here. Recently, the same player has been asking constant questions about Pick pocketing in combat, or using the mage hand to pickpocket during combat.
I really do want to give players the opportunity to try things, but I feel like with combat having people moving, dodging, fighting, that a pickpocket attempt from him wouldn't work. he is looking to in the middle of a fight to stand upon one side, and have his mage hand on the other, use his action to pickpocket, and his bonus action to pickpocket.
This player has been getting very frustrating as I have spent so much time having to worry about his one ability then even dealing with coming up with more for the campaign sometimes. As such, I want to make sure my frustration is not clouding my judgement.
Part of me want to just look at him and go, "Seriously? Your friends are dying in combat and you care more about wasting your turn trying to get a gold" and just let the party get pissed at him for wasting their time.
Oh man, I'm so sorry. It seems like you really need to have a dtr (define the relationship) talk with him. Maybe try sitting the group down as a whole and have each person say what they want from the campaign personally, as well as in character? Another idea may be to add a strong consequence to failures when he tries this stuff. That way he might think more about what he's doing Like if he tries to pickpocket someone in combat, have the DC rediculous high, and if he somehow makes it, try to tie it in to the story, but if he doesn't you could try giving him some sort of penalty like... hmmm. The person he's trying to pickpocket has a magical item and when he sees the mage hand trying to steal stuff, he uses that item to curse the player casting mage hand. It could be a sort of curse that could stop him from using the mage hand at all till he breaks the curse. Or maybe a curse that every time he tries to talk to a girl, he quacks like a duck. It could be a side-quest option to remove the curse and if you can be crafty enough, you can tie that into the campaign. Or even a picture of the guy and his little daughter and a letter threatening her harm if the dad doesn't pay his debts(guilt trip type thing). Again though, that situation sounds rough, and it sounds like he isn't taking the game seriously, which is frustrating for everyone else involved. I applaud your calm reasoning and desire to deal with things appropriately. I hope maybe a few of these ideas can help!
I feel like I am getting a better idea of how I can handle things like this. You have all been a great help. Honestly, it never occurred to me that things may have more of a difficulty to them beside the simple roll, and really I never thought of showing him that actions have consequences. Really, some of my concern is, a rogue at level 5 with expertise in Sleight of hand is really hard to notice.
I think some of it is also myself getting a bit overwhelmed as I am just learning to DM, trying to deal with NPC's, needing stats, learning what to give for loot. It may sound silly but there really is a lot more then I ever realised when I was being the player and not the DM.
NPCs are your friends here. That angry barbarian that is aiding in this quest notices that while he is being pounded on, his supposed ally is twiddling his thumbs. Now wizards and such are just about acceptable when throwing lightning bolts and turning people to frogs, but this guy brings nothing to the fight, then demands an equal share! Look at his clothes - no blood or rips. "But I was distracting them..." Geeky Boy argues. Well, even a barbarian can think of a better distraction - throw the geek into the melee at the start and see what happens.
Maybe throw the guy a bone and give him opportunities to use the mage hand in creative/useful ways - the DM should try to say "Yes" as often as possible. Closely followed by the dreaded "however....." ;)
Trick the players into having fun and they will cause less headaches.
As a last resort - This character has relied upon his mage hand so much that he now requires it for any spells with a somatic component. Maybe it even has to hold material components. Soon he's going to name his hand, and start talking to it, possibly in the middle of tense negotiations.... Perhaps his ability to pick locks will be disadvantaged unless the hand is holding the spare picks. Can't sneak attack without the hand being present to point out the exact spot to strike...
Giving a +2 bonus for hiding/sneaking attempts when using the hand doesn't seem that OTT to me.
Whenever my players try to do ridiculous things I always say "Are you sure?" and when they say yes, let them do it. Of course, I also set the DC accordingly, so if it is something that they shouldn't be able to do, the DC is usually higher than they can roll. If they get a Crit I let it happen, but always with the correct amount of amazement that it actually worked.
It has been awhile and I very much appreciate the help that everyone here has given. This unfortunately has all ended with me having to ask this player to step out of the game. He unfortunately on multiple occasions was arguing with me about abilities and trying to tell me the definition of words in it to sway either RAW or RAI in his direction. I had spoken to him previously about if I make a call about something, we will use what I say and I will look into it later...and he yet continued.
All the help you all gave me in this set of posts was awesome and very insightful into helping me DM better in general, not just with this specific player.
That was a very detailed description and I feel like it is 100% correct in this situation. Thank you very much, it doesn't help me feel better about the decision that had to be made.
I've recently started a campaign, and while I am new to DMing, it is still frustrating to have a player try to reach outside the descriptions of things to get his way continuously, and the biggest contender of this is "mage hand legerdemain"
So far he has asked if he can:
1. Cover someones mouth
2. Stuff the mage hand in someones mouth
3. Pants someone
4. Hold something in front of an enemies eyes so they can't see him and he can hide
5. Leave mage hand near an enemy so he can get sneak attack.
Most of these I've told him no as they would requite a form of attack, which the hand cannot do. I've also mentioned that the hand is "non-threatening" so it cannot be used to trigger sneak attack.
Now the thing with holding paper in front of something, I don't see it being effective.
What are some thoughts on this spell, and how to deal with players like this?
Regarding mage hand, it can’t attack, so the hostile uses are right out. I can see a use where he might be using it to distract an enemy to temporarily gain some sort of advantage to stealth, though. I’d let that one through. As long as the action is reasonably plausible, it’s ok. E.g. the hand grabs a colourful silky handkerchief and waves it about a metre in front of the enemy’s face as a distraction. The effectiveness of the chosen plausible action should be judged not on whether you like the idea or not. Ideally, it’s either prima facie effective or you roll for it. Maybe, it turns out that colourful silky clothes are like a red rag to this enemy? Or maybe the enemy doesn’t want to be reminded about the dozen twenty page forms he has to fill out to get reimbursed for the damage these adventurers are causing? You won’t know until you roll abysmally on the perception check.
Regarding the play style, it depends on the attitude. Are they trying to apply things creatively? That’s ok, it’s a roleplaying game. Apply the rule of cool. I actually want that to happen. If it’s a matter of “power gaming” and rules lawyering, however, i’d discourage that. The question is, which is it? You make it sound like the latter. I’ve not had to deal with either such player type for some time, so perhaps other posters can chime in on how they dealt effectively with thus.
The player himself knows that he is being a very large pain, as when I finally state my point as DM such as, "The mage hand cannot threaten, so it cannot be used to give sneak attack" or even when talking about how it can't cover someone's mouth, it's continuous arguing. I very much want to reward creativity, but I am also trying to balance creativity vs it's strength. He is essentially wanting to make an enemy blind for his turn so he can stealth, which sounds like a slippery slope before he starts arguing that it is "blinding" the enemy.
This is my first time really DM'ing, it's a new system to me (5e) when I played 3.5 for 7 years. The player in this case, I'm worried that if I give an inch, he will try to take everything he can get.
watch this video
https://youtu.be/wnj0CDX096A
This. So yeah, he can cast mage hand and hold something like a paper or handkerchief or whatever in front of his targets eyes, but the target can easily (a) move their head (remember medium creatures occupy a 5'x5' space, your paper/handkerchief isn't that big and thus the target can "move" around it without actually moving); (b) swipe it away. If a piece of paper floats into my face, first thing I'm doing is swatting it. Since mage hand can't be used to attack, and you're using something that has to be less than 10 lbs, it can be easily moved out of the way.
It can be a distraction for sure, maybe he does it on the side opposite of where he is, so the target is distracted and facing away, but it can't effectively blind someone (this isn't a video game where you can glitch out an NPC). It's up to you if the distraction does anything, perhaps gives the target a disadvantage to passive perception/perception for a moment, maybe it gives advantage to the tricksy PC sneaking about, maybe it poses a disadvantage to the PC because now the target is more alert.
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
If it weren't for the arguements, this situation would be far less stressful. The ideas he has are fun and inventive, but that doesn't make them effective. Instead of telling him so, let him try and fail. Maybe having the game be the one to tell him dangling a hanky in someone's face won't blind them rather than you telling him the same would help. If he's asking if it would work or if it's possible, just leave it as, "your character doesn't know, but he can try if he likes."
#OpenDnD. #DnDBegone
Thank you all for the feedback! Honestly, it's also just very nice to not feel like I am going insane here. I want to allow people to try things, have fun, but I also don't want to get burned later on with a, "You let me do 'blah' before".
I spoke to him and mentioned that he needs to respect when I say no as well, as I have put thought into whether or not it truly makes sense, or if it might be too strong.
I am definitely going to think on a lot of what you guys have said, thank you all again!
I know this is rather late to the topic, but I did want to state my positive experience with a compromise and rule bending. In a one-shot my DM ran recently, I asked if I could use my mage hand to essentially open hand slap a talking cat who insulted my group. It was a flavor thing, as I did state that I realised I couldn't use it to attack for damage, but my character is a very temperamental little lady and didn't take kindly to being insulted. He graciously allowed it, and it was hilarious because what my character wasn't paying attention to at the time was that the cat was double crossing us, and as it tried to escape through an open window, my character ended up using mage hand to pour the contents of an unknown bottle of potion over him, turning him into a huge monster. We laughed so hard as we struggled through the fight with this thing and my character maintained she was doing everyone a favor!
My point being here, if you feel like the player is asking in a respectful way, and being creative and trying to aid the story rather than themselves, it can be beneficial to have those kinds of rule bending. You can give a flavor effect that makes the story better as a compromise, and if they try to eek out damage , just say that you are allowing what you are as a flavor thing, not for actual advantage. It is important to set an expectation of respect for the DM, and I am so lucky to have a group as a whole who seems to be very good with that, but sometimes you can do small compromises to help foster the overall feeling of a mutual respect relationship in the players so they don't feel like they are always hearing "no".
Another suggestion would be to have this player develop homebrew rules for casting it as a spell at higher levels and work with them to make it solid. You'll still be in charge of the rules and can enact a cost effect, but working together can foster a good relationship with the player and you guys would both have the satisfaction of surprising the other players with this new development. Hope this gives you hope about the positives of player creativity and gives you some ideas in the current dealing with the negatives of it. As an excessively creative player myself, and now a DM, I know how difficult the bad side can be.
Well, I have a few more things to bring into this. I am trying my best to be fair here. Recently, the same player has been asking constant questions about Pick pocketing in combat, or using the mage hand to pickpocket during combat.
I really do want to give players the opportunity to try things, but I feel like with combat having people moving, dodging, fighting, that a pickpocket attempt from him wouldn't work. he is looking to in the middle of a fight to stand upon one side, and have his mage hand on the other, use his action to pickpocket, and his bonus action to pickpocket.
This player has been getting very frustrating as I have spent so much time having to worry about his one ability then even dealing with coming up with more for the campaign sometimes. As such, I want to make sure my frustration is not clouding my judgement.
Part of me want to just look at him and go, "Seriously? Your friends are dying in combat and you care more about wasting your turn trying to get a gold" and just let the party get pissed at him for wasting their time.
Oh man, I'm so sorry. It seems like you really need to have a dtr (define the relationship) talk with him. Maybe try sitting the group down as a whole and have each person say what they want from the campaign personally, as well as in character? Another idea may be to add a strong consequence to failures when he tries this stuff. That way he might think more about what he's doing Like if he tries to pickpocket someone in combat, have the DC rediculous high, and if he somehow makes it, try to tie it in to the story, but if he doesn't you could try giving him some sort of penalty like... hmmm. The person he's trying to pickpocket has a magical item and when he sees the mage hand trying to steal stuff, he uses that item to curse the player casting mage hand. It could be a sort of curse that could stop him from using the mage hand at all till he breaks the curse. Or maybe a curse that every time he tries to talk to a girl, he quacks like a duck. It could be a side-quest option to remove the curse and if you can be crafty enough, you can tie that into the campaign. Or even a picture of the guy and his little daughter and a letter threatening her harm if the dad doesn't pay his debts(guilt trip type thing). Again though, that situation sounds rough, and it sounds like he isn't taking the game seriously, which is frustrating for everyone else involved. I applaud your calm reasoning and desire to deal with things appropriately. I hope maybe a few of these ideas can help!
I feel like I am getting a better idea of how I can handle things like this. You have all been a great help. Honestly, it never occurred to me that things may have more of a difficulty to them beside the simple roll, and really I never thought of showing him that actions have consequences. Really, some of my concern is, a rogue at level 5 with expertise in Sleight of hand is really hard to notice.
I think some of it is also myself getting a bit overwhelmed as I am just learning to DM, trying to deal with NPC's, needing stats, learning what to give for loot. It may sound silly but there really is a lot more then I ever realised when I was being the player and not the DM.
NPCs are your friends here.
That angry barbarian that is aiding in this quest notices that while he is being pounded on, his supposed ally is twiddling his thumbs. Now wizards and such are just about acceptable when throwing lightning bolts and turning people to frogs, but this guy brings nothing to the fight, then demands an equal share! Look at his clothes - no blood or rips. "But I was distracting them..." Geeky Boy argues. Well, even a barbarian can think of a better distraction - throw the geek into the melee at the start and see what happens.
Maybe throw the guy a bone and give him opportunities to use the mage hand in creative/useful ways - the DM should try to say "Yes" as often as possible. Closely followed by the dreaded "however....." ;)
Trick the players into having fun and they will cause less headaches.
As a last resort - This character has relied upon his mage hand so much that he now requires it for any spells with a somatic component. Maybe it even has to hold material components. Soon he's going to name his hand, and start talking to it, possibly in the middle of tense negotiations.... Perhaps his ability to pick locks will be disadvantaged unless the hand is holding the spare picks. Can't sneak attack without the hand being present to point out the exact spot to strike...
Giving a +2 bonus for hiding/sneaking attempts when using the hand doesn't seem that OTT to me.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
Whenever my players try to do ridiculous things I always say "Are you sure?" and when they say yes, let them do it. Of course, I also set the DC accordingly, so if it is something that they shouldn't be able to do, the DC is usually higher than they can roll. If they get a Crit I let it happen, but always with the correct amount of amazement that it actually worked.
It has been awhile and I very much appreciate the help that everyone here has given. This unfortunately has all ended with me having to ask this player to step out of the game. He unfortunately on multiple occasions was arguing with me about abilities and trying to tell me the definition of words in it to sway either RAW or RAI in his direction. I had spoken to him previously about if I make a call about something, we will use what I say and I will look into it later...and he yet continued.
All the help you all gave me in this set of posts was awesome and very insightful into helping me DM better in general, not just with this specific player.
Thank you!
That was a very detailed description and I feel like it is 100% correct in this situation. Thank you very much, it doesn't help me feel better about the decision that had to be made.