A creative player can get a lot done with the Catapult spell. I have a tendency of being too generous, what are some times you've drawn the line with maybe a little too creative use of this spell? Or what are some hypothetical situations that occur to you when this spell pulls far too much weight for it's slot.
Example: Catapult a glass jar full of caltrops at a target 90ft away. Target could take 3d8 damage and have their space full of broken glass and caltrops in a single action.
There was another thread on this the other week. Catapult is a good spell, and letting it throw consumable items is fun, and I don't think it is broken to let a character who both consumes a spell slot to cast the spell and expends a consumable item like caltrops, poison, alchemist's fire, etc to apply both effects. But I would avoid freestyling other ammunition enhancements (like, throwing a sword at a target with the spell is no more deadly than throwing a rock, don't stray into having thrown objects do weapon damage in addition to the spell damage).
Personally, I love when my players are creative and will gladly allow them a lot of sway in what they do - especially if it makes me laugh or I think it's really neat.
For the situation you mentioned though, RAW - they can not just pull out a jar of caltrops and catapult it. Catapult has to be used on an item not being worn or carried. "Drawing an item from a bag" is listed as a free action, however "placing it on the ground" is not - so that's a full action there. If they drop it... then they risk the jar breaking and covering their space in caltrops.
But really... I'd even give them a chance of doing 1d4 damage more with caltrops/catapult just because I'd love to narrate the enemy looking like rabid hedgehog afterwards. This will only happen a few times, not game breaking, but sure does setup some fun moments.
There was another thread on this the other week. Catapult is a good spell, and letting it throw consumable items is fun, and I don't think it is broken to let a character who both consumes a spell slot to cast the spell and expends a consumable item like caltrops, poison, alchemist's fire, etc to apply both effects. But I would avoid freestyling other ammunition enhancements (like, throwing a sword at a target with the spell is no more deadly than throwing a rock, don't stray into having thrown objects do weapon damage in addition to the spell damage).
Doesn’t Catapult also damage the object thrown? So if they were to throw a sword, it takes 3d8 damage too, and most objects don’t get that much HP per The guidelines in the rules (2d4 for tiny, 3d6 for small, and that’s for resilient objects ).
Whilst trying to avoid a more in depth rules discussion. Would it be possible to draw the item and drop it then catapult it before it hit the ground?
What about item combinations, like the alchemist's jar full of fire, acid, ball bearings, caltrops, and poison.
Personally I really like the first one and might allow it. But the second is definitely too far for me. What do you all think about these scenarios? Any others come to mind that might push the boundaries a bit.
I've used it to launch an iron defender into the middle of a group of enemies too far away to see us and it acted as a distraction while our rogue and druid got the drop on them. It took no damage since I was just aiming to put it somewhere. Though when I catapulted it into a flying enemy, both it and the enemy took damage. At the end of the day, I think it's up to the DM and situation on how they interpret it.
No, it was catapult. But in the session we were playing, the iron defender was a small dog and the DM allowed it. Unfortunately it failed its athletics save and couldn't grapple the thing I threw it at and ended up falling into the water below. I know it might not be 100% true to the rules, but sometimes fun unique ideas takes priority to rules if the DM allows it.
I agree that DM's need to take creative license over their games and not be afraid of bending the rules or making new ones if it serves their game and their table better.
Here's a thought a vampire hunter who catapults wooden stakes and vials of holy water.
Thanks to all who posted, if anyone has any great catapult related stories I'd like to hear them, even if they end with "Then the DM said no." Also definitely checking out that other thread that chicken brought up, at a glance seems to have some interesting info.
For the situation you mentioned though, RAW - they can not just pull out a jar of caltrops and catapult it. Catapult has to be used on an item not being worn or carried. "Drawing an item from a bag" is listed as a free action, however "placing it on the ground" is not - so that's a full action there.
The core rule books are very specific that the rules are not meant to be applied this way. They are guidelines only. Remember that this is literally a game where the DM can say "Rocks fall on you. You die" without any recourse to a rulebook. The rules that do exist are simply not this specific.
There is no way to apply RaW when it comes to free actions. The PHB contains a list of suggestions of the type of things that would count as free actions. By definition you can use a free action to attempt to do anything and it's simply down to the DM whether it constitutes a full action, a bonus action, or a free action. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, and nor could it ever be. By this thinking, "I scratch my head" constitutes an action, as does "I think about a tree."
Catapult has a listed damage. I think it was really only intended to let people throw non-magical items that would overcome damage resistances, or throw items with side effects at greater range. I think it should be one or the other, not both. Items with a special effect like caltrops ought to do less damage to compensate for the extra damage they do to people stepping on them, and they shouldn't do damage themselves to things hit directly. Creative use of the thing is all right, but there are clearly balance issues with that, or there wouldn't be threads about it. The example with the Wererats is a nice example. It turned a bunch of non-magical items that wouldn't do any damage at all into a Shrapnel Grenade. I'd suggest that it can only throw one item at a time, and an extra large container shouldn't do any more damage than a normal size one. That's not really logical, but we are dealing with magic, and that doesn't have to be logical.
I'm a DM and a player at the current time. As a player i want a staff or Adornment to have 3 potential catapult "ammunitions" on my staff. Jar of oil, Alchimst's fire and Caltrops.
The rules are not 100 % clear, since worn or carried is a loose condition, and sometimes these rules come in conflict with immersion. As a player and dm i don't see why a character shouldn't be able to pull out a flask, hanging on it's belt and fling it with a catapult spell. Imagine that you have the item lying on the palm of your hand. This isn't even a problem with balancing, if the items you throw have an additional effect on the targe like an alchimist's fire. The ammunition, that you throw is a consummable and therefor will cost a lot if you use it very often (50 GP per shot is nothing to scoff at). And the little bonus will reward your players without breaking the game.
I wouldn't allow a bag of Caltrops to bey used to increase the damage. If used against a dragon ab Bag of caltrops would be a oneshot vor every dragon and alot of other foes in the game. And that would definitly break the balance of the game.
So don't let player's increase the damage of the Spell (except by using higher spellslots), but little extras (catapulted daggers could deal 3d8 piercing damage i.E.) could reward players for creativity.
This could become relevant to me soon as I have a wizard in my game which has catapult!
I would rule that the total damage for whatever is thrown is as per the spell - you throw a bag of balls, then the total damage is 3d8. If those balls hit 5 enemies, they each get 1/5 of the damage, rounding down.
As for the caltrops being around them afterwards, or throwing vials of acid, that's player ingenuity and it deserves to work. I would never say "the spell doesn't work for that because it would be more effective than the spell alone", or nerf the spell because of other factors like what the caltrops could do later. If I were foolish enough as a DM to put a vial of alchemical fire or virulent acid which weighed less than 5lb in the vicinity, then it should be a forgone conclusion that it's getting catapulted!
The spell works just like it says it does. I'm not seeing a need to fiddle with the meanings that are already written.
In my game, I'd run it as follows:
An object, within 60ft of the caster, that weighs between 1 & 5 pounds. A single arrow or sling bullet doesn't fit the bill. Small vial of acid, too light. Many potions are listed without a weight, so without a pile of math to determine the volume and SG of a magical liquid - nope. Multiple objects that are launched at the same time without an exterior container, nope. Bag of 1,000 ball bearings with a vial of acid inside it, you bet! One bag is an object.
Not worn or carried. You can't grab the enemies sword and fling it at baddie #4. Cool concept, but no. Way too much. You can use whatever you have in your hand, sure. Willing party member tosses an object in the air that fits the bill, sure thing.
Anything (object or creature) between starting point and end point makes a DEX save. First to fail takes all of the consequence, object stops moving.
If object makes it the full 90ft without striking a solid object or a creature, no damage is applied to anything.
Damage is as listed in spell and is applied to object/creature impacted and the item used in the spell. Not weapon damage also, not 3d8 per item in the container. I mean if this were the case, why wouldn't every caster in the land cart around a wheelbarrow full of 4lb sandbags with Alchemists Fire vials inside and dominate. 3d8 damage per grain of sand plus fire damage! Wait until the monsters learn how to do this! This is a better use for daggers though....just sayin'.
If you use a consumable item and the container takes damage to rupture or break the container, the condition that the item grant/imposes should stand as if it were applied by the PC directly. Be that holy water, poison, caltrops, grease, whatever. This one just makes sense. After all, the target already failed a DEX save at this point, no need for further clickity-clack-rocks.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
Catapult has a listed damage. I think it was really only intended to let people throw non-magical items that would overcome damage resistances, or throw items with side effects at greater range. I think it should be one or the other, not both. Items with a special effect like caltrops ought to do less damage to compensate for the extra damage they do to people stepping on them, and they shouldn't do damage themselves to things hit directly. Creative use of the thing is all right, but there are clearly balance issues with that, or there wouldn't be threads about it. The example with the Wererats is a nice example. It turned a bunch of non-magical items that wouldn't do any damage at all into a Shrapnel Grenade. I'd suggest that it can only throw one item at a time, and an extra large container shouldn't do any more damage than a normal size one. That's not really logical, but we are dealing with magic, and that doesn't have to be logical.
If it's only meant to do damage, then it's a pointless spell. There are other spells that can do 3d8 or better damage to a single target.
It seems to me the main use of this spell is for creative uses, and doing damage is a secondary backup effect so that you don't have to choose between using one of your prepared spells for effects or damage.
Catapult has a listed damage. I think it was really only intended to let people throw non-magical items that would overcome damage resistances, or throw items with side effects at greater range. I think it should be one or the other, not both. Items with a special effect like caltrops ought to do less damage to compensate for the extra damage they do to people stepping on them, and they shouldn't do damage themselves to things hit directly. Creative use of the thing is all right, but there are clearly balance issues with that, or there wouldn't be threads about it. The example with the Wererats is a nice example. It turned a bunch of non-magical items that wouldn't do any damage at all into a Shrapnel Grenade. I'd suggest that it can only throw one item at a time, and an extra large container shouldn't do any more damage than a normal size one. That's not really logical, but we are dealing with magic, and that doesn't have to be logical.
If it's only meant to do damage, then it's a pointless spell. There are other spells that can do 3d8 or better damage to a single target.
It seems to me the main use of this spell is for creative uses, and doing damage is a secondary backup effect so that you don't have to choose between using one of your prepared spells for effects or damage.
Name them? its a first level spell...I can't think of any ranged spells that do better than 3d8 (avg 13) except guiding bolt (4d6 avg 14) and chaos bolt (and that one only if it arcs) at first level, and even then this does better at higher levels because the greater damage die. It also has multiple chances to hit something if you line it up right, unlike similar spells that might use a ranged attack instead. plus, it potentially has 150 feet of range (60 feet] (i for the object + 90 feet of flight)
I recently had a player catapult an open bag full of ball bearings...
We were running short on time for our session so I let them basically shotgun blast a cave full of wererats by letting each individual ball bearing do the 3d8 damage.
With 1000 ball bearings in a bag....the rats were basically torn to pieces by 1000 tiny steel balls.
I mean, more power to your players, but either the spell should have catapulted the whole bag for one instance, but certainly not all bearings separately for 1000 instances (each bearing is both an individual item and under the weight minimum). Careful that they don't try this against everything they come up against now, 3000d8 shreds even a tarrasque to ribbons (avg 13,500 damage)
The only other comparable spell is chromatic Orb, wich also deals 3d8 damage. it can score critical hits and you can get advantage on the attack rolls. Since you can choose the damagetype you should always be able to deal full damage and have a higher chance of hitting vulnerabilities. it‘s arguably the best 1st Level singel target damage spell for wizards and sorcerers.
Guiding bolt is the best first Level single target damage dealing spell. AND it gives advantage to the next attack roll, no consumable needed.
The advantage of a straight line is not as good as it seems. In oben Cities or taverns the spell must be used carefully or you‘ll end up killing random citizens, and a straight line through multiple Enemies is really hard to draw if you want to throw a specific item, like the flask in your pocket.
In all honesty, the spell is pretty bad, but i like it because it‘s cool. But if i wouldnt play a transmuter, i would always choose chromatic orb or magic missile as my first level damage spell an then cast hideous laughter, shield or sleep all the time anyway.
Catapult has a listed damage. I think it was really only intended to let people throw non-magical items that would overcome damage resistances, or throw items with side effects at greater range. I think it should be one or the other, not both. Items with a special effect like caltrops ought to do less damage to compensate for the extra damage they do to people stepping on them, and they shouldn't do damage themselves to things hit directly. Creative use of the thing is all right, but there are clearly balance issues with that, or there wouldn't be threads about it. The example with the Wererats is a nice example. It turned a bunch of non-magical items that wouldn't do any damage at all into a Shrapnel Grenade. I'd suggest that it can only throw one item at a time, and an extra large container shouldn't do any more damage than a normal size one. That's not really logical, but we are dealing with magic, and that doesn't have to be logical.
If it's only meant to do damage, then it's a pointless spell. There are other spells that can do 3d8 or better damage to a single target.
It seems to me the main use of this spell is for creative uses, and doing damage is a secondary backup effect so that you don't have to choose between using one of your prepared spells for effects or damage.
Name them? its a first level spell...I can't think of any ranged spells that do better than 3d8 (avg 13) except guiding bolt (4d6 avg 14) and chaos bolt (and that one only if it arcs) at first level, and even then this does better at higher levels because the greater damage die. It also has multiple chances to hit something if you line it up right, unlike similar spells that might use a ranged attack instead. plus, it potentially has 150 feet of range (60 feet] (i for the object + 90 feet of flight)
I don't believe it can hit multiple targets.
"On a failed save, the object strikes the target and stops moving."
But it seems you are right. It does the max average damage on a hit against a single target of a l1 spell available to the same classes. Burning hands is not far behind, though, and can hit multiple targets. Magic Missile probably has a higher average damage overall, since it automatically hits.
And Catapult can get you stuck unable to use it if your DM is strict. If there are no appropriate objects in the combat area, how many 1 pound rocks will your DM allow you to carry in your pockets?
I guess I just like creative spells. This one is especially fun because a player taking it is a challenge to the DM to provide dungeon dressing. A DM is nerfing the player if all their combats play out in empty rooms. I played a one-shot with this spell once, and my one use was to lob a burning log at an orc chieftain. This is a good opportunity for the DM to reward creativity with a bonus 1d4 of fire damage.
A creative player can get a lot done with the Catapult spell. I have a tendency of being too generous, what are some times you've drawn the line with maybe a little too creative use of this spell? Or what are some hypothetical situations that occur to you when this spell pulls far too much weight for it's slot.
Example: Catapult a glass jar full of caltrops at a target 90ft away. Target could take 3d8 damage and have their space full of broken glass and caltrops in a single action.
There was another thread on this the other week. Catapult is a good spell, and letting it throw consumable items is fun, and I don't think it is broken to let a character who both consumes a spell slot to cast the spell and expends a consumable item like caltrops, poison, alchemist's fire, etc to apply both effects. But I would avoid freestyling other ammunition enhancements (like, throwing a sword at a target with the spell is no more deadly than throwing a rock, don't stray into having thrown objects do weapon damage in addition to the spell damage).
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Personally, I love when my players are creative and will gladly allow them a lot of sway in what they do - especially if it makes me laugh or I think it's really neat.
For the situation you mentioned though, RAW - they can not just pull out a jar of caltrops and catapult it.
Catapult has to be used on an item not being worn or carried.
"Drawing an item from a bag" is listed as a free action, however "placing it on the ground" is not - so that's a full action there.
If they drop it... then they risk the jar breaking and covering their space in caltrops.
But really... I'd even give them a chance of doing 1d4 damage more with caltrops/catapult just because I'd love to narrate the enemy looking like rabid hedgehog afterwards. This will only happen a few times, not game breaking, but sure does setup some fun moments.
...cryptographic randomness!
Doesn’t Catapult also damage the object thrown? So if they were to throw a sword, it takes 3d8 damage too, and most objects don’t get that much HP per The guidelines in the rules (2d4 for tiny, 3d6 for small, and that’s for resilient objects ).
Whilst trying to avoid a more in depth rules discussion. Would it be possible to draw the item and drop it then catapult it before it hit the ground?
What about item combinations, like the alchemist's jar full of fire, acid, ball bearings, caltrops, and poison.
Personally I really like the first one and might allow it. But the second is definitely too far for me. What do you all think about these scenarios? Any others come to mind that might push the boundaries a bit.
See the other thread, I gave a list. And yeah, just don’t target an object being gripped, so feel free to toss in the air and launch
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I've used it to launch an iron defender into the middle of a group of enemies too far away to see us and it acted as a distraction while our rogue and druid got the drop on them. It took no damage since I was just aiming to put it somewhere. Though when I catapulted it into a flying enemy, both it and the enemy took damage. At the end of the day, I think it's up to the DM and situation on how they interpret it.
An Iron Defender would be way to heavy for Catapult, maybe you’re thinking Telekinesis?
No, it was catapult. But in the session we were playing, the iron defender was a small dog and the DM allowed it. Unfortunately it failed its athletics save and couldn't grapple the thing I threw it at and ended up falling into the water below. I know it might not be 100% true to the rules, but sometimes fun unique ideas takes priority to rules if the DM allows it.
I agree that DM's need to take creative license over their games and not be afraid of bending the rules or making new ones if it serves their game and their table better.
Here's a thought a vampire hunter who catapults wooden stakes and vials of holy water.
Thanks to all who posted, if anyone has any great catapult related stories I'd like to hear them, even if they end with "Then the DM said no." Also definitely checking out that other thread that chicken brought up, at a glance seems to have some interesting info.
The core rule books are very specific that the rules are not meant to be applied this way. They are guidelines only. Remember that this is literally a game where the DM can say "Rocks fall on you. You die" without any recourse to a rulebook. The rules that do exist are simply not this specific.
There is no way to apply RaW when it comes to free actions. The PHB contains a list of suggestions of the type of things that would count as free actions. By definition you can use a free action to attempt to do anything and it's simply down to the DM whether it constitutes a full action, a bonus action, or a free action. The list is not meant to be exhaustive, and nor could it ever be. By this thinking, "I scratch my head" constitutes an action, as does "I think about a tree."
Catapult has a listed damage. I think it was really only intended to let people throw non-magical items that would overcome damage resistances, or throw items with side effects at greater range. I think it should be one or the other, not both. Items with a special effect like caltrops ought to do less damage to compensate for the extra damage they do to people stepping on them, and they shouldn't do damage themselves to things hit directly. Creative use of the thing is all right, but there are clearly balance issues with that, or there wouldn't be threads about it. The example with the Wererats is a nice example. It turned a bunch of non-magical items that wouldn't do any damage at all into a Shrapnel Grenade. I'd suggest that it can only throw one item at a time, and an extra large container shouldn't do any more damage than a normal size one. That's not really logical, but we are dealing with magic, and that doesn't have to be logical.
<Insert clever signature here>
I'm a DM and a player at the current time. As a player i want a staff or Adornment to have 3 potential catapult "ammunitions" on my staff. Jar of oil, Alchimst's fire and Caltrops.
The rules are not 100 % clear, since worn or carried is a loose condition, and sometimes these rules come in conflict with immersion. As a player and dm i don't see why a character shouldn't be able to pull out a flask, hanging on it's belt and fling it with a catapult spell. Imagine that you have the item lying on the palm of your hand.
This isn't even a problem with balancing, if the items you throw have an additional effect on the targe like an alchimist's fire. The ammunition, that you throw is a consummable and therefor will cost a lot if you use it very often (50 GP per shot is nothing to scoff at). And the little bonus will reward your players without breaking the game.
I wouldn't allow a bag of Caltrops to bey used to increase the damage. If used against a dragon ab Bag of caltrops would be a oneshot vor every dragon and alot of other foes in the game. And that would definitly break the balance of the game.
So don't let player's increase the damage of the Spell (except by using higher spellslots), but little extras (catapulted daggers could deal 3d8 piercing damage i.E.) could reward players for creativity.
This could become relevant to me soon as I have a wizard in my game which has catapult!
I would rule that the total damage for whatever is thrown is as per the spell - you throw a bag of balls, then the total damage is 3d8. If those balls hit 5 enemies, they each get 1/5 of the damage, rounding down.
As for the caltrops being around them afterwards, or throwing vials of acid, that's player ingenuity and it deserves to work. I would never say "the spell doesn't work for that because it would be more effective than the spell alone", or nerf the spell because of other factors like what the caltrops could do later. If I were foolish enough as a DM to put a vial of alchemical fire or virulent acid which weighed less than 5lb in the vicinity, then it should be a forgone conclusion that it's getting catapulted!
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
The spell works just like it says it does. I'm not seeing a need to fiddle with the meanings that are already written.
In my game, I'd run it as follows:
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
If it's only meant to do damage, then it's a pointless spell. There are other spells that can do 3d8 or better damage to a single target.
It seems to me the main use of this spell is for creative uses, and doing damage is a secondary backup effect so that you don't have to choose between using one of your prepared spells for effects or damage.
Name them? its a first level spell...I can't think of any ranged spells that do better than 3d8 (avg 13) except guiding bolt (4d6 avg 14) and chaos bolt (and that one only if it arcs) at first level, and even then this does better at higher levels because the greater damage die. It also has multiple chances to hit something if you line it up right, unlike similar spells that might use a ranged attack instead. plus, it potentially has 150 feet of range (60 feet] (i for the object + 90 feet of flight)
I mean, more power to your players, but either the spell should have catapulted the whole bag for one instance, but certainly not all bearings separately for 1000 instances (each bearing is both an individual item and under the weight minimum). Careful that they don't try this against everything they come up against now, 3000d8 shreds even a tarrasque to ribbons (avg 13,500 damage)
The only other comparable spell is chromatic Orb, wich also deals 3d8 damage. it can score critical hits and you can get advantage on the attack rolls. Since you can choose the damagetype you should always be able to deal full damage and have a higher chance of hitting vulnerabilities. it‘s arguably the best 1st Level singel target damage spell for wizards and sorcerers.
Guiding bolt is the best first Level single target damage dealing spell. AND it gives advantage to the next attack roll, no consumable needed.
The advantage of a straight line is not as good as it seems. In oben Cities or taverns the spell must be used carefully or you‘ll end up killing random citizens, and a straight line through multiple Enemies is really hard to draw if you want to throw a specific item, like the flask in your pocket.
In all honesty, the spell is pretty bad, but i like it because it‘s cool. But if i wouldnt play a transmuter, i would always choose chromatic orb or magic missile as my first level damage spell an then cast hideous laughter, shield or sleep all the time anyway.
I don't believe it can hit multiple targets.
"On a failed save, the object strikes the target and stops moving."
But it seems you are right. It does the max average damage on a hit against a single target of a l1 spell available to the same classes. Burning hands is not far behind, though, and can hit multiple targets. Magic Missile probably has a higher average damage overall, since it automatically hits.
And Catapult can get you stuck unable to use it if your DM is strict. If there are no appropriate objects in the combat area, how many 1 pound rocks will your DM allow you to carry in your pockets?
I guess I just like creative spells. This one is especially fun because a player taking it is a challenge to the DM to provide dungeon dressing. A DM is nerfing the player if all their combats play out in empty rooms. I played a one-shot with this spell once, and my one use was to lob a burning log at an orc chieftain. This is a good opportunity for the DM to reward creativity with a bonus 1d4 of fire damage.