Starting out with the mage hand cantrip, either from being a high elf or sorcerer or wizard for example, then taking telekinetic to boost the range of mage hand.
Afterwards, would having your race changed due to a reincarnate or true polymorph cause you to lose the increased range of mage hand?
By the same respect, would swapping out the original cantrip from sorcerer or wizard cause the same decrease in range?
Any help clarifying this would be greatly appreciated!
Starting out with the mage hand cantrip, either from being a high elf or sorcerer or wizard for example, then taking telekinetic to boost the range of mage hand.
Afterwards, would having your race changed due to a reincarnate or true polymorph cause you to lose the increased range of mage hand?
By the same respect, would swapping out the original cantrip from sorcerer or wizard cause the same decrease in range?
Any help clarifying this would be greatly appreciated!
Increasing the range of Mage Hand doesn't do anything, because the hand disappears if it's more than 30 feet away from you, regardless of the spell's range.
If you no longer know the cantrip from a second source, the range boost won't apply anymore.
True Polymorph replaces all of your statistics. You wouldn't even have the feat while polymorphed, effectively - just as you wouldn't have the spell from being a high elf or wizard.
Reincarnate changes your "racial traits", but Tasha's, as well as common sense, brings into question what actually *is* a racial trait. I am DMing a reincarnated PC right now, and e.g. I told him *not* to change his language proficiencies as a result of the spell, despite the spell requiring that racial traits convert from one to the other. Learned abilities - languages, skills, tools, weapons, armor, and high elf cantrips (assuming you interpret their cantrip as being taught, like a language, rather than being born with spells, like a drow) - really bring into sharp focus how poorly worded Reincarnate is, as a spell. Certainly the spell won't interact with being a sorcerer or wizard. For learned racials, RAW all of them are lost (since they're racial traits, by definition, even though Tasha's confirms they're *cultural*, as one would expect), but I would expect absolutely every DM to take a personal interest in the spell and house-rule on the nitty-gritty (I find it difficult to fathom any DM letting the spell cause you to lose or gain languages, for example).
I really hope WotC erratas that bit about the spell range being extended to 60ft to clarify that it also applies to the allowed distance from the Hand (and possibly how far you can move it in a turn?) It makes no damn sense to allow casting the Hand 60ft away only for it to disappear immediately.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
I really hope WotC erratas that bit about the spell range being extended to 60ft to clarify that it also applies to the allowed distance from the Hand (and possibly how far you can move it in a turn?) It makes no damn sense to allow casting the Hand 60ft away only for it to disappear immediately.
Yea it's not the first time that WotC fails to account for stuff that changes rules in all places it needs to. In any game I decide that part is changed to 60ft too, it's obviously meant to limit the hand to stay within the spells range so that's what I'd require.
The problem with mage hands “range increase” was identified by the public and acknowledged by WOTC the day the UA was released. They did absolutely nothing to change it.
I suppose they’re doing something right though since they keep raking in all that record breaking money every year.
Increasing the range of Mage Hand doesn't do anything, because the hand disappears if it's more than 30 feet away from you, regardless of the spell's range.
No. If an ability increases the range of the spell, the range of the spell is increased. If you're unsure if this is true, simply ask yourself what the intent of increasing the range of the spell might have been if the hand simply winks out at 30ft anyway. There is a pretty obvious answer here.
2. If you no longer know the cantrip from a second source, the range boost won't apply anymore.
Why?
The telekinetic feat causes you to learn the mage Hand cantrip. But then says "If you already know this spell, its range increases by 30 feet when you cast it."
So if you knew Mage Hand at the time you gained the Telekinetic feat, you increase the cantrip's range by 30ft when you cast it.
4. Reincarnate changes your "racial traits", but Tasha's, as well as common sense, brings into question what actually *is* a racial trait. I am DMing a reincarnated PC right now, and e.g. I told him *not* to change his language proficiencies as a result of the spell, despite the spell requiring that racial traits convert from one to the other. Learned abilities - languages, skills, tools, weapons, armor, and high elf cantrips (assuming you interpret their cantrip as being taught, like a language, rather than being born with spells, like a drow) - really bring into sharp focus how poorly worded Reincarnate is, as a spell. Certainly the spell won't interact with being a sorcerer or wizard. For learned racials, RAW all of them are lost (since they're racial traits, by definition, even though Tasha's confirms they're *cultural*, as one would expect), but I would expect absolutely every DM to take a personal interest in the spell and house-rule on the nitty-gritty (I find it difficult to fathom any DM letting the spell cause you to lose or gain languages, for example).
You're leaning pretty heavy into homebrew for this answer. This is entirely made up. Not that it isn't unreasonable ways to homebrew, it certainly is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
Even though I agree that it is obvious that the intention for the increased range of the feat is to allow for the hand to be used at the increased range I also think that it IS a clear oversight by the writers. Because there is no general rule that makes the hand to wink out when it reaches the spells max range, it is a specific rule for Mage Hand. Now Mage Hand isn't alone in having such a restriction but all spells that do specifically say so. By general rule a spell effect absolutely can go beyond its spells max range, the writers of the feat simply failed to account for Mage Hand having the additional restriction.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
Even though I agree that it is obvious that the intention for the increased range of the feat is to allow for the hand to be used at the increased range I also think that it IS a clear oversight by the writers. Because there is no general rule that makes the hand to wink out when it reaches the spells max range, it is a specific rule for Mage Hand. Now Mage Hand isn't alone in having such a restriction but all spells that do specifically say so. By general rule a spell effect absolutely can go beyond its spells max range, the writers of the feat simply failed to account for Mage Hand having the additional restriction.
It isn't a flaw in the text. If the effect winks out at 30ft, 30 ft is the range. If an ability increased the range by 30ft, it now winks out at 60 ft. They expect us to be able to math a little bit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It isn't a flaw in the text. If the effect winks out at 30ft, 30 ft is the range. If an ability increased the range by 30ft, it now winks out at 60 ft. They expect us to be able to math a little bit.
But the text doesn't say that it winks out at max range, it says it does so at 30ft. And the 30ft isn't changed by the feat, just the range. Now I have no trouble doing the math not have I problems with assuming that they meant both numbers to be increased but nothing in the text of the feat or the spell actually supports that, hence why I call it an oversight.
It isn't a flaw in the text. If the effect winks out at 30ft, 30 ft is the range. If an ability increased the range by 30ft, it now winks out at 60 ft. They expect us to be able to math a little bit.
But the text doesn't say that it winks out at max range, it says it does so at 30ft. And the 30ft isn't changed by the feat, just the range. Now I have no trouble doing the math not have I problems with assuming that they meant both numbers to be increased but nothing in the text of the feat or the spell actually supports that, hence why I call it an oversight.
I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time with this. You're saying that the feat that says the range is increased by 30ft has no effect, then? While also arguing that nothing in the feat, say, maybe the part that says its range is extended by 30ft, causes it to wink out 30ft farther away, so therefore it actually remains an effective range of only 30ft.
Wouldn't it make more sense to interpret the part about winking out at 30ft be its range? Since its range is 30ft. And then when the feat says extend the range an extra 30ft therefore those words are actually worth the cost of the ink they're printed with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
Even though I agree that it is obvious that the intention for the increased range of the feat is to allow for the hand to be used at the increased range I also think that it IS a clear oversight by the writers. Because there is no general rule that makes the hand to wink out when it reaches the spells max range, it is a specific rule for Mage Hand. Now Mage Hand isn't alone in having such a restriction but all spells that do specifically say so. By general rule a spell effect absolutely can go beyond its spells max range, the writers of the feat simply failed to account for Mage Hand having the additional restriction.
It isn't a flaw in the text. If the effect winks out at 30ft, 30 ft is the range. If an ability increased the range by 30ft, it now winks out at 60 ft. They expect us to be able to math a little bit.
Not how the spell works. It manifests a hand at the spell's range the hand has special rules. Changing the spell's range doesn't change the hand's special rules.
Wouldn't it make more sense to interpret the part about winking out at 30ft be its range? Since its range is 30ft. And then when the feat says extend the range an extra 30ft therefore those words are actually worth the cost of the ink they're printed with.
No, because that's not what the words say.
And this isn't a new issue - the feat doesn't introduce any new headaches. Sorcerers have been able to apply Distant Spell to Mage Hand since 5E came into existence, and doing so has always been a waste of sorcery points.
Wouldn't it make more sense to interpret the part about winking out at 30ft be its range? Since its range is 30ft. And then when the feat says extend the range an extra 30ft therefore those words are actually worth the cost of the ink they're printed with.
Yes it would make sense ad as I've said that's how I would play it. But neither the text of the spell, the text of the feat or how the rules work for things like this actually support such a reading. And hence I say that it is an oversight by the designers.
The feat says "its range increases by 30 feet". So this can be applied both to the range/area field of the spell description as well as the range limit described in the body of the spell.
Obviously mage hand is one of the cases where the writers used the distance rather than the word 'range' to describe that distance in the spell. The rules tell us that the target has to be in range of the spell when cast, but "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise." Since the distance mentioned is the range, it is valid to treat them the same. Maybe a real pedant would say that the 30' is a hard limit on the spell, even if you cast it at 60', but that person isn't thinking. Still, that is also a valid way to treat the problem, if not a fun or obvious or RAI way.
Other spells, such as witch bolt use 'range' within the spell description when the range matters for the duration: "The spell also ends if the target is ever outside the spell’s range or if it has total cover from you." This could be used as evidence that it is possible to write mage hand better, but is not evidence that 30' is not the range of that spell.
would swapping out the original cantrip from sorcerer or wizard cause the same decrease in range?
Still no with a regard to a "swapping out". I don't personally think anything like this should come for free.
RAW other options are still no but, depending on your DM, you might try taking on mage hand from a second source to see if your telekinetic ability can duplicate its recognition of the spell from the new source while you have use of both. Even if the DM was kind / pretending to be kind with the result of letting the new source duplicate the increased range, this would not necessarily mean that any such duplication would remain at the increased range once the original source was gone.
You could try arcana checks to try to work out the possibilities but, the way I'd run it, you might get confirmation if a duplicated range could not be sustained but you'd never know, ahead of time, for certain if it could.
As for a final answer? I'm not your DM and couldn't say.
Wouldn't it make more sense to interpret the part about winking out at 30ft be its range? Since its range is 30ft. And then when the feat says extend the range an extra 30ft therefore those words are actually worth the cost of the ink they're printed with.
Yes it would make sense ad as I've said that's how I would play it. But neither the text of the spell, the text of the feat or how the rules work for things like this actually support such a reading. And hence I say that it is an oversight by the designers.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
There is a subsection of the community that requires absolutely everything to be spelled out explicitly and in intricate detail. A certain strata of society that has completely forgotten how to even think for themselves let alone practice critical thinking. So there is no point in arguing with them, they seem to need everything to be spoonfed to them. Even if you are patently correct they won’t accept it. You will end up giving yourself a stroke if you try.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Starting out with the mage hand cantrip, either from being a high elf or sorcerer or wizard for example, then taking telekinetic to boost the range of mage hand.
Afterwards, would having your race changed due to a reincarnate or true polymorph cause you to lose the increased range of mage hand?
By the same respect, would swapping out the original cantrip from sorcerer or wizard cause the same decrease in range?
Any help clarifying this would be greatly appreciated!
I really hope WotC erratas that bit about the spell range being extended to 60ft to clarify that it also applies to the allowed distance from the Hand (and possibly how far you can move it in a turn?) It makes no damn sense to allow casting the Hand 60ft away only for it to disappear immediately.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Yea it's not the first time that WotC fails to account for stuff that changes rules in all places it needs to. In any game I decide that part is changed to 60ft too, it's obviously meant to limit the hand to stay within the spells range so that's what I'd require.
The problem with mage hands “range increase” was identified by the public and acknowledged by WOTC the day the UA was released. They did absolutely nothing to change it.
I suppose they’re doing something right though since they keep raking in all that record breaking money every year.
No. If an ability increases the range of the spell, the range of the spell is increased. If you're unsure if this is true, simply ask yourself what the intent of increasing the range of the spell might have been if the hand simply winks out at 30ft anyway. There is a pretty obvious answer here.
Why?
The telekinetic feat causes you to learn the mage Hand cantrip. But then says "If you already know this spell, its range increases by 30 feet when you cast it."
So if you knew Mage Hand at the time you gained the Telekinetic feat, you increase the cantrip's range by 30ft when you cast it.
You're leaning pretty heavy into homebrew for this answer. This is entirely made up. Not that it isn't unreasonable ways to homebrew, it certainly is.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Remember that the rules aren't made to be super-duper-finnicky. They're idiomatic. It's indescribably obvious that the reason the spectral hand winks out beyond 30 ft is because the spell's range is 30 ft. The idiomatic approach would mean if something increases the range of the spell, it increases how far the hand can go. This isn't an oversight by the writers - they just don't expect DMs to be so finnicky to the point of being ***** about it.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Even though I agree that it is obvious that the intention for the increased range of the feat is to allow for the hand to be used at the increased range I also think that it IS a clear oversight by the writers. Because there is no general rule that makes the hand to wink out when it reaches the spells max range, it is a specific rule for Mage Hand. Now Mage Hand isn't alone in having such a restriction but all spells that do specifically say so. By general rule a spell effect absolutely can go beyond its spells max range, the writers of the feat simply failed to account for Mage Hand having the additional restriction.
It isn't a flaw in the text. If the effect winks out at 30ft, 30 ft is the range. If an ability increased the range by 30ft, it now winks out at 60 ft. They expect us to be able to math a little bit.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But the text doesn't say that it winks out at max range, it says it does so at 30ft. And the 30ft isn't changed by the feat, just the range.
Now I have no trouble doing the math not have I problems with assuming that they meant both numbers to be increased but nothing in the text of the feat or the spell actually supports that, hence why I call it an oversight.
I'm sorry. I'm having a hard time with this. You're saying that the feat that says the range is increased by 30ft has no effect, then? While also arguing that nothing in the feat, say, maybe the part that says its range is extended by 30ft, causes it to wink out 30ft farther away, so therefore it actually remains an effective range of only 30ft.
Wouldn't it make more sense to interpret the part about winking out at 30ft be its range? Since its range is 30ft. And then when the feat says extend the range an extra 30ft therefore those words are actually worth the cost of the ink they're printed with.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Not how the spell works. It manifests a hand at the spell's range the hand has special rules. Changing the spell's range doesn't change the hand's special rules.
No, because that's not what the words say.
And this isn't a new issue - the feat doesn't introduce any new headaches. Sorcerers have been able to apply Distant Spell to Mage Hand since 5E came into existence, and doing so has always been a waste of sorcery points.
Yes it would make sense ad as I've said that's how I would play it. But neither the text of the spell, the text of the feat or how the rules work for things like this actually support such a reading. And hence I say that it is an oversight by the designers.
The feat says "its range increases by 30 feet". So this can be applied both to the range/area field of the spell description as well as the range limit described in the body of the spell.
Obviously mage hand is one of the cases where the writers used the distance rather than the word 'range' to describe that distance in the spell. The rules tell us that the target has to be in range of the spell when cast, but "Once a spell is cast, its effects aren't limited by its range, unless the spell's description says otherwise." Since the distance mentioned is the range, it is valid to treat them the same. Maybe a real pedant would say that the 30' is a hard limit on the spell, even if you cast it at 60', but that person isn't thinking. Still, that is also a valid way to treat the problem, if not a fun or obvious or RAI way.
Other spells, such as witch bolt use 'range' within the spell description when the range matters for the duration: "The spell also ends if the target is ever outside the spell’s range or if it has total cover from you." This could be used as evidence that it is possible to write mage hand better, but is not evidence that 30' is not the range of that spell.
That's a definite no if you don't have a version of mage hand prepared at the point of change.
Still no with a regard to a "swapping out". I don't personally think anything like this should come for free.
RAW other options are still no but, depending on your DM, you might try taking on mage hand from a second source to see if your telekinetic ability can duplicate its recognition of the spell from the new source while you have use of both. Even if the DM was kind / pretending to be kind with the result of letting the new source duplicate the increased range, this would not necessarily mean that any such duplication would remain at the increased range once the original source was gone.
You could try arcana checks to try to work out the possibilities but, the way I'd run it, you might get confirmation if a duplicated range could not be sustained but you'd never know, ahead of time, for certain if it could.
As for a final answer? I'm not your DM and couldn't say.
How do you know it's not deliberate?
Wait, what!?! Why would they deliberately make a mistake??? I don't think you have understood the discussion fully.
There is a subsection of the community that requires absolutely everything to be spelled out explicitly and in intricate detail. A certain strata of society that has completely forgotten how to even think for themselves let alone practice critical thinking. So there is no point in arguing with them, they seem to need everything to be spoonfed to them. Even if you are patently correct they won’t accept it. You will end up giving yourself a stroke if you try.