I was just wondering what exactly manacles do, or the magical version dimensional shackles.
RAW, these appear to do nothing. They do not impose the restrained, grappled or paralysed conditions. They do not state that manacles interfere with taking any actions or that they interfere with movement. I can't really find any rules for them at all. The basic statement is "These metal restraints can bind a Small or Medium creature." but there is no statement of what bind means from what I can tell.
I could see bindings, particularly magical ones, making it impossible for a creature to move. That would certainly be one definition of bound. Common usage of manacles are chains that go around the hands or ankles. I'd think that these would significantly reduce movement (since that is what they are designed to do) as well as make it difficult to make attacks (restrained condition?). So as a house rule, at a minimum, I would at least 1/2 movement rate and impose the restrained condition on a creature bound with manacles.
What would everyone else do? Especially if you are trying to play RAW. Are Manacles and Dimensional Shackles essentially useless since they don't do explicitly do anything? Just to be clear, in a game I was running I'd use the ruling I suggested above, but I could see differences of opinion.
-------
Rules:
Manacles: "These metal restraints can bind a Small or Medium creature. Escaping the manacles requires a successful DC 20 Dexterity check. Breaking them requires a successful DC 20 Strength check. Each set of manacles comes with one key. Without the key, a creature proficient with thieves' tools can pick the manacles' lock with a successful DC 15 Dexterity check. Manacles have 15 hit points."
Dimensional Shackles: "You can use an action to place these shackles on an incapacitated creature. The shackles adjust to fit a creature of Small to Large size. In addition to serving as mundane manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional movement, including teleportation or travel to a different plane of existence. They don't prevent the creature from passing through an interdimensional portal.
You and any creature you designate when you use the shackles can use an action to remove them. Once every 30 days, the bound creature can make a DC 30 Strength (Athletics) check. On a success, the creature breaks free and destroys the shackles."
What would everyone else do? Especially if you are trying to play RAW. Are Manacles and Dimensional Shackles essentially useless since they don't do explicitly do anything? Just to be clear, in a game I was running I'd use the ruling I suggested above, but I could see differences of opinion.
Manacles effectively don't have any binding rules as written. It still limit limbs movement somehow like IRL. I'd probably have the following
On ankles: You have disadvantage on any d20 rolls involving your feet movement. You also move at half speed in manacles, 1 foot costs 2 feet of speed--so you can cover only half the normal distance in a minute, an hour, or a day.
On writs: You have disadvantage on any d20 rolls involving your hands movement.
Manacles, I thought are just for the wrists, handcuffs. Shackles also get to ankles.
I’d rule you can’t use a shield, and only weapons with the light property, and even then with disadvantage on the roll. I’d probably say no spells with a somatic component — I know some could argue the rules are unclear on just how intense the hand motions are, but I’d say manacles effectively mean you can’t move them freely enough to make the gestures. Also, no component pouch. If you had a focus in hand, I could allow that, but I couldn’t see you accessing a pouch deftly enough to pull out the proper components.
Beyond that, I’d agree with plaguescarred. Though I might even restrict movement more. Like your speed becomes 5.
Manacles are a storytelling tool. They aren't really a mechanically-focused object. You will probably get a more useful answer asking this question in another forum. Not to say you shouldn't ask here. I just think you will find the mechanical answer less satisfying than the storytelling options that manacles provide.
Manacles are handcuffs, they do what handcuffs do. I mean… if a DM can’t figure that one out I don’t know what to say. Whatever the DM determines “bound” to be is what it is. I will say that it would really depends on how the manacles are applied. If your hands are bound in front of you then you can do a heck of a lot more than you can if they’re bound behind your back. That’s the advantage of a TTRPG like D&D, when something is too variable to have a hard and fast written rule to cover it, the GM can use logic, reason, experience, and instinct to adjudicate those occurrences.
Manacles are handcuffs, they do what handcuffs do. I mean… if a DM can’t figure that one out I don’t know what to say. Whatever the DM determines “bound” to be is what it is. I will say that it would really depends on how the manacles are applied. If your hands are bound in front of you then you can do a heck of a lot more than you can if they’re bound behind your back. That’s the advantage of a TTRPG like D&D, when something is too variable to have a hard and fast written rule to cover it, the GM can use logic, reason, experience, and instinct to adjudicate those occurrences.
This is exactly why I think people should be more willing to let their GM make up rulings on the spot. If there was a rule for every situation, then you wouldn't be playing a TTRPG; you'd be playing a glorified board game
The spell Raulothim's Psychic Lance from Fizban's inflicts the incapacitated condition on a creature on a failed save (it is an int save so this isn't that uncommon). Hypnotic Pattern also leaves a creature incapacitated.
Dimensional Shackles is a magic item that a level 14 Artificer can make. Non-attunement.
"Dimensional Shackles: "You can use an action to place these shackles on an incapacitated creature. The shackles adjust to fit a creature of Small to Large size. In addition to serving as mundane manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional movement, including teleportation or travel to a different plane of existence. They don't prevent the creature from passing through an interdimensional portal. ... Once every 30 days, the bound creature can make a DC 30 Strength (Athletics) check. On a success, the creature breaks free and destroys the shackles. "
These could be used IN COMBAT after a creature fails a save to the Psychic Lance or Hypnotic Pattern and a character uses an action to apply the shackles. The creature can no longer teleport AND the magic item behaves as "mundane manacles". The Dimensional Shackles require a DC30 strength (athletics) check to escape and this can only be attempted once a month. In this context, the specific effect of manacles on a creature in combat becomes very relevant. As DM, I just wanted to figure out how I would rule it and as a player, I am curious to know how other DMs would rule it.
1) Are shackled hands capable of casting spells?
2) Would shackled hands affect weapon attacks? Presumably a shackled creature couldn't use a bow at all?
3) Would shackles interfere with movement?
Shackles and manacles can refer to both wrists and ankles or hands and feet - they aren't just handcuffs.
P.S. Attaching these to Acerak would be interesting since they are incapable of passing a DC30 strength (athletics) check. Maybe they would have to try wishing themselves out of them if they have the spell, assuming they could cast it?
The spell Raulothim's Psychic Lance from Fizban's inflicts the incapacitated condition on a creature on a failed save (it is an int save so this isn't that uncommon). Hypnotic Pattern also leaves a creature incapacitated.
Dimensional Shackles is a magic item that a level 14 Artificer can make. Non-attunement.
"Dimensional Shackles: "You can use an action to place these shackles on an incapacitated creature. The shackles adjust to fit a creature of Small to Large size. In addition to serving as mundane manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional movement, including teleportation or travel to a different plane of existence. They don't prevent the creature from passing through an interdimensional portal. ... Once every 30 days, the bound creature can make a DC 30 Strength (Athletics) check. On a success, the creature breaks free and destroys the shackles. "
These could be used IN COMBAT after a creature fails a save to the Psychic Lance or Hypnotic Pattern and a character uses an action to apply the shackles. The creature can no longer teleport AND the magic item behaves as "mundane manacles". The Dimensional Shackles require a DC30 strength (athletics) check to escape and this can only be attempted once a month. In this context, the specific effect of manacles on a creature in combat becomes very relevant. As DM, I just wanted to figure out how I would rule it and as a player, I am curious to know how other DMs would rule it.
1) Are shackled hands capable of casting spells?
2) Would shackled hands affect weapon attacks? Presumably a shackled creature couldn't use a bow at all?
3) Would shackles interfere with movement?
Shackles and manacles can refer to both wrists and ankles or hands and feet - they aren't just handcuffs.
P.S. Attaching these to Acerak would be interesting since they are incapable of passing a DC30 strength (athletics) check. Maybe they would have to try wishing themselves out of them if they have the spell, assuming they could cast it?
1) Probably, although it might be tough getting out M components from a pouch, depending on how the shackles are applied.
2) I'd say disadvantage on weapon attacks.
3) Not if they're on your hands, they wouldn't. If applied to feet, I'd say halve the walking speed of the creature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
What about using 1/2 of a manacle in combat? Imagine I had already fastened one of the manacle cuffs to my leg and used stealth to get close to an NPC. Could I use and action or basic action (especially if I had practiced this nightly with a party member so I was proficient with this pair of manacles) in order to bind myself to an NPC? I know, I know.... ask my DM. I am asking if you were my DM, what call would you make?
2) Would shackled hands affect weapon attacks? Presumably a shackled creature couldn't use a bow at all?
3) Would shackles interfere with movement?
That depends, are the hands shackled in front of the prisoner, or behind them? If behind then pro’ly not spells w/ M or S components. If in front, then probably could cast spells w/ S components, at least with a successful DC 11 Arcana check, but probably not spells w/ M components.
That depends, are the hands shackled in front of the prisoner, or behind them? If behind then probably only make unarmed strikes, and pro’ly w/ disadvantage. If in front then they could probably attack without disadvantage if using a light, one-handed weapon using Strength, but disadvantage if they were using Dex or a weapon that isn’t light, and probably couldn’t use heavy or two-handed weapons at all.
Probably everything would be difficult terrain if their ankles were bound.
I think a big part of the lack of specific rules on them is that they can be used in a variety of ways, most of which have already been covered, but I'll add a few.
You can bind someone's hands or feet to another object (either directly or putting the chain around it) to effectively immobilize them.
You can bind an object to someone's wrist to ensure it doesn't get stolen or misplaced.
You can bind two people's wrists or legs together to ensure they stay together, usually to prevent one of them from running away or getting kidnapped.
You can bind objects together to ensure that one or both of them do not move significantly.
That depends, are the hands shackled in front of the prisoner, or behind them? If behind then pro’ly not spells w/ M or S components. If in front, then probably could cast spells w/ S components, at least with a successful DC 11 Arcana check, but probably not spells w/ M components.
That depends, are the hands shackled in front of the prisoner, or behind them? If behind then probably only make unarmed strikes, and pro’ly w/ disadvantage. If in front then they could probably attack without disadvantage if using a light, one-handed weapon using Strength, but disadvantage if they were using Dex or a weapon that isn’t light, and probably couldn’t use heavy or two-handed weapons at all.
Probably everything would be difficult terrain if their ankles were bound.
The semi-unwritten rules of requiring hands to do things definitely need to do the heavy lifting for manacles. Personally I'd rule that by default they interfere with all activities requiring hands as standard, so disadvantage on all attacks requiring the hands whether in front or behind. However for behind you might not even be able to attack at all unless you can justify how you're doing it (and it'd probably need to be unarmed or improvised).
Somatic component spells would likewise either have disadvantage to attack, or targets would get advantage to save because of the difficulty in aiming effectively, and if the hands are locked behind, you either can't attempt it, or are firing blindly behind you (strictly speaking being unable to properly see a target means you can't even attempt most spells, but it's more fun to allow at least a chance of hitting anyway IMO).
My Strixhaven Wizard character had an encounter with some manacles that went something like the following:
Went to Ravnica for a dragonchess tournament. Secured first place through a mixture of idiot savant'ing most of his games and using detect thoughts to cheat. Offended everyone involved.
Got captured by the Golgari and dragged to a cell with his hands manacled behind his back, leaving his familiar (Ferret the weasel) dragging his trophy around in search of help.
When the interrogator left the cell door open briefly, cast expeditious retreat to bolt away yelling "no prison can hold me!" This required ruling that the somatic components for running really fast being tied to the hands was a bit weird, so we ruled the actual act of dashing as the somatic component.
Jumped straight through a window to escape pursuit, casting feather fall to avoid damage. We ruled that the material component was reachable blind because he could still get to his component pouch (which he had managed to avoid being confiscated) and the material component for grease is a pound of butter, so every uncosted component he has is embedded into one big lump.
While hiding in a bush, summoned his magical quill (order of scribes) to try to pick the lock on the manacles. Since he was blind picking a lock without any relevant skill using a poorly suited implement when lock-picking usually requires at least two tools for a skilled person to do, the DM gave him one shot at getting a natural 20 for the hell of it. Surprisingly he failed miserably.
Resorting to the obvious back-up plan he started blindly casting acid splash on the manacles under the devil's bargain that due to his inability to aim he would be the secondary target. It's unclear whether the manacles or his hands gave out first, but the important thing is he got them out.
After waiting for a gap in the search he continued running away, only later realising he didn't need to get out of the manacles at all because he eventually reunited with his party who could have freed him.
Good times. That's with a lot of generous DMing, but I think it highlights why it's actually a good thing that the item isn't too strict; if the DM didn't want escape to be possible he could have ruled that much of the above simply wasn't possible, and maybe in future with better secured manacles they won't be, but since escape was the intention being a bit more permissive worked well.
In terms of RAW the item is weird because you could easily rule either way on whether the hands count as "free" for the purposes of weapons etc. Personally I'd lean towards free, but with appropriate penalties to compensate for being impeded (you're not unable to use them, but they're not going to be at full effect).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
What about using 1/2 of a manacle in combat? Imagine I had already fastened one of the manacle cuffs to my leg and used stealth to get close to an NPC. Could I use and action or basic action (especially if I had practiced this nightly with a party member so I was proficient with this pair of manacles) in order to bind myself to an NPC? I know, I know.... ask my DM. I am asking if you were my DM, what call would you make?
You'd have to be not visible (e.g. invisible) for this ploy to work - simply trying to use stealth to creep up behind somebody isn't going to work.
In the middle of combat, it won't be trivial to place the manacle on another character, since any combat aware character is most likely shuffling their feet as they rotate to keep an eye out on the battle field.
The target should also be allowed some sort of DEX saving throw since they will most likely feel the manacle being placed around their ankle - probably with a DC set by your sleight of hand?
What about using 1/2 of a manacle in combat? Imagine I had already fastened one of the manacle cuffs to my leg and used stealth to get close to an NPC. Could I use and action or basic action (especially if I had practiced this nightly with a party member so I was proficient with this pair of manacles) in order to bind myself to an NPC? I know, I know.... ask my DM. I am asking if you were my DM, what call would you make?
Sleight of Hand check against either the NPC's Perception check or passive Perception, depending on whether or not they're on guard.
If they're aware of you, it'd be a contested Sleight of Hand check against the NPC's Dexterity save.
Oh and it would use your Action.
But that's just how I would rule it. Other DMs might call for a melee attack roll against the NPC's AC, or just a Dex save against a DC.
I would then rule that if either you or the NPC wish to move (this is assuming in different directions), it would be a contested Athletics check for every 10 feet.
2) Would shackled hands affect weapon attacks? Presumably a shackled creature couldn't use a bow at all?
3) Would shackles interfere with movement?
...
P.S. Attaching these to Acerak would be interesting since they are incapable of passing a DC30 strength (athletics) check. Maybe they would have to try wishing themselves out of them if they have the spell, assuming they could cast it?
1.) Dexterity (arcana / religion) check first, but only if they're proficient in the skill related to their power type. otherwise no, too difficult in my opinion. 2.) Dexterity (athletics) check first to determine whether it's easily possible (one-handed weapon or unarmed), possible with self harm (fail by one), possible with disadvantage and self harm (fail by 5 or less), or completely improbable without inspiration / advantage. i'd okay a bow in an ambush or non-combat situation if they attempt the Dex check with disadvantage and the understanding that they'd very likely be prone while attempting it, unable to reload without assistance, and no multiple attacks that round. in my opinion. 3.) are the shackles for both ankles solid or separated by a length of chain? are they also linked by chain or bar to wrist shackles? either way, sounds like a Dex (acrobatics) check to "stay on your feet in a tricky situation," with success still cutting movement speed in half (difficult terrain, as sposta noted above). probably a Constitution (athletics) check to avoid a point of exhaustion if you had to hop a mile or more like that. opinion, mine.
RE: P.S.: it made me chuckle to think of players having to use a dust pan to get Tomb of Horrors Acererak the Demilich's wrists and ankles into iron circlets. i don't have a Tomb of Annihilation statblock for Acererak the Eternal, but it's probably less of an issue for an archlich. please, carry on.
What about using 1/2 of a manacle in combat? Imagine I had already fastened one of the manacle cuffs to my leg and used stealth to get close to an NPC. Could I use and action or basic action (especially if I had practiced this nightly with a party member so I was proficient with this pair of manacles) in order to bind myself to an NPC? I know, I know.... ask my DM. I am asking if you were my DM, what call would you make?
Sleight of Hand check against either the NPC's Perception check or passive Perception, depending on whether or not they're on guard.
If they're aware of you, it'd be a contested Sleight of Hand check against the NPC's Dexterity save.
Oh and it would use your Action.
But that's just how I would rule it. Other DMs might call for a melee attack roll against the NPC's AC, or just a Dex save against a DC.
I would then rule that if either you or the NPC wish to move (this is assuming in different directions), it would be a contested Athletics check for every 10 feet.
Follow up to this scenario, if you are successfully manacled by your leg to an NPC's leg, what would happen if you shot them with some displacement spell like a warlock's repelling blast? If you braced yourself, could you ride the NPC through the air like you were surfing on a magic broom?
Follow up to this scenario, if you are successfully manacled by your leg to an NPC's leg, what would happen if you shot them with some displacement spell like a warlock's repelling blast? If you braced yourself, could you ride the NPC through the air like you were surfing on a magic broom?
Pure DM call on that one!
Personally I'd make some kind of roll to see if the manacles are broken by the blast first, and if they aren't you'd both go half the distance, maybe with a Dexterity save to avoid falling prone? But it's very much homebrew/using only bits of the rules, as there's no clear rule to handle a case like that. Another DM might just as easily rule that the repelling blast simply doesn't work because the manacle and extra weight would halt their movement.
Mechanically riding through the air is a "no" in terms of rules as written, because once the repelling blast ends you would immediately start to fall; you'd need some kind of ongoing effect on the NPC in order to use them as a high-risk budget broom of flying, and you'd need to make some kind of checks in order to "surf" the NPC rather than just flapping around behind them like a ragdoll.
That said, as a DM I would say that players should always be allowed to attempt something, but I might make them aware of just how unlikely it is to succeed or work as they intend.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I was just wondering what exactly manacles do, or the magical version dimensional shackles.
RAW, these appear to do nothing. They do not impose the restrained, grappled or paralysed conditions. They do not state that manacles interfere with taking any actions or that they interfere with movement. I can't really find any rules for them at all. The basic statement is "These metal restraints can bind a Small or Medium creature." but there is no statement of what bind means from what I can tell.
I could see bindings, particularly magical ones, making it impossible for a creature to move. That would certainly be one definition of bound. Common usage of manacles are chains that go around the hands or ankles. I'd think that these would significantly reduce movement (since that is what they are designed to do) as well as make it difficult to make attacks (restrained condition?). So as a house rule, at a minimum, I would at least 1/2 movement rate and impose the restrained condition on a creature bound with manacles.
What would everyone else do? Especially if you are trying to play RAW. Are Manacles and Dimensional Shackles essentially useless since they don't do explicitly do anything? Just to be clear, in a game I was running I'd use the ruling I suggested above, but I could see differences of opinion.
-------
Rules:
Manacles: "These metal restraints can bind a Small or Medium creature. Escaping the manacles requires a successful DC 20 Dexterity check. Breaking them requires a successful DC 20 Strength check. Each set of manacles comes with one key. Without the key, a creature proficient with thieves' tools can pick the manacles' lock with a successful DC 15 Dexterity check. Manacles have 15 hit points."
Dimensional Shackles: "You can use an action to place these shackles on an incapacitated creature. The shackles adjust to fit a creature of Small to Large size. In addition to serving as mundane manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional movement, including teleportation or travel to a different plane of existence. They don't prevent the creature from passing through an interdimensional portal.
You and any creature you designate when you use the shackles can use an action to remove them. Once every 30 days, the bound creature can make a DC 30 Strength (Athletics) check. On a success, the creature breaks free and destroys the shackles."
By RAW they do almost nothing yes... It is a very underdeveloped item/concept. Lots of room for homebrew though.
Manacles effectively don't have any binding rules as written. It still limit limbs movement somehow like IRL. I'd probably have the following
On ankles: You have disadvantage on any d20 rolls involving your feet movement. You also move at half speed in manacles, 1 foot costs 2 feet of speed--so you can cover only half the normal distance in a minute, an hour, or a day.
On writs: You have disadvantage on any d20 rolls involving your hands movement.
Manacles, I thought are just for the wrists, handcuffs. Shackles also get to ankles.
I’d rule you can’t use a shield, and only weapons with the light property, and even then with disadvantage on the roll. I’d probably say no spells with a somatic component — I know some could argue the rules are unclear on just how intense the hand motions are, but I’d say manacles effectively mean you can’t move them freely enough to make the gestures. Also, no component pouch. If you had a focus in hand, I could allow that, but I couldn’t see you accessing a pouch deftly enough to pull out the proper components.
Beyond that, I’d agree with plaguescarred. Though I might even restrict movement more. Like your speed becomes 5.
Manacles are a storytelling tool. They aren't really a mechanically-focused object. You will probably get a more useful answer asking this question in another forum. Not to say you shouldn't ask here. I just think you will find the mechanical answer less satisfying than the storytelling options that manacles provide.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Ask your DM.
[REDACTED]
Manacles are handcuffs, they do what handcuffs do. I mean… if a DM can’t figure that one out I don’t know what to say. Whatever the DM determines “bound” to be is what it is. I will say that it would really depends on how the manacles are applied. If your hands are bound in front of you then you can do a heck of a lot more than you can if they’re bound behind your back. That’s the advantage of a TTRPG like D&D, when something is too variable to have a hard and fast written rule to cover it, the GM can use logic, reason, experience, and instinct to adjudicate those occurrences.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
This is exactly why I think people should be more willing to let their GM make up rulings on the spot. If there was a rule for every situation, then you wouldn't be playing a TTRPG; you'd be playing a glorified board game
[REDACTED]
I'll give this a little additional context.
The spell Raulothim's Psychic Lance from Fizban's inflicts the incapacitated condition on a creature on a failed save (it is an int save so this isn't that uncommon). Hypnotic Pattern also leaves a creature incapacitated.
Dimensional Shackles is a magic item that a level 14 Artificer can make. Non-attunement.
"Dimensional Shackles: "You can use an action to place these shackles on an incapacitated creature. The shackles adjust to fit a creature of Small to Large size. In addition to serving as mundane manacles, the shackles prevent a creature bound by them from using any method of extradimensional movement, including teleportation or travel to a different plane of existence. They don't prevent the creature from passing through an interdimensional portal. ... Once every 30 days, the bound creature can make a DC 30 Strength (Athletics) check. On a success, the creature breaks free and destroys the shackles. "
These could be used IN COMBAT after a creature fails a save to the Psychic Lance or Hypnotic Pattern and a character uses an action to apply the shackles. The creature can no longer teleport AND the magic item behaves as "mundane manacles". The Dimensional Shackles require a DC30 strength (athletics) check to escape and this can only be attempted once a month. In this context, the specific effect of manacles on a creature in combat becomes very relevant. As DM, I just wanted to figure out how I would rule it and as a player, I am curious to know how other DMs would rule it.
1) Are shackled hands capable of casting spells?
2) Would shackled hands affect weapon attacks? Presumably a shackled creature couldn't use a bow at all?
3) Would shackles interfere with movement?
Shackles and manacles can refer to both wrists and ankles or hands and feet - they aren't just handcuffs.
P.S. Attaching these to Acerak would be interesting since they are incapable of passing a DC30 strength (athletics) check. Maybe they would have to try wishing themselves out of them if they have the spell, assuming they could cast it?
1) Probably, although it might be tough getting out M components from a pouch, depending on how the shackles are applied.
2) I'd say disadvantage on weapon attacks.
3) Not if they're on your hands, they wouldn't. If applied to feet, I'd say halve the walking speed of the creature.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
The other players wondered why my character was carrying around two pairs of manacles.
When we decided to take a prisoner, they suddenly saw that they were useful :-)
What about using 1/2 of a manacle in combat? Imagine I had already fastened one of the manacle cuffs to my leg and used stealth to get close to an NPC. Could I use and action or basic action (especially if I had practiced this nightly with a party member so I was proficient with this pair of manacles) in order to bind myself to an NPC? I know, I know.... ask my DM. I am asking if you were my DM, what call would you make?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I think a big part of the lack of specific rules on them is that they can be used in a variety of ways, most of which have already been covered, but I'll add a few.
You can bind someone's hands or feet to another object (either directly or putting the chain around it) to effectively immobilize them.
You can bind an object to someone's wrist to ensure it doesn't get stolen or misplaced.
You can bind two people's wrists or legs together to ensure they stay together, usually to prevent one of them from running away or getting kidnapped.
You can bind objects together to ensure that one or both of them do not move significantly.
The semi-unwritten rules of requiring hands to do things definitely need to do the heavy lifting for manacles. Personally I'd rule that by default they interfere with all activities requiring hands as standard, so disadvantage on all attacks requiring the hands whether in front or behind. However for behind you might not even be able to attack at all unless you can justify how you're doing it (and it'd probably need to be unarmed or improvised).
Somatic component spells would likewise either have disadvantage to attack, or targets would get advantage to save because of the difficulty in aiming effectively, and if the hands are locked behind, you either can't attempt it, or are firing blindly behind you (strictly speaking being unable to properly see a target means you can't even attempt most spells, but it's more fun to allow at least a chance of hitting anyway IMO).
My Strixhaven Wizard character had an encounter with some manacles that went something like the following:
Good times. That's with a lot of generous DMing, but I think it highlights why it's actually a good thing that the item isn't too strict; if the DM didn't want escape to be possible he could have ruled that much of the above simply wasn't possible, and maybe in future with better secured manacles they won't be, but since escape was the intention being a bit more permissive worked well.
In terms of RAW the item is weird because you could easily rule either way on whether the hands count as "free" for the purposes of weapons etc. Personally I'd lean towards free, but with appropriate penalties to compensate for being impeded (you're not unable to use them, but they're not going to be at full effect).
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
You'd have to be not visible (e.g. invisible) for this ploy to work - simply trying to use stealth to creep up behind somebody isn't going to work.
In the middle of combat, it won't be trivial to place the manacle on another character, since any combat aware character is most likely shuffling their feet as they rotate to keep an eye out on the battle field.
The target should also be allowed some sort of DEX saving throw since they will most likely feel the manacle being placed around their ankle - probably with a DC set by your sleight of hand?
Sleight of Hand check against either the NPC's Perception check or passive Perception, depending on whether or not they're on guard.
If they're aware of you, it'd be a contested Sleight of Hand check against the NPC's Dexterity save.
Oh and it would use your Action.
But that's just how I would rule it. Other DMs might call for a melee attack roll against the NPC's AC, or just a Dex save against a DC.
I would then rule that if either you or the NPC wish to move (this is assuming in different directions), it would be a contested Athletics check for every 10 feet.
[REDACTED]
1.) Dexterity (arcana / religion) check first, but only if they're proficient in the skill related to their power type. otherwise no, too difficult in my opinion.
2.) Dexterity (athletics) check first to determine whether it's easily possible (one-handed weapon or unarmed), possible with self harm (fail by one), possible with disadvantage and self harm (fail by 5 or less), or completely improbable without inspiration / advantage. i'd okay a bow in an ambush or non-combat situation if they attempt the Dex check with disadvantage and the understanding that they'd very likely be prone while attempting it, unable to reload without assistance, and no multiple attacks that round. in my opinion.
3.) are the shackles for both ankles solid or separated by a length of chain? are they also linked by chain or bar to wrist shackles? either way, sounds like a Dex (acrobatics) check to "stay on your feet in a tricky situation," with success still cutting movement speed in half (difficult terrain, as sposta noted above). probably a Constitution (athletics) check to avoid a point of exhaustion if you had to hop a mile or more like that. opinion, mine.
RE: P.S.: it made me chuckle to think of players having to use a dust pan to get Tomb of Horrors Acererak the Demilich's wrists and ankles into iron circlets. i don't have a Tomb of Annihilation statblock for Acererak the Eternal, but it's probably less of an issue for an archlich. please, carry on.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Follow up to this scenario, if you are successfully manacled by your leg to an NPC's leg, what would happen if you shot them with some displacement spell like a warlock's repelling blast? If you braced yourself, could you ride the NPC through the air like you were surfing on a magic broom?
Pure DM call on that one!
Personally I'd make some kind of roll to see if the manacles are broken by the blast first, and if they aren't you'd both go half the distance, maybe with a Dexterity save to avoid falling prone? But it's very much homebrew/using only bits of the rules, as there's no clear rule to handle a case like that. Another DM might just as easily rule that the repelling blast simply doesn't work because the manacle and extra weight would halt their movement.
Mechanically riding through the air is a "no" in terms of rules as written, because once the repelling blast ends you would immediately start to fall; you'd need some kind of ongoing effect on the NPC in order to use them as a high-risk budget broom of flying, and you'd need to make some kind of checks in order to "surf" the NPC rather than just flapping around behind them like a ragdoll.
That said, as a DM I would say that players should always be allowed to attempt something, but I might make them aware of just how unlikely it is to succeed or work as they intend.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.