Originally the Tentacule Rod has no +X but the DM can always rule differently.
Since it's the rod attacking and not the wielder, being invisible or under a Bless should not affect the item's attack since they affect creatures.
Tentacule Rod: While holding the rod, you can use an action to direct each tentacle to attack a creature you can see within 15 feet of you. Each tentacle makes a melee attack roll with a +9 bonus
Bless: You bless up to three creatures of your choice within range. Whenever a target makes an attack roll or a saving throw before the spell ends, the target can roll a d4 and add the number rolled to the attack roll or saving throw.
Invisible: Attack rolls against the creature have disadvantage, and the creature's attack rolls have advantage.
No. It's the rod that attacks and not the wielder and thus it is the rod that would need to be blessed to get the bonus but Bless can only target Creatures.
Can it attack at advantage if the wielder is invisible?
Technically no. But if you change the question to be "can it attack at advantage if the rod is invisible?" then the answer would be yes because again it is the rod that attacks, not the wielder. And thus, IMO at least, it is the rod that needs to be invisible to get the benefit of being an unseen attacker. Of course in most cases the rod would be invisible if its wielder is but that isn't a must.
That depends on the bonus you're referring to. I'll give an example below.
If you wield the tentacle rod and cast invisibility on yourself, the rod also becomes invisible. And after its first attack roll (with advantage if it is an unseen attacker), the rod becomes visible, but I think you remain invisible since you did not attack.
Bless affects creatures, so you can be blessed, but the rod cannot.
As a caveat, there is a sentence that says "If you hit a target with all three tentacles..." and that makes it seem like you're the one attacking. That kind of goes against the previous sentence that says you direct the rod to attack, and why would it say that if you are the one attacking with it? If the DM decides it is the PC making the attack, then invisibility would end for the wielder as well as the rod. It's a weird weapon.
If you wield the tentacle rod and cast invisibility on yourself, the rod also becomes invisible. And after its first attack roll (with advantage if it is an unseen attacker), the rod becomes visible, but I think you remain invisible since you did not attack.
I would have to disagree here. Invisibility says "The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell" but it can only target "creatures". So I can't see that the rod would lose the invisibility. Of course neither would the creature holding it. I agree that it is a weird weapon.
After reading more, if a Tentacule Rod is unseen while attacking, it should still have advantage on it's attack roll due to Unseen Attackers and Target because this rule refer to you as combatant and not necessarily creature..
Unseen Attackers and Target: Combatants often try to escape their foes' notice by hiding, casting the invisibility spell, or lurking in darkness....When a creature can't see you, you have advantage on attack rolls against it.
The more I look at this item, the weirder it gets. It's a magic weapon because the description says it is, but the magic item type is "rod" so it's neither a simple nor a martial weapon. It makes a melee attack that is neither a weapon attack nor a spell attack. You must be holding it, but you don't need to be wielding it, so thrikreen and loxodon and even your familiar can make use of it while potentially keeping hands free for other things. It can attack a creature you can see within 15 feet of you, even though it doesn't have a weapon range in the traditional sense. The tentacle rod's attacks cannot benefit from flanking, but since you, a creature, are holding the rod, you can still provide flanking to another creature while holding the rod. Although it could not be used for opportunity attacks (maybe as an improvised weapon, but that's a waste), you could potentially ready the tentacle rod action on your turn, and then, on a trigger, have the rod make its three attacks.
Whenever you have an object that does something normally reserved for creatures, you're going to get weird interactions with spells that are intended to interact with attacks, since the game assumes attacks are going to be coming from creatures. The dancing sword has a little bit of the same kind of funkiness as well. Seems like a pretty cool "weapon" to try to find other strange rule interactions while using.
An invisible imp's Tencule Rod could as an action be to direct each of them to attack a creature the imp can see within 15 feet of it. Each tentacle makes a melee attack roll with a +9 bonus and advantage.
"Because it is an attack, regardless if they are making or directing it. If they are the ones activating the magic item, then they are the ones rolling the D20. The only items (to my knowledge) that are capable of making rolls on their own are sentient magic items, and that is because they have mental stats of Int, Wis, and Cha. Tentacle Rod is not a sentient magic item."
"Because it is an attack, regardless if they are making or directing it. If they are the ones activating the magic item, then they are the ones rolling the D20. The only items (to my knowledge) that are capable of making rolls on their own are sentient magic items, and that is because they have mental stats of Int, Wis, and Cha. Tentacle Rod is not a sentient magic item."
It makes sense to me what do you guys think?
The description of the rod does say you( the pc ) can use an action to attack with the three tentacles of the rod, sounds like whatever affects the wielder that’s attuned to it is the one making the attacks and getting a fat bonus to hit to boot.
And if thats the case, whatever extra bonuses and whatnot the wielder has or can have with regards to meele attacks.
The reason it tends to feel weird is the trying to justify it as just the rod itself as attacking, but it’s really just the wielder attacking, getting three for the action, and nearly a 50% boost to hit.
Hell if i were a magic user I’d want one for those times an enemy would get in attack range as a way to hopefully nail a hat trick and really put that enemy in a bad spot.
Can the rod receive any bonuses? If so, how? Can it attack at advantage if the wielder is invisible? Can it benefit from bless?
Originally the Tentacule Rod has no +X but the DM can always rule differently.
Since it's the rod attacking and not the wielder, being invisible or under a Bless should not affect the item's attack since they affect creatures.
No. It's the rod that attacks and not the wielder and thus it is the rod that would need to be blessed to get the bonus but Bless can only target Creatures.
Technically no. But if you change the question to be "can it attack at advantage if the rod is invisible?" then the answer would be yes because again it is the rod that attacks, not the wielder. And thus, IMO at least, it is the rod that needs to be invisible to get the benefit of being an unseen attacker. Of course in most cases the rod would be invisible if its wielder is but that isn't a must.
As a caveat, there is a sentence that says "If you hit a target with all three tentacles..." and that makes it seem like you're the one attacking. That kind of goes against the previous sentence that says you direct the rod to attack, and why would it say that if you are the one attacking with it? If the DM decides it is the PC making the attack, then invisibility would end for the wielder as well as the rod. It's a weird weapon.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I would have to disagree here. Invisibility says "The spell ends for a target that attacks or casts a spell" but it can only target "creatures". So I can't see that the rod would lose the invisibility. Of course neither would the creature holding it. I agree that it is a weird weapon.
After reading more, if a Tentacule Rod is unseen while attacking, it should still have advantage on it's attack roll due to Unseen Attackers and Target because this rule refer to you as combatant and not necessarily creature..
The more I look at this item, the weirder it gets. It's a magic weapon because the description says it is, but the magic item type is "rod" so it's neither a simple nor a martial weapon. It makes a melee attack that is neither a weapon attack nor a spell attack. You must be holding it, but you don't need to be wielding it, so thrikreen and loxodon and even your familiar can make use of it while potentially keeping hands free for other things. It can attack a creature you can see within 15 feet of you, even though it doesn't have a weapon range in the traditional sense. The tentacle rod's attacks cannot benefit from flanking, but since you, a creature, are holding the rod, you can still provide flanking to another creature while holding the rod. Although it could not be used for opportunity attacks (maybe as an improvised weapon, but that's a waste), you could potentially ready the tentacle rod action on your turn, and then, on a trigger, have the rod make its three attacks.
Whenever you have an object that does something normally reserved for creatures, you're going to get weird interactions with spells that are intended to interact with attacks, since the game assumes attacks are going to be coming from creatures. The dancing sword has a little bit of the same kind of funkiness as well. Seems like a pretty cool "weapon" to try to find other strange rule interactions while using.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
So, if I have an Imp who is invisible and uses the tentacle rod, what happens?
An invisible imp's Tencule Rod could as an action be to direct each of them to attack a creature the imp can see within 15 feet of it. Each tentacle makes a melee attack roll with a +9 bonus and advantage.
A well-respected DM in my area said this:
"Because it is an attack, regardless if they are making or directing it. If they are the ones activating the magic item, then they are the ones rolling the D20. The only items (to my knowledge) that are capable of making rolls on their own are sentient magic items, and that is because they have mental stats of Int, Wis, and Cha. Tentacle Rod is not a sentient magic item."
It makes sense to me what do you guys think?
It's pretty clear that the Tentacule Rod that makes the attack roll.
The description of the rod does say you( the pc ) can use an action to attack with the three tentacles of the rod, sounds like whatever affects the wielder that’s attuned to it is the one making the attacks and getting a fat bonus to hit to boot.
And if thats the case, whatever extra bonuses and whatnot the wielder has or can have with regards to meele attacks.
The reason it tends to feel weird is the trying to justify it as just the rod itself as attacking, but it’s really just the wielder attacking, getting three for the action, and nearly a 50% boost to hit.
Hell if i were a magic user I’d want one for those times an enemy would get in attack range as a way to hopefully nail a hat trick and really put that enemy in a bad spot.
Byte my shiny metal ass
It is weird, but its not the only thing in the game that has this behaviour. The same question applies to the eldritch cannons that Artificers get.
Personally, I like the scene of an invisible foe weilding a visible tentacle rod. Very creepy.