I thought the version with the boots might works (or perhaps a PC with a fly speed) assuming the polymorphed form is pretty small ( "tiny").
I guess it might take some time to get enough altitude to do signifant damage, and by that time the party might be out of combat and so it might not be cool to do that to a creature, if you are not engaged in combat against them. (is that a thing?)
For this to work, the DM would have to go to great lengths to make it possible.
There is no rule to firing arrows with something tied to it, they would have to make a house rule that really utilizes fantasy physics to make this possible.
There is also no rule for damage caused by acceleration and air resistance. They'd choose to not have the firing deal any damage.
It would be 100% justified for the DM to just say: not possible.
Also, when would this come up? If it needs 20d6 damage, then most likely you can deal much more damage with your actions.
Polymorph - 1 turn, picking up the critter - possibly 1 turn, securely attaching it to an arrow - quite a few turns and hoping their allies don't drop your con, firing the arrow - 1 turn, waiting for the arrow to reach 200 meters and time dropping concentration - at least 1 turn, waiting for them to fall and hope they don't have feather fall or similar - 1 turn.
You can deal a lot of cantrip damage by then.
Also. Why wouldn't they survive the indestructible arrow tube? A lot of spells determine an effect when such a thing happens. Oftentimes appearing in the closest available space and/or taking a bit of dmg etc. Polymorph doesn't specify this. So the DM has absolute control over what happens. Maybe the magical transmutation effect will still destroy the arrow, maybe they will appear next to it. Maybe they will magically squeeze out of the point's seams while their body is magically reshaping.
This idea cherry picks when to use physics and rules and makes rulings on behalf of the DM. Basically an obvious exploit attempt without any ground.
i did forget to mention, when i used this, he was the last enemy up. i don't think this would work well in most situations, as you need to take several actions to polymorph them, tie them to an arrow and shoot them in the air. also, since it is going 600 feet up if you use a longbow, they will stay falling for a good round or so.
for the unbreakable arrow, ruling that the creature appears outside is completely reasonable, i just wanted to post that as an idea without making a separate thread.
either way, everything you said is quite reasonable, this idea is quite situational and difficult to pull off, but it can work
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hollow unbreakable arrows are the most OP common magic item, and my current method of coming up with insane combat shenanigans.
if you make a steel pipe with one end closed and a nozzle on the other, you can enlarge it, fill with any liquid, and then drop concentration, creating a high pressure squirt gun. (or a pipe bomb, depending if it holds)
I thought the version with the boots might works (or perhaps a PC with a fly speed) assuming the polymorphed form is pretty small ( "tiny").
I guess it might take some time to get enough altitude to do signifant damage, and by that time the party might be out of combat and so it might not be cool to do that to a creature, if you are not engaged in combat against them. (is that a thing?)
you are right that this is more of an out of (active) combat execution tactic. if you wanted it to do even more, just put a wall of fire and entangle where they land.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hollow unbreakable arrows are the most OP common magic item, and my current method of coming up with insane combat shenanigans.
if you make a steel pipe with one end closed and a nozzle on the other, you can enlarge it, fill with any liquid, and then drop concentration, creating a high pressure squirt gun. (or a pipe bomb, depending if it holds)
Just generally, are out of combat executions and, executions of caputured or surrundered enemies frowned on, in D&D, like considered murder or war crimes, in the context of the game? If so, that would be inconvient and inhibit creativity. And yet . . .
Just generally, are out of combat executions and, executions of captured or surrendered enemies frowned on, in D&D, like considered murder or war crimes, in the context of the game? If so, that would be inconvenient and inhibit creativity. And yet . . .
D&D's basic rules take a moral or ethical position? Huh. Strange idea. *whistles tunelessly*
More properly, that's a function of the setting. In some parts of Toril, not really, In others, absolutely. In Eberron, probably. DL depends on who wins. Not sure how planescape would take it. Probably very situationally.
Of course, under the rule of "if it happens to NPCs it can happen to players", one might want to be far more careful...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Just generally, are out of combat executions and, executions of caputured or surrundered enemies frowned on, in D&D, like considered murder or war crimes, in the context of the game? If so, that would be inconvient and inhibit creativity. And yet . . .
Broadly speaking, killing NPCs outside of combat is considered morally dubious but there are some exceptions: where there's reason to believe that a surrender is made under false pretenses or you've captured someone alive who's dangerous enough that you don't have a way to safely transport them back to the nearest magistrate for a proper trial, for example. That does not mean executing someone just because it's more convenient for you, though.
Just generally, are out of combat executions and, executions of caputured or surrundered enemies frowned on, in D&D, like considered murder or war crimes, in the context of the game? If so, that would be inconvient and inhibit creativity. And yet . . .
Entirely depends on the setting or even a certain place within the setting. In some nations laws protect the citizens, in some nations a person of nobility could have a peasant killed for the pettiest reason without consequences.
D&D's basic rules take a moral or ethical position? Huh. Strange idea. *whistles tunelessly*
I mean, there is this thing called alignment, so maybe not so crazy, granted there doesn't seem to be an expectation that every character will be lawful good, but morality is a concept in the game, at least. And then some people think that D&D characters should try to be the heroes of their own stories, or at least be given to doing the right thing, most of the time. But then the life of the adventurer and all the things that magic can do, in and out of combat, the lure of gold and all the things an adventure might have to do, just to survive and then the urge by players to solve problems in interesting and creative ways (and how that might feel to the DM and other players, which seems like the real moral test).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I thought the version with the boots might works (or perhaps a PC with a fly speed) assuming the polymorphed form is pretty small ( "tiny").
I guess it might take some time to get enough altitude to do signifant damage, and by that time the party might be out of combat and so it might not be cool to do that to a creature, if you are not engaged in combat against them. (is that a thing?)
i did forget to mention, when i used this, he was the last enemy up. i don't think this would work well in most situations, as you need to take several actions to polymorph them, tie them to an arrow and shoot them in the air. also, since it is going 600 feet up if you use a longbow, they will stay falling for a good round or so.
for the unbreakable arrow, ruling that the creature appears outside is completely reasonable, i just wanted to post that as an idea without making a separate thread.
either way, everything you said is quite reasonable, this idea is quite situational and difficult to pull off, but it can work
Hollow unbreakable arrows are the most OP common magic item, and my current method of coming up with insane combat shenanigans.
if you make a steel pipe with one end closed and a nozzle on the other, you can enlarge it, fill with any liquid, and then drop concentration, creating a high pressure squirt gun. (or a pipe bomb, depending if it holds)
you are right that this is more of an out of (active) combat execution tactic. if you wanted it to do even more, just put a wall of fire and entangle where they land.
Hollow unbreakable arrows are the most OP common magic item, and my current method of coming up with insane combat shenanigans.
if you make a steel pipe with one end closed and a nozzle on the other, you can enlarge it, fill with any liquid, and then drop concentration, creating a high pressure squirt gun. (or a pipe bomb, depending if it holds)
Just generally, are out of combat executions and, executions of caputured or surrundered enemies frowned on, in D&D, like considered murder or war crimes, in the context of the game? If so, that would be inconvient and inhibit creativity. And yet . . .
D&D's basic rules take a moral or ethical position? Huh. Strange idea. *whistles tunelessly*
More properly, that's a function of the setting. In some parts of Toril, not really, In others, absolutely. In Eberron, probably. DL depends on who wins. Not sure how planescape would take it. Probably very situationally.
Of course, under the rule of "if it happens to NPCs it can happen to players", one might want to be far more careful...
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Broadly speaking, killing NPCs outside of combat is considered morally dubious but there are some exceptions: where there's reason to believe that a surrender is made under false pretenses or you've captured someone alive who's dangerous enough that you don't have a way to safely transport them back to the nearest magistrate for a proper trial, for example. That does not mean executing someone just because it's more convenient for you, though.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Entirely depends on the setting or even a certain place within the setting. In some nations laws protect the citizens, in some nations a person of nobility could have a peasant killed for the pettiest reason without consequences.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I mean, there is this thing called alignment, so maybe not so crazy, granted there doesn't seem to be an expectation that every character will be lawful good, but morality is a concept in the game, at least. And then some people think that D&D characters should try to be the heroes of their own stories, or at least be given to doing the right thing, most of the time. But then the life of the adventurer and all the things that magic can do, in and out of combat, the lure of gold and all the things an adventure might have to do, just to survive and then the urge by players to solve problems in interesting and creative ways (and how that might feel to the DM and other players, which seems like the real moral test).