I am curious as to some interactions with these two things!
The Artificer Infusion "Returning Weapon" allows it to be applied to any simple or martial weapon with the thrown property. Nets are a martial weapon with the thrown property.
If an artificer were to throw a net of returning at a creature and hit, would said creature be dragged back to the artificer by the net?
Secondly, if the net is now a magical item, does it gain the unbreakable aspect of magical items and so eliminate the "deal 5 slashing damage" aspect?
Finally, the rules for the net do not explicitly state that the net has to remain on the restrained enemy to work - would it become a magical net which hits them, restrains them, and then returns to the artificers hand to be thrown again?
I am considering adding a net of returning as an item as I have Giants as foes in my game, so will definitely include this ability to catch and retrieve enemies with the nets!
So i cant find it in any other mention so i cant really talk to the returning part cause as I always knew it it just magically pops back up in your hand it doesn't fly back to you. But again cant find anything to back that up so that is just my opinion atm.
As for the item being unbreakable. It is breakable in the DMG
Magic Item Resilience
Most magic items are objects of extraordinary artisanship, assembled from the finest materials with meticulous attention to detail. Thanks to this combination of careful crafting and magical reinforcement, a magic item is at least as durable as a regular item of its kind. Most magic items, other than potions and scrolls, have resistance to all damage. Artifacts are practically indestructible, requiring extreme measures to destroy.
This feels like more of a videogame exploit than a D&D exploit. Like When you find a cursed magic item that reduces some stat, but if you equip it to the right character it rolls that stat all the way back past zero and shoots up to 256 or something.
Yeah, if Returning Weapon caused enemies to be yanked back to the thrower along with the weapon, you'd end up with Artificers being turned into Scorpion from Mortal Kombat. GET OVER HERE!
So? They still have to hit with a freakin' net. If you haven't recently looked at the net, let me give you a refresher: you either get disadvantage on your attack for being threatened, or you get it for using the long range which starts at 10ft. Defender chooses which skill they'll use to bust out of a DC 10 that can't scale up, and they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points. Attacking with a net doesn't deal damage and there's no way to make it deal damage.
The Artificer could just use Lightning Lure instead -- it reaches up to 15ft, targets only one ability instead of the defender's choice between two, doesn't automatically roll two dice in the defender's favor instead of just one, and can deal damage that scales with level, all for the trade that it can't restrain someone. It's also on the spell list for Artificers. And it scales using the casting ability, not a secondary ability for the caster. I think if they're choosing the net, it's at the very most a lateral move (no pun intended), not an upgrade. Really I think it's a downgrade.
they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points.
Only slashing damage. You can toss a net on someone, pour oil on them, light them up with heat metal, and the net will remain perfectly intact while the victim burns. Rules as written~ (Am I talking about the Players' Handbook, or the Geneva Conventions?)
Well, that's an interesting interpretation. Here's the text:
"Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net."
I would assume that dealing any other kinds of damage to the net (AC 10) frees the creature while harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net. Are you suggesting instead that the net is immune to all non-slashing damage?
Also, nothing in the heat metal spell lights fires. There are plenty of other ways, I'm just nitpicking.
they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points.
Only slashing damage. You can toss a net on someone, pour oil on them, light them up with heat metal, and the net will remain perfectly intact while the victim burns. Rules as written~ (Am I talking about the Players' Handbook, or the Geneva Conventions?)
Well, that's an interesting interpretation. Here's the text:
"Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net."
I would assume that dealing any other kinds of damage to the net (AC 10) frees the creature while harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net. Are you suggesting instead that the net is immune to all non-slashing damage?
Also, nothing in the heat metal spell lights fires. There are plenty of other ways, I'm just nitpicking.
I would rule that no other damage will break a net off of someone, though I may allow fire to do so - but it will be resistant to fire, and have more hp. As a DM, I would consider the net to be:
10hp Vulnerable to slashing Resistant to fire and acid Immune to everything else.
I mean, if you bludgeon a net, it's still going to be a net. If you try to damage its mind with psychic damage; it's a net. Blast some cold at it - it's a net. Force damage? Net.
A net has hit points like any object in 5e - that is, the DM gets to assign amount of HP based on rough guidelines of size and resilience. The point of this rule, as I understand it, is saying that you can use slashing damage to free a creature *without hurting them*. Fire damage, for example, would also free the creature, but will also hurt them in the process (and also in the reverse, I would argue. There is no way of applying fire damage to a restrained creature without also harming the net).
So? They still have to hit with a freakin' net. If you haven't recently looked at the net, let me give you a refresher: you either get disadvantage on your attack for being threatened, or you get it for using the long range which starts at 10ft. Defender chooses which skill they'll use to bust out of a DC 10 that can't scale up, and they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points. Attacking with a net doesn't deal damage and there's no way to make it deal damage.
they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points.
Only slashing damage. You can toss a net on someone, pour oil on them, light them up with heat metal, and the net will remain perfectly intact while the victim burns. Rules as written~ (Am I talking about the Players' Handbook, or the Geneva Conventions?)
Well, that's an interesting interpretation. Here's the text:
"Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net."
I would assume that dealing any other kinds of damage to the net (AC 10) frees the creature while harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net. Are you suggesting instead that the net is immune to all non-slashing damage?
Also, nothing in the heat metal spell lights fires. There are plenty of other ways, I'm just nitpicking.
I would rule that no other damage will break a net off of someone, though I may allow fire to do so - but it will be resistant to fire, and have more hp. As a DM, I would consider the net to be:
10hp Vulnerable to slashing Resistant to fire and acid Immune to everything else.
I mean, if you bludgeon a net, it's still going to be a net. If you try to damage its mind with psychic damage; it's a net. Blast some cold at it - it's a net. Force damage? Net.
i would argue that force damage might harm it in some situation, but the element is just damned weird in general so it comes down to if the DM rules it like Psychic or like a physical attack.
"Force is pure magical energy focused into a da. Momaging formst effects that deal force damage are spells, including magic missile and spiritual weapon."
spells like magic missile seem like they wouldn't affect it but spiritual weapon might, depending on weapon type, except that the weapon type doesn't matter and is just flavour which is kinda hard to work with, sword burst definitely seems like it would damage it, but once again its unclear whether force works more like bludgeoning/piercing/slashing or more like psychic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
This Mug immediately shared with me a transcendental tale of an Infinite Mug that anchors the Universe and keeps it from folding in on itself. I filed this report under "illogical nonsense" and asked why its sign is in Times New Roman font, when it is basic knowledge that Arial Black is a far superior font. I wondered: How did this mug even get past the assembly line with its theistic beliefs and poor font choices?
quote from Romantically Apocalyptic byVitaly S Alexius
Why has no one written “gotta catch them all” here yet?
So, my approach would include size — M or smaller for a combat Net. Which, for my game, means things under 7’.
Dragging them I would rule requires more work, but doable, just not with a single use of ability. So they could get it eventually. I would always include a save against it, though. Nets don’t operate by closing up like some claw, lol, so DC would be low for M, higher for S. But, again, I have more size categories than standard, so meh.
outside of that, I don’t see why not. In a different game within my group, there is a net of constricting. And I have Threads of Doom.
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
If an effect doesn't specifically state 'this happens' - then it does not. Like, Fireball. It doesn't say that a huge burst of flame consumes the oxygen in the air, causing choking for anyone in the area (assuming they survive the fire itself) - hence, that is not something that happens.
Returning weapon doesn't state 'oh, and btw if you throw a net, or a harpoon, or a very sticky boomerang, it will drag the target back along with it' - and hence, that is not what happens. That's what you want to happen. It just isn't.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Correct. Just like you can't use a harpoon (javelin?) to impale something and haul it towards you, unless you happen to be a sahuagin I suppose, because it doesn't say it gets lodged in there, it just deals the damage and I guess falls to the floor.
These are the moments when most people would just bend the rules. But since we're in the rules forum right now, that route of conversation is a dead end.
So? They still have to hit with a freakin' net. If you haven't recently looked at the net, let me give you a refresher: you either get disadvantage on your attack for being threatened, or you get it for using the long range which starts at 10ft. Defender chooses which skill they'll use to bust out of a DC 10 that can't scale up, and they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points. Attacking with a net doesn't deal damage and there's no way to make it deal damage.
That's the rub right there ...
Oh, and I forgot to mention -- if you happen to have Extra Attack, no you don't. Attacking with a net is gonna eat up your whole action.
So, my approach would include size — M or smaller for a combat Net. Which, for my game, means things under 7’.
Dragging them I would rule requires more work, but doable, just not with a single use of ability. So they could get it eventually. I would always include a save against it, though. Nets don’t operate by closing up like some claw, lol, so DC would be low for M, higher for S. But, again, I have more size categories than standard, so meh.
I'm reminded of the 3.5e spider you can summon with Summon Monster. "Web-spinners can throw a web eight times per day. This is similar to an attack with a net* but has a maximum range of 50 feet, with a range increment of 10 feet, and is effective against targets up to one size category larger than the spider. An entangled creature can escape with a successful Escape Artist check or burst it with a Strength check. Both are standard actions whose DCs are given in the table below. The check DCs are Constitution-based, and the Strength check DC includes a +4 racial bonus."
* Net: "When you throw a net, you make a ranged touch attack against your target. A net’s maximum range is 10 feet. If you hit, the target is entangled. An entangled creature takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls and a -4 penalty on Dexterity, can move at only half speed, and cannot charge or run. If you control the trailing rope by succeeding on an opposed Strength check while holding it, the entangled creature can move only within the limits that the rope allows. If the entangled creature attempts to cast a spell, it must make a DC 15 Concentration check or be unable to cast the spell.
An entangled creature can escape with a DC 20 Escape Artist check (a full-round action). The net has 5 hit points and can be burst with a DC 25 Strength check (also a full-round action).
A net is useful only against creatures within one size category of you.
A net must be folded to be thrown effectively. The first time you throw your net in a fight, you make a normal ranged touch attack roll. After the net is unfolded, you take a -4 penalty on attack rolls with it. It takes 2 rounds for a proficient user to fold a net and twice that long for a nonproficient one to do so."
I wonder sometimes, if some people here might be better off playing 3.5e. Not me though. I cannot stand all this needless detail. All I need will fit in one sentence, and it's not even a run-on: "A net is a thrown weapon that reduces its target's movement speed to 0 but usually doesn't deal damage." Everything else is better served as rulings if you ask me. (Although now I'm imagining a weapon that deals 1d10 damage to the target's movement speed...)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I am curious as to some interactions with these two things!
The Artificer Infusion "Returning Weapon" allows it to be applied to any simple or martial weapon with the thrown property. Nets are a martial weapon with the thrown property.
If an artificer were to throw a net of returning at a creature and hit, would said creature be dragged back to the artificer by the net?
Secondly, if the net is now a magical item, does it gain the unbreakable aspect of magical items and so eliminate the "deal 5 slashing damage" aspect?
Finally, the rules for the net do not explicitly state that the net has to remain on the restrained enemy to work - would it become a magical net which hits them, restrains them, and then returns to the artificers hand to be thrown again?
I am considering adding a net of returning as an item as I have Giants as foes in my game, so will definitely include this ability to catch and retrieve enemies with the nets!
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!
So i cant find it in any other mention so i cant really talk to the returning part cause as I always knew it it just magically pops back up in your hand it doesn't fly back to you. But again cant find anything to back that up so that is just my opinion atm.
As for the item being unbreakable. It is breakable in the DMG
Magic Item Resilience
Most magic items are objects of extraordinary artisanship, assembled from the finest materials with meticulous attention to detail. Thanks to this combination of careful crafting and magical reinforcement, a magic item is at least as durable as a regular item of its kind. Most magic items, other than potions and scrolls, have resistance to all damage. Artifacts are practically indestructible, requiring extreme measures to destroy.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/treasure#MagicItemResilience
along with this being a property you can ADD in on the weapon special features tab
Unbreakable. The item can’t be broken. Special means must be used to destroy it.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/treasure#WhatMinorPropertyDoesItHave
So maybe at that point it might be like 10 hp worth of slashing damage but nothing to make it worth that much.
To me the net would return to the artificer leaving the target free and not restrained anymore.
I'd allow it. You never see nets in play, and it's not as if forced movement is rare these days, even for Artificers.
This feels like more of a videogame exploit than a D&D exploit. Like When you find a cursed magic item that reduces some stat, but if you equip it to the right character it rolls that stat all the way back past zero and shoots up to 256 or something.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
I just think having the Returning Weapon applying forced movement assumes a lot from the infusion.
So? They still have to hit with a freakin' net. If you haven't recently looked at the net, let me give you a refresher: you either get disadvantage on your attack for being threatened, or you get it for using the long range which starts at 10ft. Defender chooses which skill they'll use to bust out of a DC 10 that can't scale up, and they, or anyone else, can just damage the net instead. It barely has any hit points. Attacking with a net doesn't deal damage and there's no way to make it deal damage.
The Artificer could just use Lightning Lure instead -- it reaches up to 15ft, targets only one ability instead of the defender's choice between two, doesn't automatically roll two dice in the defender's favor instead of just one, and can deal damage that scales with level, all for the trade that it can't restrain someone. It's also on the spell list for Artificers. And it scales using the casting ability, not a secondary ability for the caster. I think if they're choosing the net, it's at the very most a lateral move (no pun intended), not an upgrade. Really I think it's a downgrade.
Well, that's an interesting interpretation. Here's the text:
"Dealing 5 slashing damage to the net (AC 10) also frees the creature without harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net."
I would assume that dealing any other kinds of damage to the net (AC 10) frees the creature while harming it, ending the effect and destroying the net. Are you suggesting instead that the net is immune to all non-slashing damage?
Also, nothing in the heat metal spell lights fires. There are plenty of other ways, I'm just nitpicking.
I would rule that it would only return to the thrower if it did not engulf the target and restrain them.
It would make the net a more useful weapon but that is a big cost to do so. Unless your goal is to capture things alive.
I would rule that no other damage will break a net off of someone, though I may allow fire to do so - but it will be resistant to fire, and have more hp. As a DM, I would consider the net to be:
10hp
Vulnerable to slashing
Resistant to fire and acid
Immune to everything else.
I mean, if you bludgeon a net, it's still going to be a net. If you try to damage its mind with psychic damage; it's a net. Blast some cold at it - it's a net. Force damage? Net.
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!
A net has hit points like any object in 5e - that is, the DM gets to assign amount of HP based on rough guidelines of size and resilience. The point of this rule, as I understand it, is saying that you can use slashing damage to free a creature *without hurting them*. Fire damage, for example, would also free the creature, but will also hurt them in the process (and also in the reverse, I would argue. There is no way of applying fire damage to a restrained creature without also harming the net).
That's the rub right there ...
Life's hard - get a helmet!
i would argue that force damage might harm it in some situation, but the element is just damned weird in general so it comes down to if the DM rules it like Psychic or like a physical attack.
"Force is pure magical energy focused into a da. Momaging formst effects that deal force damage are spells, including magic missile and spiritual weapon."
spells like magic missile seem like they wouldn't affect it but spiritual weapon might, depending on weapon type, except that the weapon type doesn't matter and is just flavour which is kinda hard to work with, sword burst definitely seems like it would damage it, but once again its unclear whether force works more like bludgeoning/piercing/slashing or more like psychic.
This Mug immediately shared with me a transcendental tale of an Infinite Mug that anchors the Universe and keeps it from folding in on itself. I filed this report under "illogical nonsense" and asked why its sign is in Times New Roman font, when it is basic knowledge that Arial Black is a far superior font. I wondered: How did this mug even get past the assembly line with its theistic beliefs and poor font choices?
quote from Romantically Apocalyptic by Vitaly S Alexius
Why has no one written “gotta catch them all” here yet?
So, my approach would include size — M or smaller for a combat Net. Which, for my game, means things under 7’.
Dragging them I would rule requires more work, but doable, just not with a single use of ability. So they could get it eventually. I would always include a save against it, though. Nets don’t operate by closing up like some claw, lol, so DC would be low for M, higher for S. But, again, I have more size categories than standard, so meh.
outside of that, I don’t see why not. In a different game within my group, there is a net of constricting. And I have Threads of Doom.
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
If an effect doesn't specifically state 'this happens' - then it does not. Like, Fireball. It doesn't say that a huge burst of flame consumes the oxygen in the air, causing choking for anyone in the area (assuming they survive the fire itself) - hence, that is not something that happens.
Returning weapon doesn't state 'oh, and btw if you throw a net, or a harpoon, or a very sticky boomerang, it will drag the target back along with it' - and hence, that is not what happens. That's what you want to happen. It just isn't.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
Correct. Just like you can't use a harpoon (javelin?) to impale something and haul it towards you, unless you happen to be a sahuagin I suppose, because it doesn't say it gets lodged in there, it just deals the damage and I guess falls to the floor.
These are the moments when most people would just bend the rules. But since we're in the rules forum right now, that route of conversation is a dead end.
Oh, and I forgot to mention -- if you happen to have Extra Attack, no you don't. Attacking with a net is gonna eat up your whole action.
Poor net.
I'm reminded of the 3.5e spider you can summon with Summon Monster. "Web-spinners can throw a web eight times per day. This is similar to an attack with a net* but has a maximum range of 50 feet, with a range increment of 10 feet, and is effective against targets up to one size category larger than the spider. An entangled creature can escape with a successful Escape Artist check or burst it with a Strength check. Both are standard actions whose DCs are given in the table below. The check DCs are Constitution-based, and the Strength check DC includes a +4 racial bonus."
* Net: "When you throw a net, you make a ranged touch attack against your target. A net’s maximum range is 10 feet. If you hit, the target is entangled. An entangled creature takes a -2 penalty on attack rolls and a -4 penalty on Dexterity, can move at only half speed, and cannot charge or run. If you control the trailing rope by succeeding on an opposed Strength check while holding it, the entangled creature can move only within the limits that the rope allows. If the entangled creature attempts to cast a spell, it must make a DC 15 Concentration check or be unable to cast the spell.
An entangled creature can escape with a DC 20 Escape Artist check (a full-round action). The net has 5 hit points and can be burst with a DC 25 Strength check (also a full-round action).
A net is useful only against creatures within one size category of you.
A net must be folded to be thrown effectively. The first time you throw your net in a fight, you make a normal ranged touch attack roll. After the net is unfolded, you take a -4 penalty on attack rolls with it. It takes 2 rounds for a proficient user to fold a net and twice that long for a nonproficient one to do so."
I wonder sometimes, if some people here might be better off playing 3.5e. Not me though. I cannot stand all this needless detail. All I need will fit in one sentence, and it's not even a run-on: "A net is a thrown weapon that reduces its target's movement speed to 0 but usually doesn't deal damage." Everything else is better served as rulings if you ask me. (Although now I'm imagining a weapon that deals 1d10 damage to the target's movement speed...)