AC
15
Initiative
+2 (12)
HP
81
(18d8)
Speed
30 ft.
Mod | Save | ||
---|---|---|---|
STR | 9 | -1 | -1 |
DEX | 14 | +2 | +2 |
CON | 11 | +0 | +0 |
Mod | Save | ||
---|---|---|---|
INT | 17 | +3 | +6 |
WIS | 12 | +1 | +4 |
CHA | 11 | +0 | +0 |
Skills
Arcana +6, History +6, Perception +4
Gear
Wand
Senses
Passive Perception 14
Languages
Common and any three languages
CR
6 (XP 2,300; PB +3)
Actions
Multiattack. The mage makes three Arcane Burst attacks.
Arcane Burst. Melee or Ranged Attack Roll: +6, reach 5 ft. or range 120 ft. Hit: 16 (3d8 + 3) Force damage.
Spellcasting. The mage casts one of the following spells, using Intelligence as the spellcasting ability (spell save DC 14):
At Will: Detect Magic, Light, Mage Armor (included in AC), Mage Hand, Prestidigitation
2/Day Each: Fireball (level 4 version), Invisibility
1/Day Each: Cone of Cold, Fly
Bonus Actions
Misty Step (3/Day). The mage casts Misty Step, using the same spellcasting ability as Spellcasting.
Reactions
Protective Magic (3/Day). The mage casts Counterspell or Shield in response to the spell’s trigger, using the same spellcasting ability as Spellcasting.
"Should it be common knowledge that everyone that isn't a PC just functions differently when it comes to magic?" — I think so. I believe that is the official stance for this edition (and for more than just magic). I also think you came to the right decision ultimately. It's more important that players enjoy their time and don't waste time trying to figure out NPC-specific mechanics that they have no means of deducing. I think the only way that players could be cued into this facet of Spell Attacks is if the NPC's actions are narrated in a way that leads to that conclusion. For example, if the DM says, "Without a word or gesture, the mage twitches its finger sending a pulse of force in your direction," the players might conclude that the mage uses no components for its attacks.
In the Wheel of Time, the author encountered a similar quandary: channelers can use their magic even if their hands are tied, they're blindfolded, etc. Essentially, the only real way to prevent them from channeling was (1) unconsciousness, (2) active "shielding" where one mage prevented another from using their magic, (3) special areas where magic doesn't work, (4) a magical collar that enslaved mages to other mages, and (5) a tea (a poison) that prevented the mages from using magic. I think a similar poison could serve you well. It also gives the mage a realistic means of escape down the line if their imprisonment is neglected—they could surreptitiously avoid taking the poison or build up an immunity. I'm just spitballing here. In sum, you're correct (in my opinion) in that this is a strange byproduct of the rules as written.
Edit: grammar
I thought about this some more, and this is what I came up with. Total Cover prevents a creature from targeting another creature with Attacks. Thus, Total Cover would prevent the Mage from using Arcane Burst against anyone they saw (their jailers). The jailers could also prevent the Mage from using Spell components (Verbal with a gag, Somatic with hand bindings, and Material with careful provision of goods). This would essentially neutralize the Mage.
However, this leaves one possibility of escape: the Mage battering down its prison with Arcane Burst. Doors describes what kind of doors can be used to imprison the Mage, the strongest being a Metal Door with 72 HP (which could be double or tripled if the door is large, per the rules) and an AC of 19. As you can imagine, a Mage can chew through that door in a few minutes using Arcane Burst.
We can also impose guardrails on this kind of strategy. For instance, guards could hear the Mage attempting to destroy the door and rush in to stop (or punish them). There's no requirement that using Arcane Burst against a metal door be silent.
Alternatively, as a DM you are encouraged to retool or reframe NPCs and objects to fit the needs of your group (i.e., a potion of flying could be reframed as an anti-gravity potion in a futuristic space campaign). So, you can take the Rolling Stone from the DMG's hazard section and retool it to be the door blocking the Mage if you so desired. This would give you a barrier with an AC 17, HP 100, a Damage Threshold of 10, and Immunity to Poison and Psychic damage.
Lastly, you can simply add a Damage Threshold to a Door (See above) greater than the damage that the Mage could inflict. This is my least favorite solution to be honest because it requires a Damage Threshold of 51 to fully negate any possibility of the Mage damaging the door, but you could always couch that as a very specific effect of a specially prepared door—and whether those are ubiquitous is up to the DM.