Scry and Sleight of hand? (RAW)

[With a box]

1. scry on a person
2. pink what you want to take (a rod/ the BoH / portable hole or whatever)
3. take it by DC 20 Sleight of hand (no range limit, not require LoS or LoE, fixed DC)
4. ???
5. now you have said item.:smallbiggrin:

[Segev]

It's a very weak argument from the RAW, since it's based in "since it doesn't specify that you have to be able to reach them..." but it is an argument you could make.

I would say that the stronger argument is that it is relying on the fact that it discusses using your hand and physically taking things, which would fall back to something akin to the "hand an item to somebody else" rules without the whole voluntary handing-off part. In other words, sleight-of-hand relies on using your hands to physically manipulate objects. If you can't get to it with your hand, you can't take it.

[Crake]

the same argument could be made simply by standing on a rooftop looking down at the marketplace. In the absense of rules (it doesn't say you dont require LoE/LS etc etc, it merely lacks any rules saying otherwise) common sense prevails.

[Lightlawbliss]

the same argument could be made simply by standing on a rooftop looking down at the marketplace. In the absense of rules (it doesn't say you dont require LoE/LS etc etc, it merely lacks any rules saying otherwise) common sense prevails.
One problem with common sense prevailing: it isn't very common. Also, this was a question about RAW, and how "common sense" says something should happen is not RAW, it is RAI or a house rule.

[Segev]

Like I said, it's possible to make an argument weakly supported by the RAW that this is the case. That support is of the "it doesn't say you can't" variety.

Common sense is often over-used as a justification, but in this case, I don't think most people - that is, the "common man" - would agree that you can pick somebody's pocket with nothing but natural skill without being able to physically access that pocket with anything you are manipulating.


Conversely, I'd be inclined to allow a character who is good enough at this kind of thing to do so...if they could explain the awesome method they're using to do it.

"I flip a coin hard at the ground in such a way that it will bounce up and jar loose the object from my target's pocket, have it get kicked by the passers-by whose pace I time just right, and fly through the air into my waiting hand," is outlandish but awesome-crazy, so if you're Just That Good(tm), I'd probably let you make the attempt. (Might take some big penalties, or require additional rolls to land the coin, bounce it right, and time the kick.)

[Deophaun]

1. scry on a person
2. pink what you want to take (a rod/ the BoH / portable hole or whatever)
3. take it by DC 20 Sleight of hand (no range limit, not require LoS or LoE, fixed DC)
4. ???
5. now you have said item.:smallbiggrin:

A practical problem you have with this: who is going to sit within your LoS and LoE for an hour while you cast scrying?

Live by stupid RAW, die by stupid RAW.

[Flickerdart]

Arcane trickster has a helpful ability for this argument: Ranged Legerdemain. It says "an arcane trickster can perform one of the following class skills at a range of 30 feet: Disable Device, Open Lock, or Sleight of Hand."

If Sleight of Hand were possible to be used at indefinite distances, this ability would be redundant. Therefore we can conclude that Sleight of Hand checks have a maximum range of at most 25 feet normally.

[Troacctid]

Well, there is a general rule that says that, when you're not engaged in round-by-round combat, you can move however a real person could move.

[Lightlawbliss]

Arcane trickster has a helpful ability for this argument: Ranged Legerdemain. It says "an arcane trickster can perform one of the following class skills at a range of 30 feet: Disable Device, Open Lock, or Sleight of Hand."

If Sleight of Hand were possible to be used at indefinite distances, this ability would be redundant. Therefore we can conclude that Sleight of Hand checks have a maximum range of at most 25 feet normally.

(I agree with you but...) Because we totally don't have massive lists of places where the rules don't make sense or even hurt you while pretending to help you.