Mage Hand Legerdemain

[Keravath]

A question on what information an arcane trickster rogue can receive from the mage hand.

Rules:

The mage hand spell:

"MACE HAND LEGERDEMAIN
Starting at 3rd level, when you cast mage hand, you can make the spectral hand invisible, and you can perform the following additional tasks with it:
• You can stow one object the hand is holding in a container worn or carried by another creature.
• You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature.
• You can use thieves' tools to pick locks and disarm traps at range.
You can perform one of these tasks without being noticed by a creature if you succeed on a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check contested by the creature's Wisdom (Perception) check.
In addition, you can use the bonus action granted by your Cunning Action to control the hand."


"MAGE HAND
Conjuration cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: 1 minute
A spectral, floating hand appears at a point you choose within range. The hand lasts for the duration or until you dismiss it as an action. The hand vanishes if it is ever more than 30 feet away from you or if you cast this spell again.
You can use your action to control the hand. You can use the hand to manipulate an object, open an unlocked door or container, stow or retrieve an item from an open container, or pour the contents out of a vial. You can move the hand up to 30 feet each time you use it.
The hand can't attack, activate magic items, or carry more than 10 pounds."

The spell only indicates that you create a floating spectral hand. No detail about the hand is given. You can perform certain actions without penalty at range using the Mage Hand.


The question is: What sensory feedback, if any, is provided by the hand?

The spell doesn't indicate either way. However, you can summon the hand anywhere within the range of 30'. It does not indicate that you need to be able to see where the hand is summoned. (Edit: The basic rules on spell targeting require that the target of the spell not be behind total cover which means you need to be able to see the location where it initially appears.)

Mage Hand Legerdemain indicates that the Arcane Trickster mage hand can be invisible. In addition, the arcane trickster can pick locks or disarm traps at a range of 30' and there is no requirement that they be able to see the hand or the target lock/trap in order to perform these actions.

This would require either the hand to be able to provide tactile feedback to the caster (at least the arcane trickster rogue) in order to perform these actions or the spell creates a semi-sentient hand that is able to go where the rogue can not see and perform the actions specified as possible in the spell description (open locks, disarm traps, stow and recover items from a container worn or carried by another character).

None of the special abilities state any requirement for the rogue to be able to see the target. RAW this is not a requirement for the use of either mage hand or mage hand legerdemain.

RAW it should be fine to (unless I am missing something):
- cast mage hand on the far side of a door and use it to open the lock/lift the bar blocking the door (if less than 10lbs)
(Edit: Can't target the far side of the door - but should be able to move it under the door if space available?)
- cast mage hand inside a chest to disarm a trap
(Edit: Can't cast it inside a chest since you can't see it - unless you make a small hole in the chest or otherwise create a way to see inside)
- cast mage hand to pick a pocket of a person in the next room, or plant evidence

All of these are possible RAW without any modifiers being applied to the activity - they are just applications of what the spell and mage hand legerdemain say they can do.

Do folks just apply the rules as written for this or does every DM have their own set of house rules? Since it is "magic", all of the RAW functionality can simply happen without need for an explanation of how it works but that makes it difficult to assess creative uses of mage hand when the player does something other than the specific specified actions.

[Man_Over_Game]

It's already one of the (if not THE) most versatile tools for RP scenarios.

Ask yourself, what's more plausible:

That sight doesn't matter?
Or that sight does?


Similarly, Spiritual Weapon is separate from a Cleric, yet it has Disadvantage to attack if it's attacking a creature that the Cleric cannot see.

I'd impose the same thing upon the enhanced Mage Hand. Any Check the Hand must make obeys LoS rules. I might not require a Check for the Hand to grab something (do you ask your players to make a Check to draw their weapons in the dark?) but I would require a Check for the Hand to use your Thieves' Tools. In those instances where you cannot see the target, you suffer Disadvantage.

I don't see enough justification to allow the Hand to be a better thief than the Thief. Having a magical hand does not allow the Arcane Trickster to see in the dark, nor should it provide a similar conclusion.

[Tanarii]

You cannot cast on the other side of an object. You need line of effect to the point you choose, as per the general rule for spells and targeting.

[Dalebert]

You cannot cast on the other side of an object. You need line of effect to the point you choose, as per the general rule for spells and targeting.

You beat me to it. So many exploitations seem to be based on ignorance of this general rule. This rule applies to any spell that doesn't explicit state an exception, e.g. Teleport.

[Man_Over_Game]

You cannot cast on the other side of an object. You need line of effect to the point you choose, as per the general rule for spells and targeting.


You beat me to it. So many exploitations seem to be based on ignorance of this general rule. This rule applies to any spell that doesn't explicit state an exception, e.g. Teleport.

Mage Hand doesn't need to be cast every turn, it only needs to be cast once per minute. After that, the Rogue's Cunning Action is able to move the Mage Hand for the next minute.

So you're both right in that in that the Hand cannot be cast behind the object, but that doesn't answer the question as to how the Hand performs when out of Line of Sight (and it can be out of Line of Sight).

[Mellack]

Mage Hand doesn't need to be cast every turn, it only needs to be cast once per minute. After that, the Rogue's Cunning Action is able to move the Mage Hand for the next minute.

So you're both right in that in that the Hand cannot be cast behind the object, but that doesn't answer the question as to how the Hand performs when out of Line of Sight (and it can be out of Line of Sight).


The rule doesn't answer the question but it does eliminate the most common uses for using it out of sight, such as the OPs examples of on the other side of a locked door or inside of a chest.

Personally I would probably rule that you get disadvantage if you try to use mage hand to do a skill check while it is out of sight.

[Naanomi]

If you are a Gith you can cast it without verbal or somatic componant as well

[saucerhead]

What came up at our last session was whether the invisibility of the hand is conferred to the items it's carrying. It would seem silly to have an invisible hand with the ability of sleight of hand, but hey look the gemstone, coins, what have you are floating through the air visible.

The invisibility spell allows carried or worn items to vanish. It only makes sense. If you wanted the item to be visible you can drop or toss it.

How does this work in your campaign?

[Sindeloke]

That hasn't come up, but I think I'd rule it as a Slight of Hand check. From an in-universe perspective I can't tell you exactly what would be happening to make a gem or gold piece invisible, but conceptually I'd say it's basically equivalent to trying to carry a coin in your actual fleshy hand without anyone noticing. People can still see you're carrying something (or palming a card, or whatever) unless you know some stage magic to disguise the behavior of your hand as "normal" for an empty hand. Thus people would still see your mage hand is carrying something unless you know some skill (come to think of it this is probably an Arcana check) to disguise the behavior of the mage hand as "normal" for empty air.

[RSP]

Also keep in mind, the created spectral hand can use Thieves Tools, but is not summoned with them. If the AT wants the hand to pick a lock, the hand must first be given the tools to do so.

[Chronos]

The items the hand is picking up are still visible, but part of the skill involved in the Sleight of Hand check is keeping anyone from noticing them. That could mean doing it when nobody is looking, or creating a small distraction to make them not look in the right place, or moving it underneath the table or someplace similarly obstructed, or whatever. If you want, the DM and/or player can describe just how the rogue keeps it from being noticed (and how that fails, if the check isn't high enough), or if you prefer you can just say "you succeeded on your check, so it works".

[saucerhead]

Okay, that makes sense. The mage hand is described as "spectral" so even if you closed it like a fist you could conceivably see an item through it regardless of whether you make it invisible or not. The sleight of hand ability should be the part that counts towards making the filched items "disappear". Skill not Magic.

Thanks for the input everyone.:smallsmile:

[BarneyBent]

Okay, that makes sense. The mage hand is described as "spectral" so even if you closed it like a fist you could conceivably see an item through it regardless of whether you make it invisible or not. The sleight of hand ability should be the part that counts towards making the filched items "disappear". Skill not Magic.

Thanks for the input everyone.:smallsmile:

Though not really supported by RAW, I’d probably rule that something small enough to fit into a hand completely, without anything poking through (so some small coins, a few ball bearings, etc) would become invisible. Things bigger than that would become increasingly more visible, and would apply malus to the sleight of hand roll (probably in line with zero, half and three quarters cover impact to AC, but in the other direction).

[saucerhead]

Though not really supported by RAW, I’d probably rule that something small enough to fit into a hand completely, without anything poking through (so some small coins, a few ball bearings, etc) would become invisible. Things bigger than that would become increasingly more visible, and would apply malus to the sleight of hand roll (probably in line with zero, half and three quarters cover impact to AC, but in the other direction).

Thanks for the input. That's what I thought too and will discuss it with my group. I initially took it for granted, but it isn't RAW and that's why I was looking for advice.

I know mage hand can't make attacks. It can carry weapons under the weight limit, so it could steal them off an opponents belt with a sleight of hand ability. It's surprising that wouldn't count as distracting an enemy. RAW you can't distract targets with mage hand for another 10 levels after you initially get it. You could hold a dagger or sword (even an arrow) in your invisible mage hand and wave it around trying to get it behind your opponent. How does he know it's not a magic item that will strike him? (like a dancing sword or even Yondu's deadly arrow in the GotG movies) It would become apparent eventually when it doesn't attack, but initially?

Would any of you allow an intimidation roll or deception roll to basically BS an opponent this way? Would that give advantage for one attack? Maybe it's more an inspiration reward for roleplaying.

[Chronos]

Sure, you could attempt to distract an enemy that way, just like you could attempt to distract them by saying "Hey, look, behind you!" without using any magic. In either case, you'd get an opposed check (Deception vs. Insight, maybe?).

The high-level ability to use the hand to get advantage on attack rolls doesn't need any check; it just works (though it still doesn't guarantee that the attack-with-advantage will hit).