How many hands does it take to use tools to create an Eldritch Cannon?

[HappyDaze]

How many hands are required to be used when an Artificer (Artillerist) spends an Action to create the Eldritch Cannon using woodcarver's tools or smith's tools? It says using the tools, not merely touching them, so I'm particularly concerned that this Action may require both hands and thus make using a shield more complicated (d/t the doff/don requirements).

[stoutstien]

By my reading one hand. It's pretty vague and left to DM discretion. I think this allows players to narratively decide how they create the cannon. they could have already had them pre-made and have them strapped to them and they're just using the tools to activate them or maybe the cannon are random objects that the artificer has infused magic into.

I personally handwaved the free hand because it doesn't even say they user has to use their hands to use the tools.
Gogo gadget flamethrower.

[Tanarii]

Doesn't the artificer need a free hand as usual plus another hand holding the tools as a focus to cast spells? I vaguely remember it was an outlier in that regard for casters.

Not related to the OP, just another reason a Shield may not be usable, if I'm recalling correctly.

[stoutstien]

Doesn't the artificer need a free hand as usual plus another hand holding the tools as a focus to cast spells? I vaguely remember it was an outlier in that regard for casters.

Not related to the OP, just another reason a Shield may not be usable, if I'm recalling correctly.

yes but they can also use any infused item as a spell casting focus which prevents the need to juggle. the only one who that need the tools is the alchemist for some reason.

[HappyDaze]

Doesn't the artificer need a free hand as usual plus another hand holding the tools as a focus to cast spells? I vaguely remember it was an outlier in that regard for casters.

Not related to the OP, just another reason a Shield may not be usable, if I'm recalling correctly.

They have a weirdly worded section that says they always need a tool as a required focus (although they can sometimes substitute another type of focus) though how this works with spells that are S sans M isn't entirely clear. If it's accepted that all of their spells have M, then the hand with the focus can also do the S, but if not then they might need an extra hand free. I think the intention is that all of their spells are assumed to have an M component and that tools (or their designated substitutes) fulfill it with that hand also completing any S component. I don't know if this is 100% RAW (which is why I said it is weirdly worded).

[HappyDaze]

I personally handwaved the free hand because it doesn't even say they user has to use their hands to use the tools.
Gogo gadget flamethrower.

So when the question is one hand or two, you opted for zero? OK... I don't think that's a route I'm going to go since it says you spend an action to create it with the tools. If it said you summoned it, that would be different.

[stoutstien]

So when the question is one hand or two, you opted for zero? OK... I don't think that's a route I'm going to go since it says you spend an action to create it with the tools. If it said you summoned it, that would be different.

Either way it's usually not a big deal because they are using they're action to make the cannon and probably bonus action to activate it. they can Stow their arcane firearm and then pull it out next turn. Warforged can use wand sleeve to circumvent this same with any artificer after lv 14.
Because I can also use any infused item as a focus they will rarely have issues in that department.

[HappyDaze]

Either way it's usually not a big deal because they are using they're action to make the cannon and probably bonus action to activate it. they can Stow their arcane firearm and then pull it out next turn. Warforged can use wand sleeve to circumvent this same with any artificer after lv 14.
Because I can also use any infused item as a focus they will rarely have issues in that department.

The ability to make the cannon does not allow swapping spellcasting focus items for the tools because it is not spellcasting. You have to use the woodcarver's tools as indicated. That means drawing/stowing items and using hands. The question of whether one hand or two is required to use the tools for making an Eldritch Cannon is still relevant.

[stoutstien]

The ability to make the cannon does not allow swapping spellcasting focus items for the tools because it is not spellcasting. You have to use the woodcarver's tools as indicated. That means drawing/stowing items and using hands. The question of whether one hand or two is required to use the tools for making an Eldritch Cannon is still relevant.

And I'm saying nothing indicates that you have to have the tools "in hand" past using your action to make the cannon. The tools can be strapped to your body and are still within reach to use them. Nothing in the text says the tools must be in hand to use compared to the tools required feature that specifically calls out that the tools must be- in hand.
Most of the artisan tools have more than two tools in them so maybe you need extra helping hands to use this feature.

[HappyDaze]

And I'm saying nothing indicates that you have to have the tools "in hand" past using your action to make the cannon. The tools can be strapped to your body and are still within reach to use them. Nothing in the text says the tools must be in hand to use compared to the tools required feature that specifically calls out that the tools must be- in hand.
Most of the artisan tools have more than two tools in them so maybe you need extra helping hands to use this feature.

Using that logic, nothing in the text says you even need to have the tools on your person. Oh, wait...

"Using woodcarver's tools or smith's tools, you can take an action to magically create a Small or Tiny eldritch cannon in an unoccupied space on a horizontal surface within 5 feet of you."

It says the Artillerist is using the tools. If it said "using a longbow" would you argue that no hands need be free to actually hold and draw ("use") the longbow? The question is still whether using tools requires one hand or two. Reading over the descriptions of what comes in those tool sets, there is really nothing there that someone without any hands could be said to be "using" in any reasonable manner.

[stoutstien]

Using that logic, nothing in the text says you even need to have the tools on your person. Oh, wait...

"Using woodcarver's tools or smith's tools, you can take an action to magically create a Small or Tiny eldritch cannon in an unoccupied space on a horizontal surface within 5 feet of you."

It says the Artillerist is using the tools. If it said "using a longbow" would you argue that no hands need be free to actually hold and draw ("use") the longbow? The question is still whether using tools requires one hand or two. Reading over the descriptions of what comes in those tool sets, there is really nothing there that someone without any hands could be said to be "using" in any reasonable manner.


How would you see reasonably using tools to build a cannon in a 2-4 second timeframe?
Reach and tapping a spring loaded hammer on your vest makes as much since as using wood carving tools to whittle a cannon out of thin air. The player isn't actually crafting anything more than Summoning.
It's magic so it's not going to make sense.

If a DM wanting to be pedantic then charcoal is an the smiths tool Component list so toss a lump of it out. boom cannon.

[HappyDaze]

How would you see reasonably using tools to build a cannon in a 2-4 second timeframe?
Reach and tapping a spring loaded hammer on your vest makes as much since as using wood carving tools to whittle a cannon out of thin air. The player isn't actually crafting anything more than Summoning.
It's magic so it's not going to make sense.

If a DM wanting to be pedantic then charcoal is an the smiths tool Component list so toss a lump of it out. boom cannon.

I don't think we're going to agree on this one, and that's OK.

I remain curious to see how others feel about the hands required for using the tools.

If anyone knows about an official answer to this (I don't Twitter), feel free to throw that up too.

[MaxWilson]

By my reading one hand. It's pretty vague and left to DM discretion. I think this allows players to narratively decide how they create the cannon. they could have already had them pre-made and have them strapped to them and they're just using the tools to activate them or maybe the cannon are random objects that the artificer has infused magic into.

I personally handwaved the free hand because it doesn't even say they user has to use their hands to use the tools.
Gogo gadget flamethrower.

"Bully Blinders!"
"Pincers of Power!"

:)


How would you see reasonably using tools to build a cannon in a 2-4 second timeframe?
Reach and tapping a spring loaded hammer on your vest makes as much since as using wood carving tools to whittle a cannon out of thin air. The player isn't actually crafting anything more than Summoning.
It's magic so it's not going to make sense.

If a DM wanting to be pedantic then charcoal is an the smiths tool Component list so toss a lump of it out. boom cannon.

Honestly I think that rule is best ignored entirely, or rewritten to say you use the tools when you're *preparing* your cannons/spells. Frankly I think the Artificer should not have to use verbal or somatic components at all. But in exchange I think they should be fully Vancian: Artificer spells must be specifically prepped in advance, not chosen on the fly via spell slots. Artificer is the one class where Batman's utility belt really is an appropriate metaphor! (Also, Counterspelling Artificer spells should be impossible.)

[Nagog]

I'm pretty sure it works the same as summoning a creature, and using the tools as a spellcasting focus.

[HappyDaze]

What is the weight of a tiny cannon? What about a small one?

I ask because there does not seem to be anything to prevent an opponent from just picking it up and carrying it away (it is an object that has to be activated each turn, not a creature, and certainly doesn't need to be grappled [it is also immune to the grappled condition]) other than it activating (if still within 60 feet of the Artificer), zapping the cannon thief, and beginning the slow crawl back (if it has legs).

[stoutstien]

"Bully Blinders!"
"Pincers of Power!"

:)



Honestly I think that rule is best ignored entirely, or rewritten to say you use the tools when you're *preparing* your cannons/spells. Frankly I think the Artificer should not have to use verbal or somatic components at all. But in exchange I think they should be fully Vancian: Artificer spells must be specifically prepped in advance, not chosen on the fly via spell slots. Artificer is the one class where Batman's utility belt really is an appropriate metaphor! (Also, Counterspelling Artificer spells should be impossible.)

IMO I would take it a step further and remove traditional spell casting all together and have all of it be infusions based. Practically it would work the same as you say with Vatcian casting but through items that could have different triggers. Like shatter landmines that go off when stepped on or can be set off with a reaction or taking the smite spells from battle Smith and infuse them into a weapon so they don't need concentration but have a more limited duration.

[HappyDaze]

So nobody wants to guess at the weight of an eldritch cannon?

Also, since it is a magical object rather than a creature, that means that many spells that specify creature cannot be used against the cannon,right? Is it true that the following spells have no effect upon the Eldritch Cannon?

Cone of Cold
Ice Storm
Thunderclap
Thunderwave
Wall of Fire
Web
Wind Wall

[stoutstien]

So nobody wants to guess at the weight of an eldritch cannon?

Also, since it is a magical object rather than a creature, that means that many spells that specify creature cannot be used against the cannon,right? Is it true that the following spells have no effect upon the Eldritch Cannon?

Cone of Cold
Ice Storm
Thunderclap
Thunderwave
Wall of Fire
Web
Wind Wall


Web is redundant because it's already immune to all conditions but good catch on the spells that specify creatures. Same time shatters could put it down fast.

I think it would also not be affected by any spell effect that makes movement cost more like plant growth.

*The Cannon would be immune to shatter as well due to being magical.
This is one tough little cookie*

[MaxWilson]

So nobody wants to guess at the weight of an eldritch cannon?

Also, since it is a magical object rather than a creature, that means that many spells that specify creature cannot be used against the cannon,right? Is it true that the following spells have no effect upon the Eldritch Cannon?

Cone of Cold
Ice Storm
Thunderclap
Thunderwave
Wall of Fire
Web
Wind Wall


The RAW is silent on whether or not Cone of Cold affects objects in the area, so my ruling as a DM is: it doesn't work that way in my game. I ignore the object/creature distinction for purposes of damage spells, and stone walls are exactly as susceptible to cold damage as stone golems.

The alternative that there's no physical reason why a crystal vase is immune to Thunderwave, just an appeal to "the rules", and that's way too gamist for my taste. (I'm more of a simulationist.) If you're going to operate strictly on the basis of RAW and nothing that isn't in RAW, why even bother with a human DM in the first place?

[stoutstien]

The RAW is silent on whether or not Cone of Cold affects objects in the area, so my ruling as a DM is: it doesn't work that way in my game. I ignore the object/creature distinction for purposes of damage spells, and stone walls are exactly as susceptible to cold damage as stone golems.

The alternative that there's no physical reason why a crystal vase is immune to Thunderwave, just an appeal to "the rules", and that's way too gamist for my taste. (I'm more of a simulationist.) If you're going to operate strictly on the basis of RAW and nothing that isn't in RAW, why even bother with a human DM in the first place?

It wouldn't fly at my tables either but it's fun to picture the little cannon that could

[HappyDaze]

If you're going to operate strictly on the basis of RAW and nothing that isn't in RAW, why even bother with a human DM in the first place?

Because, by RAW, one of the players is the DM (PHB, p. 5). As all of my players are human (I know, not enough diversity in my group for some people), the DM has to be human.

[HappyDaze]

Web is redundant because it's already immune to all conditions but good catch on the spells that specify creatures. Same time shatters could put it down fast.

I think it would also not be affected by any spell effect that makes movement cost more like plant growth.

*The Cannon would be immune to shatter as well due to being magical.
This is one tough little cookie*

There are other bits of fun, like the cannon being able to pass unharmed through a blade barrier or the area of spirit guardians.

Why do you say that about movement cost spells not working on it? Do all of those specify creatures, or is because of the funky way the cannon's movement is not listed as a speed (although the intent seems to be it has speed 15 ft., climb 15 ft.)?

[stoutstien]

There are other bits of fun, like the cannon being able to pass unharmed through a blade barrier or the area of spirit guardians.

Why do you say that about movement cost spells not working on it? Do all of those specify creatures, or is because of the funky way the cannon's movement is not listed as a speed (although the intent seems to be it has speed 15 ft., climb 15 ft.)?

They all specify creature.

like I said I wouldn't let a lot of this lfly at my table but it is kind of funny that 90% of a druid offense hand control could be bypassed by the class built around technology.