Artificer Returning Weapon; Net?

[msfnc]

For all its warts, the Net remains fascinating to me. What a mechanical flustercluck for such a weak effect. I still love it. The question is, on the slim chance that your Infused Returning Net does manage to restrain a creature 15’ away, does the restrained creature get pulled back to you when your Net returns? Or does it stay where it is, still restrained? Or no longer restrained? Or does the Net not return because it’s busy?

[Kane0]

I... honestly dont know. I suppose it would be worth the investment to drag the captured target back to you?

[Chugger]

It returns the weapon, not the target.

[luuma]

Nets are solid enough, I think. Plenty of people take archery with crossbow expert and/or sharpshooter. The trick is to use one with a haste action.

To answer your question - there is no effect saying the target is dragged with the net. Bizarrely, there's also nothing explicitly saying that the net is what restrains the target - only that it is restrained if it's hit, can make a strength check to escape, and can also destroy the net to escape. So RAW the target's restrained by nothing until it is freed by a strength check.

It is probably easiest to rule that the target is immediately freed when the net returns, but you could maybe make the case for saying the net only returns after the target frees itself. If so, its magical properties mean that it has resistance to slashing damage which is a nice boon.

[Addaran]

I don't think Returning says if the weapon floats back to you Mjnolnir style or if it teleports back in your hand. Both have different implications.

If it teleports, it doesn't make sense to teleport the victim to you. So decide if it returns right away or when you decide.

If it flies back, decide if it's strong enough to drag the victim, if there is some check/save. If it can't drag someone, then it should probably come back once the victim is freed.

[DwarfFighter]

It returns the weapon, not the target.

Agreed. Now, the net rules don't say what happens to the target when the net is removed, so this is where the GM should weigh in with a ruling.

Hint: No net, no Restrain.

Only infuse Nets of Returning as a practical joke on the thrower!

[Kane0]

but you could maybe make the case for saying the net only returns after the target frees itself. If so, its magical properties mean that it has resistance to slashing damage which is a nice boon.

Yeah this would still have some use, returning if you miss or the target is freed.

[Aett_Thorn]

Nets are solid enough, I think. Plenty of people take archery with crossbow expert and/or sharpshooter. The trick is to use one with a haste action.

Hard to say that a weapon is fine if it requires both a feat and a third-level spell to work well. 😂

[ff7hero]

Hard to say that a weapon is fine if it requires both a feat and a third-level spell to work well. 😂

A commonly taken feat and spell though. I don't think anyone is suggesting one get XBE/SS/Haste solely to be good with nets.

[msfnc]

A commonly taken feat and spell though. I don't think anyone is suggesting one get XBE/SS/Haste solely to be good with nets.

My face, the picture of nonchalance as I crumple up and eat a fresh character sheet while nodding in sage agreement.

[Damon_Tor]

A commonly taken feat and spell though. I don't think anyone is suggesting one get XBE/SS/Haste solely to be good with nets.

No, but Quick Toss on an archer who already has SS is a great way to do this as well.

[JonBeowulf]

Yeah this would still have some use, returning if you miss or the target is freed.
You don't get to choose, though:

Returning Weapon

Item: A simple or martial weapon with the thrown property

This magic weapon grants a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with it, and it returns to the wielder’s hand immediately after it is used to make a ranged attack.
You throw it, it comes back. It doesn't stay there until you decide you want it back.

[Aett_Thorn]

You don't get to choose, though:

You throw it, it comes back. It doesn't stay there until you decide you want it back.

And the net remains useless, once again! The one constant in 5e, I feel.

[sayaijin]

Let's remember that a net has a range of 5/15 ft. So unless they want to throw nets with disadvantage, they're pulling someone...5ft? You can do that with Telekinetic as a bonus action. They could take SS, but even then it's far worse than EB with an Invocation because the nets aren't doing damage.

All in all, it's not RAW, and it's probably not RAI, but it's (MUCH) weaker than Eldritch Blast with an Invocation, and kinda on par with Telekinetic. I would let my player do it, if nothing else for the teamwork and tactical decision making it brings.

[Mjolnirbear]

Let's remember that a net has a range of 5/15 ft. So unless they want to throw nets with disadvantage, they're pulling someone...5ft? You can do that with Telekinetic as a bonus action. They could take SS, but even then it's far worse than EB with an Invocation because the nets aren't doing damage.

All in all, it's not RAW, and it's probably not RAI, but it's (MUCH) weaker than Eldritch Blast with an Invocation, and kinda on par with Telekinetic. I would let my player do it, if nothing else for the teamwork and tactical decision making it brings.

Not to crimp your style, but as a ranged weapon it also imposed disadvantage on attacks within 5 feet. In other words, you will always forever have disadvantage unless you offset it with advantage or have a feat like XBE.

[Gignere]

Not to crimp your style, but as a ranged weapon it also imposed disadvantage on attacks within 5 feet. In other words, you will always forever have disadvantage unless you offset it with advantage or have a feat like XBE.

SS works too because that would allow you to toss it up to max distance without disadvantage.

[Man_Over_Game]

Let's remember that a net has a range of 5/15 ft. So unless they want to throw nets with disadvantage, they're pulling someone...5ft? You can do that with Telekinetic as a bonus action. They could take SS, but even then it's far worse than EB with an Invocation because the nets aren't doing damage.

All in all, it's not RAW, and it's probably not RAI, but it's (MUCH) weaker than Eldritch Blast with an Invocation, and kinda on par with Telekinetic. I would let my player do it, if nothing else for the teamwork and tactical decision making it brings.

Yeah, that's my thought on it. I'm experienced enough to know that if someone really wanted to invest a whole lot for a niche and occasionally-overpowered thing, I'd let them.

It's a hell of a lot interesting than watching players try for a nuclear arms race in top damage, and that's almost always a lot more devastating to a table than "Expensive Thorn Whip".

If you want players to do something other than damage, you gotta show it.

[sayaijin]

Not to crimp your style, but as a ranged weapon it also imposed disadvantage on attacks within 5 feet. In other words, you will always forever have disadvantage unless you offset it with advantage or have a feat like XBE.

Good catch! Like I said, it would require some sort of feat investment to even do anything without handwaving.

Me, I'd probably just give the net different range statistics with it being a magic item and all. Like Man_Over_Game said, thorn whip isn't breaking anything.

I don't know if anyone here has played League of Legends, but this reminds me of Blitzcrank (and Scorpion from Mortal Kombat). And I would encourage that kind of character creation.

[Man_Over_Game]

Good catch! Like I said, it would require some sort of feat investment to even do anything without handwaving.

Me, I'd probably just give the net different range statistics with it being a magic item and all. Like Man_Over_Game said, thorn whip isn't breaking anything.

I don't know if anyone here has played League of Legends, but this reminds me of Blitzcrank (and Scorpion from Mortal Kombat). And I would encourage that kind of character creation.

One thing I've noticed with 5e: You can't really wait for WOTC to make the decision for you. They will drag their feet longer than you'd expect them to.

[Sigreid]

I'd probably allow it just because funny/cool

[Zhorn]

Yeah, that's my thought on it. I'm experienced enough to know that if someone really wanted to invest a whole lot for a niche and occasionally-overpowered thing, I'd let them.

It's a hell of a lot interesting than watching players try for a nuclear arms race in top damage, and that's almost always a lot more devastating to a table than "Expensive Thorn Whip".

If you want players to do something other than damage, you gotta show it.

Agreed. If players are attempting to show creativity with interesting combinations, I want to encourage that.
I'd allow returning nets to drag the restrained target, RAW/RAI be damned as this is a more fun ruling.

[micahaphone]

I'd personally say that if the net hits and wraps around a person, then it doesn't fly back to you, it's restraining itself by enveloping the target.

For example, if you threw a returning dagger at a person and it missed, could a person step on it, or grab it, or throw a bucket over it, preventing its return flight?

[sayaijin]

I'd personally say that if the net hits and wraps around a person, then it doesn't fly back to you, it's restraining itself by enveloping the target.

For example, if you threw a returning dagger at a person and it missed, could a person step on it, or grab it, or throw a bucket over it, preventing its return flight?

How strong is the magic of the suped up mage hand from Telekinetic? It does not have a size limitation on moving a creature 5ft. Thorn whip only works on large or smaller creatures. So how strong is the magic of the returning weapon? Well we're way outside of RAW/RAI, so it's up to you. I'm tempted to put it on par with thorn whip and have the size limitation.

[quindraco]

For all its warts, the Net remains fascinating to me. What a mechanical flustercluck for such a weak effect. I still love it. The question is, on the slim chance that your Infused Returning Net does manage to restrain a creature 15’ away, does the restrained creature get pulled back to you when your Net returns? Or does it stay where it is, still restrained? Or no longer restrained? Or does the Net not return because it’s busy?

Crago the Artificer is setting up camp in the forest at twilight among his adventurer friends. From the nearby brush an angry boar charges toward Crago.

Crago acts quickly and throws his net over the boar (10 feet away). With the odds against him Crago still manages to restrain the boar with his net.

The net immediately returns to Crago's hand. The boar squeals as it attempts to free itself from restraint. Onlookers are bewildered as the boar is unable to free itself[1]; Tondo exclaims, "Crago, by what magic have you captured this boar?"

Crago replies "You think that was cool, watch this!" Crago walks 10 paces further away from the boar and takes out his dagger. Crago smirks, then slashes the net he is holding; the net falls to the ground at Crago’s feet.

The boar grunts and scampers away into the night, a free pig once more.

Tondo claps. “Bravo! Bravo, my friend.” 👏👏👏

[1] It can make an Athletics check as normal to do this, but has no practical way to attack the net, as Crago has the net. For the purposes of this story, it is simply failing the check, and is then stuck, as it can't attack or damage the net, which is 10 feet away. Were it to succeed on the check, it would escape the net that Crago is holding.

[micahaphone]

How strong is the magic of the suped up mage hand from Telekinetic? It does not have a size limitation on moving a creature 5ft. Thorn whip only works on large or smaller creatures. So how strong is the magic of the returning weapon? Well we're way outside of RAW/RAI, so it's up to you. I'm tempted to put it on par with thorn whip and have the size limitation.

Very true - I guess I was thinking that this enchantment is meant to carry a single weapon back, it isn't juiced enough to drag anything more than the weapon in question. The heaviest weapon with the thrown quality is a 4 lb trident, so I wouldn't expect it to be able to carry more than 4-5 pounds, just like a default mage hand.

That said, if a player wanted to make this work I'd say it's pretty cool and should be a thing, perhaps only at a higher level or after some tinkering. Not at level 2 when returning weapon is unlocked, but maybe level 6 when they get a 3rd infusion choice and the tool expertise.



Crago the Artificer is setting up camp in the forest at twilight among his adventurer friends. From the nearby brush an angry boar charges toward Crago.

Crago acts quickly and throws his net over the boar (10 feet away). With the odds against him Crago still manages to restrain the boar with his net.

The net immediately returns to Crago's hand. The boar squeals as it attempts to free itself from restraint. Onlookers are bewildered as the boar is unable to free itself[1]; Tondo exclaims, "Crago, by what magic have you captured this boar?"

Crago replies "You think that was cool, watch this!" Crago walks 10 paces further away from the boar and takes out his dagger. Crago smirks, then slashes the net he is holding; the net falls to the ground at Crago’s feet.

The boar grunts and scampers away into the night, a free pig once more.

Tondo claps. “Bravo! Bravo, my friend.” 👏👏👏

[1] It can make an Athletics check as normal to do this, but has no practical way to attack the net, as Crago has the net. For the purposes of this story, it is simply failing the check, and is then stuck, as it can't attack or damage the net, which is 10 feet away. Were it to succeed on the check, it would escape the net that Crago is holding.


Now this I'd quickly veto. Nets impose the restrained condition on creatures because they're entangled in it. If the net isn't wrapped around the creature then it's not restraining it.

[stoutstien]

Id rather fix nets by making them adventuring gear rather than a weapon and just add a new infusion for artificers who want something like this.

[sayaijin]

Very true - I guess I was thinking that this enchantment is meant to carry a single weapon back, it isn't juiced enough to drag anything more than the weapon in question. The heaviest weapon with the thrown quality is a 4 lb trident, so I wouldn't expect it to be able to carry more than 4-5 pounds, just like a default mage hand.

That said, if a player wanted to make this work I'd say it's pretty cool and should be a thing, perhaps only at a higher level or after some tinkering. Not at level 2 when returning weapon is unlocked, but maybe level 6 when they get a 3rd infusion choice and the tool expertise.


To each his own. The enchantment is as powerful as you want it to be (think mjolnir). What you're proposing is weaker than thorn whip which druids get at level 1.

[ImproperJustice]

I am envisioning the following scenario:

Battle smith Artificer launches net at Monk.

Monk auto deflects net since it does 0 damage and hurls it back at Artificer.

Artificer gets entangled, then readies net launcher for his second attack, causing the initial net to vanish “return” and then launches it again.

This time the Monk has no reaction left and is entangled.

[micahaphone]

To each his own. The enchantment is as powerful as you want it to be (think mjolnir). What you're proposing is weaker than thorn whip which druids get at level 1.

Thorn whip doesn't impose the restrained condition and require an attack or an action to get out. This is entirely my personal table reading as a DM, but nothing in the infusion says the weapon can carry other things with it. Otherwise I'd expect players to ferry each other across a chasm by teleporting the artificer, then they can just throw a returning dagger across, the remaining party members hold onto the dagger and have it carry them across the gap.

[quindraco]

Thorn whip doesn't impose the restrained condition and require an attack or an action to get out. This is entirely my personal table reading as a DM, but nothing in the infusion says the weapon can carry other things with it. Otherwise I'd expect players to ferry each other across a chasm by teleporting the artificer, then they can just throw a returning dagger across, the remaining party members hold onto the dagger and have it carry them across the gap.

The RAW doesn't specify how the weapon returns. I would 100% not have it traverse the intervening space, to avoid any questions like what you're asking about, like how much weight it can drag. If I'm the GM, Returning Weapon teleports the weapon, and like all teleports in the game, does not teleport anything with it unless otherwise specified. So at my table, it's absurd from the jump asking if a returning net drags the target with it - the returning mechanic exerts 0 motive force and can't drag anything, not even air. This also means I don't have to entertain questions like what happens if you throw a returning dagger at someone and they use their Readied action to grab it - the question answers itself (the dagger teleports out of their hand).

The problem with Returning Nets isn't a problem with Returning, it's that the RAW on Nets is poorly written garbage WOTC has never bothered to errata or clarify in the SAC. If you don't house-rule the Nets at your table to have functional rules, Returning is just one of many problems you're going to have if a player leans into throwing them.

[micahaphone]

The RAW doesn't specify how the weapon returns. I would 100% not have it traverse the intervening space, to avoid any questions like what you're asking about, like how much weight it can drag. If I'm the GM, Returning Weapon teleports the weapon, and like all teleports in the game, does not teleport anything with it unless otherwise specified. So at my table, it's absurd from the jump asking if a returning net drags the target with it - the returning mechanic exerts 0 motive force and can't drag anything, not even air. This also means I don't have to entertain questions like what happens if you throw a returning dagger at someone and they use their Readied action to grab it - the question answers itself (the dagger teleports out of their hand).

The problem with Returning Nets isn't a problem with Returning, it's that the RAW on Nets is poorly written garbage WOTC has never bothered to errata or clarify in the SAC. If you don't house-rule the Nets at your table to have functional rules, Returning is just one of many problems you're going to have if a player leans into throwing them.

You've convinced me, teleporting is better than magical boomerang-ing.

I don't know off the top of my head the other issues RAW with nets, other than that it's a bit awkward/odd that crossbow expert or sharpshooter is needed to use them normally. If I ever play a PC again, I do have one character concept of a strength based rogue who uses nets, a bounty hunter type. I'd definitely hope that the DM would allow for upgrades over time, to increase the hp, increase the DC, maybe a further max distance throw, etc.

[Gignere]

You've convinced me, teleporting is better than magical boomerang-ing.

I don't know off the top of my head the other issues RAW with nets, other than that it's a bit awkward/odd that crossbow expert or sharpshooter is needed to use them normally. If I ever play a PC again, I do have one character concept of a strength based rogue who uses nets, a bounty hunter type. I'd definitely hope that the DM would allow for upgrades over time, to increase the hp, increase the DC, maybe a further max distance throw, etc.

You also can’t make more than one attack with a net. The way is worded it might even preclude attacks with other weapons. Although I haven’t met a dm that canceled extra attack, granted you use a second weapon, due to a net but it is definitely RAW that you can’t extra attack with a net.

[quindraco]

You've convinced me, teleporting is better than magical boomerang-ing.

I don't know off the top of my head the other issues RAW with nets, other than that it's a bit awkward/odd that crossbow expert or sharpshooter is needed to use them normally. If I ever play a PC again, I do have one character concept of a strength based rogue who uses nets, a bounty hunter type. I'd definitely hope that the DM would allow for upgrades over time, to increase the hp, increase the DC, maybe a further max distance throw, etc.

Yeah, it's a fine question whether or not you can make a net out of silk rope (reducing the weight). But I meant both the issues we were discussing in this thread, where nets are written to inflict Restrained on hit but don't need to sustain the condition, unlike with the grappled rules - which is why RAW the net returns but the target remains grappled - and the absolutely horrendous results of nets being damage "-", which isn't defined anywhere in any rules source. Here's an example question: do Hunter's Mark and Hex work with nets? Did you answer differently for each spell?

Oh, and the issue with Restrained not requiring a sustain is not unique to Returning. An incorporeal creature, like a Banshee, is theoretically restrained on hit, and that restrained condition remains until they pass the check or damage the net - the reason this doesn't come up is that incorporeal creatures are generally just immune to restrained, but not all of them are. For a real world example, if you cast Summon Undead and choose Ghostly, the spirit can explicitly phase through objects, including nets - which doesn't matter for how poorly written nets are. As a result, you can restrain a Ghostly Undead Spirit with a net, and the creature then remains restrained by the net even if it uses Incorporeal Passage to let the net fall to the ground.