Could prestidigitation be used to clean poison off an enemy's arrow?

[thorr-kan]

I realize the range is 10 feet, but assuming you're enough, would this be a valid use of the clean a soiled surface function of prestidigitation?

[Calen]

As a DM I would ask for some kind of skill check but I would think that the action is valid.

[Abracadangit]

I realize the range is 10 feet, but assuming you're enough, would this be a valid use of the clean a soiled surface function of prestidigitation?

I'd allow it - it's a very clever use of what's often seen as a more flavorful function.

Would every DM allow it? I don't know about that - I could see a lot of them debating whether or not "envenomed" is functionally the same as "soiled." And beware of enemies who have another poisoned arrow/bolt/dart in their quiver, all ready to go.

[Lunali]

I would allow it if the arrow was not actually in the enemy's possession at the time. Otherwise it would receive the same general protection that carried items get. If a player were particularly adamant about it I might make up a save for it.

[Brookshw]

I'd allow it and give inspiration the first time for the creative use of the spell.

[Garresh]

I'd 100% allow it, and just treat it like any other spell allowing a dex saving throw. Probably give inspiration or some kind of bonus. Maybe even have the enemy have to make a perception or intelligence check to notice what the spell did?

[thorr-kan]

I don't wanna get w/i 10' of the yuan-ti with the bow, but we leveled up mid-battle, we're low on resources, and I'm desperately looking for out of the box options.

No, I'm not starting a general thread for combat advice.

[Unoriginal]

I don't wanna get w/i 10' of the yuan-ti with the bow, but we leveled up mid-battle, we're low on resources, and I'm desperately looking for out of the box options.

No, I'm not starting a general thread for combat advice.

What's your character, which spells do you have, who are your allies and who are the enemies?

[thorr-kan]

What's your character, which spells do you have, who are your allies and who are the enemies?
Thanks, but like I said, not starting a general advice thread.

Game was called on account of the DM fell asleep anyways.

[elyktsorb]

I dunno, would a dm allow you to remove poison from a drink or meal by using prestidigitation?

[Thunderous Mojo]

I dunno, would a dm allow you to remove poison from a drink or meal by using prestidigitation?

Prestidigitation can instantaneously clean or soil an object no larger than 1 cubic foot.

Instantly cleaning an apple isn't going to be helpful if the poison is inside the apple; if, however, the apple was coated externally with contact poison, "cleaning" the apple should likely include removing the application of poison.

Prestidigitation being able to clean the layer of poison applied to the arrowhead, seems a sound use to me.

The only pitfall I see, is the magical cleaning will likely apply to the single drawn arrow. If the Yuan-ti notices that the arrow has been de-venomed, the Yuan-ti may simply draw another envenomed arrow from their quiver.

Now, if the Yuan-ti decides to use their action to Investigate the arrow...that is probably the best outcome. Alas..I don't think this outcome is likely.

[BBQ Pork]

Prestidigitation can instantaneously clean or soil an object no larger than 1 cubic foot.

Instantly cleaning an apple isn't going to be helpful if the poison is inside the apple; if, however, the apple was coated externally with contact poison, "cleaning" the apple should likely include removing the application of poison.

Prestidigitation being able to clean the layer of poison applied to the arrowhead, seems a sound use to me.

The only pitfall I see, is the magical cleaning will likely apply to the single drawn arrow. If the Yuan-ti notices that the arrow has been de-venomed, the Yuan-ti may simply draw another envenomed arrow from their quiver.

Now, if the Yuan-ti decides to use their action to Investigate the arrow...that is probably the best outcome. Alas..I don't think this outcome is likely.

The Yuan-Ti already has the arrow ready to fire. If I were playing the Yuan-Ti, I'd fire the arrow, mildly annoyed at losing the poison, then draw another envenomed arrow for the next shot. Seems most logical/reasonable.
Noticing the suddenly-clean arrowhead shouldn't be hard. The tip of the arrow is in the middle of their field of vision as they go to fire.

Saving throw feels applicable, as it is a carried item and you are getting a combat effect from a spell. All of the damaging/controlling spells generally give a saving throw or require a roll to hit.

[DwarfFighter]

If the item is an "arrow" that has been dipped in poison, sure. But if it's a "poisoned arrow", it just removes impurities in the poison.

-DF

[Foolwise]

Let's reverse it. Can a wizard archer soil their arrowheads with prestidigitation to "poison" the target? Say, put rust on the arrowhead to inflict tetanus on the target.

[awa]

that's not how rust or tetanus works

tetanus is a bacteria that can collect in rusts rough surface but nothing about rust produces the bacteria out of nothing.

D&d does not tend to care about normal dirty wounds only, not even in the more crunch heavy editions. So i would say no soiling just means it makes it dirty not covers it in poison.

I would allow it but i also doubt it is a good use of your action unless I'm mistaken you are trading a whole action to remove the poison from one attack. And that assumes he doesn't notice it if he does well drawing a new arrow is a free.

edit
also if rusty arrows were better than normal arrows you could just leave the arrow heads out in the rain for a bit and make them non-magical rusty.

[Wizard_Lizard]

I'd allow it, particularly against kobolds and goblins who's poison may be fecal matter.

[elyktsorb]

I would allow it but i also doubt it is a good use of your action unless I'm mistaken you are trading a whole action to remove the poison from one attack. And that assumes he doesn't notice it if he does well drawing a new arrow is a free.


I mean this mostly depends on the poison, regular basic poison? Yeah that's not even worth removing.

Purple Worm Poison? Yeah I'd waste an action to get rid of that from some ones weapon.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'd 100% allow it, and just treat it like any other spell allowing a dex saving throw. OOh, yeah, like the save versus Light Cantrip. (Which I have used in combat!)

Game was called on account of the DM fell asleep anyways. ROFL. Was Vaarsuvius around (https://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0010.html)?

I'd allow it, particularly against kobolds and goblins who's poison may be fecal matter. Touché.

[thorr-kan]

Realized this never got closure.

Since we leveled up mid-battle, I choose another level in sorcerer instead of another level in warlock. That gave me another 1st level slot and sorcery points to recover another 1st level slot. I decided to ignore the yuan-ti with the bow and concentrate of dropping their cleric. It got dicey for awhile, but the crits turned our way for once, and we got away with it.

[Phhase]

Bit slow on the draw but for what it's worth, yes, Very Yes. This kind of outside-the-box, mage-minded cleverness is the bread and butter of creative play, and one of the biggest reasons I love this game.

[nickl_2000]

My DM allowed another PC to use Prestidigitation to soil an NPCs pants... I imagine this would easily fly on my table.

[Psyren]

Is this for an arrow someone has nocked in their bow, or for an arrow flying towards you (readied action)?

[Arkhios]

As a DM I would ask for some kind of skill check but I would think that the action is valid.

Indeed. I'd probably ask for a contest such as 'your sleight of hand vs. target's perception' or 'your deception vs. target's insight' (or both).

However, I would only allow this if you have the means and the necessary time to detect and locate the poisoned arrow, and definitely not as a reaction if said arrow is fired against a target.

[Chronic]

For game balance reasons, I would say no except if the arrows aren't wielded at the moment. I very rarely authorize or encourage the use of spells outside of their stated rules. Magic is already powerful enough. I'd rather prefer my players to use mundane but clever solutions.

[Damon_Tor]

RAW, this works. And it's very clever. And doesn't break anything. I have a hard time imagining a situation where I would say no to this. Hell, I have a sorcerer in one of my games who uses Gust as a readied action to knock arrows out of the air. It's rad, and rarely better than taking the dodge action, so why say no? Let your players have fun FFS.

[Zhorn]

One substance coating an object? That's as close a definition to soiled I can think of without rules lawyering to weasel around it. Check
Target within range? 10 feet as per the spell text, so; check
Object in possession by another creature? Spell text makes no such restriction, so I see no reason to disallow it. another check

At this point I'm incline to view this as a perfectly acceptable use of the spell. If anything I think the question would change from "could this be done" to "what houserule do you foresee DMs attempting to block this with"

such as


I'd 100% allow it, and just treat it like any other spell allowing a dex saving throw.OOh, yeah, like the save versus Light Cantrip. (Which I have used in combat!)
which to be fair sounds reasonable enough on its own, but when you have a DM doing this for every outside the box idea even when you're still colouring inside the lines, it can become very frustrating and turns from "let's see if this creative spell use works" to "here's an extra hurdle to make it less likely to work" (been a player in that game. not fun).
At least for the basing it off the light cantrip feels like a similar power scope, though for light the dex save is for avoiding a touch.
For a spell affecting an object in another creature's possession but not manipulating the object away from them, I'd be more inclined to view this as heat metal; the spell just lands on the object without a save.

[Phhase]

For game balance reasons, I would say no except if the arrows aren't wielded at the moment. I very rarely authorize or encourage the use of spells outside of their stated rules. Magic is already powerful enough. I'd rather prefer my players to use mundane but clever solutions.

What do you mean balance reasons, they proposed this instead of doing damage or controlling the battlefield, there's a huge tradeoff here. Cmon, Rule of Fun won't cause any problems here.

[Pex]

What do you mean balance reasons, they proposed this instead of doing damage or controlling the battlefield, there's a huge tradeoff here. Cmon, Rule of Fun won't cause any problems here.

It's an old DMing issue. Rule of Fun/Cool is all good, but DMs exist who worry about players trying to get away with something. They don't trust unforeseen circumstances. There's worry of the slippery slope that a player may then ask for something more powerful even if in an unrelated circumstance. There's also worry that allowing This Thing in this situation which seems innocuous could mean allowing This Thing in some future situation ruins the encounter. It's not wrong for DMs to consider these consequences, but in my opinion I do find it a problem for the DM to always say No because of these worries which is NOT the same thing as they must never say No.