Would a feat to activate magic items as object interactions work?

[Segev]

This is a hard thing to quantify in precise mechanical terms, but I am thinking specifically about items that are activated via physical manipulation, like the immovable rod or the opening of an eversmoking bottle, but not ones that let you cast spells or require command words. The idea being to let them be "use an object" actions or "free" object interactions.

Would that be too much for a feat? Too little? Too variable to tell?

What is the most abusive use you can think of for such a thing?

[KorvinStarmast]

Let's think about all of the cheese and abuse this can add to the action economy .
Maybe the devs saw this coming and chose not to go there.
I suggest that you shelve this idea.

[loki_ragnarock]

So the nuclear wizard gets a free use of their wand of magic missiles in the routine?

[Ugmaro]

Well, the way I see it grabbing your sword/holy simbol/arcane focus are interactions already. If you have 1 hand free and are using an item you first have to retrieve the item, which is your item interaction right there... I think this would just mean that in a fight where you know exactly how you want to start you could use an item as well as a spell/attack in the first round but after that it becomes useless. All in all a terrible feat I'd never take as a player

[Brookshw]

As a rule of thumb, things that disrupt the action economy tend to be exponential power modifiers, I would not recommend this, or other methods to bypass/minimize the restrictions of action economy.

[Kane0]

This is a hard thing to quantify in precise mechanical terms, but I am thinking specifically about items that are activated via physical manipulation, like the immovable rod or the opening of an eversmoking bottle, but not ones that let you cast spells or require command words. The idea being to let them be "use an object" actions or "free" object interactions.

Would that be too much for a feat? Too little? Too variable to tell?

What is the most abusive use you can think of for such a thing?

Its about as variable in power as the magic items themselves are, but it's basically adding an extra action for anyone with the feat and something to use it on. The Artificer's spell-storing item springs to mind, and maybe a Thief Rogue getting to use a magic item three times in one turn.

[sithlordnergal]

Hmmm, I feel like such a feat would mostly apply to potions. Most magic items, like wands, boots, rings, ect, state they require an Action or Bonus Action to use in the item description. And I get the sense that those actions are different from the "use a magic item" action that your feat would apply to. Even then, its a bit too varied to tell how strong such a feat will be.

[Segev]

Let's think about all of the cheese and abuse this can add to the action economy .
Maybe the devs saw this coming and chose not to go there.
I suggest that you shelve this idea.Part of what I'm asking for is some help coming up with the ways this would break things, yes. Could you list some, please?


So the nuclear wizard gets a free use of their wand of magic missiles in the routine?The idea would be to exclude "spellcasting from an item" as an option. Potions, too, though I'm less concerned about those. The target items in my own thoughts are the ones mentioned in the opening post: immovable rods and eversmoking bottles. But I'm interested in what other items are 'similar' to those and would also be applicable.


Its about as variable in power as the magic items themselves are, but it's basically adding an extra action for anyone with the feat and something to use it on. The Artificer's spell-storing item springs to mind, and maybe a Thief Rogue getting to use a magic item three times in one turn.Wording it to restrict things to what I'm looking for is going to be tricky. I do think I can word it so that you cannot cast a spell or say a command word as an object interaction. The idea is things like pushing buttons, twisting a knob, opening a flask, or the like.

I am also interested in items that would likely qualify; the mention of potions below is a good one, and not exactly on the list of what I would intend, but illustrates the difficulty of expressing my intent clearly, especially in rules.


Hmmm, I feel like such a feat would mostly apply to potions. Most magic items, like wands, boots, rings, ect, state they require an Action or Bonus Action to use in the item description. And I get the sense that those actions are different from the "use a magic item" action that your feat would apply to. Even then, its a bit too varied to tell how strong such a feat will be.I would be looking to expressly override the "requires an action to..." line in items, but only on certain ones. For example, it seems weird to me that an immovable rod's button takes your whole action to press, and a use case I have in mind is to be able to actually use more than one immovable rod per round. That said, potions are not something I'd want to necessarily make so easy to use, though I'm not 100% opposed. They're just not in the rough category I'm aiming at.



Thanks for all the replies; I'm not entirely sure this is broken, but I am not sure it isn't, so that's why I'm asking for feedback on ways to break it as well as possible ways to word it.

I hope I've clarified what I'm trying to aim for a bit better in this post; if I haven't, I will try again once I see how people are interpreting it.

[GeoffWatson]

So they could use a Wand of Paralysis each round in addition to their normal actions?
And a Wand of Fear.
And a Ring of Shooting Stars.
And a Ring of the Ram.
etc, etc.

All of them, every round, until they run out of charges.

[Rynjin]

There's a lot of people here who clearly just read the title of the thread, let me quote the relevant bit everyone's ignoring so they can stop cluttering the thread with pointless posts about wands and whatnot.


but not ones that let you cast spells or require command words.

Anyway, my 2 cp on this is it sounds like a great idea for a specialist subclass, not for a Feat as 5e uses them. 5e Feats are not typically playstyle changing/defining, which this would be.

Call it Occultist, slap it on as a Rogue, Artificer, or maybe Warlock subclass and you're probably good to go.

[GeoffWatson]

There's a lot of people here who clearly just read the title of the thread, let me quote the relevant bit everyone's ignoring so they can stop cluttering the thread with pointless posts about wands and whatnot.



Anyway, my 2 cp on this is it sounds like a great idea for a specialist subclass, not for a Feat as 5e uses them. 5e Feats are not typically playstyle changing/defining, which this would be.

Call it Occultist, slap it on as a Rogue, Artificer, or maybe Warlock subclass and you're probably good to go.

The items I listed do not (only) cast spells or require command words.

[Ugmaro]

The items I listed do not (only) cast spells or require command words.

Ah, so it doesn't ONLY decapitate you, it also sets your corpse on fire?

Jokes aside, I would once again like to point out that grabbing an item is an interaction already means this would do very little. I know most tables ignore the whole "You can draw your sword as an item interaction and attack in the same turn using your action" but if your hands are full with a heavy crossbow you need to DROP it just so you can draw your sword and attack with it in that single turn (after which you can't pick up the xbow again or even stow the sword away). If you're disallowing the use of wands and similar (as you've mentioned you would) you're basically making the interaction of using the item fight the interaction of "drawing" or taking the item - this basically makes the whole feat useless. If you decide that you get to both "draw" and use the item as 1 interaction that means shield users (as well as 2handed and 2weapon fighters) can't use the feat at all while casters and 1h weapon & no shield (like a thief rogue or maybe a monk) might be able to and that just feels like a poor design decision.

THE worst thing I can imagine here is actually the use of a mundane item (ball bearings) along with the spell animate object. I hate that spell from the bottom of my soul and refuse to allow my players to animate a million tiny objects. I know it's irrational but that's the result of a one-shot where 2 of my players both cast the spell and I had to spend about an hour just rolling for those things...

[Kane0]

@Segev, a list of items that might fit your requirements:

Oil of Slipperiness
Philter of Love
Potion of X
Immovable Rod
Staff of the Adder/Python
Alchemy Jug
Bag of Tricks
Decanter of Endless Water
Deck of Illusions
Driftglobe
Dust of X
Eversmoking Bottle
Figurine of Wondrous Power
Gem of Brightness
Hat of Disguise
Keoghtom's Ointment
Lantern of Revealing
Pipes of Haunting
Pipes of the Sewers
Robe of Useful Items
Elixir of Health
Oil of Etherealness
Tentacle Rod
Bag of Beans
Chime of Opening
Daern's Instant Fortress
Dimensional Shackles
Folding Boat
Horn of Blasting
Horn of Valhalla
Lyre of Building
Feather Token
Rope of Entanglement
Candle of Invocation
Crystal Ball
Efreeti Bottle
Nolzur's Marvelous Pigments
Cubic Gate
Deck of Many Things
Instrument of the Bards
Iron Flask
Sovereign Glue
Universal Solvent

So maybe limit it to magic items in the Potion or Wondrous item categories, that appears to take out the majority of the nastier offenders (wands, rods, staves, rings, scrolls), or even better reword it such that you can activate an item as part of the same object interactions as getting it out (because you are normally holding a weapon or spell implement instead of a say potion or horn of valhalla).

[Segev]

@Segev, a list of items that might fit your requirements:

Oil of Slipperiness
Philter of Love
Potion of X
Immovable Rod
Staff of the Adder/Python
Alchemy Jug
Bag of Tricks
Decanter of Endless Water
Deck of Illusions
Driftglobe
Dust of X
Eversmoking Bottle
Figurine of Wondrous Power
Gem of Brightness
Hat of Disguise
Keoghtom's Ointment
Lantern of Revealing
Pipes of Haunting
Pipes of the Sewers
Robe of Useful Items
Elixir of Health
Oil of Etherealness
Tentacle Rod
Bag of Beans
Chime of Opening
Daern's Instant Fortress
Dimensional Shackles
Folding Boat
Horn of Blasting
Horn of Valhalla
Lyre of Building
Feather Token
Rope of Entanglement
Candle of Invocation
Crystal Ball
Efreeti Bottle
Nolzur's Marvelous Pigments
Cubic Gate
Deck of Many Things
Instrument of the Bards
Iron Flask
Sovereign Glue
Universal Solvent

So maybe limit it to magic items in the Potion or Wondrous item categories, that appears to take out the majority of the nastier offenders (wands, rods, staves, rings, scrolls), or even better reword it such that you can activate an item as part of the same object interactions as getting it out (because you are normally holding a weapon or spell implement instead of a say potion or horn of valhalla).

I want to thank you for this list; I haven't had time to give it the attention it deserves this week, but hope to next week. I will be using it to try to refine the idea in my head of what "should" work with this hypothetical feature and try to find a better way to word what I'm getting at.

[Rukelnikov]

@Segev, a list of items that might fit your requirements:

snip

So maybe limit it to magic items in the Potion or Wondrous item categories, that appears to take out the majority of the nastier offenders (wands, rods, staves, rings, scrolls), or even better reword it such that you can activate an item as part of the same object interactions as getting it out (because you are normally holding a weapon or spell implement instead of a say potion or horn of valhalla).

I think the Staff of Thunder and Lightning is missing. I used it to great effect with my sorlock because it doesn't cast a spell, so it could be used in conjuntion with Quickened Spell for essentially a ~4th level nuke and a bonus action spell a couple times per day.

[Kane0]

I think the Staff of Thunder and Lightning is missing. I used it to great effect with my sorlock because it doesn't cast a spell, so it could be used in conjuntion with Quickened Spell for essentially a ~4th level nuke and a bonus action spell a couple times per day.

Yeah also the staves of fire and frost, i only put in the adder and viper because they dont replicate spells

[Rukelnikov]

Yeah also the staves of fire and frost, i only put in the adder and viper because they dont replicate spells

Fire and Frost do replicate spells, but Thunder and Lightning doesn't, it has its own effect 9d6 in a line (similar to Lightning Bolt, but its not Lightning Bolt), and 2d6 60 feet around caster.

[Kane0]

Fair enough, missed that

[Rukelnikov]

Fair enough, missed that

Sorry if it came out offensive, I just pointed it out cause it was the first one that came to mind (having used it for a similar kind of cheese :P).

[stoutstien]

I think it's would work better as a specific special tag of upgrades versions of those items rather than a feat. Maybe a subclass for artificer but I'd struggle to find a way to get that to work well unless you added it to alchemist to fix their own action issues with the EE.