Can I do the following things with Arcane Trickster Mage Hand, and what happens?

[Mr Adventurer]

So I think unfortunately that the Arcane Trickster is hard to read at the table because you have to apply all of the rules from three separate places at once: Mage Hand spell (including general spell rules like targeting/LOS); Cunning Action; and the Arcane Trickster boost to Mage Hand.

Can I do these things, why or why not, and what would you rule the effect would be, using an invisible Mage Hand?

1- Tie someone's shoelaces together
2- Undo someone's belt
3- Take their spell component pouch from their belt
4- Take a dagger from it sheath at their belt
5- Take a greatsword from its case on their back
6- Pull someone's hat or helmet down over their eyes
7- Take someone's quiver full of arrows
8- Take the arrows out of their quiver


Bonus points: can they be done with Telekinesis?

[Aett_Thorn]

So I think unfortunately that the Arcane Trickster is hard to read at the table because you have to apply all of the rules from three separate places at once: Mage Hand spell (including general spell rules like targeting/LOS); Cunning Action; and the Arcane Trickster boost to Mage Hand.

Can I do these things, why or why not, and what would you rule the effect would be, using an invisible Mage Hand?

1- Tie someone's shoelaces together
2- Undo someone's belt
3- Take their spell component pouch from their belt
4- Take a dagger from it sheath at their belt
5- Take a greatsword from its case on their back
6- Pull someone's hat or helmet down over their eyes
7- Take someone's quiver full of arrows
8- Take the arrows out of their quiver


Bonus points: can they be done with Telekinesis?

So, since this may be important, I wanted to bring in the spell description of Mage Hand first:

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.

As such, I would rule that

1) Yes, though you'd need to make a sleight of hand check to do it
2) Same as 1
3) Same as 1
4) Yes, and maybe a sleight of hand check
5) Yes, no sleight of hand check because I'd rule it an to be highly visible and you'd notice the weight gone from your back
6) Yes
7) Probably not. These are usually strapped to a person, so would make it difficult
8) Yes

[Mr Adventurer]

Do you mean "sleight of hand to do it unnoticed", or "sleight of hand to do it at all"?

If the second, what's the rationale?

Edit: also, what would you rule the game effects in combat of many of these actions such as shoelaces, belts, and helmets?

[Misterwhisper]

Yes to all of those but some would require slight of hand.

A related question because it has come up multiple times at our table:

Do you have to make a slight of hand check to do something if you do not care if they see you or not?

Ex.

I beat an opponent on initiative, the do not have their weapon drawn yet, it is still at their waist in the scabbard.

I want to reach over and draw it off them.

I am not trying to do it stealthy, I am just grabbing their weapon before they do.

[Mellack]

I would say they require a slight of hand check if the person you are taking from is unwilling, even if you are not being sneaky. You are trying to grab something, much the same way as if you were trying to grapple. Instead of getting a firm hold with an athletics check, you are trying to make a precise grab, so slight of hand check.

[Mr Adventurer]

A related question because it has come up multiple times at our table:

Do you have to make a slight of hand check to do something if you do not care if they see you or not?

Ex.

I beat an opponent on initiative, the do not have their weapon drawn yet, it is still at their waist in the scabbard.

I want to reach over and draw it off them.

I am not trying to do it stealthy, I am just grabbing their weapon before they do.

I have the same question! It's part of what I'm asking aett thorn, I think.

I would say they require a slight of hand check if the person you are taking from is unwilling, even if you are not being sneaky. You are trying to grab something, much the same way as if you were trying to grapple. Instead of getting a firm hold with an athletics check, you are trying to make a precise grab, so slight of hand check.

What's the rules rationale for this?

For example, I can say that Arcane Trickster says "You can retrieve an object in a container worn or carried by another creature." and doesn't refer to a check to do so, and then goes on to say "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." which implies the check is to avoid notice, but similarly doesn't refer to a check to succeed.

[Mellack]

My rationale is that one character wants to do something another opposes. That seems like an opposed check of some kind, what the book calls a contest.

"Sometimes one character’s or monster’s efforts are directly opposed to an other’s. ... This situation also applies when one of them is trying to prevent the other one from accomplishing a goal." -PHB

[Tanarii]

Generally speaking, taking something from someone when they're aware it's happening should probably be a contested check of some kind. Basically, like the DMG Disarm rule.

OTOH we're talking about a class feature that specifically says you can do it, and doesn't reference any kind of check. To me that means it should automatically happen. But keep in mind total movement for the hand is 30ft as part of the action. (I'm assuming your DM rules it like characters, with movement allowed before and after the action.)

[Aett_Thorn]

I would say they require a slight of hand check if the person you are taking from is unwilling, even if you are not being sneaky. You are trying to grab something, much the same way as if you were trying to grapple. Instead of getting a firm hold with an athletics check, you are trying to make a precise grab, so slight of hand check.

This is exactly my rationale.

[Naanomi]

Remember that unless you have a way around it, the spell still has obvious components (V, S) that make some of those tricks harder than you’d think of trying to pull it off outside of combat/before combat

[Mr Adventurer]

Remember that unless you have a way around it, the spell still has obvious components (V, S) that make some of those tricks harder than you’d think of trying to pull it off outside of combat/before combat

What do you mean? Harder to do at all, or harder to do unnoticed? Why would it make it harder to do in the first place?

[Keravath]

I would say they require a slight of hand check if the person you are taking from is unwilling, even if you are not being sneaky. You are trying to grab something, much the same way as if you were trying to grapple. Instead of getting a firm hold with an athletics check, you are trying to make a precise grab, so slight of hand check.

I would say a sleight of hand check is required because all of these actions are easy to prevent if they are noticed. Putting a hand on any of these items is easy. Mage hand only moves up to 10 pounds, it isn't very strong. A defender who is aware can easily prevent it being taken by putting their hand on the item.

The sleight of hand check can also be used to determine whether the item snags on something else or is otherwise blocked when the mage hand tries to remove it.

Keep in mind that everything happens at the same time whether in combat or out. The defender doesn't stand perfectly still waiting for opponents to attack while waiting for their initiative to come up. They aren't standing perfectly still while the mage hand does its work (unless they happen to be sleeping or incapacitated).

Also, these situations are all well into the realm of DMs ruling. Many DMs will run the situations differently since the rules don't break down how to handle these types of situations.

[Chronos]

You can do those things with the Mage Hand in the same way that you could do them with your own real hand: You can attempt them, but you're not guaranteed success. If it's possible but not guaranteed, then it must be a roll of some sort. What sort? In this case, Sleight of Hand.

[MinotaurWarrior]

There's just no rules at all for some of those things, like shoe tying, so it's DM fiat. I'd personally be inclined to say that people in a quasi medieval world aren't wearing laced shoes - maybe that's silly of me and based on a bogus understanding of shoe history, but it's my genuine instinct, and that's the danger of DM fiat.

Other uses that are imo clearer include:

Stealing arcane foci / spell component pouches

Applying contact / injested poisons to surfaces / foods

Spreading ball bearings / caltrops

Laying down hunter's traps

Spreading oil

Stealing potions

Remember that unless you have a way around it, the spell still has obvious components (V, S) that make some of those tricks harder than you’d think of trying to pull it off outside of combat/before combat

That's to cast the spell, not to manipulate the hand. You cast it when undiscoverable, establish LoS, then use your actions to move it over there.

[da newt]

As DM I would ask the player to show/tell me how they would do "X" with one hand and limited to 10 lbs of force. Then allow it or disallow it based on if it could reasonably be accomplished.

As for slight of hand, this only comes into play if the rogue would like to do "X" unnoticed/uncontested.

[Lunali]

Remember that unless you have a way around it, the spell still has obvious components (V, S) that make some of those tricks harder than you’d think of trying to pull it off outside of combat/before combat

While the spell has obvious components, that only applies to the turn when you cast it. It has a duration of 1 min and is invisible. It also has a casting time of 1 action, so unless you have a turn where sneak attack isn't available to you, it probably isn't worth casting.

I would call #6 a specific narration of the level 13 ability.

[Tanarii]

I'd personally be inclined to say that people in a quasi medieval world aren't wearing laced shoes - maybe that's silly of me and based on a bogus understanding of shoe history, but it's my genuine instinct, and that's the danger of DM fiat.

Clearly we should never have moved away from medieval Velcro.

Seriously though I'm genuinely curious how you think medieval shoes were kept attached to the foot. To me lacing seems like it'd be more a common method, not less.

[MinotaurWarrior]

Clearly we should never have moved away from medieval Velcro.

Seriously though I'm genuinely curious how you think medieval shoes were kept attached to the foot. To me lacing seems like it'd be more a common method, not less.

I think there were more buckles, buttons (or not quite buttons - those oblong wooden pieces you use like buttons), straps, slip ons, occasional pins (mostly on armor), chords you pull tight without tying, and those things you do tie, but are actually built out of the same material as the shoe and you can't reasonably pull over to another shoe shoulder-width apart (like iirc the front of Roman sandals).

I could be totally wrong, but I just don't picture any of my characters (pc or NPC) having big long laces with aglets at the end, tied up in bunny ears.

[Keravath]

As DM I would ask the player to show/tell me how they would do "X" with one hand and limited to 10 lbs of force. Then allow it or disallow it based on if it could reasonably be accomplished.

As for slight of hand, this only comes into play if the rogue would like to do "X" unnoticed/uncontested.

I'm not sure about the "one" hand requirement ... especially for an arcane trickster.

An arcane trickster can use the hand for some delicate manipulations without having disadvantage or other negative effects.

"You can use thieves' tools to pick locks and disarm traps at range."

Picking locks and disarming traps likely requires the "hand", at least in the case of the arcane trickster to be sufficiently dexterous to manipulate a set of thieves tools to open a lock or disarm a trap - something that in many cases one might think would require two hands.

In addition, it isn't clear whether the hand offers any feedback ... but in order to pick a lock, a rogue likely needs some feedback from the tools to successfully pick a lock. I'm not sure how you could pick a lock just by putting the tools in the lock and rotating them around randomly using a mage hand hoping it will open but apparently an arcane trickster can do that. Magic I guess :)

[OldTrees1]

I'm not sure about the "one" hand requirement ... especially for an arcane trickster.

An arcane trickster can use the hand for some delicate manipulations without having disadvantage or other negative effects.

"You can use thieves' tools to pick locks and disarm traps at range."

Picking locks and disarming traps likely requires the "hand", at least in the case of the arcane trickster to be sufficiently dexterous to manipulate a set of thieves tools to open a lock or disarm a trap - something that in many cases one might think would require two hands.

In addition, it isn't clear whether the hand offers any feedback ... but in order to pick a lock, a rogue likely needs some feedback from the tools to successfully pick a lock. I'm not sure how you could pick a lock just by putting the tools in the lock and rotating them around randomly using a mage hand hoping it will open but apparently an arcane trickster can do that. Magic I guess :)

Arcane Tricksters get 3 upgrades to their Mage Hand
1) Theirs is invisible. A lot of the tasks in this thread are much easier with an invisible hand than with one the victim (even a surprised one) can see coming. I believe this is also why they mention sleight of hand in the arcane trickster description and not in the main spell.
2) Theirs is faster. An arcane trickster can use both Action and Bonus Action commands to the Mage Hand.
3) Theirs is more capable.As we all know "you can perform the following additional tasks with it" include the delicate and complicated tasks you (Keravath) mentioned.

I know there are traps and lock that, if I knew how to disarm / unlock them, it would take me 3+ hands. However Rogues are much better at disarming traps than I am. I expect they can do more with one hand than I can do with 3. So the one hand limitation might be reasonable, IF we use the Rogue's hand as an example rather than my hand. But if we use the "guy at the gym"'s hand then that test is not as reasonable at 3rd+ level.

[MinotaurWarrior]

but apparently an arcane trickster can do that. Magic I guess :)

Yeah I think the caster just magically imbues the hand with his own ability and it operates semi-autonomously as directed. The AT can pick two locks, pockets, etc. Only by doing one set with natural hands and the other with the mage hand. Cunning action doesn't allow the AT to do any of these complex actions except through the spell.

[Chaosity]

So I think unfortunately that the Arcane Trickster is hard to read at the table because you have to apply all of the rules from three separate places at once: Mage Hand spell (including general spell rules like targeting/LOS); Cunning Action; and the Arcane Trickster boost to Mage Hand.

Can I do these things, why or why not, and what would you rule the effect would be, using an invisible Mage Hand?

1- Tie someone's shoelaces together
2- Undo someone's belt
3- Take their spell component pouch from their belt
4- Take a dagger from it sheath at their belt
5- Take a greatsword from its case on their back
6- Pull someone's hat or helmet down over their eyes
7- Take someone's quiver full of arrows
8- Take the arrows out of their quiver


Bonus points: can they be done with Telekinesis?

I would rule a contested check between the AT sleight of hand check vs a relevant check of the opposition. With advantage if they are on to the AT tricks

For example a dex save to see if they can react fast enough to grab their weapon that's being unsheated.

It has a cost of a bonus action and a rogue doing these shenenigans isn't hiding all the time so i would welcome these kind of things at my table

So for the actual questions
1) yes, with a contested check but only out of combat. In combat everybody is constantly moving. Also note that a lot of heavy armor doesn't have shoelaces
2) same as 1
3) with a contested check
4) same as 3
5)same as 3
6) same as 1
7) quiver are usually strapped around a shoulder so not getting it off of them
8) this on the other hand would work fine. Same as 1

[Mr Adventurer]

Some good points and discussion here, thanks all.

It seems most people are coming down on the idea that the AT bonus uses of Mage Hand are usually gated behind a check. I can see the logic.

Out of interest, on some of the actions that aren't described in the rules, what would you rule the effect to be in combat (this question assumes the action is permitted)?

E.g.
- Tying shoelaces together or loosening shoe buckles (fair point about laces)
- Undoing a belt
- Pulling a hat or helm down over the eyes

[Porcupinata]

Some good points and discussion here, thanks all.

It seems most people are coming down on the idea that the AT bonus uses of Mage Hand are usually gated behind a check. I can see the logic.

Out of interest, on some of the actions that aren't described in the rules, what would you rule the effect to be in combat (this question assumes the action is permitted)?

E.g.
- Tying shoelaces together or loosening shoe buckles (fair point about laces)
- Undoing a belt
- Pulling a hat or helm down over the eyes

Well for a start I'd say that the various Sleight of Hand checks are assuming that the target is standing around doing nothing, rather than the target being in combat.

Undoing the belt or loosening the shoe buckles of someone who isn't moving? Requires no roll, but needs a Sleight of Hand check to do it without them noticing.
Undoing the belt of loosening the shoe buckles of someone who's actively fighting with all the movement and footwork that that entails? Forget it. You'd struggle to even get the hand to keep up with their movement, let alone do fine manipulation.

Of all of the ones listed, I'd say that the only one that's viable as a combat manoeuver is probably the pulling someone's hat down one - it's quick and simple and simply grabbing a hat in combat is probably possible (as opposed to undoing a buckle that's bouncing around as the person moves and fights). It's simple to do, but also simple to undo, so I'd probably call it the "Help" action. In fact I'd probably generalise and give the following ruling:

An arcane trickster can use Mage Hand to do the Help action at a range instead of just within 5' and as a bonus action instead of a normal action.

How they justify that help action (pulling a hat down or whatever) would be up to the player, but that seems to me to be about right in terms of the power of the cantrip/feature.

I certainly wouldn't want to get into minutiae of "you did X therefore it had effect Y" for every single conceivable action. Partly because judging them on a case-by-case basis would slow the game down and also because it would inevitably lead to munchkinism where the player keeps trying to find the perfect action to cause the maximum inconvenience possible to the target and then once they've found something they then do it repeatedly against every target they fight.

Best just to give a single "you can do this with it" effect - such as the Help action mentioned above - and then let the player go wild with the fluff justifications without needing to either slow the game down nor start adjudicating things and justifying those adjudications in the middle of a fight or worrying about setting precedent by allowing something too powerful that the player will then want to use again and again.

[Chronos]

Complication: Giving you (and not someone else) advantage on an attack roll is something ATs get at 13th level. Implying that it's not something you can do before then.

[Porcupinata]

That's a good point. In that context even my proposed guideline (allowing the Help action at range and as a bonus action) is probably far too generous.

In that case I'd be tempted to simply say "you don't have enough control to do that sort of thing till 13th level" and be done with it.

[Aussiehams]

As a general rule should Arcana be the correct skill to use for spells skill checks? It's usually not, but it seems that using mage hand to do something tricky, or minor illusion to mimic a noise is a particular function of the magic, not the dexterity of your hand or the cleverness of your voice.
Alternatively, should it be the other skills, but using intelligence instead of dex/cha etc. to represent it's your mastery of magic.
We don't play it that way, but its a thought I had.

[OldTrees1]

As a general rule should Arcana be the correct skill to use for spells skill checks? It's usually not, but it seems that using mage hand to do something tricky, or minor illusion to mimic a noise is a particular function of the magic, not the dexterity of your hand or the cleverness of your voice.
Alternatively, should it be the other skills, but using intelligence instead of dex/cha etc. to represent it's your mastery of magic.
We don't play it that way, but its a thought I had.

5E skill system starts by choosing which ability score to use. For most of these usages I would have the Arcane Trickster start with Dex or Int to represent physical or mental finesse.

To morph a spell I would allow Arcana proficiency
To perform a task, I would allow the proficiencies I associate with that task. Like Thieves Tools.

So Int(Arcana, or <physical skill>) would be the common verdict. If they have either proficiency, then they are proficient in the check.

[Chronos]

Keep in mind, though, that which proficiency goes with which ability score isn't set in stone. You could, for instance, call for a Dex (Arcana) check, or Int (Sleight of Hand).

[Lunali]

As a general rule should Arcana be the correct skill to use for spells skill checks? It's usually not, but it seems that using mage hand to do something tricky, or minor illusion to mimic a noise is a particular function of the magic, not the dexterity of your hand or the cleverness of your voice.
Alternatively, should it be the other skills, but using intelligence instead of dex/cha etc. to represent it's your mastery of magic.
We don't play it that way, but its a thought I had.

I would use int if you wanted to lift an 11 pound item, but for sleight of hand stuff I'd still use dex because it's less about your magical power and more about knowing the proper motions to pull off a feat. Similarly for illusion, it's not a question of magical strength but of whether it's the right sound to convince the target to do what you want.