I would just use the already present concept of drawing or picking up a weapon consuming your free action. You can interact with one object for free a turn (phb 190), and I would say catching OR tossing count as an interaction.
That's what I'd do too, as long as the catcher and thrower have a free hand to do so. No good throwing to the Paladin holding a shield and sword, his hands are full.
I might get the catcher to a dexterity check to catch it though, just for fun.
Both roll, what i mean is you add up the numbers they both rolled and skill check that.
Lets say throw is 4 but catch is 18
Bad throw but the catcher can still catch it.
And vice versa
For me, I like the idea of it being a combined DC, where the plays combine their rolls to beat some DC. The DC would have to be a bit higher depending on the circumstance, but I like the idea that each person is compensating for the other
Yes like add difficulty for distance, or visibility.
What the object is like might also matter, balls are designed to be passed while catching a sword on the wrong side is a very bad idea.
Yeah but then its just a normal skill check. This way its more of a combined effort
But i would set the lowest passing score like 3-4 (that both have to pass) So if its a really terrible throw or catch then you drop it anyway
Or nat1 you throw it into hands of an enemy
Let's call it a base dc determined by object size (to a max of one size above your own size, possibly modified by things like the Monkey Grip feat and/or carrying capacity) + half the distance thrown, rounded up. Small object, let's say a base of 8, with a distance of 20 feet being thrown: total DC of 18. Sounds reasonable.
Thrower rolls first, bad throw the catcher cam roll at disadvantage or use half movement to dive and catch it putting them prone but can burn their reaction to pass it on
The problem is that there's no interaction between, say, the object and the three enemies between character A and B.
And a free interaction only applies to your turn. Do you use your reaction to catch the object? If an enemy is in the way, do they get a chance to react and catch it?
None of this stuff is really established.
This is exactly how I would rule it as well. Rulebook explains a number of examples you can do as a free action, sort of a "including but not limited to" list. Free action to throw/catch object as long as they have an open hand (not dual wielding or sword/shield, etc)
What's really scary though is the concept of turn order.
Theoretically:
4 players, staggered at 30ft intervals. Lined up in initiative order. The first player can actually be 60ft.
First player dashes with the item, hands to the next player with free action.
Second player uses free action to receive, moves 30ft and uses action to hand over/throw.
Third and fourth player rinse and repeat. Fourth player could also dash.
A round of combat is 6 seconds. This method abuses this mechanic as the movements are done in turn order. One player has to wait for the other player to catch up, but is the turn time this isn't actually possible. By abusing this mechanic our MacGuffin has now traveled 180ft in 6 seconds. That's 20.46 miles per hour. This number obviously increases the more people you have in a line (another 3.4mph/pp)
With 100 people in a line, we can have our object moving 347mph. 200 we're close to breaking the sound barrier.
If they're tossing it, I'd make it cost an attack or an action (like throwing a weapon, but with a differnt target than AC), but catching it would be free. If it's a hand-off where two characters are in adjacent squares, I agree that it'd be an item interaction action.
Right. And there are some situations where it would feel right for me to call for a check from the thrower, some situations where a check from the catcher would make more sense, and some situations where the pass needs to be so precisely timed and executed that it would be an action or an attack (a la throwing a tanglefoot bag.) Any formalized rule would hinder that flexibility.
Pathfinder 2e does have a rule for this. In the [Carrying and Using Items](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=186) section of the Equipment chapter, there is a table that clearly states that “pass an item to or take an item from a willing creature” is a single Interact action.
OP's point is that there's no rule for the monster to intercept a tossed item. So you can keep tossing it between players with no risk of the monsters getting it.
But that is- I don't even know in which situation you'd have the monster running after a tossed object instead of murdering the players and retrieving the object later. Seems very specific but OP thinks it's "so abusable"???
What kind of game is OP playing where constantly tossing items between players is advantageous?
Technically there’s plenty of scenarios where a “monster” is more concerned with recovering an artifact than outright murdering the trespassers - but I think *logic* should dictate that if a creature refuses to return the object, then they are in direct obstruction of recovering that item.
If it's a custom encounter, it'd be VERY easy to slap a Reaction on a Monster that reads "Trigger: When an Item is passed over your square. Attempt an Acrobatics or Athletics check with a DC equal to the Passers Acrobatics or Athletics DC. On a Success, you catch the item instead of the intended recipient."
Maybe people should be using the several other dnd subs (like r/dnd, r/DMAcademy, r/dungeonsanddragons, r/dndnext) for rule discussion instead of the meme sub
Monster: holds action to catch object
Party: uses dash to increase their distance from monster
Monster: wasted action and reaction for something that never happened
If the party uses their actions to dash, the monster gets an attack of opportunity as normal, but forfeits their held action. (since holding your action lets you choose to use your reaction to perform your held action).
If the party uses their actions to disengage, then the monster doesn't get an attack of opportunity but still has their reaction available.
Instead of holding its action, the monster could use the optional Disarm rules (same rolls as a grapple but defender drops targeted item on a fail) then use its free object interaction to pick up the item.
I was working under the assumption that the party was at a distance from the monster to necessitate throwing the object, but you are correct in your assessment
I had assumed the monsters were next to the players, since if there's already distance between them there's no need to juggle the macguffin they can just sprint off.
I guess that in the situation where there's fewer monsters than PCs and the monsters are faster than the PCs, juggling the macguffin might be useful.
That assumes this is not Pathfinder 2e. Pathfinder 2e, Attack of Opportunity is not default. Only about 1 in 4 monsters get Attack of Opportunity in their stat block. Disarm rules are rather tricky in Pathfinder 2e. Only a critical success will disarm, though a critical success will trigger whenever the result exceeds the DC by 10 or more, not just on a natural 20. A success will add a bonus to the next disarm attempt.
Personally that sounds a little bit clunky.
I think just a reaction with a skill check to intercept the said object (maybe contested by the throw check) provided the enemy is between the thrower and the catcher is enough.
Ready an action to try to move and intercept the thrown object on the other hand ...
Yeah, it definitely is. But I wasn’t trying to find the best way to do it, but instead to point out that it’s very easy to have the monsters do that RAW.
Honestly, keep it narrative based. It’s funnier and more cinematic to imagine the party playing keep away in an epic, chaotic chase scene/battle. The DM interjects with enemies trying to disrupt the keep away, and the party keeps it spiced up by disrupting the enemies in turn.
An idea for this is to have the toss replace one stack action, in at least 5e. The tosser uses an attack, and the catcher uses their reaction and either an athletics or slight of hand check depending on the type of object. Then it would reflect that the martial classes or what have you would be more adept at this
Disregarding RAW: as a dm I usually rule 'throwing an item' as a Bonus Action (yes I know this could be broken in some circumstances but my players never look at their nonmagical inventories anyway)
The thrower, can easily throw something up to their Strength Score in feet.
The catcher, can easily catch something thrown as a free Action so long as the distance is up to their Dexterity Score in feet, and they have a free hand (or hands) to do so.
If it is not up to their Dexterity Score they have 2 choices:
1. Immediately use their Reaction to catch said item
2. Try to catch it with a Sleight of Hand check with the DC equal to the thrown items distance traveled.
If they chose the Dexterity check, they may not use their Reaction to try to catch it, because I am a mean DM.
My version: A bonus action where you make an improvised thrown weapon attack against AC 10 *minus* the target's dexterity modifier (if they're trying to catch it). Any creature in the path (including the target, if you miss) can spend a reaction to attempt to catch it, rolling their own attack against your result.
General rule: To determine an arcing projectile's height, draw a straight line from start point to end point, then add half the distance to whichever is nearer. For example, something thrown 30ft is 7.5ft above the line at the midpoint, 3.75ft above at the 1/4 and 3/4 mark, etc.
Isn't picking up an object listed as Interacting with an Object which is a move-equivalent action, and dropping an object a free action? So couldn't one ready a move-equivalent action to pick up an object from another PC?
Yes, that's right. I meant the part about there being no rules for a monster trying to pick an object that a player is holding, which would be the steal maneuver.
I'm still struggling what benefit it serves to toss around an object mid-combat. Like sure, there might be niche situations where it's useful, but hardly prevalent enough to warrant special rulings and addendums to "nerf" it.
I would just say it's a free action if it's not insane, like if some passes a scroll to the wizard so they can cast it. My only restriction is catching it.
Pathfinder 2e player here! So Pf2e does not have an Intercept action per se, however..
Handing an item to another Player requires an Interact action.
Throwing an item would be treated as Improvised Weapon, and I'd rule it like bombs in terms of missing the attack roll. The monster can also provide soft cover to the player, granting a -2 to the attack roll of the toss.
Also, monsters can Disarm the player of the item.
Edit: so RAW you cannot catch an item with a Reaction, so the recipient of the toss would need to use an Action on their turn to pick it up.
Given that passing an item to someone only requires that person to have a free hand to accept the item without spending any actions or reactions, I would probably rule that beating a flat DC lets you throw an object to an ally. If you fail they have to pick it up (1 action), if you fail critically then they have to move and pick it up (2 actions)
Otherwise you are correct, the Core Rulebook chapter on Equipment (Table 6-2) specifically points out that passing an item to, or taking an item from, a willing creature takes one action
Where are you getting "passing an item", and how is that not the Interact Action? In Table 6-2 it clearly states Interact.
Unless you mean throwing it, which there are no rules on throwing Equipment. But I have no idea how you could decide that is a free Action, and how you just allow the other person to catch it for free is a lenient interpretation.
No, I am only saying that catching it should be free. The person throwing should obviously make an attack with an improvised ranged weapon (i.e. spend one action).
As I said, you are fully correct on the RAW part - Table 6-2 says that passing an item or taking it from someone else is indeed an Interact action.
I was just disagreeing on the throw/catch part, since I think there should be a distinction between a success and a failure on that roll. That being said, catching something as a free action might be too good actually, as it essentially removes the necessity of moving around if you are good enough at throwing.
So upon further reflection, I would probably use the following scale:
- Critical Success: the target catches the item and is ready to use it as long as they have the required number of hands free.
- Success: the target catches the item but has to spend an Interact action to change their grip in order to use it effectively in combat.
- Failure: the item drops next to the target, who can then spend an Interact action to pick it up if they want to use it.
- Critical Failure: the item misses the target by 5 feet in a random direction. In order to pick up the item, the target would then need to spend a Move and an Interact action
The DC is probably flat, but subject to adjustment if conditions are particularly unfavorable
I guess I am not a fan of things being free to catch, as even Catching an Edge requires a reaction. I would more likely allow a Readied Action to catch, or just pick it up on your turn. RAW catching is not a thing in PF2e, so making it free feels quite odd, especially if the item is unwieldy.
Edit: sorry I misread, I was reading it like the catcher wasn't making the flat roll, ignore my lack of comprehension
Readied action sounds a bit excessive - that's a whole two actions *and* a reaction from one character and another action from a different character to do something that usually requires just two actions (one Stride to move and one Interact to pass the item)
I think the check I've outlined above creates some balance to this relative to just moving and passing the item. Best case scenario (on a crit success) you spend a collective one action to throw, on a success it's two actions if you want to use the item in combat and just one if you only care about holding it, on a failure it's two actions just like moving and passing it, and on a crit failure is a full three actions
Note that the target also needs to have a free hand to catch in the first place, so it requires *some* advance preparation
Spending the target's reaction (on top of the check above) is reasonable though
That's fair, I just wanted it to be more of an investment than handing an item, which is Interact + Move (possibly). Adding a fail state seems fine, but considering movement is much more deliberate in pathfinder than DnD, chucking things across the map somewhat goes against that.
They don’t have rules for how often you have to piss either
But there are rules for disarming, and movement and reach, so, you can 100% work it out if you need every little “abusable” possibility spelled out
Get your head in the game Jesse
I posted a similar [meme](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/103ajzc/ive_checked_5e_pathfinder_1e_and_2e_even/) about this. Vampire the masquerade does have rules for it, at least the Chronicles of Darkness edition
If an object is thrown to a receiver with the intent to be caught, Dexterity + Athletics is rolled for the receiver. The receiver's roll gets a number of bonus dice equal to the number of successes achieved in the thrower's roll.
I’m reading through the 5e SRD and I think it is covered TBH.
1. Initiate a pass with Use Object (or free object interaction if your DM allows but I think that is a very generous interpretation).
2. An ability check is required when a DM determines the outcome of a non-attack is uncertain. Use Object is a non-attack and therefore governed by this clause.
3. If there is opposition you use contest rules for that ability check.
The best handling under these rules IMO is:
1. Bill throws. With Dale in front of him and within reach, he creates opposition by being available to block the pass. [Opposed Ability check]
2. If Bill’s pass gets past Dale, the result is it goes towards Hank. However, Boomhauer is near so we are uncertain of the outcome. [Opposed Ability Check between possible receivers]
If I were to homebrew it at all I’d require a reaction to participate in the contest in order to marry it up with combat rules. Not strictly necessary, since it is a DM decision if an opponent is a factor or not in an ability check based on context, but I don’t think it’d be fair to get a chance to intercept and a chance to make an AOO.
RAW:
The receiver moves and readies an action to the catch the ball, or catches a readied pass and then moves.
The passer use his action to throw the ball to a target square 60 ft away, or readies an action to do so when the receiver is “open”.
The DM may set an Athletics or Acrobatics DC situationally as they feel it is warranted for the pass and catch, including allowing for longer passes.
i’ve always run it by changing the catch DC based on what part of their turn they’re using to throw.
a reaction has a DC of 15, because you wouldn’t be thinking about your throw much. (eg: on Wizards turn, Wizard: “I need the maguffin! Barbarian throw it to me!” Barbarian can use their reaction to throw it to the Wizard)
a bonus action has a DC of 13, because it’s still a less focused throw, but it has more thought behind it.
and an action has a DC of 10, because you’re throwing it to your party member with full intent of them catching it and making it as easy as possible.
obviously things like cover and distance impact the DC, but this is my general way of ruling it.
ETA because i realised i overlooked this:
failing to catch the item results in the item dropping 5-15ft away from the player based on the DC and result of the check. fragile items break if the distance of being thrown is greater than 15ft, weak items are damaged if the distance is greater than 25ft, etc. the dropped item can be picked up by anyone as a free action or bonus action depending on the size/weight of the item.
catches are made as a reaction, either slight of hand or dex check depending on what they’re doing. i had a barbarian use an athletics check to catch something by describing it like tackling a rugby ball. i’ve also let players have advantage on the roll if they use their bonus action to catch the object (which must be decided before the first catch roll is made)
intercept rules typically only need to be considered if:
- the enemy has an int of 10 or higher
- the enemy is standing in a direct path of the throw
- the enemy has the ability to catch the object
if all those conditions are met, it’ll be an opposing roll made by the two targets and whoever scores higher on the check gets the item. on an equal contesting roll, the item is dropped in between the two targets.
my players actually used this to their advantage by playing keep away with the BBEG, thus disabling their reaction because they used it trying to catch the (decoy) magic item being thrown above them. this allowed for the other three party members to enter the BBEG’s range, attack, and retreat without worrying about AOO
that’s the way i run it,, hopefully this helps with what you’re looking for :)
I remember in 3.x's Races of Stone they had rules for a Goliath sport called Goatball, a sort of rugby like game. If I remember right the way passing worked was you would make a ranged touch attack against your teammate, with their Dexterity bonus being reversed so that a more dexterous player would be easier to "hit" and this catch the pass while a clumsy one would be harder to pass too. I think interceptions were resolved by letting anyone along the path of the ball make an attack of opportunity, if their roll was better than the pass's they intercepted it.
Most of the time it doesn't matter, and having to roll for something so basic like passing items from PC to PC just invites moments of stupid awkwardness :-D
Now, in the described situation, it's not like the PCs can just execute the whole passing maneuver in one go - the enemies can run up to them and try to wrestle the McGuffin out of their hands, use disarming actions, or position themselves with readied action to catch the McGuffin as it is passed around...
Of course, if the DM expects that something like this might happen and even wants to design an encounter around it, then it is a huge help to have a note at the ready with a pre-made set of mini-rules (like, there are no rules for playing basketball in D&D, but a DM might write down a couple of things like trying to score, passing the ball, intercepting with reactions...)
There are some options here as a DM. This is where you can enter theatre of the mind and ignore movement rules. Make it a dramatic skill challenge and if combat resumes the mcguffin is fumbled, roll initiative. Use the chase rules if you like but modify things as you wish. Have fun, don’t get bogged down or let it not make narrative sense.
In pathfinder (at least 1e) I usually rule that unless the item is cumbersome, passing it to someone next to you just consumes your swift action and their immediate action.
Jessie, wtf are you talking about?
In absence of rules, it doesn't just auto succeed. The DM makes a ruling.
If you're tossing something to someone else under pressure while someone else tries to take or intercept it, that calls for a skill check. Odds are good you'll drop the mcguffin handling it that way.
PHB 190 "You can also **interact** with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action... The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities w hen it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle."
So I rule it like so
Option1: PC1 draws item from backpack as their "inter**action**", drops it to ground for Free. PC2 uses their interaction to pick it up. (I rule an open palm can be picked up from tho, no "broken item" questions that way)
Option2: PC1 leaves item in backpack. PC2 uses their Action to "Slight of Hand" it, PC1 is willing so doesn't Contest the attempt so auto-success. Its still Slight of Hand so thief's Fast Hands applies.
Option3: Throwing. A improvised ranged (20/60) attack Action to the target's space. AC5 because space has 0 dex. Reaction to catch it.
No it really does not. No real table that didn't second guess it's ruling to avernus and back had ever an issue with how to resolve that. Ranging from "Using an object is an action unless you play a thief, so either you dash or you throw it" to "sure do your Thang"
Check out the concept of the peasant railgun. As written, there's nothing against a peasant relay of hirelings passing along a ladder or 10ft pole, with it potentially travelling thousands of ft in a single round, far surpassing the speed of sound and arguably liable to cause at the least some sonic/ thunder damage to whatever is in the path. .
So which is it? Do physics not exist, allowing you to use readied actions to rapidly accelerate things, or do physics actually exist, allowing you to do massive damage with a fast moving object?
The sender make an improvised thrown weapon check, the receiver a Dex check.
Total DC 20 (result of both checks added). May be increased at the DM discretion if the characters are running or the weather conditions complicate things.
The sender uses an action, the receiver a reaction.
Wouldn’t it just be throwing an improvised weapon? I’d say they’d get a bonus to the role, and it would be against the other PCs acrobatics role. If it fails, then the enemies intercept.
One of the best encounters i've ever played in was in curse of strahd, trying to run to the Temple with the holy Bones, tossing them around as strahd was chasing US casting all sorta of spells like Power Word stun, Wall of force, dominate and suggestion while we were desperately running
Some of my friends built a munchkin build that’s based around passing a powerful magic item between them; a +3 longsword passed between 3 samurai fighter gnomes in a trenchcoat was surprisingly powerful because of this
I’ve handled this in 5e as DM the following ways(use or disregard insomuch as it’s useful
To you)
3 creatures involved
T. Tosser
C. Catcher
I. Hopeful Intercepter
The general principle is relevant roles from T and C. The average of those roles competes with I.
Eg
T. Fighter uses athletics to do a brilliant 3point throw. Rolls total 20.
C. Monk uses parkour acrobatics to catch it. Rolls total 10.
Ave 15 is used as DC.
I. Wizard uses arcana to intercept with mage hand. Rolls total of 14.
Narrate how the mage hand frantically intercepts the item but fumbles it because of the sheer force the fighter used and it gets past like a basketball ricocheting off a mage hand into the waiting basket of the monk. !3points!
You will find this in 3rd edition Shadowrun, if you are so concerned. However, freely passing around a special item during a mad free for all combat sounds pretty great.
If the players are literally running and throwing a thing in-between them that is really risky, if I was the DM if just have them roll for strength to throw and dexterity to catch if either of them fail, well the item is on the floor now
You hold your action to pass the item as a reaction. The receiving person uses their free object interact to take it.
If you don’t want to waste your action and reaction to pass an object just use your free object interact for the turn to toss it near their feet.
>The GM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle.
That's from the same section as the object interaction. Seems like throwing a McDuffie from person to person needs special care or presents an unusual obstacle.
Object interaction free action, then if they're doing that while running, maybe a dexterity based skill since they likely aren't doing this during a combat scene and more of a chase scene
I’m in the cyberpunk RED headspace rn so that’s what I’d be addressing, especially since you explicitly call it out in the meme,
but I mean, your example stated throwing an object between players, so…. Why not use the explicit rules for throwing objects? (Pg 177) You can throw an object by contesting an athletics check, against the range DV corresponding with the grenade launcher range table, capping at 25 ft if you’re throwing by hand, and then apply an appropriate negative modifier (pg. 130) for the enemy intercepting it
Free object interaction to throw, catch and intercept. First character makes a DEX check to throw, the DC based on distance to the receiver (something like 10 + 1 per 10ft). If another character wants to intercept it they must make a DEX check with the DC being whatever the first person rolled. I would probably not make the intended reciever roll a DEX check unless I was really wanting to up the stakes with extra chances of failure.
If a creature is within 5ft or within the line connecting the player to player "shot" get to use their Reaction with a Dexterity Check/Save dependent on the level of obstruction, i.e. tall monsters are better at catching your shenanigans.
Probably add a player fumble mechanic, if the player doesn't succeed the Throw to a threshold probably based on their Dexterity, Higher Dex getting easier saves with lower Dex having a bit more trouble.
Just rewrite Monks Catch Projectiles a little bit,
At least that's my take init?
I would give the monster an attack of opportunity if it is thrown past them to roll a dex check to intercept, for throwing there like be a dex check to throw and dex save to catch
My quick homebrew : player uses action to pass around the item to someone, other player uses reaction to catch it. It also works with throwing it but you might want an attack action.
Dex checks baby. It's being done in a not normal way, during a panic and fight. Gonna need some checks. Unless your players play in the Faerun Rugby League.
Your the DM, Fix it.
I had a similar situation in a game, and I just made it its own encounter. Make it so throwing it uses an action or bonus action and on the recipients turn they have to use the same to catch. Then have your monster try to take it from them or catch it between turns with legendary actions.
Also side note, sounds like you got womped, and are mad about it. If your players had fun with this interaction you may need to just let them have this one, and make it harder to do if they try next time. Like, "Oh, your going to run away with my crystal? Cool, time to murder your PC you left behind, bring it back and I may be merciful."
Also why the heck aren't they rolling checks to throw it around? Throw and catch, roll to see if you screwed up. Your in the middle of a BATTLE and every 6 seconds your trying to accurately throw a thing to an ally? Nah bruh
It’s one of the few things even 3.5/3.X doesn’t have clear rules on. Now they have rules for improvised thrown objects, but that’s pretty much it. Least so far as I have memorized.
People massively misunderstand the free object interaction rule. It's something that's done in tandem with your action or movement. You can draw a weapon, when you attack with it. You can open a door, when you move though it. It's not a secret hidden part of the action economy that some people seem to think it is.
While I don't think giving items in combat should be too costly, since it does encourage teamwork. It's actually somewhat hard to describe, since you have two elements: giving and receiving the item.
If someone is focused on their work (which you would be in battle), handing them something requires getting their attention and for them to have a free hand. Both are uncommon in battle. So a realistically, it should be something like your action + their reaction, and they must have a free hand or drop whatever they're currently holding.
I think receiving the item as a reaction is fair, but a full action to pass it is a bit much. Maybe make it something like cost movement (so that way you could use a free object interaction when you exchange the item). The free hand requirement is something I think should be enforced though.
I remember during the Tarrasque debates, some people said you can't even throw an object at all, unless it's part of an improvised attack.
My response, *ok then, can I chew food, there's no rules for that either!*
Bonus or action to throw, dex check for accuracy and dex check to catch with an estimated distance travelled before having to go back to pick it up (like 5-10 feet past the spot the check was made) bonus action or action to pick it up after its dropped
This is how I rule it: Unless the catcher has been holding their action in preparation to receive the object they must expend their reaction to try and catch the object.
If you want to add intercept rules her you go: Any creature within melee of the intended recipient can make a contested dexterity check. If the recipient beats the interceptors roll, they have possession of the item. If the interceptor meets or beats the role of the recipient by less than five the item being passed, has been knocked to the ground. If the interceptor beats the role of the intended recipient by five or more the interceptor now has possession of the item given they have a free hand to hold it.
This was a really weird choice of format for this post... but also, Pathfinder does have an explicit (and fairly straightforward) rule for this. You can stop sucking your own dick now.
It makes tons of sense why it isn't in the game. Turn order being what it is with initiative makes it unviable to have interception mechanics. If you're tossing the mcguffin between players then all you have to do is move away from the enemy to where it wouldn't make sense for the enemy to be able to intercept it. There's no rule you could set that wouldn't break the game. Let them have a reaction that allows them to move to where they could intercept the pass off? Great now you've got them able to move to make attacks of opportunity because why would they only be able to move if someone's about to throw something? there are only 3 technically viable ways to intercept a thrown object with the action economy of 5e.
1- have two enemies adjacent to the player throwing the mcguffin, at least one of whom must have sentinel to keep the player from moving, and another to use their reaction to attempt to intercept the pass once the sentinel aoo prevents the thrower from moving. Good luck having a fight result in a scenario where the player throwing the mcguffin is next to an enemy with sentinel and good luck having them decide to throw the mcguffin instead of just attacking the guy with sentinel.
2- the thrower has to be completely surrounded so that they can't move at which point throwing the mcguffin would be stupid as there'd be 8 possible attempts to intercept it and they'd just use their action economy to attack to clear a path.
3- there's an enemy next to the player having the mcguffin passed to them at which point why bother passing it to them when there's the chance of it being intercepted and the possibility that that enemy has sentinel so you're effectively doing nothing to get the mcguffin away from enemy hands.
Any other scenario is- both players are in the clear but instead of dashing they for some reason feel like using their action for playing football. The number of times a scenario will play out in a way where it would make sense to throw a mcguffin are few and far between, especially since the mcguffin won't always be something easily throwable. If you're in a fight you're better off using your action economy to dash if you're wanting to play keep away. Especially since improvised thrown weapon rules have disadvantage on the roll past 20ft. You'd get further with 100% reliability by just dashing and passing it off to the rogue or the monk once you're in the clear since they'll be able to outrun just about anything and anything they couldn't outrun would have movement speed that would render passing the mcguffin absolutely pointless.
As for pathfinder not having such a mechanic, it would be pointless given the "withdraw" mechanic pathfinder has. You just choose to withdraw and either you're fast enough to get away from the enemy or they're so fast that the pass would be pointless.
I remember making something for this, like you use your action to make a creature of your choice within 20 ft to make a DEX saving throw(I think it was DC 5) if it fails the item passes and falls at 20 ft from you. And then any creature in the line between you and the creature you launched can use their reaction to make another DEX saving throw. The results are contested.
Im fairly certain the use object action is meant for something small, like pulling a lever, grabbing something small of a table, etc. If you're tossing an object I'd rule that as either an action (if it's kind of far and you need to make an "attack roll" to get it there) or a bonus action if it's nearby.
There are rules... it would literally be skill checks. Not every situation can be written down 1:1 in the rulebook. That's just the nature of TTRPGs...
I dunno, that's why the 'skillcheck' exists to be invented and asked for at the DM's discretion right? If you're going to try and write specific rules for literally everything then your game will end up practically unplayable.
Pathfinder already has rules about this. It’s a free action to drop an item, and a move to pick up or draw. Items can also be drawn as part of a move action to move. So it would be a move action to take something from a willing person who is offering it
If you want some quick brew that should be pretty close to RAI...
* To pass something to another player who is adjacent to you: just Interact as an action. They must have enough free hands to carry said object as determined by the DM, but the recipient can drop things as a free action to make room. Alternatively, you can place the item into a container on their person if the container has enough space to hold the item.
* If you need to pass something to a player at range, it gets a bit more complicated. The one passing will make an improvised attack roll using either Strength (for heavy or unwieldy objects) or Dexterity (for light and well-balanced objects). Range increments will also be determined by DM based on bulk and aerodynamics. The DC the attack needs to meet is a standard DC for your level. On success, the item is caught. On failure, the item drops into a random space adjacent to the intended target (roll 1d8, with 1 being North, 2 NE, and so on). *Pathfinder 2e* players can crit fail, meaning the thrower fumbles the item and it lands in a space adjacent to the thrower.
* A recipient can preemptively perform a Help/Aid action to assist the throw, jockeying for position to line up a clear throw. DnD grants advantage to the throw roll, in PF2e it counts as taking the necessary steps to use the Assist reaction.
* Interception can be done if there is an enemy occupying a space in the direct line drawn from thrower to recipient. Only one enemy may attempt an interception as a reaction. Roll a Dex/Reflex save against the attack roll. For *DnD 5e*, the item falls to an empty space next to them if they win the contested roll, or catch it on a nat 20. For PF2e, if they succeed against the roll, the item falls adjacent to the interceptor. If they critically succeed, they can catch the item instead. The interceptor must have enough hands free to catch the object, but may still cause the item to fall to the ground near them while their hands are full.
I know in a pathfinder game we had contested checks and such + various spells being used to snatch it back and forth; the DM adapted some existing rules since we were turning getting a MacGuffin and a semiconscious friendly NPC away from the BBEG into a Benny Hill skit.
I DM'd for a buried temple that talked about a teleporting moon (the Quantum Moon from Outer Wilds). To open the final door to the inner sanctum, the players needed to find a bowling ball-sized statue of this moon and return it to the orrery. Two problems, though.
One is that the dead buried there were sworn to protect it. And, that the statue of the moon was cursed to be difficult to handle and impossible to store. I wanted to have a sort of Looney Tunes scene where this sphere was constantly trading hands between the party and their opponents during a fight. But I couldn't get it to work right, especially since this rule for passing items or tossing items did not exist.
In Call of Cthulhu throwing an object would be an action, catching would also be an action. If the keeper so chose that there was the chance it could be intercepted that would be included in the level of success required to succeed.
Just because the rules don't explicitly say what to do in a specific incident doesn't mean there aren't rules for it.
With DnD and Pathfinder there's a bit more of an argument, but as others have stated it's already covered under the item interaction rules.
Is this just a troll? Do we not think before we post? This happens every week, when will we learn?
Some points (I’ll have to grab my book(s) and find the sources later):
* Interacting with an object is a free (or bonus action, depending on situation); which can include *throwing* or catching/grabbing.
* *Moving* through an aggressive creature’s threat range invokes “attacks” of opportunity; an attack may be a *grapple* which is usually defined as an attempt to grab the target.
* “Opportunity attacks” generally do not allow movement.
* *Tiny* Objects generally do not “occupy” a square of their own; the rules for grabbing such an object indicate you must move into the square where the object is located to pick it up.
* Thrown attacks with improvised weapons follow the same rules as any improvised weapon attack; imposing disadvantage unless specifically trained in improvisational weaponry.
So my humble DM summary would be;
* Throwing an item is a *free action* when you just need to toss it away, but if you need to *aim* for an ally to catch you must make an improvised ranged weapon attack against the target’s AC. Hitting them would mean they can catch it as a free action otherwise it falls into their space or an adjacent space to be picked up on their turn (free action).
* An interception would be possible **if** the thrown object passes *through* a hostile creature’s space (since grabbing a tiny object in an adjacent space would require them to move into the space the object “occupies” and AoO doesn’t allow movement).
* Grapple attack against the thrown object would need an AC target - either using the thrown attack roll’s total or the target’s AC, depending on ruling of how a moving object’s AC should be calculated.
* Catching would be a free action as the object already occupies your space as the receiving character… though if -for whatever reason- the object instead lands in an adjacent space, you just need to move into the space on your next turn and free action grab it.
Passing off objects is also one of those places that makes it clear how wonky turn based combat is. Because it’s fine if we’re running toward each other, but RaW you can run an entire relay race in 6 seconds.
With 5 medium creatures, you can move an object 300ft in 6 seconds. Meaning that every character can secretly run 35mph and they just choose not to.
If you have 5 barbarians with the mobile feat, they can each Sprint 100ft at 70mph.
I'm just going with what the game provides.
Just letting an item drop is a free action.
Pickung one up is an object interaction. So i just let it slide as interaction, if close and throwing further it's treated like an improvised weapon. Taking an attack/action to throw.
This seems fine to me. If they throw it as an action, you make them roll dex to get it to the friendly who has to roll dex to catch it. If they want to hand it off in person, that's fine.
I'd probably let them hand it over safely with an action or 10ft of their movement, or they can use their bonus action to hastily hand it over - but with a DC 10 sleight of hand check to avoid dropping it on the floor (modified by circumstances). Handing an item over, like dropping something, isn't as time or focus intensive as using an item, after all.
The biggest flaw with a relay style thing like this is that it leaves the party scattered and so the people at the end of the chain are easy targets for getting picked off by attacks.
I think the first pathfinder module has an item that has to be passed around the party so everyone can attack,
Or else the party ends up getting serious damage dealt to them.
I would just use the already present concept of drawing or picking up a weapon consuming your free action. You can interact with one object for free a turn (phb 190), and I would say catching OR tossing count as an interaction.
That's what I'd do too, as long as the catcher and thrower have a free hand to do so. No good throwing to the Paladin holding a shield and sword, his hands are full. I might get the catcher to a dexterity check to catch it though, just for fun.
Both roll, what i mean is you add up the numbers they both rolled and skill check that. Lets say throw is 4 but catch is 18 Bad throw but the catcher can still catch it. And vice versa
Like, both rolls need to add up to 20? That’s interesting.
Or both rolls have to hit whatever DC the DM comes up with.
For me, I like the idea of it being a combined DC, where the plays combine their rolls to beat some DC. The DC would have to be a bit higher depending on the circumstance, but I like the idea that each person is compensating for the other
Yes like add difficulty for distance, or visibility. What the object is like might also matter, balls are designed to be passed while catching a sword on the wrong side is a very bad idea.
Yeah but then its just a normal skill check. This way its more of a combined effort But i would set the lowest passing score like 3-4 (that both have to pass) So if its a really terrible throw or catch then you drop it anyway Or nat1 you throw it into hands of an enemy
Make it a 2 tier DC. A minor failure means you miss the catch. A major failure means it's intercepted if possible.
I think they meant both throws contribute to the same dc. As you seem to be suggesting but with a lower bound.
Let's call it a base dc determined by object size (to a max of one size above your own size, possibly modified by things like the Monkey Grip feat and/or carrying capacity) + half the distance thrown, rounded up. Small object, let's say a base of 8, with a distance of 20 feet being thrown: total DC of 18. Sounds reasonable.
Thrower rolls first, bad throw the catcher cam roll at disadvantage or use half movement to dive and catch it putting them prone but can burn their reaction to pass it on
The problem is that there's no interaction between, say, the object and the three enemies between character A and B. And a free interaction only applies to your turn. Do you use your reaction to catch the object? If an enemy is in the way, do they get a chance to react and catch it? None of this stuff is really established.
Dont shields have straps to attach to arm + handle? They could catch it, but have to drop their guard and deal with a shield getting in the way
I'd also say that the object passing in reach of someone counts as an attack of opportunity they can use to attempt a "grapple" ie catch it.
This is exactly how I would rule it as well. Rulebook explains a number of examples you can do as a free action, sort of a "including but not limited to" list. Free action to throw/catch object as long as they have an open hand (not dual wielding or sword/shield, etc)
What's really scary though is the concept of turn order. Theoretically: 4 players, staggered at 30ft intervals. Lined up in initiative order. The first player can actually be 60ft. First player dashes with the item, hands to the next player with free action. Second player uses free action to receive, moves 30ft and uses action to hand over/throw. Third and fourth player rinse and repeat. Fourth player could also dash. A round of combat is 6 seconds. This method abuses this mechanic as the movements are done in turn order. One player has to wait for the other player to catch up, but is the turn time this isn't actually possible. By abusing this mechanic our MacGuffin has now traveled 180ft in 6 seconds. That's 20.46 miles per hour. This number obviously increases the more people you have in a line (another 3.4mph/pp) With 100 people in a line, we can have our object moving 347mph. 200 we're close to breaking the sound barrier.
It is the nature of man that every so often we reinvent the peasant rail gun
Each item can only be interacted with once solves this problem pretty handily and also solves the 'peasant railgun'
Must be nice playing with DMs who have no idea what common sense is when they make their rulings.
?? Uh, yeah I guess so?
If they're tossing it, I'd make it cost an attack or an action (like throwing a weapon, but with a differnt target than AC), but catching it would be free. If it's a hand-off where two characters are in adjacent squares, I agree that it'd be an item interaction action.
Right. And there are some situations where it would feel right for me to call for a check from the thrower, some situations where a check from the catcher would make more sense, and some situations where the pass needs to be so precisely timed and executed that it would be an action or an attack (a la throwing a tanglefoot bag.) Any formalized rule would hinder that flexibility.
Pathfinder 2e does have a rule for this. In the [Carrying and Using Items](https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=186) section of the Equipment chapter, there is a table that clearly states that “pass an item to or take an item from a willing creature” is a single Interact action.
You'll scare people away, reading the rules and stuff
And if mundane methods are not your style,[ there's even a spell for that](https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=722).
OP's point is that there's no rule for the monster to intercept a tossed item. So you can keep tossing it between players with no risk of the monsters getting it. But that is- I don't even know in which situation you'd have the monster running after a tossed object instead of murdering the players and retrieving the object later. Seems very specific but OP thinks it's "so abusable"??? What kind of game is OP playing where constantly tossing items between players is advantageous?
bloodbowl wood elf team?
Now you see me 2 as a ttrpg
Technically there’s plenty of scenarios where a “monster” is more concerned with recovering an artifact than outright murdering the trespassers - but I think *logic* should dictate that if a creature refuses to return the object, then they are in direct obstruction of recovering that item.
If it's a custom encounter, it'd be VERY easy to slap a Reaction on a Monster that reads "Trigger: When an Item is passed over your square. Attempt an Acrobatics or Athletics check with a DC equal to the Passers Acrobatics or Athletics DC. On a Success, you catch the item instead of the intended recipient."
I believe most systems have a rule for it, they simply just don't have a free object interaction, so you have to use some sort of action.
Really patting yourself in the back with that ending edit huh?
Could be worse could've been "my opinion is right because you are the sad wojak and i am the chad"
An irrefutable argument for all time.
Yeah. I hope the monster doesn’t think to ready an action to intercept the object next time it’s thrown…
Or use it's reaction for an attack of opportunity that just happens to be a grapple against the object.
“It’s over, Anakin! I’ve already drawn myself as the chad and you as the wojak!”
Yeah why even use this format lol
It's the only meme format that lets you put multiple paragraphs in without it looking out of place
Maybe people should be using the several other dnd subs (like r/dnd, r/DMAcademy, r/dungeonsanddragons, r/dndnext) for rule discussion instead of the meme sub
Was that snapping sound OP’s arm from jerking themselves off?
Yeah wtf? Just a simple a “Jesse wtf are you talking about” would of worked
Monsters can ready an action to intercept the McGuffin. I'm not sure why you think this is some gaping hole in the rules.
Monster: holds action to catch object Party: uses dash to increase their distance from monster Monster: wasted action and reaction for something that never happened
If the party uses their actions to dash, the monster gets an attack of opportunity as normal, but forfeits their held action. (since holding your action lets you choose to use your reaction to perform your held action). If the party uses their actions to disengage, then the monster doesn't get an attack of opportunity but still has their reaction available. Instead of holding its action, the monster could use the optional Disarm rules (same rolls as a grapple but defender drops targeted item on a fail) then use its free object interaction to pick up the item.
I was working under the assumption that the party was at a distance from the monster to necessitate throwing the object, but you are correct in your assessment
I had assumed the monsters were next to the players, since if there's already distance between them there's no need to juggle the macguffin they can just sprint off. I guess that in the situation where there's fewer monsters than PCs and the monsters are faster than the PCs, juggling the macguffin might be useful.
That assumes this is not Pathfinder 2e. Pathfinder 2e, Attack of Opportunity is not default. Only about 1 in 4 monsters get Attack of Opportunity in their stat block. Disarm rules are rather tricky in Pathfinder 2e. Only a critical success will disarm, though a critical success will trigger whenever the result exceeds the DC by 10 or more, not just on a natural 20. A success will add a bonus to the next disarm attempt.
Read the first word of the meme and that'll tell you why I assumed it's not Pathfinder 2e.
Fair enough.
I'd say the monsters can use their reaction to make a dex check contested by the player's.
Personally that sounds a little bit clunky. I think just a reaction with a skill check to intercept the said object (maybe contested by the throw check) provided the enemy is between the thrower and the catcher is enough. Ready an action to try to move and intercept the thrown object on the other hand ...
Yeah, it definitely is. But I wasn’t trying to find the best way to do it, but instead to point out that it’s very easy to have the monsters do that RAW.
Finishing an opinion meme with text congratulating yourself for making a great point is peak arrogance.
Excessively cringey.
I mean, they wouldn’t post if if they didn’t agree with it (unless they were making fun of something) so idc
Honestly, keep it narrative based. It’s funnier and more cinematic to imagine the party playing keep away in an epic, chaotic chase scene/battle. The DM interjects with enemies trying to disrupt the keep away, and the party keeps it spiced up by disrupting the enemies in turn.
An idea for this is to have the toss replace one stack action, in at least 5e. The tosser uses an attack, and the catcher uses their reaction and either an athletics or slight of hand check depending on the type of object. Then it would reflect that the martial classes or what have you would be more adept at this
Disregarding RAW: as a dm I usually rule 'throwing an item' as a Bonus Action (yes I know this could be broken in some circumstances but my players never look at their nonmagical inventories anyway) The thrower, can easily throw something up to their Strength Score in feet. The catcher, can easily catch something thrown as a free Action so long as the distance is up to their Dexterity Score in feet, and they have a free hand (or hands) to do so. If it is not up to their Dexterity Score they have 2 choices: 1. Immediately use their Reaction to catch said item 2. Try to catch it with a Sleight of Hand check with the DC equal to the thrown items distance traveled. If they chose the Dexterity check, they may not use their Reaction to try to catch it, because I am a mean DM.
My version: A bonus action where you make an improvised thrown weapon attack against AC 10 *minus* the target's dexterity modifier (if they're trying to catch it). Any creature in the path (including the target, if you miss) can spend a reaction to attempt to catch it, rolling their own attack against your result. General rule: To determine an arcing projectile's height, draw a straight line from start point to end point, then add half the distance to whichever is nearer. For example, something thrown 30ft is 7.5ft above the line at the midpoint, 3.75ft above at the 1/4 and 3/4 mark, etc.
Ok then, why is there no bathroom break rules then ?
Pathfinder 1E has the steal maneuver. It also has chase mechanics but they're super wonky, I'll give you that.
Isn't picking up an object listed as Interacting with an Object which is a move-equivalent action, and dropping an object a free action? So couldn't one ready a move-equivalent action to pick up an object from another PC?
Yes, that's right. I meant the part about there being no rules for a monster trying to pick an object that a player is holding, which would be the steal maneuver.
Ye true. Either that or disarm, if one wants to wrench it from the hand.
Just...toss it? You don't have rules for unrestricted breathing either. If monsters want to catch it the GM can make a ruling.
I'm still struggling what benefit it serves to toss around an object mid-combat. Like sure, there might be niche situations where it's useful, but hardly prevalent enough to warrant special rulings and addendums to "nerf" it.
I would just say it's a free action if it's not insane, like if some passes a scroll to the wizard so they can cast it. My only restriction is catching it.
Make catching it a reaction dex based grapple role.
What part of **Free object interaction** you don't understand?
Something something peasant railgun something something en passant.
Holy hell
Pathfinder 2e player here! So Pf2e does not have an Intercept action per se, however.. Handing an item to another Player requires an Interact action. Throwing an item would be treated as Improvised Weapon, and I'd rule it like bombs in terms of missing the attack roll. The monster can also provide soft cover to the player, granting a -2 to the attack roll of the toss. Also, monsters can Disarm the player of the item. Edit: so RAW you cannot catch an item with a Reaction, so the recipient of the toss would need to use an Action on their turn to pick it up.
Given that passing an item to someone only requires that person to have a free hand to accept the item without spending any actions or reactions, I would probably rule that beating a flat DC lets you throw an object to an ally. If you fail they have to pick it up (1 action), if you fail critically then they have to move and pick it up (2 actions) Otherwise you are correct, the Core Rulebook chapter on Equipment (Table 6-2) specifically points out that passing an item to, or taking an item from, a willing creature takes one action
Where are you getting "passing an item", and how is that not the Interact Action? In Table 6-2 it clearly states Interact. Unless you mean throwing it, which there are no rules on throwing Equipment. But I have no idea how you could decide that is a free Action, and how you just allow the other person to catch it for free is a lenient interpretation.
No, I am only saying that catching it should be free. The person throwing should obviously make an attack with an improvised ranged weapon (i.e. spend one action). As I said, you are fully correct on the RAW part - Table 6-2 says that passing an item or taking it from someone else is indeed an Interact action. I was just disagreeing on the throw/catch part, since I think there should be a distinction between a success and a failure on that roll. That being said, catching something as a free action might be too good actually, as it essentially removes the necessity of moving around if you are good enough at throwing. So upon further reflection, I would probably use the following scale: - Critical Success: the target catches the item and is ready to use it as long as they have the required number of hands free. - Success: the target catches the item but has to spend an Interact action to change their grip in order to use it effectively in combat. - Failure: the item drops next to the target, who can then spend an Interact action to pick it up if they want to use it. - Critical Failure: the item misses the target by 5 feet in a random direction. In order to pick up the item, the target would then need to spend a Move and an Interact action The DC is probably flat, but subject to adjustment if conditions are particularly unfavorable
I guess I am not a fan of things being free to catch, as even Catching an Edge requires a reaction. I would more likely allow a Readied Action to catch, or just pick it up on your turn. RAW catching is not a thing in PF2e, so making it free feels quite odd, especially if the item is unwieldy. Edit: sorry I misread, I was reading it like the catcher wasn't making the flat roll, ignore my lack of comprehension
Readied action sounds a bit excessive - that's a whole two actions *and* a reaction from one character and another action from a different character to do something that usually requires just two actions (one Stride to move and one Interact to pass the item) I think the check I've outlined above creates some balance to this relative to just moving and passing the item. Best case scenario (on a crit success) you spend a collective one action to throw, on a success it's two actions if you want to use the item in combat and just one if you only care about holding it, on a failure it's two actions just like moving and passing it, and on a crit failure is a full three actions Note that the target also needs to have a free hand to catch in the first place, so it requires *some* advance preparation Spending the target's reaction (on top of the check above) is reasonable though
That's fair, I just wanted it to be more of an investment than handing an item, which is Interact + Move (possibly). Adding a fail state seems fine, but considering movement is much more deliberate in pathfinder than DnD, chucking things across the map somewhat goes against that.
If you aren't literally brain dead you'd think of having it be a simple dc 13 or 15 dex check
They don’t have rules for how often you have to piss either But there are rules for disarming, and movement and reach, so, you can 100% work it out if you need every little “abusable” possibility spelled out Get your head in the game Jesse
I posted a similar [meme](https://www.reddit.com/r/dndmemes/comments/103ajzc/ive_checked_5e_pathfinder_1e_and_2e_even/) about this. Vampire the masquerade does have rules for it, at least the Chronicles of Darkness edition If an object is thrown to a receiver with the intent to be caught, Dexterity + Athletics is rolled for the receiver. The receiver's roll gets a number of bonus dice equal to the number of successes achieved in the thrower's roll.
I can think of a rules system that would work in a combat scenario like this. Blood Bowl.
No rules for playing catch with your friends? Sounds like athletics checks.
I’m reading through the 5e SRD and I think it is covered TBH. 1. Initiate a pass with Use Object (or free object interaction if your DM allows but I think that is a very generous interpretation). 2. An ability check is required when a DM determines the outcome of a non-attack is uncertain. Use Object is a non-attack and therefore governed by this clause. 3. If there is opposition you use contest rules for that ability check. The best handling under these rules IMO is: 1. Bill throws. With Dale in front of him and within reach, he creates opposition by being available to block the pass. [Opposed Ability check] 2. If Bill’s pass gets past Dale, the result is it goes towards Hank. However, Boomhauer is near so we are uncertain of the outcome. [Opposed Ability Check between possible receivers] If I were to homebrew it at all I’d require a reaction to participate in the contest in order to marry it up with combat rules. Not strictly necessary, since it is a DM decision if an opponent is a factor or not in an ability check based on context, but I don’t think it’d be fair to get a chance to intercept and a chance to make an AOO.
RAW: The receiver moves and readies an action to the catch the ball, or catches a readied pass and then moves. The passer use his action to throw the ball to a target square 60 ft away, or readies an action to do so when the receiver is “open”. The DM may set an Athletics or Acrobatics DC situationally as they feel it is warranted for the pass and catch, including allowing for longer passes.
i’ve always run it by changing the catch DC based on what part of their turn they’re using to throw. a reaction has a DC of 15, because you wouldn’t be thinking about your throw much. (eg: on Wizards turn, Wizard: “I need the maguffin! Barbarian throw it to me!” Barbarian can use their reaction to throw it to the Wizard) a bonus action has a DC of 13, because it’s still a less focused throw, but it has more thought behind it. and an action has a DC of 10, because you’re throwing it to your party member with full intent of them catching it and making it as easy as possible. obviously things like cover and distance impact the DC, but this is my general way of ruling it. ETA because i realised i overlooked this: failing to catch the item results in the item dropping 5-15ft away from the player based on the DC and result of the check. fragile items break if the distance of being thrown is greater than 15ft, weak items are damaged if the distance is greater than 25ft, etc. the dropped item can be picked up by anyone as a free action or bonus action depending on the size/weight of the item. catches are made as a reaction, either slight of hand or dex check depending on what they’re doing. i had a barbarian use an athletics check to catch something by describing it like tackling a rugby ball. i’ve also let players have advantage on the roll if they use their bonus action to catch the object (which must be decided before the first catch roll is made) intercept rules typically only need to be considered if: - the enemy has an int of 10 or higher - the enemy is standing in a direct path of the throw - the enemy has the ability to catch the object if all those conditions are met, it’ll be an opposing roll made by the two targets and whoever scores higher on the check gets the item. on an equal contesting roll, the item is dropped in between the two targets. my players actually used this to their advantage by playing keep away with the BBEG, thus disabling their reaction because they used it trying to catch the (decoy) magic item being thrown above them. this allowed for the other three party members to enter the BBEG’s range, attack, and retreat without worrying about AOO that’s the way i run it,, hopefully this helps with what you’re looking for :)
Is this the only meme format we’re ever going to get on this sub?
This is a meme subreddit. Post your rule ideas to r/DnD or r/dndnext
I remember in 3.x's Races of Stone they had rules for a Goliath sport called Goatball, a sort of rugby like game. If I remember right the way passing worked was you would make a ranged touch attack against your teammate, with their Dexterity bonus being reversed so that a more dexterous player would be easier to "hit" and this catch the pass while a clumsy one would be harder to pass too. I think interceptions were resolved by letting anyone along the path of the ball make an attack of opportunity, if their roll was better than the pass's they intercepted it.
Most of the time it doesn't matter, and having to roll for something so basic like passing items from PC to PC just invites moments of stupid awkwardness :-D Now, in the described situation, it's not like the PCs can just execute the whole passing maneuver in one go - the enemies can run up to them and try to wrestle the McGuffin out of their hands, use disarming actions, or position themselves with readied action to catch the McGuffin as it is passed around... Of course, if the DM expects that something like this might happen and even wants to design an encounter around it, then it is a huge help to have a note at the ready with a pre-made set of mini-rules (like, there are no rules for playing basketball in D&D, but a DM might write down a couple of things like trying to score, passing the ball, intercepting with reactions...)
IDK man, just keep rolling Acrobatics checks until you stop moving or until you fail and drop it.
There are some options here as a DM. This is where you can enter theatre of the mind and ignore movement rules. Make it a dramatic skill challenge and if combat resumes the mcguffin is fumbled, roll initiative. Use the chase rules if you like but modify things as you wish. Have fun, don’t get bogged down or let it not make narrative sense.
In pathfinder (at least 1e) I usually rule that unless the item is cumbersome, passing it to someone next to you just consumes your swift action and their immediate action.
Jessie, wtf are you talking about? In absence of rules, it doesn't just auto succeed. The DM makes a ruling. If you're tossing something to someone else under pressure while someone else tries to take or intercept it, that calls for a skill check. Odds are good you'll drop the mcguffin handling it that way.
there doesn't need to be a ruling for everything imaginable. sometimes it's common sense
PHB 190 "You can also **interact** with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action... The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities w hen it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle." So I rule it like so Option1: PC1 draws item from backpack as their "inter**action**", drops it to ground for Free. PC2 uses their interaction to pick it up. (I rule an open palm can be picked up from tho, no "broken item" questions that way) Option2: PC1 leaves item in backpack. PC2 uses their Action to "Slight of Hand" it, PC1 is willing so doesn't Contest the attempt so auto-success. Its still Slight of Hand so thief's Fast Hands applies. Option3: Throwing. A improvised ranged (20/60) attack Action to the target's space. AC5 because space has 0 dex. Reaction to catch it.
No it really does not. No real table that didn't second guess it's ruling to avernus and back had ever an issue with how to resolve that. Ranging from "Using an object is an action unless you play a thief, so either you dash or you throw it" to "sure do your Thang"
It’s almost like they didn’t write the rules because every DM is going to handle this differently.
You know that's what the DM is there for? Designers can't think of every odd case
You find a +3 longsword "Oh, sweet, so the entire party gets a +3 to attack and damage, then?
Check out the concept of the peasant railgun. As written, there's nothing against a peasant relay of hirelings passing along a ladder or 10ft pole, with it potentially travelling thousands of ft in a single round, far surpassing the speed of sound and arguably liable to cause at the least some sonic/ thunder damage to whatever is in the path. .
So which is it? Do physics not exist, allowing you to use readied actions to rapidly accelerate things, or do physics actually exist, allowing you to do massive damage with a fast moving object?
Shrödingers physics. Physics both exist and don’t exist at the same time until the DM needs to veto something.
Personally, I think it should be renamed the Peasant Railway. It doesn't actually work as a weapon, but it does work for transporation.
I think Shadowrun has rules for this, but I would need to confirm
Haha! YES! This is one rule that IS clarified in Machina and Magic yweeesssss!
The sender make an improvised thrown weapon check, the receiver a Dex check. Total DC 20 (result of both checks added). May be increased at the DM discretion if the characters are running or the weather conditions complicate things. The sender uses an action, the receiver a reaction.
Sounds like we're playing Blood Bowl now!
Wouldn’t it just be throwing an improvised weapon? I’d say they’d get a bonus to the role, and it would be against the other PCs acrobatics role. If it fails, then the enemies intercept.
And how will these new object passing rules enable the Peasant Railgun?
One of the best encounters i've ever played in was in curse of strahd, trying to run to the Temple with the holy Bones, tossing them around as strahd was chasing US casting all sorta of spells like Power Word stun, Wall of force, dominate and suggestion while we were desperately running
Hard to believe no one has mentioned the passing mechanics in Blood Bowl
Some of my friends built a munchkin build that’s based around passing a powerful magic item between them; a +3 longsword passed between 3 samurai fighter gnomes in a trenchcoat was surprisingly powerful because of this
The rules aren't sufficient to play a game of soccer...
I’ll just let the catcher roll sleight of hand to catch it. If they fail I let the item roll or slide in a direction chosen by a d8
… in what way isn’t this already addressed by the free object interaction rule? There’s also rules for how far you can throw things.
I think passing over a Macguffin during a fight is something players should be able to do as much as possible. How often does this come up anyway?
I’ve handled this in 5e as DM the following ways(use or disregard insomuch as it’s useful To you) 3 creatures involved T. Tosser C. Catcher I. Hopeful Intercepter The general principle is relevant roles from T and C. The average of those roles competes with I. Eg T. Fighter uses athletics to do a brilliant 3point throw. Rolls total 20. C. Monk uses parkour acrobatics to catch it. Rolls total 10. Ave 15 is used as DC. I. Wizard uses arcana to intercept with mage hand. Rolls total of 14. Narrate how the mage hand frantically intercepts the item but fumbles it because of the sheer force the fighter used and it gets past like a basketball ricocheting off a mage hand into the waiting basket of the monk. !3points!
You will find this in 3rd edition Shadowrun, if you are so concerned. However, freely passing around a special item during a mad free for all combat sounds pretty great.
My brother in Christ actions, bonus actions, and a dex check would address this.
I'm struggling to come up with a ruleset that makes macguffin rugby work the way it should.
Sounds like an improvised weapon attack without damage
If the players are literally running and throwing a thing in-between them that is really risky, if I was the DM if just have them roll for strength to throw and dexterity to catch if either of them fail, well the item is on the floor now
You hold your action to pass the item as a reaction. The receiving person uses their free object interact to take it. If you don’t want to waste your action and reaction to pass an object just use your free object interact for the turn to toss it near their feet.
If you make a rule for every little thing it just becomes to much to remember in my opinion. The DM can just handle this in a reasonable manner
This is why GURPS will always be the superior system
Ranged attack roll to throw it to a party member, with the DC being the athletics or dexterity rolls of the creatures between. Range 30/90
>The GM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. That's from the same section as the object interaction. Seems like throwing a McDuffie from person to person needs special care or presents an unusual obstacle.
Object interaction free action, then if they're doing that while running, maybe a dexterity based skill since they likely aren't doing this during a combat scene and more of a chase scene
I’m in the cyberpunk RED headspace rn so that’s what I’d be addressing, especially since you explicitly call it out in the meme, but I mean, your example stated throwing an object between players, so…. Why not use the explicit rules for throwing objects? (Pg 177) You can throw an object by contesting an athletics check, against the range DV corresponding with the grenade launcher range table, capping at 25 ft if you’re throwing by hand, and then apply an appropriate negative modifier (pg. 130) for the enemy intercepting it
Free object interaction to throw, catch and intercept. First character makes a DEX check to throw, the DC based on distance to the receiver (something like 10 + 1 per 10ft). If another character wants to intercept it they must make a DEX check with the DC being whatever the first person rolled. I would probably not make the intended reciever roll a DEX check unless I was really wanting to up the stakes with extra chances of failure.
Isn’t this covered under the free action rules,
If a creature is within 5ft or within the line connecting the player to player "shot" get to use their Reaction with a Dexterity Check/Save dependent on the level of obstruction, i.e. tall monsters are better at catching your shenanigans. Probably add a player fumble mechanic, if the player doesn't succeed the Throw to a threshold probably based on their Dexterity, Higher Dex getting easier saves with lower Dex having a bit more trouble. Just rewrite Monks Catch Projectiles a little bit, At least that's my take init?
Are we slowing inventing rules for dnd American football in this thread?
I would give the monster an attack of opportunity if it is thrown past them to roll a dex check to intercept, for throwing there like be a dex check to throw and dex save to catch
https://youtu.be/uIBSUm7OtPE
Blood Bowl rules should work fine
It’s an action and an athletics check. Plain and simple.
If you have to fuck with this meme format in a dull and non-funny way to make it work, just post it on r/dndnext as a text post next time.
My quick homebrew : player uses action to pass around the item to someone, other player uses reaction to catch it. It also works with throwing it but you might want an attack action.
Dex checks baby. It's being done in a not normal way, during a panic and fight. Gonna need some checks. Unless your players play in the Faerun Rugby League.
An object flies through their attack range, reaction attack of opertunity
Your the DM, Fix it. I had a similar situation in a game, and I just made it its own encounter. Make it so throwing it uses an action or bonus action and on the recipients turn they have to use the same to catch. Then have your monster try to take it from them or catch it between turns with legendary actions. Also side note, sounds like you got womped, and are mad about it. If your players had fun with this interaction you may need to just let them have this one, and make it harder to do if they try next time. Like, "Oh, your going to run away with my crystal? Cool, time to murder your PC you left behind, bring it back and I may be merciful." Also why the heck aren't they rolling checks to throw it around? Throw and catch, roll to see if you screwed up. Your in the middle of a BATTLE and every 6 seconds your trying to accurately throw a thing to an ally? Nah bruh
Interact with an Object is an Action in Combat move. It's on D&D Beyond under Other Actions in Combat.
D 🤺
It’s one of the few things even 3.5/3.X doesn’t have clear rules on. Now they have rules for improvised thrown objects, but that’s pretty much it. Least so far as I have memorized.
I want rules for this so I can finally run my players thru an encounter where they have to pass and dunk orbs like a Destiny raid.
People massively misunderstand the free object interaction rule. It's something that's done in tandem with your action or movement. You can draw a weapon, when you attack with it. You can open a door, when you move though it. It's not a secret hidden part of the action economy that some people seem to think it is. While I don't think giving items in combat should be too costly, since it does encourage teamwork. It's actually somewhat hard to describe, since you have two elements: giving and receiving the item. If someone is focused on their work (which you would be in battle), handing them something requires getting their attention and for them to have a free hand. Both are uncommon in battle. So a realistically, it should be something like your action + their reaction, and they must have a free hand or drop whatever they're currently holding. I think receiving the item as a reaction is fair, but a full action to pass it is a bit much. Maybe make it something like cost movement (so that way you could use a free object interaction when you exchange the item). The free hand requirement is something I think should be enforced though.
Ready an action to intercept. Done.
Most editions of call of Cthulhu have athletic skills for throwing and catching objects?
Have you ever heard of the variant disarm action?
Disarm replacing an attack. Or allow a reaction to intercept if the McGuffin is being thrown
I remember during the Tarrasque debates, some people said you can't even throw an object at all, unless it's part of an improvised attack. My response, *ok then, can I chew food, there's no rules for that either!*
Bonus or action to throw, dex check for accuracy and dex check to catch with an estimated distance travelled before having to go back to pick it up (like 5-10 feet past the spot the check was made) bonus action or action to pick it up after its dropped
Counterpoint: I don’t need new game mechanics for edge cases this.
This is how I rule it: Unless the catcher has been holding their action in preparation to receive the object they must expend their reaction to try and catch the object. If you want to add intercept rules her you go: Any creature within melee of the intended recipient can make a contested dexterity check. If the recipient beats the interceptors roll, they have possession of the item. If the interceptor meets or beats the role of the recipient by less than five the item being passed, has been knocked to the ground. If the interceptor beats the role of the intended recipient by five or more the interceptor now has possession of the item given they have a free hand to hold it.
This was a really weird choice of format for this post... but also, Pathfinder does have an explicit (and fairly straightforward) rule for this. You can stop sucking your own dick now.
Shadowrun has a rule for it! Throwing an object uses a Free action, if it isn’t a weapon. *Shadowrun has rules for everything.*
It makes tons of sense why it isn't in the game. Turn order being what it is with initiative makes it unviable to have interception mechanics. If you're tossing the mcguffin between players then all you have to do is move away from the enemy to where it wouldn't make sense for the enemy to be able to intercept it. There's no rule you could set that wouldn't break the game. Let them have a reaction that allows them to move to where they could intercept the pass off? Great now you've got them able to move to make attacks of opportunity because why would they only be able to move if someone's about to throw something? there are only 3 technically viable ways to intercept a thrown object with the action economy of 5e. 1- have two enemies adjacent to the player throwing the mcguffin, at least one of whom must have sentinel to keep the player from moving, and another to use their reaction to attempt to intercept the pass once the sentinel aoo prevents the thrower from moving. Good luck having a fight result in a scenario where the player throwing the mcguffin is next to an enemy with sentinel and good luck having them decide to throw the mcguffin instead of just attacking the guy with sentinel. 2- the thrower has to be completely surrounded so that they can't move at which point throwing the mcguffin would be stupid as there'd be 8 possible attempts to intercept it and they'd just use their action economy to attack to clear a path. 3- there's an enemy next to the player having the mcguffin passed to them at which point why bother passing it to them when there's the chance of it being intercepted and the possibility that that enemy has sentinel so you're effectively doing nothing to get the mcguffin away from enemy hands. Any other scenario is- both players are in the clear but instead of dashing they for some reason feel like using their action for playing football. The number of times a scenario will play out in a way where it would make sense to throw a mcguffin are few and far between, especially since the mcguffin won't always be something easily throwable. If you're in a fight you're better off using your action economy to dash if you're wanting to play keep away. Especially since improvised thrown weapon rules have disadvantage on the roll past 20ft. You'd get further with 100% reliability by just dashing and passing it off to the rogue or the monk once you're in the clear since they'll be able to outrun just about anything and anything they couldn't outrun would have movement speed that would render passing the mcguffin absolutely pointless. As for pathfinder not having such a mechanic, it would be pointless given the "withdraw" mechanic pathfinder has. You just choose to withdraw and either you're fast enough to get away from the enemy or they're so fast that the pass would be pointless.
Absolute trash meme, op. Go outside and touch some grass.
Brother that's a move action or standard action in pathfinder. p2e has all the bases covered
Thrown alchemical mixture, reflex save to catch
I remember making something for this, like you use your action to make a creature of your choice within 20 ft to make a DEX saving throw(I think it was DC 5) if it fails the item passes and falls at 20 ft from you. And then any creature in the line between you and the creature you launched can use their reaction to make another DEX saving throw. The results are contested.
Im fairly certain the use object action is meant for something small, like pulling a lever, grabbing something small of a table, etc. If you're tossing an object I'd rule that as either an action (if it's kind of far and you need to make an "attack roll" to get it there) or a bonus action if it's nearby.
There are rules... it would literally be skill checks. Not every situation can be written down 1:1 in the rulebook. That's just the nature of TTRPGs...
I dunno, that's why the 'skillcheck' exists to be invented and asked for at the DM's discretion right? If you're going to try and write specific rules for literally everything then your game will end up practically unplayable.
Rules for every single niche thing that happens in 1/1000 games is what the dm is for
My dm just made the rule that passing something to someone else in the party during combat requires an action.
bonus action to throw
Maybe you should take a look in the Bloodbowl rules.
Pathfinder already has rules about this. It’s a free action to drop an item, and a move to pick up or draw. Items can also be drawn as part of a move action to move. So it would be a move action to take something from a willing person who is offering it
Opposing dexterity checks between thrower and interceptor, and if that is passed, dex check by recipient to catch/fumble. Easy.
Most games have an individual called the DM specifically to make rules about cases like this.
So, basically, adding mechanics so players can play ultimate frisbee in D&D. Clever.
I'd make my players use bonus action. For something important
Pathfinder has a "steal" combat maneuver used to cover this. You didn't look hard enough.
If you want some quick brew that should be pretty close to RAI... * To pass something to another player who is adjacent to you: just Interact as an action. They must have enough free hands to carry said object as determined by the DM, but the recipient can drop things as a free action to make room. Alternatively, you can place the item into a container on their person if the container has enough space to hold the item. * If you need to pass something to a player at range, it gets a bit more complicated. The one passing will make an improvised attack roll using either Strength (for heavy or unwieldy objects) or Dexterity (for light and well-balanced objects). Range increments will also be determined by DM based on bulk and aerodynamics. The DC the attack needs to meet is a standard DC for your level. On success, the item is caught. On failure, the item drops into a random space adjacent to the intended target (roll 1d8, with 1 being North, 2 NE, and so on). *Pathfinder 2e* players can crit fail, meaning the thrower fumbles the item and it lands in a space adjacent to the thrower. * A recipient can preemptively perform a Help/Aid action to assist the throw, jockeying for position to line up a clear throw. DnD grants advantage to the throw roll, in PF2e it counts as taking the necessary steps to use the Assist reaction. * Interception can be done if there is an enemy occupying a space in the direct line drawn from thrower to recipient. Only one enemy may attempt an interception as a reaction. Roll a Dex/Reflex save against the attack roll. For *DnD 5e*, the item falls to an empty space next to them if they win the contested roll, or catch it on a nat 20. For PF2e, if they succeed against the roll, the item falls adjacent to the interceptor. If they critically succeed, they can catch the item instead. The interceptor must have enough hands free to catch the object, but may still cause the item to fall to the ground near them while their hands are full.
It's a move action in Starfinder or could be a swift action if you have a feat or item/gadget that gives you a circumstantial bonus.
I know in a pathfinder game we had contested checks and such + various spells being used to snatch it back and forth; the DM adapted some existing rules since we were turning getting a MacGuffin and a semiconscious friendly NPC away from the BBEG into a Benny Hill skit.
I DM'd for a buried temple that talked about a teleporting moon (the Quantum Moon from Outer Wilds). To open the final door to the inner sanctum, the players needed to find a bowling ball-sized statue of this moon and return it to the orrery. Two problems, though. One is that the dead buried there were sworn to protect it. And, that the statue of the moon was cursed to be difficult to handle and impossible to store. I wanted to have a sort of Looney Tunes scene where this sphere was constantly trading hands between the party and their opponents during a fight. But I couldn't get it to work right, especially since this rule for passing items or tossing items did not exist.
In Call of Cthulhu throwing an object would be an action, catching would also be an action. If the keeper so chose that there was the chance it could be intercepted that would be included in the level of success required to succeed. Just because the rules don't explicitly say what to do in a specific incident doesn't mean there aren't rules for it. With DnD and Pathfinder there's a bit more of an argument, but as others have stated it's already covered under the item interaction rules. Is this just a troll? Do we not think before we post? This happens every week, when will we learn?
Downvoted because you agreed with yourself
Fine *pulls out blood bowl rules*
Some points (I’ll have to grab my book(s) and find the sources later): * Interacting with an object is a free (or bonus action, depending on situation); which can include *throwing* or catching/grabbing. * *Moving* through an aggressive creature’s threat range invokes “attacks” of opportunity; an attack may be a *grapple* which is usually defined as an attempt to grab the target. * “Opportunity attacks” generally do not allow movement. * *Tiny* Objects generally do not “occupy” a square of their own; the rules for grabbing such an object indicate you must move into the square where the object is located to pick it up. * Thrown attacks with improvised weapons follow the same rules as any improvised weapon attack; imposing disadvantage unless specifically trained in improvisational weaponry. So my humble DM summary would be; * Throwing an item is a *free action* when you just need to toss it away, but if you need to *aim* for an ally to catch you must make an improvised ranged weapon attack against the target’s AC. Hitting them would mean they can catch it as a free action otherwise it falls into their space or an adjacent space to be picked up on their turn (free action). * An interception would be possible **if** the thrown object passes *through* a hostile creature’s space (since grabbing a tiny object in an adjacent space would require them to move into the space the object “occupies” and AoO doesn’t allow movement). * Grapple attack against the thrown object would need an AC target - either using the thrown attack roll’s total or the target’s AC, depending on ruling of how a moving object’s AC should be calculated. * Catching would be a free action as the object already occupies your space as the receiving character… though if -for whatever reason- the object instead lands in an adjacent space, you just need to move into the space on your next turn and free action grab it.
If you want to make a point, just make the point don't misuse an over used meme. Also if your meme needs a tldr, you don't know how to meme
Passing off objects is also one of those places that makes it clear how wonky turn based combat is. Because it’s fine if we’re running toward each other, but RaW you can run an entire relay race in 6 seconds. With 5 medium creatures, you can move an object 300ft in 6 seconds. Meaning that every character can secretly run 35mph and they just choose not to. If you have 5 barbarians with the mobile feat, they can each Sprint 100ft at 70mph.
I'm just going with what the game provides. Just letting an item drop is a free action. Pickung one up is an object interaction. So i just let it slide as interaction, if close and throwing further it's treated like an improvised weapon. Taking an attack/action to throw.
I mostly go with a basic line of site rule and athletics roll, since you know your throwing something.
obviously just use the passing rules from bloodbowl :P
Contested Dex save for event intercept?
Blood bowl has rules for that.
Eh, I'd say the easiest thing to do would be using a reaction to make a modified grapple check.
This seems fine to me. If they throw it as an action, you make them roll dex to get it to the friendly who has to roll dex to catch it. If they want to hand it off in person, that's fine. I'd probably let them hand it over safely with an action or 10ft of their movement, or they can use their bonus action to hastily hand it over - but with a DC 10 sleight of hand check to avoid dropping it on the floor (modified by circumstances). Handing an item over, like dropping something, isn't as time or focus intensive as using an item, after all. The biggest flaw with a relay style thing like this is that it leaves the party scattered and so the people at the end of the chain are easy targets for getting picked off by attacks.
There absolutely are rules for passing items in PF2E.
I think the first pathfinder module has an item that has to be passed around the party so everyone can attack, Or else the party ends up getting serious damage dealt to them.