Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Xuub May 11, 2015 8:02:05	I'm just curious if this is a proper RAW ruling.  We are using the optional rules for Disarming, DMG p.271     A rogue is standing adjacent to a spellcaster who is wielding an implement to cast spells.  The implement could be a holy symbol, or a staff, wand, crystal ball, etc.  This relieves the caster from needing material components without cost.   The rogue successfully disarms the spellcaster (using he optional rule), then uses his movement action to pick up the implement from the ground and move away.  The spellcaster doesn't have any spell components because he didn't think he needed them.  So we told him that he can't cast spells with material components and he does not have an implement.
#2 mellored May 11, 2015 8:16:53	Correct.   This is the whole point of M compoents is to allow for disarming a wizard the same way you could disarm a fighter.   And why you should always carry a backup weapon / wand.
#3 jaelis May 11, 2015 9:13:30	Xuub wrote:
(Reply to #3) Xuub	jaelis wrote:
#5 jaelis May 11, 2015 10:02:29	I'd rule there is a difference between picking an item off the ground, and picking up an item from the ground at some other character's feet when that other character doesn't want you to have it.   (Much like opening a chest or a door is a different story if someone else is trying to keep it closed.)
#6 Undrhil May 11, 2015 10:11:56	Yeah, I would have called for a Slight of hand vs the wizard's acrobatics as a contest, personally.
(Reply to #5) Xuub	jaelis wrote:
#8 jaelis May 11, 2015 10:31:39	Not so obvious that the wizard can just pick up the wand either, if the rogue is going to hang out and interfere.
#9 Kentus May 11, 2015 13:21:50	Since you can do an object interaction while performing an action, you could also disarm the spellcaster and catch the weapon, before it lands. It's much cooler. ;)
#10 reddaemon May 11, 2015 13:32:25	Why call for another check? They already succeeded at the contested check to disarm the character. To me that is sufficient to pick up the item. The caster already failed to maintain control of the item.
#11 jaelis May 11, 2015 14:40:30	reddaemon wrote:
#12 Bumpo May 11, 2015 14:35:00	Xuub wrote:
#13 Xuub May 11, 2015 14:52:42	Because I'm an evil DM with a rogue NPC.
#14 strider13x May 11, 2015 15:32:51	I would allow it. I may let the Wizard get an Opportunity Attack when the Rogue stoops to pick up the weapon, depending on situation (was the Rogue hidden? in or out of combat?)