Yes. Moving a thing in any means with telekinesis, very well or differently, consumes an action. This means you may use your action to do any of your regular battle actions, ( such as fix, daunt, attack, cast a spell, etc. ) Or you can use your action to manipulate your target object. It effectively gives you an extra action type. The spell puts no restrictions on your finely movement of an object, so there is no reason for why you could n’t swing a sword or mace about. It might not be potential to fire a crossbow with any accuracy though, and you would n’t be able to use any other ranged weapon either, as all of those require you to interact with the weapon and its ammunition at the same time, while telekinesis is strictly limited to one target object .
If they do n’t say no, the answer is yes. The game ‘s rules and content represent realistic things, so they are capable of doing anything the real equivalent would be capable of. The DMG provides DMs a wide diverseness of outline tools which allow them to represent the infinite properties of a fake reality. As such, angstrom long as the rules do not specifically exclude something, and the DM believes it is within an accurate representation, then the thing actually does have the assumed properties. This includes everything from humans having hands and feet, graveness pulling objects down, polearms having a wooden cock that can interact with the environment the lapp way a 10ft punt would, and all sorts of early elements of the game. D & D depends on the presumption of representation in order to function at all.
Since it consumes the lapp action resource as an attack, the only profit it gives you is field control, as you are now efficaciously occupying two locations on the map at the same time, and you may make melee attacks without putting yourself in damage ‘s manner of reciprocal melee attacks on subsequent turns. As a flat 5 enchantment, this seems fairly fair, specially compared to the significant damage output possible from other 5th flush spells .
even in a general sense, merely passing an object through their quad would effectively be like attacking them. You could, for example, lift a boulder several times larger than them and drag it through their distance, efficaciously smearing them across the floor like a giant boot to a tease, you could drop it on them for an identical effect. You could even squash them against a rampart with it like a bulldozer. The same effect could be achieved by running a lance or spear through their space, basically the same as stabbing them while riding by on horseback. You could even do things like strangle a person with their own necklace. ( Since you are n’t removing it from their person, the spell vs. strength contest is not invoked )
As for how the “ attack ” would be resolved, that would depend on how your DM interprets the nature of charming, spells, damage, and attacks. In other words, it would come down to what the DM thinks the rules represent.
Read more : Top 5 định mới nhất năm 2022
unintelligent Magic : The spell is primarily kinesthetic/somatic in nature. Moving the prey aim would be the same as moving your own limbs. In this respect, damage could credibly be resolved in the like manner as an attack bun for simplicity .
smart Magic : The spell does the execution for you. This would be more like thinking “ attack that guy ” and the spell carrying out your desire/command. This interpretation would be more likely to use your spell attack modifier or some such.
Read more : Top 15 biên bản bàn giao mới nhất năm 2022
environmental effect : This interpretation would treat the “ attack ” as nothing more than a collision. In this subject, the DM would determine damage based on the rules for improvising damage in the DMG .
Would that make it a spell attack?
No. A while attack is charming in its own right. In this case, it ‘s more like attacking a person while wearing charming gloves. The magic is touching the weapon, but that does n’t make the weapon charming, and the telekinesis is n’t directly causing injury to the target .
