Does knock work on getting someone out of manacles?

for those who do not know the text of the spell right off their heads:

From the PRD:

Since the target states "Target one door, box, or chest with an area of up to 10 sq. ft./level" my first instinct would be to say no, but I like the cinematic feel of allowing it since it would not really break it.

I, as a GM, would allow it to work for the character.

For me its the "It also loosens welds, shackles, or chains (provided they serve to hold something shut)." That says it should. If they went out and specified everything in the target it would be absurd.

Well if it works on shackles, why not on manacles...

For flavor.

I think it should work on one manacle but not the other. Needs another knock spell....

Since there is another lock...

For me its the "It also loosens welds, shackles, or chains (provided they serve to hold something shut)." That says it should. If they went out and specified everything in the target it would be absurd.

As I said, I am not sure I agree with how it is written in the book. By their wording, what are manacles holding shut?

Now that being said, I would allow it. I do not see how it could make the spell overpowered and seems to be in line with the intent of the spell. Especially since it does not require a somatic or material component.

I would say no, Knock doesn't work, if only because I think there's a spell in Gods and Magic specifically for giving a "Knock" effect to manacles, locks, and chains.

I would say no, Knock doesn't work, if only because I think there's a spell in Gods and Magic specifically for giving a "Knock" effect to manacles, locks, and chains.

Not technically true:

"They [clerics of Cayden Cailean] may spontaneously cast knock as a 1st-level spell but only to open welds, shackles, or chains used to imprison or hobble someone."

So it's not a new spell, it's a restricted use of an existing spell (thus the lower level-equivalence).

Um, if it works on Shackles it should work on Manacles, they're only slightly different in design, virtually two separate words for the same thing. To deny that would amount to DM dickery. That and Gods and Magic is 3.5 so...

Um, if it works on Shackles it should work on Manacles, they're only slightly different in design, virtually two separate words for the same thing. To deny that would amount to DM dickery. That and Gods and Magic is 3.5 so...

There's actually a pretty significant difference between shackles and manacles. Shackles are typically held shut by bolts or screws, this is why the spell says 'loosen'. It would still be shut and you would still need to be able to grab a hold of the screw mechanism, but you would not need a tool to do so.

But that's a technical thing and really should not affect the game. I don't see any reason why the spell shouldn't work on manacles as well.

The real question is (or should be) can you cast knock while wearing manacles/shackles? Or does someone have to cast it on you.

EDIT: Just noticed the OP said "getting someone out of manacles" so I'm assuming he means if he casts it on someone wearing manacles not casting it while he's in manacles.

Karui Kage wrote:

I would say no, Knock doesn't work, if only because I think there's a spell in Gods and Magic specifically for giving a "Knock" effect to manacles, locks, and chains.

Not technically true:

"They [clerics of Cayden Cailean] may spontaneously cast knock as a 1st-level spell but only to open welds, shackles, or chains used to imprison or hobble someone."

So it's not a new spell, it's a restricted use of an existing spell (thus the lower level-equivalence).

Blast! Well I knew there was some reference in there. Can I at least get partial credit Sean?

The real question is (or should be) can you cast knock while wearing manacles/shackles? Or does someone have to cast it on you.

EDIT: Just noticed the OP said "getting someone out of manacles" so I'm assuming he means if he casts it on someone wearing manacles not casting it while he's in manacles.

Since it's verbal only, it should be fine.

Since it's verbal only, it should be fine.

The fact that it is verbal only makes me think that it was specifically designed with getting one's self out of shackles, manacles, and other tight spots in mind (as well as to open stuff of course).

As a side note, I really like the flavor of "verbal only". My sorcerer recently turned level 5 while IN a jail cell. He woke up the next morning and ordered the cell door to "Move it!" and dammit, that's exactly what it did!

I also like not using "arcane" languages for some spells. Sorcerers especially don't "cast spells", when I play them. They "bend reality to their wills." It's hella fun when you play it that way. :)

For flavor.

I think it should work on one manacle but not the other. Needs another knock spell....

Since there is another lock...

Unless you go by manacle's as one object, and

Each casting can undo as many as two means of preventing access

In the same train of thoughts...

Could a knock spell 'unlock' and trigger a loaded crossbow?

The required mechanical manipulations would not be much different from a lock, but there are no parts to 'open' in a crossbow...

'findel

As a side note, I really like the flavor of "verbal only". My sorcerer recently turned level 5 while IN a jail cell. He woke up the next morning and ordered the cell door to "Move it!" and dammit, that's exactly what it did!

I also like not using "arcane" languages for some spells. Sorcerers especially don't "cast spells", when I play them. They "bend reality to their wills." It's hella fun when you play it that way. :)

Problem is that does bend the rules severely. Whatever Sorcerer's do it's similar enough to what a Wizard does so that the spell will correctly identify on a spellcraft check no matter who's casting it. Going by the RAW, what sorcerers do is IDENTICAL to what wizards do, the difference being that the magical matrix is permanently embedded in thier minds and charged by expending spell slots as opposed to being memorised on a one by one basis by a preparation caster.

Since it's verbal only, it should be fine.

Ya I didn't read far enough into it to see it was verbal only :P

Regardless of what the spell text says, you can only target something in the target description of a targeted spell. The possible options are:

• door
  
• box
  
• chest

The text:

It also loosens welds, shackles, or chains (provided they serve to hold something shut).

Might be interpreted to mean the spell opens something other than a box, a chest, or a door. But if that were so, the spell needs errata to change the target description. If the target entry had "see text", that could also let it work on manacles. . . assuming you mean the above text is talking about manacles. But the target text is limited and specific.

IF you consider

Each casting can undo as many as two means of preventing access

Only one side of the manacle is preventing access to your wrist, so I stick with it can only unfo one and not the other. Unless both manacles are on the same wrist then it would be both...

Might be interpreted to mean the spell opens something other than a box, a chest, or a door. But if that were so, the spell needs errata to change the target description. If the target entry had "see text", that could also let it work on manacles. . . assuming you mean the above text is talking about manacles. But the target text is limited and specific.

This is fine, but that doesn't change the fact that one particular wizard doesn't need to cast a particular spell in the same way that another wizard casts it. It is perfectly fine for one wizard to say: "Gesta Vani Heares!" along with mystical ritual hand waving - and another to say: "Open Dammit". As long as they release the appropriate components and arcane potential, the spell will happen.

A "verbal" component means noise-from-mouth is made, it doesn't mean a specific set of words said in a specific language.

From what I'm aware, Knock wouldn't open manacles, but it would unlock the locks keeping the manacles closed.

Most manacles have locks; add the cost of the lock you want to the cost of the manacles.

Enlight_Bystand wrote:

Since it's verbal only, it should be fine.

The fact that it is verbal only makes me think that it was specifically designed with getting one's self out of shackles, manacles, and other tight spots in mind (as well as to open stuff of course).

+1

It's pretty clear this is what it was meant for.

In the same train of thoughts...

Could a knock spell 'unlock' and trigger a loaded crossbow?

The required mechanical manipulations would not be much different from a lock, but there are no parts to 'open' in a crossbow...

'findel

USE MAGE HAND ITS EASIER...

To the situation, this is mechanics vs. LOGIC, the mechanics of the spell do not warnet that it would be over powered to be used on a lock of a different calaber. the spell manipulates a lock in a door, chest. it does not change it or miniuplate the material of the door or chest so why should it not work on the cuffs, what is so different. now logic, why would a magical spell that works on a door/chest not work on the locks of a cuff.

Dont think to far into D&D it never turns out good.

USE MAGE HAND ITS EASIER...

To the situation, this is mechanics vs. LOGIC, the mechanics of the spell do not warnet that it would be over powered to be used on a lock of a different calaber. the spell manipulates a lock in a door, chest. it does not change it or miniuplate the material of the door or chest so why should it not work on the cuffs, what is so different. now logic, why would a magical spell that works on a door/chest not work on the locks of a cuff.

Dont think to far into D&D it never turns out good.

Mage Hand is nothing more than say your bare hand with a few pounds of force. By itself it won't pick locks.

Mage Hand is nothing more than say your bare hand with a few pounds of force. By itself it won't pick locks.

Er, he meant to shoot a crossbow. 'Would knock release the trigger mechanism if it was cocked and loaded' was the original question.

Knock does indeed work on manacles. It works on any lock, in fact, provided the lock or the thing that the lock LOCKS is within the area of effect of the spell. A set of manacles attached to Godzilla probably wouldn't be something a knock spell could unlock... but Godzilla could just melt the manacles anyway so it'd probably never come up in play.

Knock does indeed work on manacles. It works on any lock, in fact, provided the lock or the thing that the lock LOCKS is within the area of effect of the spell. A set of manacles attached to Godzilla probably wouldn't be something a knock spell could unlock... but Godzilla could just melt the manacles anyway so it'd probably never come up in play.

Any question that can be answered can be answered better if you can work Godzilla in there somewhere.

James Jacobs wrote:

Knock does indeed work on manacles. It works on any lock, in fact, provided the lock or the thing that the lock LOCKS is within the area of effect of the spell. A set of manacles attached to Godzilla probably wouldn't be something a knock spell could unlock... but Godzilla could just melt the manacles anyway so it'd probably never come up in play.

Any question that can be answered can be answered better if you can work Godzilla in there somewhere.

Is that an example of Godzillawinning the thread as opposed to just Godwinning it?

Prince That Howls wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Knock does indeed work on manacles. It works on any lock, in fact, provided the lock or the thing that the lock LOCKS is within the area of effect of the spell. A set of manacles attached to Godzilla probably wouldn't be something a knock spell could unlock... but Godzilla could just melt the manacles anyway so it'd probably never come up in play.

Any question that can be answered can be answered better if you can work Godzilla in there somewhere.

Is that an example of Godzillawinning the thread as opposed to just Godwinning it?

I think the term is godzillamodding. :)

It didn't read that way to me, but neither does that use seem unreasonable (overpowered). It's 2nd level, so most parties with someone capable of casting it would have some other means of defeating manacles (sneakily or forcefully, at least) anyway.

For me its the "It also loosens welds, shackles, or chains (provided they serve to hold something shut)." That says it should. If they went out and specified everything in the target it would be absurd.

As absurd as saying "locks"? Or "see text"? Because the spell doesn't target locks, it shouldn't work on locks.

Knock does indeed work on manacles. It works on any lock, in fact, provided the lock or the thing that the lock LOCKS is within the area of effect of the spell.

Good to know. More errata to keep track of q:

Not to revive an old thread, but if knock works on any lock, would it be safe to assume that arcane lock works on any "lockable" mechanism (like manacles) also?

How bout chastity belts?