step 1: ask your DM if you can cast illusion spells around and perhaps attached to solid objects. like, for instance, changing the emblem on a held shield. keep it simple and listen. do not offer opinions about handbooks, twitter, or Sage Advice: let the DM make a ruling. they might indicate that a leveled spell (not a simple cantrip) might work. that counts as a yes. if yes, then continue.
step 2: ask DM to describe how this bland 1sp sword your character is holding might look with a spell in the school of illusion cast upon it. shadow themed, please. they may ask you to describe. if awesome, then continue.
step 3: next combat, announce that you're holding the material component for booming blade which you intend to cast as your action. but first! you'd like to use a bonus action before that to cast shadow blade around the material component, this 1sp sword. how did the DM say that would look again? awesomely? awesome.
step 4: resolve the Attack action (with or without cantrip, depending on vehemence of reaction from those nearby whose opinions you tolerate). you may then proceed with typical chanting and beseeching of the cosmos and the powers that be that the monsters in melee range don't notice your anemic AC.
(edit - the above is the player's script. ymmv. the dm's script is much easier: either "yes, that sounds cool." or "no, and let's move on." ...an additional single-target 1d8 thunder damage isn't game breaking to allow in the moment, but this also might not be the only request to bend rules without prior authorization. dm's sanity weighs more heavily than proper rules here, imho.)
That is probably why the booming blade and green flame blade cantrips were changed so that the material component now requires a weapon worth at least 1 sp.
That being said there is an argument to be made that it does work:
In the DMG somewhere under the treasure/magic items/buying and selling headings it says:
Selling magic items is difficult in most D&D worlds primarily because of the challenge of finding a buyer. Plenty of people might like to have a magic sword, but few of them can afford it.
This would suggest that magic items have value. Even a common magic item like a potion of healing is listed under the equipment items list as having a cost of 50gp.
I mention this because the Shadow Blade spell states that it is a magic weapon. As such it does have value and should at least meet the 1sp requirement.
Shadow Blade dissipates if the caster is not holding on to it. It's literally worthless unless you're RPing a crypto-bro and marketing it as an NFT.
step 1: ask your DM if you can cast illusion spells around and perhaps attached to solid objects. like, for instance, changing the emblem on a held shield. keep it simple and listen. do not offer opinions about handbooks, twitter, or Sage Advice: let the DM make a ruling. they might indicate that a leveled spell (not a simple cantrip) might work. that counts as a yes. if yes, then continue.
step 2: ask DM to describe how this bland 1sp sword your character is holding might look with a spell in the school of illusion cast upon it. shadow themed, please. they may ask you to describe. if awesome, then continue.
step 3: next combat, announce that you're holding the material component for booming blade which you intend to cast as your action. but first! you'd like to use a bonus action before that to cast shadow blade around the material component, this 1sp sword. how did the DM say that would look again? awesomely? awesome.
step 4: resolve the Attack action (with or without cantrip, depending on vehemence of reaction from those nearby whose opinions you tolerate). you may then proceed with typical chanting and beseeching of the cosmos and the powers that be that the monsters in melee range don't notice your anemic AC.
(edit - the above is the player's script. ymmv. the dm's script is much easier: either "yes, that sounds cool." or "no, and let's move on." ...an additional single-target 1d8 thunder damage isn't game breaking to allow in the moment, but this also might not be the only request to bend rules without prior authorization. dm's sanity weighs more heavily than proper rules here, imho.)
Trying to trick your DM into letting you bend/break the rules isn't going to foster a healthy table. If a DM knows the rules (or anyone at the table), they'll stop you when you try to Booming Blade with Shadow Blade. If they don't know the rules, then this whole [very obvious] song and dance was unnecessary; but eventually the DM may find out this interaction doesn't work and resent the player for [knowingly] cheating.
The mature thing to do is just to ask your DM if you can use them together. Not every DM agrees with the official rulings, especially those made later as errata.
That is probably why the booming blade and green flame blade cantrips were changed so that the material component now requires a weapon worth at least 1 sp.
That being said there is an argument to be made that it does work:
In the DMG somewhere under the treasure/magic items/buying and selling headings it says:
Selling magic items is difficult in most D&D worlds primarily because of the challenge of finding a buyer. Plenty of people might like to have a magic sword, but few of them can afford it.
This would suggest that magic items have value. Even a common magic item like a potion of healing is listed under the equipment items list as having a cost of 50gp.
I mention this because the Shadow Blade spell states that it is a magic weapon. As such it does have value and should at least meet the 1sp requirement.
This is an absolutely tortured argument. They specify it’s a magic item so there’s no question it overcome resistance. Not to imply you can sell it. The rules don’t imply things.
An item can have value without ever being bought or sold.
No it can’t. That is how prices work. A product is worth only as much as someone is willing to pay for it. Without a market, that number is 0. If no one is willing to buy your illusion that vanishes when you let go of it, it has no value.
existence doesn't guarantee significant value. an appraised value for a minute's worth of shadows in solid form is likely to be more connected to the novelty of the trick or the cost of labor for someone to put it to use. either way, situational value. temporary shadows are worthless to almost anyone, generally. although, the object does have utility and maybe even a definable level of craftsmanship which someone might find an equivalent for. the blade of shadows could be of a quality that matches with the results of crafting a typical 1sp sword. if you want to say the sword is equivalent or better in make and quality to a 1sp sword, then that fact might or might not be acceptable to the uncaring, remorseless universe from which the laws of your mystical powers are wrought. however, it may instead be that the laws of magic prefer a mundane sword of enduring materials with careful workmanship and effort worth 1sp asking cost because the underpinning spirits of thunder are fickle with regards to intent and sweat equity. basically, it all requires interpretation. and rules interpretation is in the dm's job description.
if you're the dm, your word is worth more than the explanation behind it. decide and then go about your day.
if you're not the dm then i recommend you ply the chocolate and pizza well ahead of (but adjacent to!) the request for rules arbitration.
either way, my message to the original poster is that it's in the dm's interest to give a quick gut-check yes or no rather than wasting brain cells on why. the dm needs to save their concentration for giving a name to all the farmers the players are about to meet by taking what was supposed to be the much less interesting fork at the last crossroads.
Absolutely not. If nobody will pay a silver piece for the shadow blade that disappears in a minute, then it is not worth a silver piece, and therefore it is not applicable for booming.
But trying to pretend Shadow Blade doesn't have any value because it is a temporary spell that can't be used by anyone else is immersive breaking. Are we supposed to believe that a magical weapon has 0 value?
A created object that evaporates when its caster drops it, or after a minute if he doesn't, does not have a monetary value (it might have non-monetary value). "Worth at least 1 sp" means "You can sell it for at least 1 sp".
There is literally no reason for the spell to include that text other than forbidding its use with created objects (it also bans a small category of improvised weapons, but no-one would be trying to do that in the first place).
Absolutely not. If nobody will pay a silver piece for the shadow blade that disappears in a minute, then it is not worth a silver piece, and therefore it is not applicable for booming.
"this is my peasant, sam. he's trained so that when i step on his foot--"
"ouch! oh, uh, gee i'd expect that glowin' thing in your hand there was worth one silver coin, m'lord. and here's a genuine piece of silver (which i'll note: you didn't give me, sur) to satisfy both intent and means to purchase. err, happy booming, sur! (and, uh, i keep the coin. right?)"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
You're the DM, in the end it does come down to your decision. Though since shadow blade dissipates when the caster lets go, it would have no value. But, they could be hired as a mercenary because of their shadow blade, giving it the technical value that would allow booming blade to be cast.
Something can have a value without ever being sold or purchased. It is that value that often determines at what price it will be sold or purchased
No. Seriously, pick up an economics book. Price is a function of how much someone is willing to pay. An object has no inherent value simply by virtue of its existence. Its value is a function of supply and demand (do you think there’s a lot of demand for something a person can’t actually hold?) but ultimately price is determined by what the market will bear. If no one wants it, it is valueless. And I can promise you no one wants a thing that ceases to exist when it’s creator puts it down.
If anything is immersion breaking, it the idea that someone will fork over cash for nothing.
Pantagruel666 there are many items that each of my characters have that are worth 1sp or more and I don't sell them... my starting equipment comes to mind. You can use improvised weapons worth 1 sp and now that people are aware of that fact, everybody is going to being trying it.
The fact that you typically don't sell an item doesn't mean you can't; appraised price is based on what a theoretical buyer would be expected to pay, rather than what someone has actually paid (though your character presumably bought the starting equipment off-screen so it has been sold at some point). As for using it with improvised weapons... yes, you can do it, but why would you?
you can ready an action to pass the Shadow Blade to an ally on their turn and they can use it to make attacks with until the end of turn when it will dissipate
Xalthu If 2 or more people agree on a price for something then that is the value of the item. It need never exchange hands. No price is ever paid for it but it has value.
Magical items in the game of D&D have value. Even the most common of items. (eg. potions of healing are listed on the equipment lists as having a cost of 50gp)
Pantagruel666 starting equipment can be inherited instead of purchased.
the ways in which you get your starting equipment is limited only by your imagination... an all powerful being from the far realm created mine from magic fungi and gifted them to me... they were never bought and never sold... but it did guarantee me that it would buy every single Shadow Blade from me for at least 2sp
how lucky am I?
Because D&D uses a primitive economic model where items have fixed value, it doesn't make any difference. In a more sophisticated economic model it would matter.
RAW, it doesn't work but it is a situation where you can ask your DM. Personally, I'd allow it in a home game.
The 1sp limit could also cause an issue with a blade pact warlock's pact weapon except the argument there is that the pact creates a weapon of a specific type (eg longsword) and a longsword is listed in the PHB with a stated value. Shadow blade, unfortunately, doesn't list a specific weapon type to justify that argument.
----
Btw, as far as I know, the reason for the 1sp limit has nothing to do with shadow blade - it has to do with the abuse of the component pouch rules when casting spells.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Original booming blade: Components: V, M (a weapon): "As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails."
From the rules for the component pouch, because booming blade's material component has NO cost associated with it in the spell description, the component pouch can thus provide ANY weapon needed as the material component for the original booming blade.
Make sense? No. However, that is what the rules said prior to the change in TCoE and there were apparently some folks abusing it.
Xalthu If 2 or more people agree on a price for something then that is the value of the item. It need never exchange hands. No price is ever paid for it but it has value.
Magical items in the game of D&D have value. Even the most common of items. (eg. potions of healing are listed on the equipment lists as having a cost of 50gp)
Assuming you are one person, please identify the second person who will pay you for it. I’ll wait.
sam the peasant, that's who! if we accept that the free market allows not only for the sale of goods (like nothing-swords) but also labor, then it follows that one might hire a laborer in the role of purchaser (of nothing-swords). you summon a bewildering energy into your hand, they inquire about purchase, you politely refuse sale, and now you're free to go about attacking with a little bit of extra oomf (assuming you still have any of that minute of spell duration leftover). wouldn't it be easier to hire (or even better, offer unpaid apprenticeship to) someone with a ranged weapon to simply fight with you? irrelevant!
...of course, that's easy to say at the pub. much like the fabled 'peasant railgun,' this plan has it's logistical issues. out in the field in a real fight i think the spellcaster would find the free market also allows for price inflation due to increased demand, supply shortages, and/or procurement difficulties (or whatever label you want to slap on 'sam demands more gold at the dungeon entrance, then runs the hell away at the first hint of giant spiders').
(( if it's not obvious: i would love it if some player tried this on me. it would tickle me to no end to acquiesce, and then proceed to never forget about lurking disposable peasant sam ever again. with the costs and complications of keeping a follower comfortable, keeping them close, keeping them safe, and keeping them from defecting at the first chance. oh, the stealth checks ruined and tents lost in the river and the lice, oh my! ))
No, but it should because it limits options more than it actually works to balance the game. The sword spells like booming blade are already and will still be sub par options
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
New DM this question came up in our last game session. Looking for help
Booming Blade: Material component: a melee weapon worth at least 1 sp.
Does not work with created weapons, as they have no value.
step 1: ask your DM if you can cast illusion spells around and perhaps attached to solid objects. like, for instance, changing the emblem on a held shield. keep it simple and listen. do not offer opinions about handbooks, twitter, or Sage Advice: let the DM make a ruling. they might indicate that a leveled spell (not a simple cantrip) might work. that counts as a yes. if yes, then continue.
step 2: ask DM to describe how this bland 1sp sword your character is holding might look with a spell in the school of illusion cast upon it. shadow themed, please. they may ask you to describe. if awesome, then continue.
step 3: next combat, announce that you're holding the material component for booming blade which you intend to cast as your action. but first! you'd like to use a bonus action before that to cast shadow blade around the material component, this 1sp sword. how did the DM say that would look again? awesomely? awesome.
step 4: resolve the Attack action (with or without cantrip, depending on vehemence of reaction from those nearby whose opinions you tolerate). you may then proceed with typical chanting and beseeching of the cosmos and the powers that be that the monsters in melee range don't notice your anemic AC.
(edit - the above is the player's script. ymmv. the dm's script is much easier: either "yes, that sounds cool." or "no, and let's move on." ...an additional single-target 1d8 thunder damage isn't game breaking to allow in the moment, but this also might not be the only request to bend rules without prior authorization. dm's sanity weighs more heavily than proper rules here, imho.)
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Shadow Blade dissipates if the caster is not holding on to it. It's literally worthless unless you're RPing a crypto-bro and marketing it as an NFT.
Trying to trick your DM into letting you bend/break the rules isn't going to foster a healthy table. If a DM knows the rules (or anyone at the table), they'll stop you when you try to Booming Blade with Shadow Blade. If they don't know the rules, then this whole [very obvious] song and dance was unnecessary; but eventually the DM may find out this interaction doesn't work and resent the player for [knowingly] cheating.
The mature thing to do is just to ask your DM if you can use them together. Not every DM agrees with the official rulings, especially those made later as errata.
It dissipates at end of turn. The only way you could [mechanically] hand it off to someone else is by prepping a reaction to do so.
Items have value when there is a market for them, not by simply existing.
This is an absolutely tortured argument. They specify it’s a magic item so there’s no question it overcome resistance. Not to imply you can sell it. The rules don’t imply things.
No it can’t. That is how prices work. A product is worth only as much as someone is willing to pay for it. Without a market, that number is 0. If no one is willing to buy your illusion that vanishes when you let go of it, it has no value.
existence doesn't guarantee significant value. an appraised value for a minute's worth of shadows in solid form is likely to be more connected to the novelty of the trick or the cost of labor for someone to put it to use. either way, situational value. temporary shadows are worthless to almost anyone, generally. although, the object does have utility and maybe even a definable level of craftsmanship which someone might find an equivalent for. the blade of shadows could be of a quality that matches with the results of crafting a typical 1sp sword. if you want to say the sword is equivalent or better in make and quality to a 1sp sword, then that fact might or might not be acceptable to the uncaring, remorseless universe from which the laws of your mystical powers are wrought. however, it may instead be that the laws of magic prefer a mundane sword of enduring materials with careful workmanship and effort worth 1sp asking cost because the underpinning spirits of thunder are fickle with regards to intent and sweat equity. basically, it all requires interpretation. and rules interpretation is in the dm's job description.
if you're the dm, your word is worth more than the explanation behind it. decide and then go about your day.
if you're not the dm then i recommend you ply the chocolate and pizza well ahead of (but adjacent to!) the request for rules arbitration.
either way, my message to the original poster is that it's in the dm's interest to give a quick gut-check yes or no rather than wasting brain cells on why. the dm needs to save their concentration for giving a name to all the farmers the players are about to meet by taking what was supposed to be the much less interesting fork at the last crossroads.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
Absolutely not. If nobody will pay a silver piece for the shadow blade that disappears in a minute, then it is not worth a silver piece, and therefore it is not applicable for booming.
DMing:
Dragons of Stormwreck Isle
Playing:
None sadly.
Optimization Guides:
Literally Too Angry to Die - A Guide to Optimizing a Barbarian
A created object that evaporates when its caster drops it, or after a minute if he doesn't, does not have a monetary value (it might have non-monetary value). "Worth at least 1 sp" means "You can sell it for at least 1 sp".
There is literally no reason for the spell to include that text other than forbidding its use with created objects (it also bans a small category of improvised weapons, but no-one would be trying to do that in the first place).
"this is my peasant, sam. he's trained so that when i step on his foot--"
"ouch! oh, uh, gee i'd expect that glowin' thing in your hand there was worth one silver coin, m'lord. and here's a genuine piece of silver (which i'll note: you didn't give me, sur) to satisfy both intent and means to purchase. err, happy booming, sur! (and, uh, i keep the coin. right?)"
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
You're the DM, in the end it does come down to your decision. Though since shadow blade dissipates when the caster lets go, it would have no value. But, they could be hired as a mercenary because of their shadow blade, giving it the technical value that would allow booming blade to be cast.
No. Seriously, pick up an economics book. Price is a function of how much someone is willing to pay. An object has no inherent value simply by virtue of its existence. Its value is a function of supply and demand (do you think there’s a lot of demand for something a person can’t actually hold?) but ultimately price is determined by what the market will bear. If no one wants it, it is valueless. And I can promise you no one wants a thing that ceases to exist when it’s creator puts it down.
If anything is immersion breaking, it the idea that someone will fork over cash for nothing.
The fact that you typically don't sell an item doesn't mean you can't; appraised price is based on what a theoretical buyer would be expected to pay, rather than what someone has actually paid (though your character presumably bought the starting equipment off-screen so it has been sold at some point). As for using it with improvised weapons... yes, you can do it, but why would you?
Good trick. That seems to be accurate.
The shadow blade ceases to do any damage because that's forbidden for objects created through illusory reality?
Assuming you are one person, please identify the second person who will pay you for it. I’ll wait.
Because D&D uses a primitive economic model where items have fixed value, it doesn't make any difference. In a more sophisticated economic model it would matter.
RAW, it doesn't work but it is a situation where you can ask your DM. Personally, I'd allow it in a home game.
The 1sp limit could also cause an issue with a blade pact warlock's pact weapon except the argument there is that the pact creates a weapon of a specific type (eg longsword) and a longsword is listed in the PHB with a stated value. Shadow blade, unfortunately, doesn't list a specific weapon type to justify that argument.
----
Btw, as far as I know, the reason for the 1sp limit has nothing to do with shadow blade - it has to do with the abuse of the component pouch rules when casting spells.
"A component pouch is a small, watertight leather belt pouch that has compartments to hold all the material components and other special items you need to cast your spells, except for those components that have a specific cost (as indicated in a spell's description)."
Original booming blade: Components: V, M (a weapon): "As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails."
From the rules for the component pouch, because booming blade's material component has NO cost associated with it in the spell description, the component pouch can thus provide ANY weapon needed as the material component for the original booming blade.
Make sense? No. However, that is what the rules said prior to the change in TCoE and there were apparently some folks abusing it.
sam the peasant, that's who! if we accept that the free market allows not only for the sale of goods (like nothing-swords) but also labor, then it follows that one might hire a laborer in the role of purchaser (of nothing-swords). you summon a bewildering energy into your hand, they inquire about purchase, you politely refuse sale, and now you're free to go about attacking with a little bit of extra oomf (assuming you still have any of that minute of spell duration leftover). wouldn't it be easier to hire (or even better, offer unpaid apprenticeship to) someone with a ranged weapon to simply fight with you? irrelevant!
...of course, that's easy to say at the pub. much like the fabled 'peasant railgun,' this plan has it's logistical issues. out in the field in a real fight i think the spellcaster would find the free market also allows for price inflation due to increased demand, supply shortages, and/or procurement difficulties (or whatever label you want to slap on 'sam demands more gold at the dungeon entrance, then runs the hell away at the first hint of giant spiders').
(( if it's not obvious: i would love it if some player tried this on me. it would tickle me to no end to acquiesce, and then proceed to never forget about lurking disposable peasant sam ever again. with the costs and complications of keeping a follower comfortable, keeping them close, keeping them safe, and keeping them from defecting at the first chance. oh, the stealth checks ruined and tents lost in the river and the lice, oh my! ))
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
D&D assumes objects have a true value -- otherwise things like 'diamond worth 100 gp' are nonsense. Shadow Blade has no specified value.
No, but it should because it limits options more than it actually works to balance the game. The sword spells like booming blade are already and will still be sub par options