Anyone have a rule quote that supports the claim that a spell can only use one focus?
We don't need to provide rule text which proves you can't do something. Rule text never does that. If you are arguing that the rules allow a character to use two or more focuses then you need to provide rule text to support that.
All text that allows casting a spell or using a focus says that you can use "a spellcasting focus". "A" is singular. The rules allow you to use one. I can find no text that specifically allows more than one.
The language allowing the use of a spellcasting focus to cast a spell in these rules is very similar to the rule text allowing the use of a weapon to make an attack. Rule allow one. You get bonuses associated with the one you are using.
Well if you're allowed to replace components with the focus, and the spell has more than one component... then you could replace components with both foci. Stands to reason, is consistent, and follows your RAG. (Rules as Grammar)
But for reals nothing RAW restricts you from using two foci. We only have text saying you're allowed to replace components with foci. So you are.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Precisely right. While a DM may choose to do something unique at their table, the RAW is that one focus replaces all components in the same way that one component pouch, contains all that is needed for all the components of a spell. (This does not refer to items with a given value that must be obtained regardless of focus/component pouch being used).
Again, every table and every DM may do something unique that homebrews to change the rules but the RAW remains: simply: one focus, or one component pouch to cast a spell.
I still maintain that to get any bonuses from a foci you only need to be holding it (or in some cases wearing it). If that was not the case you would not be able ot apply the bonus for a spell that does not require material components (that the focus can replace). If you can meet the criteria for applying the bonus of more than one magic item that can be used as a spell focus then you can get multiple benefits.
Question for the group: According to the rules, what determines if an item qualifies as an item that could be used as a spellcasting focus?
For example, let's concentrate on classes that may use an Arcane Focus as a spellcasting focus and let's concentrate on the staff. In the equipment section there is a listing for arcane focus:
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item--an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item--designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus.
There is also a table of basic arcane focus items that can be purchased:
Arcane Focus
Item
Cost
Weight
Crystal
10 gp
1 lb.
Orb
20 gp
3 lb.
Rod
10 gp
2 lb.
Staff
5 gp
4 lb.
Wand
10 gp
1 lb.
This "staff" costs 5 gp and clearly qualifies as a spellcasting focus. However, we also have a type of staff listed as a Simple Melee Weapon:
Quarterstaff
2 sp
1d6 bludgeoning
4 lb.
Versatile (1d8)
This "staff" costs 2 sp and I am assuming that it does NOT qualify as a spellcasting focus (but I cannot find a rule that confirms this assumption). Similarly, I am assuming that any other inexpensive and simple walking stick or a similar item crudely carved from a tree branch probably also cannot qualify as a spellcasting focus.
What about magical staffs? Suppose a wizard is holding a Staff of the Magi. Can this wizard use this staff as a spellcasting focus? Why or why not? Which rule would allow it?
Are the items listed in the table of basic arcane focus items considered to be "magical" items? If so, is that a requirement to be able to use an item as a spellcasting focus -- that it must be a magic item? And therefore other magical staffs such as the Staff of the Magi would also qualify to be used as a spellcasting focus? Or is there a minimum price for the item which would allow it to qualify -- in the case of a staff, perhaps any staff with a value of at least 5 gp (which should include all magical staffs) would qualify but all less valuable staffs would not qualify? Or, is a staff that can be used as an arcane focus a very specific item which must be purchased off of the above table and therefore even the Staff of the Magi would NOT qualify to be used as an arcane focus? I am hoping to see quoted text from the books to support an opinion for this answer!
(I thought it would confuse the issue to write "staves" all over the place so I decided to call them "staffs" in this post!)
Question for the group: According to the rules, what determines if an item qualifies as an item that could be used as a spellcasting focus?
For example, let's concentrate on classes that may use an Arcane Focus as a spellcasting focus and let's concentrate on the staff. In the equipment section there is a listing for arcane focus:
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item--an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item--designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus.
There is also a table of basic arcane focus items that can be purchased:
Arcane Focus
Item
Cost
Weight
Crystal
10 gp
1 lb.
Orb
20 gp
3 lb.
Rod
10 gp
2 lb.
Staff
5 gp
4 lb.
Wand
10 gp
1 lb.
This "staff" costs 5 gp and clearly qualifies as a spellcasting focus. However, we also have a type of staff listed as a Simple Melee Weapon:
Quarterstaff
2 sp
1d6 bludgeoning
4 lb.
Versatile (1d8)
This "staff" costs 2 sp and I am assuming that it does NOT qualify as a spellcasting focus (but I cannot find a rule that confirms this assumption). Similarly, I am assuming that any other inexpensive and simple walking stick or a similar item crudely carved from a tree branch probably also cannot qualify as a spellcasting focus.
What about magical staffs? Suppose a wizard is holding a Staff of the Magi. Can this wizard use this staff as a spellcasting focus? Why or why not? Which rule would allow it?
Are the items listed in the table of basic arcane focus items considered to be "magical" items? If so, is that a requirement to be able to use an item as a spellcasting focus -- that it must be a magic item? And therefore other magical staffs such as the Staff of the Magi would also qualify to be used as a spellcasting focus? Or is there a minimum price for the item which would allow it to qualify -- in the case of a staff, perhaps any staff with a value of at least 5 gp (which should include all magical staffs) would qualify but all less valuable staffs would not qualify? Or, is a staff that can be used as an arcane focus a very specific item which must be purchased off of the above table and therefore even the Staff of the Magi would NOT qualify to be used as an arcane focus? I am hoping to see quoted text from the books to support an opinion for this answer!
(I thought it would confuse the issue to write "staves" all over the place so I decided to call them "staffs" in this post!)
So a arcane focus staff is a fancier stick and not meant to use in combat while a quarterstaff is a weapon and fashioned and made differently to deal with being able to withstand combat. Don't want your fancy magic focusing inlays or carvings getting destroyed on you arcane focus staff. Second point arcane foci are not magical they are just used to help channel magic like a spell component. That bat guano used in fireball isnt any more magical then the dirt under your boots why is that foci going to be magical.
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10.
Also I cant find anywhere that says you can use a magic staff as a focus my google foo might be off so please pardon me its early in the morning as i am typing this. So unless it says it in the item description then it cant be used for that.
Also I cant find anywhere that says you can use a magic staff as a focus my google foo might be off so please pardon me its early in the morning as i am typing this. So unless it says it in the item description then it cant be used for that.
The rules say that a "staff" can be used as a focus so I assume that anything described as a staff qualifies.
A "quarterstaff" is not necessarily a staff although there is some overlap: A staff of striking is defined as a staff and the description says it "can be wielded as a magic quarterstaff". However the price difference makes is clear a standard quarterstaff would not function as a staff for the purpose of being a spell focus.
To my knowledge the rules are not clear whether all staffs can be used as a quarterstaff. It would tend to rule they can not though they do weigh the same and have played in games where they can.
The rule don't say much about the relation between the staff arcane focus, the quarterstaff and the magic staff other than the Dungeon Master Guide saying a magic staff can be used as a quarterstaff. To illustrate their differences you can check their weight; a staff arcane focus (4 lb) quarterstaff (4 lb) magic staff (2-7 lb). But to be honest i think most DM let them be used interchangeably.
Staffs: A magic staff is about 5 or 6 feet long. Staffs vary widely in appearance: some are of nearly equal diameter throughout and smooth, others are gnarled and twisted, some are made of wood, and others are composed of polished metal or crystal. Depending on the material, a staff weighs between 2 and 7 pounds. Unless a staff’s description says otherwise, a staff can be used as a quarterstaff.
Thanks for the replies. My question wasn't so much about the mundane quarterstaff -- I think that most of us would not allow that to be used as a spellcasting focus. Also, not so much about whether a staff can be used as a quarterstaff -- many magical staffs will specify that right in the description.
My question is mostly about which staffs should a DM allow to be used as a spellcasting focus? As I dig around, I tend to agree with Drakkon's post, clipped below. Emphasis on the fact that maybe not even the magical staffs would qualify as a spellcasting focus unless it says that it is. But does that seem reasonable?
So a arcane focus staff is a fancier stick and not meant to use in combat while a quarterstaff is a weapon and fashioned and made differently to deal with being able to withstand combat. Don't want your fancy magic focusing inlays or carvings getting destroyed on you arcane focus staff. Second point arcane foci are not magical they are just used to help channel magic like a spell component. That bat guano used in fireball isnt any more magical then the dirt under your boots why is that foci going to be magical.
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10.
Also I cant find anywhere that says you can use a magic staff as a focus my google foo might be off so please pardon me its early in the morning as i am typing this. So unless it says it in the item description then it cant be used for that.
The thing that makes me feel that maybe it should not be quite so restrictive is that the descriptions for the other types of foci appear to be quite a bit more open-ended and left up to the creativity of the player and DM to declare and then use a particular item as their focus:
Druidic Focus. A druidic focus might be a sprig of mistletoe or holly, a wand or scepter made of yew or another special wood, a staff drawn whole out of a living tree, or a totem object incorporating feathers, fur, bones, and teeth from sacred animals. A druid can use such an object as a spellcasting focus.
Holy Symbol. A holy symbol is a representation of a god or pantheon. It might be an amulet depicting a symbol representing a deity, the same symbol carefully engraved or inlaid as an emblem on a shield, or a tiny box holding a fragment of a sacred relic. A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
Musical Instrument. Several of the most common types of musical instruments are shown on the table as examples. If you have proficiency with a given musical instrument, you can add your proficiency bonus to any ability checks you make to play music with the instrument. A bard can use a musical instrument as a spellcasting focus. Each type of musical instrument requires a separate proficiency.
However, in a lot of those cases, such as for the Holy Symbol, it seems to imply that the spellcasting focus is an otherwise mundane item that has no other uses, bonuses, special magical effects, etc. But in the case of an Arcane focus it seems tempting to use a powerful magical staff that has all sorts of additional benefits to "also" be the spellcasting focus. I'm just not sure if that's intended or even allowed.
The most applicable rule stopping this is likely the one about the same or similar effects not stacking if they are from the same enchantment/source. So you could possibly “use” more than one focus, but only one of their bonus would be applied.
The most applicable rule stopping this is likely the one about the same or similar effects not stacking if they are from the same enchantment/source. So you could possibly “use” more than one focus, but only one of their bonus would be applied.
Anyone have a rule quote that supports the claim that a spell can only use one focus?
We don't need to provide rule text which proves you can't do something. Rule text never does that. If you are arguing that the rules allow a character to use two or more focuses then you need to provide rule text to support that.
All text that allows casting a spell or using a focus says that you can use "a spellcasting focus". "A" is singular. The rules allow you to use one. I can find no text that specifically allows more than one.
The language allowing the use of a spellcasting focus to cast a spell in these rules is very similar to the rule text allowing the use of a weapon to make an attack. Rule allow one. You get bonuses associated with the one you are using.
Well if you're allowed to replace components with the focus, and the spell has more than one component... then you could replace components with both foci. Stands to reason, is consistent, and follows your RAG. (Rules as Grammar)
But for reals nothing RAW restricts you from using two foci. We only have text saying you're allowed to replace components with foci. So you are.
I still maintain that to get any bonuses from a foci you only need to be holding it (or in some cases wearing it). If that was not the case you would not be able ot apply the bonus for a spell that does not require material components (that the focus can replace). If you can meet the criteria for applying the bonus of more than one magic item that can be used as a spell focus then you can get multiple benefits.
I believe all the foci that add bonuses are attunement items, so just wearing it depending on the type does give the bonus, for stacking the bonus, I replied just above about the rule that likely stops that RAW
If you are talking about two of the same magic items, such as two Rods of the Pact Keeper, then you may only gain the benefits from one source because of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything stating that identical effects from the same source do not stack. However, if you used a Rod of the Pact Keeper and Wand of the War Mage, the effects would stack because they are from different sources and the both descriptions only require you to hold the magic items to gain the benefits of them. Hope this helps.
If you are talking about two of the same magic items, such as two Rods of the Pact Keeper, then you may only gain the benefits from one source because of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything stating that identical effects from the same source do not stack.
It's in the core rules from Dungeon master Guide as well;
Attunement: Additionally, a creature can’t attune to more than one copy of an item.
I’ve been going back and forth on this with some folks for a while, and wanted to add a perspective with more attention to detail than some of the above entries. While English language interpretation is important and obviously implies you cannot use two focuses to replace the material elements of a spell, only one is required for that use and nowhere in the item descriptions for most items that add to spell DC/Attack does it require your use of the item as the focus to get that benefit. There may be other limitations that do however.
The Bloodwell vial +1 only gives a benefit to sorcerer spells: ”You can use the vial as a spellcasting focus for your spells while wearing or holding it, and you gain a +1 bonus to spell attack rolls and to the saving throw DCs of your sorcerer spells.”
The Arcane Grimoire is very similar, except for the wizard class, and worth noting also divides the relevant rule into two parts; Use as a focus, AND spellcasting benefits. This could be restated as 2 independent sentences since they do not use the joining words “when” or “while” implying that they are two separate benefits
The Rhythm Makers Drum, Rod of the pact keeper, and All purpose tool are similarly restricted, but interestingly do not include their use as a focus
Interestingly the Amulet of the Devout +1 has language that appears mostly unrestricted in comparison: ”This amulet bears the symbol of a deity inlaid with precious stones or metals. While you wear the holy symbol, you gain a +1 bonus to spell attack rolls and the saving throw DCs of your spells.”
In fact this last one explicitly separates the use as a focus from the buff.
Finally there are items like Wand of the War Mage or the Staff of Power that grant bonuses just for holding them, without class restrictions.
Given the strictness of the rule on combining effects which ONLY removes stacking effects with the same name, I’m forced to conclude that as long as all conditions are satisfied (attuned, held, worn, class, etc.) then indeed all effects should stack.
This neatly allows a spellcaster to pile on the buffs over time while simultaneously disallowing stacking of identical or +1 and +2 varieties of the same item.
Hopefully this serves useful at your table, happy (re)rolling!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well if you're allowed to replace components with the focus, and the spell has more than one component... then you could replace components with both foci. Stands to reason, is consistent, and follows your RAG. (Rules as Grammar)
But for reals nothing RAW restricts you from using two foci. We only have text saying you're allowed to replace components with foci. So you are.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
The use of singular and plurial in the rule grammar is pretty self evident to me, one replace all others.
Precisely right. While a DM may choose to do something unique at their table, the RAW is that one focus replaces all components in the same way that one component pouch, contains all that is needed for all the components of a spell. (This does not refer to items with a given value that must be obtained regardless of focus/component pouch being used).
Again, every table and every DM may do something unique that homebrews to change the rules but the RAW remains: simply: one focus, or one component pouch to cast a spell.
I still maintain that to get any bonuses from a foci you only need to be holding it (or in some cases wearing it). If that was not the case you would not be able ot apply the bonus for a spell that does not require material components (that the focus can replace). If you can meet the criteria for applying the bonus of more than one magic item that can be used as a spell focus then you can get multiple benefits.
Question for the group: According to the rules, what determines if an item qualifies as an item that could be used as a spellcasting focus?
For example, let's concentrate on classes that may use an Arcane Focus as a spellcasting focus and let's concentrate on the staff. In the equipment section there is a listing for arcane focus:
There is also a table of basic arcane focus items that can be purchased:
This "staff" costs 5 gp and clearly qualifies as a spellcasting focus. However, we also have a type of staff listed as a Simple Melee Weapon:
This "staff" costs 2 sp and I am assuming that it does NOT qualify as a spellcasting focus (but I cannot find a rule that confirms this assumption). Similarly, I am assuming that any other inexpensive and simple walking stick or a similar item crudely carved from a tree branch probably also cannot qualify as a spellcasting focus.
What about magical staffs? Suppose a wizard is holding a Staff of the Magi. Can this wizard use this staff as a spellcasting focus? Why or why not? Which rule would allow it?
Are the items listed in the table of basic arcane focus items considered to be "magical" items? If so, is that a requirement to be able to use an item as a spellcasting focus -- that it must be a magic item? And therefore other magical staffs such as the Staff of the Magi would also qualify to be used as a spellcasting focus? Or is there a minimum price for the item which would allow it to qualify -- in the case of a staff, perhaps any staff with a value of at least 5 gp (which should include all magical staffs) would qualify but all less valuable staffs would not qualify? Or, is a staff that can be used as an arcane focus a very specific item which must be purchased off of the above table and therefore even the Staff of the Magi would NOT qualify to be used as an arcane focus? I am hoping to see quoted text from the books to support an opinion for this answer!
(I thought it would confuse the issue to write "staves" all over the place so I decided to call them "staffs" in this post!)
So a arcane focus staff is a fancier stick and not meant to use in combat while a quarterstaff is a weapon and fashioned and made differently to deal with being able to withstand combat. Don't want your fancy magic focusing inlays or carvings getting destroyed on you arcane focus staff. Second point arcane foci are not magical they are just used to help channel magic like a spell component. That bat guano used in fireball isnt any more magical then the dirt under your boots why is that foci going to be magical.
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10.
Also I cant find anywhere that says you can use a magic staff as a focus my google foo might be off so please pardon me its early in the morning as i am typing this. So unless it says it in the item description then it cant be used for that.
The rules say that a "staff" can be used as a focus so I assume that anything described as a staff qualifies.
A "quarterstaff" is not necessarily a staff although there is some overlap: A staff of striking is defined as a staff and the description says it "can be wielded as a magic quarterstaff". However the price difference makes is clear a standard quarterstaff would not function as a staff for the purpose of being a spell focus.
To my knowledge the rules are not clear whether all staffs can be used as a quarterstaff. It would tend to rule they can not though they do weigh the same and have played in games where they can.
Arcane focus - "specially constructed staff", not just any old staff.
The rule don't say much about the relation between the staff arcane focus, the quarterstaff and the magic staff other than the Dungeon Master Guide saying a magic staff can be used as a quarterstaff. To illustrate their differences you can check their weight; a staff arcane focus (4 lb) quarterstaff (4 lb) magic staff (2-7 lb). But to be honest i think most DM let them be used interchangeably.
Thanks for the replies. My question wasn't so much about the mundane quarterstaff -- I think that most of us would not allow that to be used as a spellcasting focus. Also, not so much about whether a staff can be used as a quarterstaff -- many magical staffs will specify that right in the description.
My question is mostly about which staffs should a DM allow to be used as a spellcasting focus? As I dig around, I tend to agree with Drakkon's post, clipped below. Emphasis on the fact that maybe not even the magical staffs would qualify as a spellcasting focus unless it says that it is. But does that seem reasonable?
The thing that makes me feel that maybe it should not be quite so restrictive is that the descriptions for the other types of foci appear to be quite a bit more open-ended and left up to the creativity of the player and DM to declare and then use a particular item as their focus:
However, in a lot of those cases, such as for the Holy Symbol, it seems to imply that the spellcasting focus is an otherwise mundane item that has no other uses, bonuses, special magical effects, etc. But in the case of an Arcane focus it seems tempting to use a powerful magical staff that has all sorts of additional benefits to "also" be the spellcasting focus. I'm just not sure if that's intended or even allowed.
The most applicable rule stopping this is likely the one about the same or similar effects not stacking if they are from the same enchantment/source. So you could possibly “use” more than one focus, but only one of their bonus would be applied.
My above was in response to this
I believe all the foci that add bonuses are attunement items, so just wearing it depending on the type does give the bonus, for stacking the bonus, I replied just above about the rule that likely stops that RAW
If you are talking about two of the same magic items, such as two Rods of the Pact Keeper, then you may only gain the benefits from one source because of Tasha's Cauldron of Everything stating that identical effects from the same source do not stack. However, if you used a Rod of the Pact Keeper and Wand of the War Mage, the effects would stack because they are from different sources and the both descriptions only require you to hold the magic items to gain the benefits of them. Hope this helps.
It's in the core rules from Dungeon master Guide as well;
I’ve been going back and forth on this with some folks for a while, and wanted to add a perspective with more attention to detail than some of the above entries. While English language interpretation is important and obviously implies you cannot use two focuses to replace the material elements of a spell, only one is required for that use and nowhere in the item descriptions for most items that add to spell DC/Attack does it require your use of the item as the focus to get that benefit. There may be other limitations that do however.
The Bloodwell vial +1 only gives a benefit to sorcerer spells:
”You can use the vial as a spellcasting focus for your spells while wearing or holding it, and you gain a +1 bonus to spell attack rolls and to the saving throw DCs of your sorcerer spells.”
The Arcane Grimoire is very similar, except for the wizard class, and worth noting also divides the relevant rule into two parts; Use as a focus, AND spellcasting benefits. This could be restated as 2 independent sentences since they do not use the joining words “when” or “while” implying that they are two separate benefits
The Rhythm Makers Drum, Rod of the pact keeper, and All purpose tool are similarly restricted, but interestingly do not include their use as a focus
Interestingly the Amulet of the Devout +1 has language that appears mostly unrestricted in comparison:
”This amulet bears the symbol of a deity inlaid with precious stones or metals. While you wear the holy symbol, you gain a +1 bonus to spell attack rolls and the saving throw DCs of your spells.”
In fact this last one explicitly separates the use as a focus from the buff.
Finally there are items like Wand of the War Mage or the Staff of Power that grant bonuses just for holding them, without class restrictions.
Given the strictness of the rule on combining effects which ONLY removes stacking effects with the same name, I’m forced to conclude that as long as all conditions are satisfied (attuned, held, worn, class, etc.) then indeed all effects should stack.
This neatly allows a spellcaster to pile on the buffs over time while simultaneously disallowing stacking of identical or +1 and +2 varieties of the same item.
Hopefully this serves useful at your table, happy (re)rolling!