The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
Think of the spell component pouch much like Schrödinger's cat. If you open it up, look inside, and count what's in there... well, you'll have a specific and finite number of castings of all those spells. But, if you simply don't look in it, it can have whatever you might need in it, because you don't know, so it could be anything. It is a mysterious box with an unknown answer inside it. One we don't want to answer...
Because until you open it and count it, it can be anything at all.
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.
I found another in-depth discussion of this very question here. If you want to make the case that the rules are contradictory, then you may have a leg to stand on, even though I think the rule is pretty clear. But the conclusion you come up with (consuming the component pouch itself) is not supported by RAW or RAI that I can see.
Okay, so this seems to confirm my theory... the intent of the authors was that consumed items with no stated value still need to be acquired in some way and can't be substituted by a focus or component pouch. Even Protection from Evil and Good is meant to just require a sprinkle of Holy Water and isn't intended to consume an entire bottle for each use.
In my opinion, if it was not the case, they could have left the sentence about consuming components out entirely, as the situation would be handled by the preceding sentence about using a component pouch in lieu of having the actual material components needed for the spell. Besides, if a spell calls for a raven feather, which the casting consumes, and we assume a component pouch has all spell components, then suddenly we would need to track the fact that a raven feather is missing from the component pouch. It suspends disbelief, adds unnecessary complexity and resource management, and is never explicitly specified as such, so why should we treat it as such?
Those two sentences are separated by a paragraph split. They're not connected ideas. The topic being discussed is Material Components and therefore the sentence about consumed components needing be provided is only clarification about those components in a general sense regarding the topic of material components only. It is in no way a continuation of the previous paragraph about pouches or foci.
All it is saying is that if the spell consumes a raven feather, you'd need another raven feather for a second casting. This is simply a basic explanation of that common sense notion of what 'is consumed" means, and is only talking about material components, it is not adding a restriction to component/foci use cases.
The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
Nope. Is a Potion of Healing magical? It rapidly heals grievous wounds. But is it magical?
Yes....it's a magic item...in the DMG....I don't know any player who would say it isn't
How's that work. Explain it in biological detail for me how wounds can rapidly close without magic being involved, I want scientific breakdown of this process.
No. It works because it works. You narratively fill in the blanks any way you want to bend the narrative to the mechanics.
It works because it is a magic item.
The spell component pouch is mechanics. It allows you to not have to ever worry about thinking about this garbage. If the question comes up "where are your components coming from" the answer is just "This pouch" and then you move on to something more interesting.
You are really, really, really overanalyzing this. It isn't a magic item, it is just a pouch with an unspecified but sufficient number of unspecified but sufficient components for your unspecified spell list.
Unspecified being the operative word here because its a waste of time and energy to go into it all.
Again, i don't think that a component that requires you to possibly murder someone for it is an "unspecified" or "mundane" item you can just handwave. nor do I think so of other rare or complex consumed components.
Remember, a component pouch is explicitly stated as holding the actual material components. it is not a "substitution" in the same way as a focus but a storage system that can be easily accessed for casting. If you know the pouch to be mundane as described, then the only other way that you can argue this without tracking consumed components is the typical "the PC just finds this stuff and restocks during downtime or as part of their daily routine", but that breaks down when you consider the nature of these components.
No you justify it by not even trying to figure it out. Seriously. Stop.
Like, there are millions of details we don't need to know the exact specific answers to about millions of interaction going on around us all the time. The answer for the pouch is just don't try to count the unspecified nebulous number of unspecified components in it. And then you're good.
I don't for most, and only do for the items that either 1) have a specified value, or 2) get used up by the spellcasting process (which is a very small number of items)
How do you restock (or at least reliably restock) holy water/powdered metal?
You restock by never asking your players to restock and just assume they have everything because that's what the pouch is, the components they need for their spell, and you worry about something cooler.
Again, some things should be tracked, like how many people your PC murders to fuel their demon summoning.
that stuff can't just be found in nature, nor can the 25' of rope needed for snare, nor (especially so) the blood of a humanoid slain in the last 24 hours?
k, just don't worry about it. Why is the villian a villian, that's more important. Who hurt him, what's his motivations? And... what was the name of that tavernkeeper with the funny accent? Oh, should we bring in a reoccurring NPC this session? Hmm, which one...
Oh wait no, lets all sit down and overanalyze my player's inventory sheets and make sure they have the exact grams of bat guano they need, how much of this fine sand is going to be lost over time? Rose petals won't last forever, lets track the cycles of the moon since they restocked this stuff too, certainly this stuff has expiries! /s
Where in any location in the gosh-forsaken thread have I said I want my players to track bat guano or sand? I'm not trying to say that component pouches don't work for any spells. i am saying that they don't work (or don't work well) for the 4 spells which have non-cost consumable components. In my games, this came up for only one of them, and I made the character track (blood for one of the demon summoning spells). It wasn't hard, they had no problem with it, and all it took in game was asking how long it had been before the wanted to cast it after a 'harvest'
the first would require access to a church or temple, a blacksmith, or other spells, the second a general store (or raw material and a bit of crafting time), the third a fresh corpse (probably one you have killed or witnessed the death of, so you can confirm freshness).
Just handwave it and move on to something actually interesting.
If you want to, fine. I don't, and my players haven't had a problem with it the one time it has come up.
I mean, if you want to handwave casual murder as a "downtime" activity with no consequences I'm sure you could in your game, but I just don't see why it is a problem for you if other DMs don't want that.
You really don't understand. You're not handwaving murder, you're handwaving spell component management itself. It doesn't matter if the spell required a freakin Holy Avenger which it consumed, if it doesn't have "a listed price" in the "spell's entry" then your component pouch has whatever it is and you don't have to worry about it, don't worry about how it got there, or anything. It's there move on. What is it? Doesn't matter move on. How' it get there? Doesn't matter move on. That just isn't where your focus is, it is on why the princess was kidnapped, or why the mage school denied your reenrollment. Or the activity of the orc tribes on the frontier. Or the map to the dragon's hoard. or anything else more interesting than calculating if a vial of holy water can be split in 10 ways or if maybe it can be split in 20 way or if it can't be split at all.
If murder is required to make a spell component, then saying I handwave the component is absolutely handwaving the implied murder it took to get it.
And remember, even for those of us DMs who would make you track the components for these particular spells, 95% of the time, your pouch will have what you need, always, because those components for most spells aren't consumed, and its only in these special instances where there is an issue.
Anyone can homebrew their games however they like. More power to you.
All I've wanted in this thread was to say my point of view is valid. I've never actually said your's isn't (from my first post (#3 on page 1), i said it is up to the DM, and this implies that other points of view are valid too). We probably just need to agree to disagree, without casting aspersions on each others abilities or how their tables respond.
The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
"Should"
Should is an interesting word really. It speaks to what ought to happen. It is a moral stance you're taking. A virtue, an ethical stance.
Contrast that with where we are, on a forum to discuss rules of a game. What someone "Should" or should not do really isn't any of our business, people can play whatever kind of game they like, and if they want to handwave this sort of thing I really don't think you have any authority to stop them, moral or otherwise.
Stick to discussing what is, I think. How do the rules work. Not what people should or shouldn't do.
Edit: Also not even the point. You're not handwaving the murder. You're handwaving the components.
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 issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
"Should"
Should is an interesting word really. It speaks to what ought to happen. It is a moral stance you're taking. A virtue, an ethical stance.
Contrast that with where we are, on a forum to discuss rules of a game. What someone "Should" or should not do really isn't any of our business, people can play whatever kind of game they like, and if they want to handwave this sort of thing I really don't think you have any authority to stop them, moral or otherwise.
Stick to discussing what is, I think. How do the rules work. Not what people should or shouldn't do.
Edit: Also not even the point. You're not handwaving the murder. You're handwaving the components.
You are doing the same thing to me from the other side. I say you should, you are (and have been) saying you shouldn't. Its the same thing really.
The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
No, dude, you keep bringing that up -- and as I said earlier, I agree narratively that if a player is summoning demons that is something that will become a focus of the campaign, with all that comes with it.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the general use of the pouch though
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
"Should"
Should is an interesting word really. It speaks to what ought to happen. It is a moral stance you're taking. A virtue, an ethical stance.
Contrast that with where we are, on a forum to discuss rules of a game. What someone "Should" or should not do really isn't any of our business, people can play whatever kind of game they like, and if they want to handwave this sort of thing I really don't think you have any authority to stop them, moral or otherwise.
Stick to discussing what is, I think. How do the rules work. Not what people should or shouldn't do.
Edit: Also not even the point. You're not handwaving the murder. You're handwaving the components.
You are doing the same thing to me from the other side. I say you should, you are (and have been) saying you shouldn't. Its the same thing really.
Ctrl+F allows people to search entire pages for key words. Very easy to see that this is slander. Please do not lie about things I've said or haven't said. That, I do take offense to.
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 issue with this is that your interpretation here basically confers magic item status to a component pouch, as it is either 1) conjuring non-valuable material components after they are consumed, or 2) have infinite space in which to store consumable non-valuable material components for a lifetime of casting. Either way does not align with the presentation of the pouch as a mundane item in the rules.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
"Should"
Should is an interesting word really. It speaks to what ought to happen. It is a moral stance you're taking. A virtue, an ethical stance.
Contrast that with where we are, on a forum to discuss rules of a game. What someone "Should" or should not do really isn't any of our business, people can play whatever kind of game they like, and if they want to handwave this sort of thing I really don't think you have any authority to stop them, moral or otherwise.
Stick to discussing what is, I think. How do the rules work. Not what people should or shouldn't do.
Edit: Also not even the point. You're not handwaving the murder. You're handwaving the components.
You are doing the same thing to me from the other side. I say you should, you are (and have been) saying you shouldn't. Its the same thing really.
Ctrl+F allows people to search entire pages for key words. Very easy to see that this is slander. Please do not lie about things I've said or haven't said. That, I do take offense to.
Post #109, you told me to "Seriously, Stop" regarding my point of view. That is saying I shouldn't do this.
Post #87, you said my point of view was a "waste of mental energy" That is implying i shouldn't do this.
The fact that you didn't use the exact word "shoudn't" does not mean you haven't been saying as such using other words.
also, since this is a written forum, the correct accusation (unfounded, IMO) would be libel.
Post #109, you told me to "Seriously, Stop" regarding my point of view. That is saying I shouldn't do this.
No, I didn't. I used single word sentences, not super clear sure, but I wasn't telling you "how you should play". I was responding to your false declaration.
You said: "then the only other way that you can argue this"
That isn't the ONLY way you can argue that the component pouch has components and isn't magical. I said:
"No you justify it by not even trying to figure it out. Seriously. Stop."
As in: I'm serious. It really, really is this simple. You stop trying to figure it out. Yes... it is that simple. And that by stopping, you "can argue this" that pouches have what you need at all times and aren't also magical. I used the single word sentences to really drive home how basic and simple this is. You refuse to accept it is possible to have a nonmagical item that simply has what you need in it...and that is because you refuse to step back from that level of detail. The answer is simply: Don't ask what's in it.
If you don't know what's in it, anything could be in it.
I'm not telling you to play this way. I'm explaining to you that this is the default expectation and that it is possible to play this way, a possibility you refuse to acknowledge even exists.
Your words, I was responding to, again:
"then the only other way that you can argue this" <--- words of someone who doesn't see the other side of the argument. Can't see it, even.
Post #87, you said my point of view was a "waste of mental energy" That is implying i shouldn't do this.
No I didn't. Lies again.
I said: "I do not even let the thought cross my mind when they're casting spells if "they have the components" it is a waste of mental energy."
I said what I do. Caring what is on my player's character sheets this much is a waste of my mental energy.
I in no way shape or form even referenced you in that statement. Bit of a universe-revolves-around-you perspective there pal.
The fact that you didn't use the exact word "shoudn't" does not mean you haven't been saying as such using other words.
also, since this is a written forum, the correct accusation (unfounded, IMO) would be libel.
True, its libel then. You got me there. Either way, stop now please.
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.
So is having to wear matching platinum rings during Warding Bond, covering the target's eyes with copper pieces throughout Gentle Repose or burning the material components for Find Familiar in a brass brazier. None of those things significantly adds to the difficulty of casting the spell but the writers still wanted you to actually do it because it makes the spells more memorable. What makes Protection From Evil And Good any different?
The strongest argument in favor of hand-waving is that a component pouch could still satisfy the rule to provide the component for each casting. But then you're in a situation where the component pouch is able to substitute for the components while a spellcasting focus wouldn't, even though they're supposed to do the same thing and are completely interchangeable for every other spell. That's a pretty silly outcome in my opinion and lends even more weight to the bit about providing the component for each casting being put in its own paragraph for a reason.
So there have been about 60 or so posts since the last time I brought attention to this:
Both sides are saying "I think this because the rules say it." And guess what. You're both right. Surprise. The rules say contradictory things.
Components that don't have a cost can use a pouch or focus. Components that are consumed must be supplied every time. And nothing indicates which takes priority over the other.
So as I said around 3 pages ago yesterday: agree to disagree.
So the thread is about the spell Protection from Evil and Good. It says "holy water or powered silver and iron, which the spell consumes" It doesn't say how much of either. If you have a flask full of the stuff, it's eating some of it. I give people 10 castings of a spell before I start to worry about it, and by my rule, a flask of holy water would give you 2.5 gp per cast. and weigh 1 pound.
1 iron spike is .2 pounds 1 coin is .2 pounds .4 pounds per casting of the spell. So you need 3 coins per cast, 10 times that would be 30 coins per cast. If I want to be safe, I'll carry around enough for 20 castings. That would be 5 gold worth of holy water and would weigh 2 pounds or I could use that mixture of silver and iron dust. The iron dust would cost 2 gold (I'd buy a set of 20 iron spikes) and I'd need 60 coins. In D&D all precious metals weigh the same, and it's 50 coins per pound, so those 62 coins come in at 3.4 pounds and I'd need to pay 4 gold and 6 silver to pay for the lot.
It is worthy of note that I'm basing the weights on the rules for Encumbrance. I have no idea what any of this would weigh in the real world. Feel free to check my math. I almost always screw that up.
So there have been about 60 or so posts since the last time I brought attention to this:
Both sides are saying "I think this because the rules say it." And guess what. You're both right. Surprise. The rules say contradictory things.
Components that don't have a cost can use a pouch or focus. Components that are consumed must be supplied every time. And nothing indicates which takes priority over the other.
That's not true at all. English grammar indicates which is correct.
The people who think "Component must be provided every time" is an exception to the rule "pouch/foci can replace components" have failed their reading comprehension. It isn't the same paragraph, nor is it a continuing phrase or statement. Nothing about it is written as an exclusion to the "foci/pouch can replace component" rule. It is a simple Material Component rule.
So as I said around 3 pages ago yesterday: agree to disagree.
No. You're welcome to agree to disagree, but others are free to continue discussing it whether you want them to or not.
Here is the correct reading:
The general rule is that material components must be provided for the spell.
A specific rule is that if the component is consumed it must be provided for each subsequent casting. (This is purely clarification)
A specific rule is that material components can be met instead by providing a component pouch or foci.
Nothing AT ALL ever says that "a pouch/foci can replace the material component unless that component is consumed, and in that case the component must be provided"
That text doesn't exist in the rules because it's being invented. Imagined. Fabricated.
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.
So is having to wear matching platinum rings during Warding Bond, covering the target's eyes with copper pieces throughout Gentle Repose or burning the material components for Find Familiar in a brass brazier. None of those things significantly adds to the difficulty of casting the spell but the writers still wanted you to actually do it because it makes the spells more memorable. What makes Protection From Evil And Good any different?
The strongest argument in favor of hand-waving is that a component pouch could still satisfy the rule to provide the component for each casting. But then you're in a situation where the component pouch is able to substitute for the components while a spellcasting focus wouldn't, even though they're supposed to do the same thing and are completely interchangeable for every other spell. That's a pretty silly outcome in my opinion and lends even more weight to the bit about providing the component for each casting being put in its own paragraph for a reason.
All of the components you listed give costs in the spell description, so aren't relevant to this discussion. They are not replaceable with a component pouch nor a foci.
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.
All foci, and the Component Pouch specifically, are what is known as a "Handwave Mechanic". It's a variety of "Optional Rules" that allow the players and DMs the ability to ignore most spell components. Every DM will have a threshold for this. Mine is 10 castings for anything commonly available. If you're nowhere near somewhere that you can easily get a component this is consumed by the casting, you run out.
How much gold it costs is part of the choice the DM makes. I use the Lifestyle rules. I compare the price of the component to how much the player character has spent on Lifestyle to the price. If the price is less than what they paid, I assume they restocked. If you are maintaining a Modest Lifestyle, 100 gold worth of platinum rings would not be covered. If you were maintaining a Comfortable one, it would be. You'd get one casting without having to specifically state you went out and got a pair of rings, and so long as you were near somewhere that might reasonably sell platinum rings in pairs, so long as you keep paying your Lifestyle, you're fine and can cast as many as 10 times before I'll mess with you.
It's not that a Component Pouch produces anything. It's not magical. It just holds things, and you can assume it gets restocked at any point when the player character has the time, the gold, or whatever else it takes to get what is needed.
In my considered opinion, all components of a spell are the same here. It is very rare that a DM will insist that the player speak the words of a Verbal spell, do the gestures for a Somatic one, or have the Material ones in the real world. It's pretty much all ignored as "flavor" unless there is something that prevents your character from using the component.
So there have been about 60 or so posts since the last time I brought attention to this:
Both sides are saying "I think this because the rules say it." And guess what. You're both right. Surprise. The rules say contradictory things.
Components that don't have a cost can use a pouch or focus. Components that are consumed must be supplied every time. And nothing indicates which takes priority over the other.
That's not true at all. English grammar indicates which is correct.
The people who think "Component must be provided every time" is an exception to the rule "pouch/foci can replace components" have failed their reading comprehension. It isn't the same paragraph, nor is it a continuing phrase or statement. Nothing about it is written as an exclusion to the "foci/pouch can replace component" rule. It is a simple Material Component rule.
The exception is the ability to use a pouch or focus to replace the required components. That components must be provided every time is a separate rule (see the formatting argument response below) that does not have a similar exception.
BTW, insulting others for having a different reading of the rules from you, when the only thing backing up your reading is your opinion (same as us), is not constructive to the "discussion" you so desperately want to continue having. If you think that grammar or formatting explicitly dictates your side is correct, and that the other side is incorrect, kindly demonstrate. I'll admit english is not my best subject, but I'm not going to take your statement at face value unless you demonstrate how the grammar (or formatting) proves you right (while also proving others wrong)
So as I said around 3 pages ago yesterday: agree to disagree.
No. You're welcome to agree to disagree, but others are free to continue discussing it whether you want them to or not.
And we can all just go in circles until we give up from exhaustion or the mods step in. Is that constructive though? Because that is the point of Dx's statement. And I know I'm ignoring it either, but I will start following it after this post.
Here is the correct reading:
The general rule is that material components must be provided for the spell.
True (except it is "a" general rule in Material components, one of three given, due to formatting creating three paragraphs/concepts). Then there is an exception for the first rule allowing for the use of a foci/pouch. Since they don't number rules in the general text, we have to rely on formatting to determine when new rules or rules concepts are being stated. Paragraph separations are the clearest indicator of this, barring more concrete mechanisms. To back that up:
"A paragraph is a series of related sentences developing a central idea, called the topic. Try to think about paragraphs in terms of thematic unity: a paragraph is a sentence or a group of sentences that supports one central, unified idea. Paragraphs add one idea at a time to your broader argument."
If you think differently, that the entire text of material components is a single rule, I guess that is fine, but since you mentioned grammar, my understanding of grammar (and proper formatting) is that these are separate concepts and ideas, all related to material components, but not one singular rule, idea, or concept.
A specific rule is that if the component is consumed it must be provided for each subsequent casting. (This is purely clarification)
Why do you think so? It's a separate paragraph, and formatting gives it the same weight as any other (this is a standard way to organize and separate individual concepts, see above). Its also not in parentheses (which is one obvious way they provide clarification, look we're doing it now!). Without any other context clues, it represents a new idea/rule entirely, one that, unlike the first rule, doesn't have an exception for foci/pouches. But please elaborate on what specifically in the text makes this paragraph different different from the first one (and by the way, paragraphs can be a single sentence; the formatting dictates what a paragraph is, not the number of sentences, before you try to raise that as an issue; this is not an academic paper, and getting away from that convention is acceptable for less formal prose, like the rules for a game)
A specific rule is that material components can be met instead by providing a component pouch or foci.
No, that is an exception in the first general rule, and only in the first general rule. If it applied to the second rule, it should have been referenced in that paragraph (by saying "a component pouch or focus can meet this requirement..." or something similar. They do that in the third rule to indicate the hand can be used to access either the component or the pouch/foci)
An example of a specific rule (for clarification) regarding material components would be the text of Summon Lesser Demons, which presents an option to consume the component for an additional effect. For that spell, there is a non-standard way of treating components that overrides the general rule (because the main body of spell text indicates potential consumption, while the "standard" material component description doesn't)
Nothing AT ALL ever says that "a pouch/foci can replace the material component unless that component is consumed, and in that case the component must be provided"
the pouch/foci exception is only an exception for the first rule, and is referenced to be applicable in the third, but not the second.
That text doesn't exist in the rules because it's being invented. Imagined. Fabricated.
And you are the one inventing it...you are the one saying, in essence that a pouch/foci can replace material components that have to be provided for subsequent castings. That's not in the rules. Sure, you can do it if it makes the game easier for you, but that is your choice, not a mandate of the rules.
In the specific case of Protection From Evil And Good I treat it as not being consumed. I consider it to be an oversight by the developers. No gold cost = no consumed items.
I do in this instance consider the material not to be covered by the component pouch or arcane focus. So you still need to get a hold of the components, but when casting the spell the consumed amounts are so small that it can be treated as a non-consumption spell.
This spell will forever spark debate because as it currently stands, RAW, it satisfies two opposing rules. The game designers have been pretty refusing in amending stuff like this in the past.
All of the components you listed give costs in the spell description, so aren't relevant to this discussion.
No, they're very relevant. Regardless of cost, the spell requires you to do something with them beyond holding them at casting time. That'd still be true if they had no cost, like the blood in Summon Lesser Demons.
You made a leap of logic when you said "it's (just) a narrative device, therefore it's ok to ignore it" and I'm pointing out that's all the more reason not to.
Wow. It is my first theard in the forums, so i didn't know that after 2 days there will be 130 posts that i did not posted. Even titans, that will never dead becuse being old, haven't enogth lifetime to read 130 posts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By theway I'm a titan so please don't annoy me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You keep saying this, so I feel like I have to state again that there are more than the two possibilities you're offering.
Saying "the pouch contains enough for weekly use or whatever, and you're able to find replacement components without needing to make a whole quest about it because no one in this campaign wants to turn being a wizard into a resource management microgame" is entirely reasonable and does not require the pouch to either conjure items nor be a super-specific bag of holding variant.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Again, we are talking about components that may require you to murder an NPC, 24 hours prior to using the spell. That is not something that should be handwaved.
Think of the spell component pouch much like Schrödinger's cat. If you open it up, look inside, and count what's in there... well, you'll have a specific and finite number of castings of all those spells. But, if you simply don't look in it, it can have whatever you might need in it, because you don't know, so it could be anything. It is a mysterious box with an unknown answer inside it. One we don't want to answer...
Because until you open it and count it, it can be anything at all.
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.
Yes....it's a magic item...in the DMG....I don't know any player who would say it isn't
It works because it is a magic item.
Again, i don't think that a component that requires you to possibly murder someone for it is an "unspecified" or "mundane" item you can just handwave. nor do I think so of other rare or complex consumed components.
I don't for most, and only do for the items that either 1) have a specified value, or 2) get used up by the spellcasting process (which is a very small number of items)
Again, some things should be tracked, like how many people your PC murders to fuel their demon summoning.
Where in any location in the gosh-forsaken thread have I said I want my players to track bat guano or sand? I'm not trying to say that component pouches don't work for any spells. i am saying that they don't work (or don't work well) for the 4 spells which have non-cost consumable components. In my games, this came up for only one of them, and I made the character track (blood for one of the demon summoning spells). It wasn't hard, they had no problem with it, and all it took in game was asking how long it had been before the wanted to cast it after a 'harvest'
If you want to, fine. I don't, and my players haven't had a problem with it the one time it has come up.
If murder is required to make a spell component, then saying I handwave the component is absolutely handwaving the implied murder it took to get it.
All I've wanted in this thread was to say my point of view is valid. I've never actually said your's isn't (from my first post (#3 on page 1), i said it is up to the DM, and this implies that other points of view are valid too). We probably just need to agree to disagree, without casting aspersions on each others abilities or how their tables respond.
"Should"
Should is an interesting word really. It speaks to what ought to happen. It is a moral stance you're taking. A virtue, an ethical stance.
Contrast that with where we are, on a forum to discuss rules of a game. What someone "Should" or should not do really isn't any of our business, people can play whatever kind of game they like, and if they want to handwave this sort of thing I really don't think you have any authority to stop them, moral or otherwise.
Stick to discussing what is, I think. How do the rules work. Not what people should or shouldn't do.
Edit: Also not even the point. You're not handwaving the murder. You're handwaving the components.
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.
You are doing the same thing to me from the other side. I say you should, you are (and have been) saying you shouldn't. Its the same thing really.
No, dude, you keep bringing that up -- and as I said earlier, I agree narratively that if a player is summoning demons that is something that will become a focus of the campaign, with all that comes with it.
That has absolutely nothing to do with the general use of the pouch though
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Ctrl+F allows people to search entire pages for key words. Very easy to see that this is slander. Please do not lie about things I've said or haven't said. That, I do take offense to.
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.
Post #109, you told me to "Seriously, Stop" regarding my point of view. That is saying I shouldn't do this.
Post #87, you said my point of view was a "waste of mental energy" That is implying i shouldn't do this.
The fact that you didn't use the exact word "shoudn't" does not mean you haven't been saying as such using other words.
also, since this is a written forum, the correct accusation (unfounded, IMO) would be libel.
No, I didn't. I used single word sentences, not super clear sure, but I wasn't telling you "how you should play". I was responding to your false declaration.
You said: "then the only other way that you can argue this"
That isn't the ONLY way you can argue that the component pouch has components and isn't magical. I said:
"No you justify it by not even trying to figure it out. Seriously. Stop."
As in: I'm serious. It really, really is this simple. You stop trying to figure it out. Yes... it is that simple. And that by stopping, you "can argue this" that pouches have what you need at all times and aren't also magical. I used the single word sentences to really drive home how basic and simple this is. You refuse to accept it is possible to have a nonmagical item that simply has what you need in it...and that is because you refuse to step back from that level of detail. The answer is simply: Don't ask what's in it.
If you don't know what's in it, anything could be in it.
I'm not telling you to play this way. I'm explaining to you that this is the default expectation and that it is possible to play this way, a possibility you refuse to acknowledge even exists.
Your words, I was responding to, again:
"then the only other way that you can argue this" <--- words of someone who doesn't see the other side of the argument. Can't see it, even.
No I didn't. Lies again.
I said: "I do not even let the thought cross my mind when they're casting spells if "they have the components" it is a waste of mental energy."
I said what I do. Caring what is on my player's character sheets this much is a waste of my mental energy.
I in no way shape or form even referenced you in that statement. Bit of a universe-revolves-around-you perspective there pal.
True, its libel then. You got me there. Either way, stop now please.
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.
So is having to wear matching platinum rings during Warding Bond, covering the target's eyes with copper pieces throughout Gentle Repose or burning the material components for Find Familiar in a brass brazier. None of those things significantly adds to the difficulty of casting the spell but the writers still wanted you to actually do it because it makes the spells more memorable. What makes Protection From Evil And Good any different?
The strongest argument in favor of hand-waving is that a component pouch could still satisfy the rule to provide the component for each casting. But then you're in a situation where the component pouch is able to substitute for the components while a spellcasting focus wouldn't, even though they're supposed to do the same thing and are completely interchangeable for every other spell. That's a pretty silly outcome in my opinion and lends even more weight to the bit about providing the component for each casting being put in its own paragraph for a reason.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
So there have been about 60 or so posts since the last time I brought attention to this:
Both sides are saying "I think this because the rules say it." And guess what. You're both right. Surprise. The rules say contradictory things.
Components that don't have a cost can use a pouch or focus. Components that are consumed must be supplied every time. And nothing indicates which takes priority over the other.
So as I said around 3 pages ago yesterday: agree to disagree.
So the thread is about the spell Protection from Evil and Good. It says "holy water or powered silver and iron, which the spell consumes" It doesn't say how much of either. If you have a flask full of the stuff, it's eating some of it. I give people 10 castings of a spell before I start to worry about it, and by my rule, a flask of holy water would give you 2.5 gp per cast. and weigh 1 pound.
1 iron spike is .2 pounds 1 coin is .2 pounds .4 pounds per casting of the spell. So you need 3 coins per cast, 10 times that would be 30 coins per cast. If I want to be safe, I'll carry around enough for 20 castings. That would be 5 gold worth of holy water and would weigh 2 pounds or I could use that mixture of silver and iron dust. The iron dust would cost 2 gold (I'd buy a set of 20 iron spikes) and I'd need 60 coins. In D&D all precious metals weigh the same, and it's 50 coins per pound, so those 62 coins come in at 3.4 pounds and I'd need to pay 4 gold and 6 silver to pay for the lot.
It is worthy of note that I'm basing the weights on the rules for Encumbrance. I have no idea what any of this would weigh in the real world. Feel free to check my math. I almost always screw that up.
<Insert clever signature here>
That's not true at all. English grammar indicates which is correct.
The people who think "Component must be provided every time" is an exception to the rule "pouch/foci can replace components" have failed their reading comprehension. It isn't the same paragraph, nor is it a continuing phrase or statement. Nothing about it is written as an exclusion to the "foci/pouch can replace component" rule. It is a simple Material Component rule.
No. You're welcome to agree to disagree, but others are free to continue discussing it whether you want them to or not.
Here is the correct reading:
The general rule is that material components must be provided for the spell.
A specific rule is that if the component is consumed it must be provided for each subsequent casting. (This is purely clarification)
A specific rule is that material components can be met instead by providing a component pouch or foci.
Nothing AT ALL ever says that "a pouch/foci can replace the material component unless that component is consumed, and in that case the component must be provided"
That text doesn't exist in the rules because it's being invented. Imagined. Fabricated.
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.
All of the components you listed give costs in the spell description, so aren't relevant to this discussion. They are not replaceable with a component pouch nor a foci.
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.
All foci, and the Component Pouch specifically, are what is known as a "Handwave Mechanic". It's a variety of "Optional Rules" that allow the players and DMs the ability to ignore most spell components. Every DM will have a threshold for this. Mine is 10 castings for anything commonly available. If you're nowhere near somewhere that you can easily get a component this is consumed by the casting, you run out.
How much gold it costs is part of the choice the DM makes. I use the Lifestyle rules. I compare the price of the component to how much the player character has spent on Lifestyle to the price. If the price is less than what they paid, I assume they restocked. If you are maintaining a Modest Lifestyle, 100 gold worth of platinum rings would not be covered. If you were maintaining a Comfortable one, it would be. You'd get one casting without having to specifically state you went out and got a pair of rings, and so long as you were near somewhere that might reasonably sell platinum rings in pairs, so long as you keep paying your Lifestyle, you're fine and can cast as many as 10 times before I'll mess with you.
It's not that a Component Pouch produces anything. It's not magical. It just holds things, and you can assume it gets restocked at any point when the player character has the time, the gold, or whatever else it takes to get what is needed.
In my considered opinion, all components of a spell are the same here. It is very rare that a DM will insist that the player speak the words of a Verbal spell, do the gestures for a Somatic one, or have the Material ones in the real world. It's pretty much all ignored as "flavor" unless there is something that prevents your character from using the component.
<Insert clever signature here>
The exception is the ability to use a pouch or focus to replace the required components. That components must be provided every time is a separate rule (see the formatting argument response below) that does not have a similar exception.
BTW, insulting others for having a different reading of the rules from you, when the only thing backing up your reading is your opinion (same as us), is not constructive to the "discussion" you so desperately want to continue having. If you think that grammar or formatting explicitly dictates your side is correct, and that the other side is incorrect, kindly demonstrate. I'll admit english is not my best subject, but I'm not going to take your statement at face value unless you demonstrate how the grammar (or formatting) proves you right (while also proving others wrong)
And we can all just go in circles until we give up from exhaustion or the mods step in. Is that constructive though? Because that is the point of Dx's statement. And I know I'm ignoring it either, but I will start following it after this post.
True (except it is "a" general rule in Material components, one of three given, due to formatting creating three paragraphs/concepts). Then there is an exception for the first rule allowing for the use of a foci/pouch. Since they don't number rules in the general text, we have to rely on formatting to determine when new rules or rules concepts are being stated. Paragraph separations are the clearest indicator of this, barring more concrete mechanisms. To back that up:
From https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/planning/paragraphs/
"A paragraph is a series of related sentences developing a central idea, called the topic. Try to think about paragraphs in terms of thematic unity: a paragraph is a sentence or a group of sentences that supports one central, unified idea. Paragraphs add one idea at a time to your broader argument."
If you think differently, that the entire text of material components is a single rule, I guess that is fine, but since you mentioned grammar, my understanding of grammar (and proper formatting) is that these are separate concepts and ideas, all related to material components, but not one singular rule, idea, or concept.
Why do you think so? It's a separate paragraph, and formatting gives it the same weight as any other (this is a standard way to organize and separate individual concepts, see above). Its also not in parentheses (which is one obvious way they provide clarification, look we're doing it now!). Without any other context clues, it represents a new idea/rule entirely, one that, unlike the first rule, doesn't have an exception for foci/pouches. But please elaborate on what specifically in the text makes this paragraph different different from the first one (and by the way, paragraphs can be a single sentence; the formatting dictates what a paragraph is, not the number of sentences, before you try to raise that as an issue; this is not an academic paper, and getting away from that convention is acceptable for less formal prose, like the rules for a game)
No, that is an exception in the first general rule, and only in the first general rule. If it applied to the second rule, it should have been referenced in that paragraph (by saying "a component pouch or focus can meet this requirement..." or something similar. They do that in the third rule to indicate the hand can be used to access either the component or the pouch/foci)
An example of a specific rule (for clarification) regarding material components would be the text of Summon Lesser Demons, which presents an option to consume the component for an additional effect. For that spell, there is a non-standard way of treating components that overrides the general rule (because the main body of spell text indicates potential consumption, while the "standard" material component description doesn't)
the pouch/foci exception is only an exception for the first rule, and is referenced to be applicable in the third, but not the second.
And you are the one inventing it...you are the one saying, in essence that a pouch/foci can replace material components that have to be provided for subsequent castings. That's not in the rules. Sure, you can do it if it makes the game easier for you, but that is your choice, not a mandate of the rules.
In the specific case of Protection From Evil And Good I treat it as not being consumed. I consider it to be an oversight by the developers. No gold cost = no consumed items.
I do in this instance consider the material not to be covered by the component pouch or arcane focus. So you still need to get a hold of the components, but when casting the spell the consumed amounts are so small that it can be treated as a non-consumption spell.
This spell will forever spark debate because as it currently stands, RAW, it satisfies two opposing rules. The game designers have been pretty refusing in amending stuff like this in the past.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
No, they're very relevant. Regardless of cost, the spell requires you to do something with them beyond holding them at casting time. That'd still be true if they had no cost, like the blood in Summon Lesser Demons.
You made a leap of logic when you said "it's (just) a narrative device, therefore it's ok to ignore it" and I'm pointing out that's all the more reason not to.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Wow. It is my first theard in the forums, so i didn't know that after 2 days there will be 130 posts that i did not posted. Even titans, that will never dead becuse being old, haven't enogth lifetime to read 130 posts.
By the way I'm a titan so please don't annoy me.