I'm sorry everyone. Really I am. I just cannot wrap my head around this conversation and try to find corresponding rules in PHB or DMG. I may give up and stop bothering everyone and just do what I feel is right but I'm a rule follower so if there is a rule written out there that I just have not been able to find I would like to know it.
Focus is in the left hand and in my right is nothing.
Question:
I assume the spell goes off without a hitch. There is nothing specifically stated in Chapter 10 of PHB that says this spell would not be executed but it sounds like in this conversation that would not be true and the spell fails.
It almost sounds like the spell energy is being redirected into the focus thus negating a V, S spell.
Magic Missile goes off without a hitch. Magic Missile has Verbal and Somatic Components. You can speak the Verbal components and your right hand is free for the Somatic components. The fact that you have a spell casting focus in your left hand makes no difference, no Material Components are required for Magic Missile, so the focus serves no purpose.
Hoping your response is to the person quoted in your post and not to my most recent post #20.
Thank you in advance for any consideration you give to my post.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
There is a feat that can be found in tasha's rules called Artificer Initiate.
It's 3rd bullet point reads:
You gain proficiency with one type of artisan’s tools of your choice, and you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for any spell you cast that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability.
The things I would like to bring to people's attention about this feat is:
1. If you were to select Alchemist's Supplies as your type of artisan's tools and use that as your spellcasting focus. As it says you can within the wording of the feature.
2. It also says you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for ANY spell you cast that uses INT as its spellcasting ability.
Would you (this you refers to anyone who wants to weigh in on this) allow a caster to use said Alchemist's Supplies to cast Magic Missile since that is a spell that meets the conditions mentioned in the feature?
A spell that uses INT as its spellcasting ability.
The key point is that the artisan tools are still a still a spell casting focus, and a spell casting focus is not used when casting Magic Missile because Magic Missile does not have a material component. It doesn't prevent you from casting Magic Missile, so long as your other hand is free to perform the Somatic components, but it doesn't help either.
That part of the Feat just gives you an additional option for the object that serves as your spell casting focus, ie, Alchemist Supplies instead of, say, an Orb or a Crystal.
Would you (this you refers to anyone who wants to weigh in on this) allow a caster to use said Alchemist's Supplies to cast Magic Missile since that is a spell that meets the conditions mentioned in the feature?
No. Magic Missile doesn't have a Material component so a focus has nothing to do with this casting, just as it wouldn't matter one bit if the caster has a component pouch or not. The focus can only be a hindrance in the casting of this spell.
2. It also says you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for ANY spell you cast that uses INT as its spellcasting ability.
You are overvaluing that "any" unfortunately. They could have added a bit that said "that has a material component" to that sentence but it would be superfluous because a spellcasting focus is only relevant for spells that have a material component. You cannot substitute away a material component that doesn't exist.
An important exception here is actual artificers casting their actual artificer spells. It is a unique quirk of the artificer spellcasting feature that, in essence, every artificer spell cast with that feature has a material component. This is not true of the Artificer Initiate feat, though.
I am afraid I can't do better than "Nothing explicitly prohibits it". Personally I would allow it, but then again I would allow a hand holding an arcane focus to be used to meet a somatic component requirement for all spells, regardless of their other component requirements. This allows for classic media fantasy aesthetics like Harry Potter wand waving and Lord of the Rings sword and staff wielding.
Yea I agree that it is somewhat problematic that such tropes aren't really supported.
Gandalf would need to have the Warcaster feat. Potter can do the "empty hand + wand" just fine but wands aren't really used for such (they are portable spellslots), what he needs is a staff or an arcane focus.
There is a feat that can be found in tasha's rules called Artificer Initiate.
It's 3rd bullet point reads:
You gain proficiency with one type of artisan’s tools of your choice, and you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for any spell you cast that uses Intelligence as its spellcasting ability.
The things I would like to bring to people's attention about this feat is:
1. If you were to select Alchemist's Supplies as your type of artisan's tools and use that as your spellcasting focus. As it says you can within the wording of the feature.
2. It also says you can use that type of tool as a spellcasting focus for ANY spell you cast that uses INT as its spellcasting ability.
Would you (this you refers to anyone who wants to weigh in on this) allow a caster to use said Alchemist's Supplies to cast Magic Missile since that is a spell that meets the conditions mentioned in the feature?
A spell that uses INT as its spellcasting ability.
Hard to say, but I can tell you RAW that the Artificer class needs artisan tools or thieves tools to cast any spell, meaning that all artificer spells have a Material component.
So my forest gnome artificer has the Artificer Initiate feat specifically to use the particular tool (jeweler's tools) for casting her racial Minor Illusion, since that's technically not an Artificer spell. That way she's all-in on the Artifice concept. (Mending and a free daily Cure Wounds don't hurt either.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
WHAT’S THE AMOUNT OF INTERACTION NEEDED TO USE A SPELLCASTING FOCUS? DOES IT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SOMATIC COMPONENT?
If a spell has a material component, you need to handle that component when you cast the spell (see page 203 in the Player’s Handbook). The same rule applies if you’re using a spellcasting focus as the material component.
If a spell has a somatic component, you can use the hand that performs the somatic component to also handle the material component. For example, a wizard who uses an orb as a spellcasting focus could hold a quarterstaff in one hand and the orb in the other, and he could cast lightning bolt by using the orb as the spell’s material component and the orb hand to perform the spell’s somatic component.
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
I am afraid I can't do better than "Nothing explicitly prohibits it". Personally I would allow it, but then again I would allow a hand holding an arcane focus to be used to meet a somatic component requirement for all spells, regardless of their other component requirements. This allows for classic media fantasy aesthetics like Harry Potter wand waving and Lord of the Rings sword and staff wielding.
Yea I agree that it is somewhat problematic that such tropes aren't really supported.
Gandalf would need to have the Warcaster feat. Potter can do the "empty hand + wand" just fine but wands aren't really used for such (they are portable spellslots), what he needs is a staff or an arcane focus.
Yes, such tropes aren't supported, although the spells that Harry Potter and Gandalf cast don't have material components either, so all they need is a free hand. But I do insist, in D&D 5e, on respecting the requirement for a free hand, since it has a balancing impact on those classes which can use weapons or shields as spell casting focuses, preventing, for example, a sword and board Hexblade with Improved Pact Weapon from casting Shield or Eldritch Blast when they have their hands full.
I agree to all the requirements for casting with one hand or two and empty or such. This was never the original question and is quite moot for this topic because I have both the spellcasting focus in one hand and the other hand completely free. So I believe i meet any and all conditions under the sun for the legitimate casting of the spell.
What I'm hoping to address here is whether or not it is legal under the RAW rules to cast a spell using a spellcasting focus IF it isn't required to cast such a spell.
That bullet point of the feat I mentioned before doesn't say or reference any such limitation that the spellcasting focus can only be used to cast spells that require M (material components).
It simply states that I CAN use the spellcasting focus, Alchemist's Supplies in this case, to cast ANY spell that requires INT to cast. And Magic Missile is a wizard spell in this case and does meet that requirement.
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
No. Here's what it means to cast a spell with a spellcasting focus: "A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell." If a spell specifies no components, the focus does not factor into the casting of the spell (barring an explicit exception like the artificer class).
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
No. Here's what it means to cast a spell with a spellcasting focus: "A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell." If a spell specifies no components, the focus does not factor into the casting of the spell (barring an explicit exception like the artificer class).
The game has two things in it called components.
one group is made up of verbal, somatic and material components.
the second is the components of the material components.
This is royally confusing but I believe it is perfectly valid to say as long as a spell has a somatic component. a focus/ wand can replace it per the rule. verbal is a little bit off but since wands don't usually talk it makes sense that it won't replace that.
I also believe it is valid to say it was only refering to the components of the material reqirements. in this case more often than not the free object interaction just lets you put it away or take it out without affecting 80% of the things a caster wants to do. Gish types make up the rest but they also have ways to cover. Like the material component is the weapon in they were using any way.
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
No. Here's what it means to cast a spell with a spellcasting focus: "A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell." If a spell specifies no components, the focus does not factor into the casting of the spell (barring an explicit exception like the artificer class).
This is royally confusing but I believe it is perfectly valid to say as long as a spell has a somatic component. a focus/ wand can replace it per the rule. verbal is a little bit off but since wands don't usually talk it makes sense that it won't replace that.
Sorry, but no. It is not at all valid to say that. I only quoted the line that was actually relevant to the conversation, but it would behoove you to examine it in its full context:
Material (M)
Casting some spells requires particular objects, specified in parentheses in the component entry. A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
This is explicitly and specifically talking about material components.
Another thing to perhaps consider, since you reminded me that every artificer spell has a material component, is that a specific rule beats out a general rule.
The general rule for using a spellcasting focus is to cover the M (material components) part of the spell instead of using a components pouch, so long as the M (material components) don't have a cost (ie. such as the 10 gp required to cast Find Familiar and other such spells with a cost).
The specific rule in this case is the 3rd bullet point of the Artificer Initiate feat which states that you CAN use the spellcasting focus to cast ANY spell that requires INT as its spellcasting ability.
This seems to indicate pretty clearly that according to RAW you can use a spellcasting focus in this particular case to cast Magic Missile so long as the casting uses INT. So a wizard's magic missile is ok, but not a sorcerer's, since the sorcerer uses CHA and not INT as its spellcasting ability.
Does this make sense to anyone else?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
Another thing to perhaps consider, since you reminded me that every artificer spell has a material component, is that a specific rule beats out a general rule.
The general rule for using a spellcasting focus is to cover the M (material components) part of the spell instead of using a components pouch, so long as the M (material components) don't have a cost (ie. such as the 10 gp required to cast Find Familiar and other such spells with a cost).
The specific rule in this case is the 3rd bullet point of the Artificer Initiate feat which states that you CAN use the spellcasting focus to cast ANY spell that requires INT as its spellcasting ability.
This seems to indicate pretty clearly that according to RAW you can use a spellcasting focus in this particular case to cast Magic Missile so long as the casting uses INT. So a wizard's magic missile is ok, but not a sorcerer's, since the sorcerer uses CHA and not INT as its spellcasting ability.
Does this make sense to anyone else?
No. The Artificer Initiate text is very similar to how all classes' spellcasting focus text is written. Compare the wizard's:
It's really not that crazy. If your spell needs material components that cost a negligible amount, you can use a focus instead. If you have a feature that lets you use a special focus, you can use that instead of your regular focus.
RAW, any magical +1 focus you have, as well as any Arcane Firearm, Spiritual Focus, or other features I'm forgetting, will only apply to certain spells -- specifically, spells with negligibly-costed material components. You can use this to inform your choices of which spells to learn or prepare. Some spells will be good enough to take even without the bonus.
Most people don't seem to really care about this stuff though, and would rule that your focus can be used on any spell, full stop. I can't really say I blame them. It doesn't feel like the writers of these rules gave them much thought. Looking at the Spiritual Focus feature, for example, the list of qualifying spells for the bonus die is like, three spells, if you go by RAW. That feels stupid.
I agree to all the requirements for casting with one hand or two and empty or such. This was never the original question and is quite moot for this topic because I have both the spellcasting focus in one hand and the other hand completely free. So I believe i meet any and all conditions under the sun for the legitimate casting of the spell.
What I'm hoping to address here is whether or not it is legal under the RAW rules to cast a spell using a spellcasting focus IF it isn't required to cast such a spell.
That bullet point of the feat I mentioned before doesn't say or reference any such limitation that the spellcasting focus can only be used to cast spells that require M (material components).
It simply states that I CAN use the spellcasting focus, Alchemist's Supplies in this case, to cast ANY spell that requires INT to cast. And Magic Missile is a wizard spell in this case and does meet that requirement.
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
It is still a hard no. And I think that you are still reading that "any" wrong.
Normally a character cannot use Artisan's tools as a spellcasting focus at all and the benefit of the feat is that now you can. The "any" then further limits that to spells that use Int.
Of course the spell still needs to have a material component for that to be relevant because without a material component then the spellcasting focus wouldn't be used at all.
Not trying to be argumentative for just the sake of arguing but how do you rule the specific rule of the Artificer Initiate feat that I mentioned several times not being enforced over the general rule of when to use a spellcasting focus?
Basically, why do you feel the general beats the specific in this case when the accepted rule is usually the specific beats the general?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
The whole point of RAW is that we take what is written and go from there. We don't add things or make guesses as to what they meant such as it only applies to M (material components), this is more akin to RAI.
In that case you might be right, maybe they did only mean for it to be used that way.
But by RAW they wrote that you can use artisan's tools to cast any spell that uses INT.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
Not trying to be argumentative for just the sake of arguing but how do you rule the specific rule of the Artificer Initiate feat that I mentioned several times not being enforced over the general rule of when to use a spellcasting focus?
Basically, why do you feel the general beats the specific in this case when the accepted rule is usually the specific beats the general?
Neither beats either. They don't contradict. As I explained, Artificer Initiate uses the same style as every spellcasting class's text. You're trying to invent an exception that doesn't exist.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Magic Missile goes off without a hitch. Magic Missile has Verbal and Somatic Components. You can speak the Verbal components and your right hand is free for the Somatic components. The fact that you have a spell casting focus in your left hand makes no difference, no Material Components are required for Magic Missile, so the focus serves no purpose.
Hoping your response is to the person quoted in your post and not to my most recent post #20.
Thank you in advance for any consideration you give to my post.
The key point is that the artisan tools are still a still a spell casting focus, and a spell casting focus is not used when casting Magic Missile because Magic Missile does not have a material component. It doesn't prevent you from casting Magic Missile, so long as your other hand is free to perform the Somatic components, but it doesn't help either.
That part of the Feat just gives you an additional option for the object that serves as your spell casting focus, ie, Alchemist Supplies instead of, say, an Orb or a Crystal.
No. Magic Missile doesn't have a Material component so a focus has nothing to do with this casting, just as it wouldn't matter one bit if the caster has a component pouch or not. The focus can only be a hindrance in the casting of this spell.
You are overvaluing that "any" unfortunately. They could have added a bit that said "that has a material component" to that sentence but it would be superfluous because a spellcasting focus is only relevant for spells that have a material component. You cannot substitute away a material component that doesn't exist.
An important exception here is actual artificers casting their actual artificer spells. It is a unique quirk of the artificer spellcasting feature that, in essence, every artificer spell cast with that feature has a material component. This is not true of the Artificer Initiate feat, though.
Yea I agree that it is somewhat problematic that such tropes aren't really supported.
Gandalf would need to have the Warcaster feat. Potter can do the "empty hand + wand" just fine but wands aren't really used for such (they are portable spellslots), what he needs is a staff or an arcane focus.
Hard to say, but I can tell you RAW that the Artificer class needs artisan tools or thieves tools to cast any spell, meaning that all artificer spells have a Material component.
So my forest gnome artificer has the Artificer Initiate feat specifically to use the particular tool (jeweler's tools) for casting her racial Minor Illusion, since that's technically not an Artificer spell. That way she's all-in on the Artifice concept. (Mending and a free daily Cure Wounds don't hurt either.)
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
WHAT’S THE AMOUNT OF INTERACTION NEEDED TO USE A SPELLCASTING FOCUS? DOES IT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SOMATIC COMPONENT?
If a spell has a material component, you need to handle that component when you cast the spell (see page 203 in the Player’s Handbook). The same rule applies if you’re using a spellcasting focus as the material component.
If a spell has a somatic component, you can use the hand that performs the somatic component to also handle the material component. For example, a wizard who uses an orb as a spellcasting focus could hold a quarterstaff in one hand and the orb in the other, and he could cast lightning bolt by using the orb as the spell’s material component and the orb hand to perform the spell’s somatic component.
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
Yes, such tropes aren't supported, although the spells that Harry Potter and Gandalf cast don't have material components either, so all they need is a free hand. But I do insist, in D&D 5e, on respecting the requirement for a free hand, since it has a balancing impact on those classes which can use weapons or shields as spell casting focuses, preventing, for example, a sword and board Hexblade with Improved Pact Weapon from casting Shield or Eldritch Blast when they have their hands full.
I agree to all the requirements for casting with one hand or two and empty or such. This was never the original question and is quite moot for this topic because I have both the spellcasting focus in one hand and the other hand completely free. So I believe i meet any and all conditions under the sun for the legitimate casting of the spell.
What I'm hoping to address here is whether or not it is legal under the RAW rules to cast a spell using a spellcasting focus IF it isn't required to cast such a spell.
That bullet point of the feat I mentioned before doesn't say or reference any such limitation that the spellcasting focus can only be used to cast spells that require M (material components).
It simply states that I CAN use the spellcasting focus, Alchemist's Supplies in this case, to cast ANY spell that requires INT to cast. And Magic Missile is a wizard spell in this case and does meet that requirement.
So according to all these points of RAW it should be allowed, shouldn't it?
No. Here's what it means to cast a spell with a spellcasting focus: "A character can use a component pouch or a spellcasting focus (found in chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell." If a spell specifies no components, the focus does not factor into the casting of the spell (barring an explicit exception like the artificer class).
The game has two things in it called components.
This is royally confusing but I believe it is perfectly valid to say as long as a spell has a somatic component. a focus/ wand can replace it per the rule. verbal is a little bit off but since wands don't usually talk it makes sense that it won't replace that.
I also believe it is valid to say it was only refering to the components of the material reqirements. in this case more often than not the free object interaction just lets you put it away or take it out without affecting 80% of the things a caster wants to do. Gish types make up the rest but they also have ways to cover. Like the material component is the weapon in they were using any way.
Sorry, but no. It is not at all valid to say that. I only quoted the line that was actually relevant to the conversation, but it would behoove you to examine it in its full context:
This is explicitly and specifically talking about material components.
Another thing to perhaps consider, since you reminded me that every artificer spell has a material component, is that a specific rule beats out a general rule.
The general rule for using a spellcasting focus is to cover the M (material components) part of the spell instead of using a components pouch, so long as the M (material components) don't have a cost (ie. such as the 10 gp required to cast Find Familiar and other such spells with a cost).
The specific rule in this case is the 3rd bullet point of the Artificer Initiate feat which states that you CAN use the spellcasting focus to cast ANY spell that requires INT as its spellcasting ability.
This seems to indicate pretty clearly that according to RAW you can use a spellcasting focus in this particular case to cast Magic Missile so long as the casting uses INT. So a wizard's magic missile is ok, but not a sorcerer's, since the sorcerer uses CHA and not INT as its spellcasting ability.
Does this make sense to anyone else?
No. The Artificer Initiate text is very similar to how all classes' spellcasting focus text is written. Compare the wizard's:
There's no contradiction between this and the material component rules; they both apply.
It's really not that crazy. If your spell needs material components that cost a negligible amount, you can use a focus instead. If you have a feature that lets you use a special focus, you can use that instead of your regular focus.
RAW, any magical +1 focus you have, as well as any Arcane Firearm, Spiritual Focus, or other features I'm forgetting, will only apply to certain spells -- specifically, spells with negligibly-costed material components. You can use this to inform your choices of which spells to learn or prepare. Some spells will be good enough to take even without the bonus.
Most people don't seem to really care about this stuff though, and would rule that your focus can be used on any spell, full stop. I can't really say I blame them. It doesn't feel like the writers of these rules gave them much thought. Looking at the Spiritual Focus feature, for example, the list of qualifying spells for the bonus die is like, three spells, if you go by RAW. That feels stupid.
It is still a hard no. And I think that you are still reading that "any" wrong.
Normally a character cannot use Artisan's tools as a spellcasting focus at all and the benefit of the feat is that now you can. The "any" then further limits that to spells that use Int.
Of course the spell still needs to have a material component for that to be relevant because without a material component then the spellcasting focus wouldn't be used at all.
SagaTympana
Not trying to be argumentative for just the sake of arguing but how do you rule the specific rule of the Artificer Initiate feat that I mentioned several times not being enforced over the general rule of when to use a spellcasting focus?
Basically, why do you feel the general beats the specific in this case when the accepted rule is usually the specific beats the general?
Thezzaruz
The whole point of RAW is that we take what is written and go from there. We don't add things or make guesses as to what they meant such as it only applies to M (material components), this is more akin to RAI.
In that case you might be right, maybe they did only mean for it to be used that way.
But by RAW they wrote that you can use artisan's tools to cast any spell that uses INT.
Neither beats either. They don't contradict. As I explained, Artificer Initiate uses the same style as every spellcasting class's text. You're trying to invent an exception that doesn't exist.