Nothing too serious but, if your character is a spell caster and casts a spell with verbal components, can they use common sign language, if they do, how would that impact somatic components?
No. By definition Verbal components must be just that- verbalized. Notably, getting back into some slightly esoteric background material, there's a particular kind of Orc Cleric NPC block for priests of an unspeaking god who have their own tongues cut out in homage to their deity, and their statblocks have a specific note that they are able to ignore V components on spells to get around this. Ergo, the explicit RAW of Verbal components needing to be a sound can be inferred to further require the caster to be able to make the kinds of phonemes we associate with typical speech, rather than simple throat noises like grunts or claiming that clapping your hands in a rhythm satisfies it. You need a feature that expressly says a spell can be cast without a V component to avoid making noise when casting one that has one, and the updated stealth rules emphasize that V components give away your position, so you can't play the "I whisper the component as softly as I can" game per RAW.
Nothing too serious but, if your character is a spell caster and casts a spell with verbal components, can they use common sign language, if they do, how would that impact somatic components?
You can't use common sign language for spells. It would cause a lot of domino effects in the game. Mostly rubbing against subtle spell. Eliminating an entire restriction on the hide action. I don't think the verbal components need to be language specifically. But you need sound to interact with the other rules of the game.
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
The answer was given at least once, and here's the actual answer (significant part bolded):
Verbal (V)
A Verbal component is the chanting of esoteric words that sound like nonsense to the uninitiated. The words must be uttered in a normal speaking voice. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a creature who is gagged or in an area of magical silence can’t cast a spell with a Verbal component.
It's for this same reason that telepathy, despite being a form of speech, doesn't qualify for verbal components.
If I was DM'ing for a player that wanted to do something like this, I would just give them some sort of magic item that can translate hand gestures into verbal components. Sidesteps most of the issues involved in handwaving verbal components away altogether, like Silence and Subtle Spell losing some of their functionality. There's much crazier stuff in D&D than magical prosthetics.
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
Arguably a deaf or even mute character can still form verbal components. Deaf people speak in the real world all the time, so there's literally no issue there. Mute characters require a little more rules interpretation, but personally I would argue that, since we know the words themselves are not the important part of the Verbal component, a character that can make any sound at all can make Verbal components. This is reinforced by the fact the game does not place any special restrictions on the spells Thri-Kreen can cast, despite the fact that they can't speak.
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
Arguably a deaf or even mute character can still form verbal components. Deaf people speak in the real world all the time, so there's literally no issue there. Mute characters require a little more rules interpretation, but personally I would argue that, since we know the words themselves are not the important part of the Verbal component, a character that can make any sound at all can make Verbal components. This is reinforced by the fact the game does not place any special restrictions on the spells Thri-Kreen can cast, despite the fact that they can't speak.
Born deaf tend not to unless they go through specific training.
Arguably a deaf or even mute character can still form verbal components. Deaf people speak in the real world all the time, so there's literally no issue there. Mute characters require a little more rules interpretation, but personally I would argue that, since we know the words themselves are not the important part of the Verbal component, a character that can make any sound at all can make Verbal components. This is reinforced by the fact the game does not place any special restrictions on the spells Thri-Kreen can cast, despite the fact that they can't speak.
Born deaf tend not to unless they go through specific training.
Sure, but I think it's fair to assume that "learning to do magic" involves specific training to make the Verbal components, so as an extension of that I think it's reasonable that a deaf person could learn to make Verbal components.
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
Arguably a deaf or even mute character can still form verbal components. Deaf people speak in the real world all the time, so there's literally no issue there. Mute characters require a little more rules interpretation, but personally I would argue that, since we know the words themselves are not the important part of the Verbal component, a character that can make any sound at all can make Verbal components. This is reinforced by the fact the game does not place any special restrictions on the spells Thri-Kreen can cast, despite the fact that they can't speak.
Born deaf tend not to unless they go through specific training.
Sure, but I think it's fair to assume that "learning to do magic" involves specific training to make the Verbal components, so as an extension of that I think it's reasonable that a deaf person could learn to make Verbal components.
Which is super easy with magic because "telepathy!" It would make teaching a deaf person a lot easier than having to do it otherwise.
If a character is mute, then it cannot cast spells with a verbal component. Why would someone want to create a character with a significant disability then demand that the rules be expanded so that disability is basically cancelled out? It is fantasy, not reality. If a character is mute, it is because that player wanted it so. If you want significant disabilities then that means you deal with all the challenges, not just the parts you find "fun" about it. To try and make the rules be "inclusive" of a choice is to fetishize that disability.
guess I'll just have the character grunt and ban mute characters for casting.
I don't see why this is such an issue tbh. If you feel that it is that important then just invent something, grunts or handclaps or stomping or whistling of fingersnapping or whatever. The important part is that it should involve creating a sound so that it susceptible to the same things as verbal speech is, i.e it should be perceivable at a (reasonable) distance and it should be stopped by effects that block sounds from being made (such as the Silence spell).
If a character is mute, then it cannot cast spells with a verbal component. Why would someone want to create a character with a significant disability then demand that the rules be expanded so that disability is basically cancelled out? It is fantasy, not reality. If a character is mute, it is because that player wanted it so. If you want significant disabilities then that means you deal with all the challenges, not just the parts you find "fun" about it. To try and make the rules be "inclusive" of a choice is to fetishize that disability.
A sorcerer with subtle spell and telepathy could get around it, but it would cost resources. Could make for an interesting character story where they try to power through despite their disability. The necessary resource expenditure would even serve to keep the mechanical disability.
I would allow any substitution that makes noise. The sound wouldn't necessarily have to come from a voicebox, any sound-making action or device could be used to cast the spell (in my opinion). So a mute caster could still cast spells, so long as they had a means of generating sound for the verbal component. That way, a silence spell also prevents them from casting.
I have one character that scrapes her fingernails (actually the metal claw jewelry she wears) across stone or metal surfaces (nails on chalkboard sound) to cast Mind Sliver. (just as an example)
Items that can produce the same tones as the required verbal components of spells can be a thing disabled players can use to still cast spells.
Verbal components are nothing more than harmonic resonance amplifiers that allow magic force to be concentrated for certain spells, in a technical sense, but the exact “tone(s)” required are left very undefined.
On the somewhat pedantic end of RAW, the counterpoint there is that the components are specifically called "Verbal Components", not "Audible Components" or something to that effect. And no, objectively there's no logical reason why producing a set of sounds one way is valid and the other isn't, but there's also no objective logic to why the ultimately somewhat arbitrary value of a quantity of diamonds determines what revival spells they can be used for instead of something like the mass of the quantity being the basis. It's magic, some of the rules are arbitrary. Saying Verbal components are just "harmonic amplifiers" is fine as your homebrew setting explanation, but within the scope of RAW and the core lore laid out in the player books the components specifically come from an individual articulating a series of phonemes, not just particular sequences of disturbances in the air.
Again, none of this is to say homebrewing alternate interpretations is "wrong", just discussing what the language and descriptions within sources like the PHB indicate V components are.
It's pitch and intonation right? I'd rule this as yes. You can make specific pitches and intonation by clapping with your hands and such. I think that saying a mute player can't cast spells is too crippling, and may limit some good RPing oppurtunities.
It is a verbal component not an audio component... If a table wants to see it differently then that is up to them
However personally I would say no - hand gestures won't work as verbal
Your turning a disability into a gimmick since the player creates their own character and chose to be mute, they were not born that way so it's their choice to be hindered and face the complications of such a disability.
Why choose to make a disabled character then look at means to overwrite that disability?? Seems people want to use a disability as flavour but not use it mechanically..
Making a joke out of disabilities is not being inclusive, it's just plain insulting.
It is a verbal component not an audio component... If a table wants to see it differently then that is up to them
However personally I would say no - hand gestures won't work as verbal
Your turning a disability into a gimmick since the player creates their own character and chose to be mute, they were not born that way so it's their choice to be hindered and face the complications of such a disability.
Why choose to make a disabled character then look at means to overwrite that disability?? Seems people want to use a disability as flavour but not use it mechanically..
Making a joke out of disabilities is not being inclusive, it's just plain insulting.
It's only a joke if that's how it's handled at the table. There's respectful ways to do it and it's just fine to do so. Get off your high horse.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Nothing too serious but, if your character is a spell caster and casts a spell with verbal components, can they use common sign language, if they do, how would that impact somatic components?
No. By definition Verbal components must be just that- verbalized. Notably, getting back into some slightly esoteric background material, there's a particular kind of Orc Cleric NPC block for priests of an unspeaking god who have their own tongues cut out in homage to their deity, and their statblocks have a specific note that they are able to ignore V components on spells to get around this. Ergo, the explicit RAW of Verbal components needing to be a sound can be inferred to further require the caster to be able to make the kinds of phonemes we associate with typical speech, rather than simple throat noises like grunts or claiming that clapping your hands in a rhythm satisfies it. You need a feature that expressly says a spell can be cast without a V component to avoid making noise when casting one that has one, and the updated stealth rules emphasize that V components give away your position, so you can't play the "I whisper the component as softly as I can" game per RAW.
You can't use common sign language for spells. It would cause a lot of domino effects in the game. Mostly rubbing against subtle spell. Eliminating an entire restriction on the hide action. I don't think the verbal components need to be language specifically. But you need sound to interact with the other rules of the game.
We have at least two threads about the same topic:
And well, the answer was already given :D
Opinions were given, answer would be referencing RAW.
Given WotC's drive towards inclusivity I figured they'd include sign language for deaf and mute individuals. But what you're saying is such a condition would still penalize the fictional character. Body language is technically a "language" as it communicates, but it isn't something listed in the "known languages" so with the addition of SL included along all other spoken languages it isn't unreasonable to have it be included alongside spoken for the same reason as it was included.
The answer was given at least once, and here's the actual answer (significant part bolded):
It's for this same reason that telepathy, despite being a form of speech, doesn't qualify for verbal components.
If I was DM'ing for a player that wanted to do something like this, I would just give them some sort of magic item that can translate hand gestures into verbal components. Sidesteps most of the issues involved in handwaving verbal components away altogether, like Silence and Subtle Spell losing some of their functionality. There's much crazier stuff in D&D than magical prosthetics.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Arguably a deaf or even mute character can still form verbal components. Deaf people speak in the real world all the time, so there's literally no issue there. Mute characters require a little more rules interpretation, but personally I would argue that, since we know the words themselves are not the important part of the Verbal component, a character that can make any sound at all can make Verbal components. This is reinforced by the fact the game does not place any special restrictions on the spells Thri-Kreen can cast, despite the fact that they can't speak.
guess I'll just have the character grunt and ban mute characters for casting.
Born deaf tend not to unless they go through specific training.
Sure, but I think it's fair to assume that "learning to do magic" involves specific training to make the Verbal components, so as an extension of that I think it's reasonable that a deaf person could learn to make Verbal components.
Which is super easy with magic because "telepathy!" It would make teaching a deaf person a lot easier than having to do it otherwise.
If a character is mute, then it cannot cast spells with a verbal component. Why would someone want to create a character with a significant disability then demand that the rules be expanded so that disability is basically cancelled out? It is fantasy, not reality. If a character is mute, it is because that player wanted it so. If you want significant disabilities then that means you deal with all the challenges, not just the parts you find "fun" about it. To try and make the rules be "inclusive" of a choice is to fetishize that disability.
I don't see why this is such an issue tbh. If you feel that it is that important then just invent something, grunts or handclaps or stomping or whistling of fingersnapping or whatever.
The important part is that it should involve creating a sound so that it susceptible to the same things as verbal speech is, i.e it should be perceivable at a (reasonable) distance and it should be stopped by effects that block sounds from being made (such as the Silence spell).
A sorcerer with subtle spell and telepathy could get around it, but it would cost resources. Could make for an interesting character story where they try to power through despite their disability. The necessary resource expenditure would even serve to keep the mechanical disability.
I would allow any substitution that makes noise. The sound wouldn't necessarily have to come from a voicebox, any sound-making action or device could be used to cast the spell (in my opinion). So a mute caster could still cast spells, so long as they had a means of generating sound for the verbal component. That way, a silence spell also prevents them from casting.
I have one character that scrapes her fingernails (actually the metal claw jewelry she wears) across stone or metal surfaces (nails on chalkboard sound) to cast Mind Sliver. (just as an example)
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
On the somewhat pedantic end of RAW, the counterpoint there is that the components are specifically called "Verbal Components", not "Audible Components" or something to that effect. And no, objectively there's no logical reason why producing a set of sounds one way is valid and the other isn't, but there's also no objective logic to why the ultimately somewhat arbitrary value of a quantity of diamonds determines what revival spells they can be used for instead of something like the mass of the quantity being the basis. It's magic, some of the rules are arbitrary. Saying Verbal components are just "harmonic amplifiers" is fine as your homebrew setting explanation, but within the scope of RAW and the core lore laid out in the player books the components specifically come from an individual articulating a series of phonemes, not just particular sequences of disturbances in the air.
Again, none of this is to say homebrewing alternate interpretations is "wrong", just discussing what the language and descriptions within sources like the PHB indicate V components are.
It's pitch and intonation right? I'd rule this as yes. You can make specific pitches and intonation by clapping with your hands and such. I think that saying a mute player can't cast spells is too crippling, and may limit some good RPing oppurtunities.
Roll for Initiative: [roll]1d20+7[/roll]
Proud member of the EVIL JEFF CULT! PRAISE JEFF!
Homebrew Races: HERE Homebrew Spells: HERE Homebrew Monsters: HERE
MORE OF ME! (And platypodes/platypi/platypuses) (Extended signature)
It is a verbal component not an audio component... If a table wants to see it differently then that is up to them
However personally I would say no - hand gestures won't work as verbal
Your turning a disability into a gimmick since the player creates their own character and chose to be mute, they were not born that way so it's their choice to be hindered and face the complications of such a disability.
Why choose to make a disabled character then look at means to overwrite that disability?? Seems people want to use a disability as flavour but not use it mechanically..
Making a joke out of disabilities is not being inclusive, it's just plain insulting.
It's only a joke if that's how it's handled at the table. There's respectful ways to do it and it's just fine to do so. Get off your high horse.