Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
By definition, "explanations of the Rules as Written" does not equal "the Rules as Written". One is a rule, and the other is an explanation. For example, I've given many explanations in these forums. Nothing that I've said are the actual rules. As per Sage Advice, the actual rules are only found within the text of the rule books.
Whether or not a mod has chosen to say such a thing as part of the guidelines for posting in the forums doesn't change the fact that Sage Advice itself clarifies that nothing within its own text are the rules of the game -- they provide interpretations and Official Rulings, not rules. As per the Sage Advice, the text of the rules is forced to stand on its own.
This is particularly important in the relatively uncommon cases where the Sage Advice is wrong.
As per the Sage Advice:
This statement makes it clear that there are two distinct things here: There are rules and there is "this FAQ". These are both "tools" for the DMs and players. These are two different things. They are not the same thing. They are two different things.
And yet we are not at a table at home, we are on a forum where Sage Advice is to be considered RAW. The Sage Advice is consistent with a natural language reading of the Player's Handbook and correct until such a time as errata is printed reversing the rules, which is unlikely.
How do you perform Somatic gestures with an Emblem emblazoned on a shield? You move the held Shield. How do you perform the Somatic gestures with an Emblem on a Banner? You are probably moving the held staff for the banner. How do you perform the Somatic gestures with an Emblem on a Tabard? I don't know, dancing to Footloose? It's straightforward ... except for the Tabard one.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
A worn tabard does not function like an equipped emblazoned shield or a held holy banner. The rule requires that you have a hand that is holding your focus or is free to touch/access your focus or materials. When you hold the emblazoned shield you are actually holding your focus - this has been confirmed by the Sage Advice. When your focus is not held in your hand but is worn about your person (e.g. an amulet, a tabard, a crystal hanging from a belt, etc.) then you must have an empty hand to touch the focus to meet the requirement for casting.
Yes. Exactly. Using a held spell focus is defined. Using a worn focus is less clear. How do I gesture with my t-shirt?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Despite what Sage Advice claims, the actual rules state that there is also a third category in addition to "held" and "worn". That third category is when the focus is "borne":
Remember, the problem here is not that you are unable to use this focus -- you can use certainly use the focus for your M component just fine. The problem here is that you just don't have a free hand for your S component. The exception for when you are holding your focus doesn't apply here because this particular focus is not held, it is borne.
This is a case where there probably should be some errata to tweak the actual rules in order to bring the text in line with what is clearly the intent as indicated by Sage Advice. As currently written, the actual rules are too restrictive.
The "exception" is never defined to be only "holding." Specifically, "The spellcaster must have a hand free to access them, but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any." That covers all kinds of focus access. Held, worn, or borne --- each still requires a hand be dedicated.
The rules don't say the Material component must be held, just to access them;
In other words, the hand holding the Shield has access to the Emblem Holy Symbol and it it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any.
The point is that you don't have a hand free for your S component. You are holding a Shield in one hand and a Mace in the other hand. If instead you were actually holding your focus in one of those hands, then you could use that exception to declare that hand free for the purpose of the S component. Sure, it would also work in those other cases where you actually kept a hand free so that you could "access" your focus.
The trouble is with the wording. It's clear from Sage Advice that the line "to use a Spellcasting Focus, you must hold it unless its description says otherwise" is meant to actually mean that when its description DOES say otherwise (when you do NOT have to hold the focus) then you no longer actually need the free hand for the requirement which states that "The spellcaster must have a hand free to access them, but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any" AND the requirement which states that "A spellcaster must use at least one of their hands to perform these [Somatic] movements". If that was really the intent, then they should have actually said that in the rules. As written, it doesn't quite get there.
Again, the problem is with the S component requirement. To illustrate, it might be easier to switch to a case of using a worn amulet as a focus. Sure, we are "accessing" the M component via this amulet. The "same hand used to perform Somatic components" rule just doesn't even apply here since we do not even need a free hand to use an amulet. But the problem is -- while holding a mace and a Shield and wearing the amulet, you just have no way to actually perform the S component.
It's the same problem when using an Emblem. The emblem is borne. The "same hand" rule doesn't apply at all since you can already use the Emblem without a free hand to access the M component. But since you are holding a mace and a Shield and bearing the emblem, you just have no way to actually perform the S component.
This should be changed. It's too restrictive. Playing under the Sage Advice interpretation instead is totally reasonable.
I have a different interpretation, but I already shared it in comment #94.
Nothing needs be changed for 10+ years, nor was it needed during the core rules revision 2024.
It is not the same problem for a Sword & Board caster wearing an Amulet than one using an Emblem borne on Shield because the hand holding the Shield has access to the Emblem and can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, while the Amulet caster's hand holding a Shield doesn't have access to it to do both.
There's no special exception needed here. If you have material components, you can access them with your somatic hand. Under the right conditions (no costly/consumed material components), you can use a Component Pouch and access it with that hand. Under further conditions (a feature allowing it) you can use a focus with that hand. The focus is either held, worn, or borne, and any of those three can be done with the somatic hand, as per the more general rule.
The equivalent to a caster holding a Mace & Shield's Emblem in each hand is
A caster holding a Mace & Amulet in each hand.
You keep missing that in the scenario being discussed there is no "somatic hand". Both hands are occupied. One is holding a mace and the other is holding a Shield. If you are wearing an amulet, yes, you can "access" the amulet with the Somatic hand if you want (even though you don't have to), but you currently don't have such a hand free. You currently cannot perform the S component. You have to start with being able to perform the S component. Then, if you also have to meet an M component you can do that with the same hand. It's not the other way around. The lack of the need to physically hold the M component does not erase the requirement of having to physically perform the S component with a free hand.
But where is the text from the rules that supports this claim? Not Sage Advice, rules text. From what I can see, the only text in the rules that addresses this subject makes it clear that an Emblem is borne, NOT held. Why would a hand holding a shield be able to access an Emblem but not an Amulet when neither of those are held objects?
The entire point of the officially hosted Sage Advice on Beyond is to clarify rule ambiguities like this. If it’s not how you want to rule it, that’s your prerogative, but please stop trying to discredit an official “this is what we meant by this rule” source hosted in the same place as the rules.
With all due respect, what is the ambiguity here?
I have already acknowledged several times that Sage Advice is clearly telling us what was meant by this rule. That's helpful information and it's a better way to run a game than what actually appears in the text. How is that discrediting anything? I agree that the Sage Advice for this rule has value. It's a solid RAI and if we run our games according to RAI, we should just be sure that our players are aware of what we are doing.
This would be sort of like if Sage Advice came out and said that the Invisible Condition causes you to become Unseen -- and maybe they already have, I'm not sure. That would certainly be a better way to run it than what actually appears in the text. It's not as good as just issuing errata to fix the rule, but it's better than nothing.
There is no "order" to this, only identity. The "somatic hand" is merely the hand being used to perform Somatic components. It is allowed to be the same hand as the one accessing/holding/bearing/wielding the material components, component pouch, or focus. That's all there is to it.
Ah. I see the confusion. Not every list is a sequential or ordered list. Nothing about the language used indicates an ordered list.
Nothing about that language indicates any kind of order. It's just a list. There are no numbers. It never mentions, "then", "after", "before", or any other language that defines any significance to the order. You have read down the list and assumed that they had to be performed in that order. You can perform them in any order. You can perform the verbal components last. I generally assume that they are being performed simultaneously, but that's not a given either.
I don't know where the tradition for listing the components as V, S, M, but it has been the case for as long as I can remember. Personally, I would have placed it alphabetical order. Maybe "verbal, somatic, material" feels better to say than "material, somatic, verbal" or maybe it feels unnatural because of that long standing tradition.
It's like the Actions section of the rules. It defines them in order Actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions, but you are not restricted to using them in that order during your turn.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
No, there's not an order per se, it's just easier to resolve it that way due to how the rules are actually written. To meet the Somatic component requirement, "A spellcaster must use at least one of their hands to perform these movements." That's just Full Stop. You must perform gestures with at least one hand. Before figuring out anything to do with your focus, this means that one of your hands must actually be free to perform these gestures. Then, if you also have an M component requirement, you can satisfy that M component requirement of accessing the materials with your hand by using the same hand as you are already setting aside to do the gestures. Next, most people agree that when you use a Spellcasting focus (in any way) instead of accessing loose materials, you can still take advantage of the "it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components" exception if desired. That's not a given, by the way. The rules do not actually spell that out. But I am comfortable making that leap. So, from there, sure, we can work backwards and realize that whenever you are actually holding your focus or accessing loose components or reaching into a component pouch, then that hand "counts as" your free hand for your Somatic component requirement.
The problem arises during the times when you are not holding the focus with any hand. You are still using the focus, so your M component is satisfied. But if your hands are full in that situation then you simply do not have a free hand for your S component. Nothing changes that requirement. To meet the S requirement of a V, S, M spell, one hand must be either totally free, or it must be holding a focus or accessing loose materials or reaching into a component pouch. If both of your hands are holding something unrelated, such as a mace in one hand and a shield in the other hand (assume the focus is a worn amulet for this example so that we can stay on track), then you have no free hand for your S component. That situation is even more restrictive if your spell didn't even have an M component -- to meet the S requirement of a V, S spell, one hand must be totally free and that's the only option.
That doesn't require working backwards at all. That's just true. They can be the same hand, full stop.
...or bearing a focus on a shield. That's an equal rule to holding a focus. Nothing in the Somatic component rules nor the base Material component rules calls out "holding" as more special than bearing. Either requires a hand, just like "accessing."
If you are wearing the amulet, and both your hands are full of non-material-component-like stuff, then you can't access the amulet (which no one here is arguing against), so you can't cast spells with M components, period. And you can't use Somatic components without Warcaster, essentially.
Yeah, basically. This is why the sentence that introduces a spell Focus as an option requires that it be used only as a substitution --- you can't do somatic components with a focus if the spell has no M component (that's a hole that Warcaster fills, kinda).