Makes sense for standard rope. But the spell does not require standard rope. Just rope. So you could buy cheaper and lighter rope if you want and the DM allows. Given the cost the money isn't a huge issue. But 2.5 pounds for a spell adds up quick.
In 3e snare just enchanted the material component (and could use things like vines instead of rope), which suggests that the requirement is "rope that could plausibly hold the things that can be held by snare".
I'd prefer that as it was reusable rope. This one seems to dissolve the rope and then create a band of force so I am not sure the rope really matters. Still its within the DMs discretion on how it is run.
Then 25 feet of rope has no cost. Okay. That's a fine stance.
This really isn't a good argument to make when you also complain about other posters making red herring arguments.
The rules cannot have a specified cost for every possible thing that a player can want to buy in-game, that would make the rules have more volumes than the tax code.
Do I think that rope is a commonly enough used item that it deserves a bit more specificity in the rules, yea probably. But it isn't really a bigger problem that "rope" is an item and material component that have an unclear price than it is that a "feather", "bat guano" or "eye of a newt" are material components that have unclear price. And even if an item did have a clearly specified price that doesn't mean that a player can just decided that they have that item to use, it would still have to be acquired with the consent of the DM and at a price determined by the DM. Which is just the same as the situation for the rope is.
But if you want a RAW answer then that is quite simple, "rope" costs 1GP but then you have to ask the DM how long a rope you just bought.
Then 25 feet of rope has no cost. Okay. That's a fine stance.
This really isn't a good argument to make when you also complain about other posters making red herring arguments.
The rules cannot have a specified cost for every possible thing that a player can want to buy in-game, that would make the rules have more volumes than the tax code.
The rules can have a specified cost for every possible item that is required for a game mechanic to function. That is a reasonable expectation. We aren't talking about everything a player can want to buy in the game. We are talking about a component required to use a feature (spellcasting) of a class. It's like saying Fighters have martial weapon proficiency but ask your DM for the cost of martial weapons.
I don't care if anyone says yes or no, but please keep the arguments within the constraint of RAW/RAI. And please avoid comparing asking that spell components that are not covered by a spell component pouch have a defined method of acquiring them to "[specifying a] cost for every possible thing that a player can want to buy in-game." That is another red herring distracting from the discussion of the thread.
Do I think that rope is a commonly enough used item that it deserves a bit more specificity in the rules, yea probably. But it isn't really a bigger problem that "rope" is an item and material component that have an unclear price than it is that a "feather", "bat guano" or "eye of a newt" are material components that have unclear price.
These are less of an issue because the assumption is that you are going to use a spell component pouch or spellcasting focus instead of acquiring these individually.
Perhaps the authors of the book could have included a Table of Spellcasting Components with a few hundred entries detailing the cost and weight of every individual spell component, but they didn't do that. Instead, the rules have left this detail up to the DM.
In my opinion, these individual spell components are generally meant to be treated as easily accessible, free and weightless for the purposes of any sort of encumbrance rules unless the DM determines otherwise. For example, perhaps any town large enough to have a weapon shop will also have a "Magic Shop". In this Magic Shop, it might be customary for the shop owner to provide bins full of mundane individual components that are given away as an incentive to do business there in the future. The shop takes a small loss on such items but then makes a substantial profit on the 100gp diamond, etc., that has been marked up well beyond what it cost the shop owner to acquire such an item.
This exact system is not written into the rules -- it is just one way of running it based on the rules or the lack thereof on the subject.
I have found some RAW "evidence" of the length of the rope which has a cost of 1gp in the '24 rules. See Grappling Hook, which can be thrown to a point 50ft away and then if a Rope was tied to it, can be climbed. Therefore that rope must be at least 50ft long and so can be used for at least two castings of Snare. QED.
I have found some RAW "evidence" of the length of the rope which has a cost of 1gp in the '24 rules. See Grappling Hook, which can be thrown to a point 50ft away and then if a Rope was tied to it, can be climbed. Therefore that rope must be at least 50ft long and so can be used for at least two castings of Snare. QED.
I tried to figure out the length based on "You can bind an unwilling creature with the rope", but TBH, I've never tried to bind an unwilling creature, so my experience is basically zero.
I have found some RAW "evidence" of the length of the rope which has a cost of 1gp in the '24 rules. See Grappling Hook, which can be thrown to a point 50ft away and then if a Rope was tied to it, can be climbed. Therefore that rope must be at least 50ft long and so can be used for at least two castings of Snare. QED.
I tried to figure out the length based on "You can bind an unwilling creature with the rope", but TBH, I've never tried to bind an unwilling creature, so my experience is basically zero.
My search on the internet suggests around 25 ft.
Careful. That sort of search on the internet risks awakening something you were not aware of...
Perhaps the authors of the book could have included a Table of Spellcasting Components with a few hundred entries detailing the cost and weight of every individual spell component, but they didn't do that.
Hyperbole is unnecessary and misrepresents the situation.
If such an approach was taken, we would need a handful of entries.
mistletoe that was harvested with a golden sickle under the light of a full moon (Druid Grove)
Gentle Repose is debatable, but I read it as a cost of 2 CP.
That is the list of spellcasting components missing, not "a few hundred entries". We're talking about 3 entries, 1 for the PHB and 2 for Xanathar's. Alternatively, they could take the stance that spellcasting components are free unless your DM says otherwise.
For example, perhaps any town large enough to have a weapon shop will also have a "Magic Shop". In this Magic Shop, it might be customary for the shop owner to provide bins full of mundane individual components that are given away as an incentive to do business there in the future. The shop takes a small loss on such items but then makes a substantial profit on the 100gp diamond, etc., that has been marked up well beyond what it cost the shop owner to acquire such an item.
I don't think the modern concept of "loss leaders" would work in a historical setting, but this is D&D and that's an interesting concept.
Other variations could include more of a general store approach where day-to-day shopping involves bartering for goods in exchange for found components. Or components are thrown in for free with larger purchases (maintaining the appearance of a functional economy outside of adventurers). It's a little off topic for the post, but I didn't want a good idea to get lost. Thanks.
In my opinion, these individual spell components are generally meant to be treated as easily accessible, free and weightless for the purposes of any sort of encumbrance rules unless the DM determines otherwise.
I am leaning towards that being the intention even though I started on the other side of the fence. Looking at similar spells, there's a good chance that it's a coincidence that Snare uses rope as a material component and rope has a defined cost in the equipment chapter.
I am leaning towards that being the intention even though I started on the other side of the fence. Looking at similar spells, there's a good chance that it's a coincidence that Snare uses rope as a material component and rope has a defined cost in the equipment chapter.
Make up your mind,. You spent the entire thread shouting that rope was free.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
I am leaning towards that being the intention even though I started on the other side of the fence. Looking at similar spells, there's a good chance that it's a coincidence that Snare uses rope as a material component and rope has a defined cost in the equipment chapter.
Make up your mind,. You spent the entire thread shouting that rope was free.
No. I asked for opinions from the group on RAW and RAI. I've shouted nothing. You might be projecting. I have had to put an inordinate amount of effort explaining that "ask your DM" is an invalid response in the context of this thread.
I will reserve the right to change my mind as many times as I like in this thread and every other thread on this forum. You should not enter a debate without being open to having your opinion challenged and possibly changed.
You have yet to provide a RAW/RAI interpretation. Do you wish to take a stance on what the RAW/RAI cost is?
You have yet to provide a RAW/RAI interpretation. Do you wish to take a stance on what the RAW/RAI cost is?
I already did multiple times.
You've provided snarky responses multiple times. You have never provided a RAW/RAI interpretation.
Are you of the mindset that you must buy rope from the equipment section? Are you of the opinion that it has no RAW cost? Are you of the opinion that it is free for use a spell component?
You have yet to provide a RAW/RAI interpretation. Do you wish to take a stance on what the RAW/RAI cost is?
I already did multiple times.
You've provided snarky responses multiple times. You have never provided a RAW/RAI interpretation.
Are you of the mindset that you must buy rope from the equipment section? Are you of the opinion that it has no RAW cost? Are you of the opinion that it is free for use a spell component?
This has already been answered many times, it is clear you simply do not want to accept the answers given.
The spell requires that the caster have 25' of rope that gets consumed by the casting of the spell. No cost is specified in the spell description which means it doesn't matter how the caster acquires the rope (make it themselves, find a larger rope and cut it to size, buy rope, whatever). The 2024 player's handbook does not mention a length of rope in the price list of gear, but does list a price.
As with all things in a campaign, if there is any question of how to interpret - anything, or if additional information is needed to fill out gaps in info contained within any of the sourcebooks, it is up to the DM to provide. That is both RAW and RAI.
The issue appears to be, that you do not want to exercise the DM discretion that the rules clearly state is the role of a DM. I would suggest that perhaps you are not ready to be a DM? If a DM is unable to find a satisfactory answer to any question the DM has, it is their job to create an answer for themselves. It appears that you are unwilling to do so.
Your question has been answered. The Spell has a required material component that cannot be replaced with a focus (25' of rope that is consumed - it cannot be replaced because it is consumed). The spell does not list a value for the rope, so (at least as far as spellcasting is concerned) it is not a material component with cost.
How your players obtain that rope, is up to you. They can find it for free, make it for free, buy it, buy the materials and make it - whatever you decide. As for how much any of that costs, it is not specified in the PHB, so it becomes the job of the DM to decide that too.
There's your answer - I am sorry that you do not want to accept it. As someone who has played and DM'd for over 4 decades, perhaps your group would be better served with someone else in the DM chair? As always you are free to take that advice, or ignore it - it is your table - but your question has been answered. Many times.
There really is no clear cut RAW answer. RAI, well that is almost never clear cut. All we can say is there is no set cost to the rope no weird requirements, it does not have to be fancy gold braided rope worth 100gp, it does not have to be gathered in a lightning storm, its just rope. IMO that means that as soon as strings gets thick enough to be called rope and is now 25 feet long it would work. Some though point to the 1GP rope and say they mean that rope. Since those answers vary and both fall under the spell its not really RAW. Maybe one of them is the RAI, but not both of them. Now maybe just wing it was their RAI, I kind of doubt it. it most likely falls into the overlooked category since we are talking like 3 spells that have this issue. End of the day though wing it is the best answer you will get as all the clarity you can find is n a fairly short spell description, and the answer is not there. I do wish I had a more satisfying answer to this as it kind of bothers me as well.
I'm a little confused by the argument that because rope has a suggested price in the source books that it is a "material component with a stated cost" as that would pertain to the "using a focus" rules.
ALL spell components have a value. They aren't all stated in a book, but there are surely places in the world to buy bat guano, a red dragon's scale, phosphorus, etc. Just because they aren't stated doesn't mean they don't have value. Unless you're pulling the scales off of a red dragon yourself, you're probably buying them from somewhere.
To me, the rules stating the focus cannot replace a component with an associated cost means the cost must be stated in the "materials needed" portion of the spell. "A silver rod worth 1500 gold, a piece of onyx worth 50 gold", etc. Those are stated costs, and therefore cannot be substituted by a focus. It is a "game" rule, not a "in-world" rule. It is meta. To the character, basically all material components have some cost associated with them (maybe "dust" and "water" would be an exception, but I'm guessing at the local magic shop they have "magic kits" that contain all the things you might need to cast spells, including vials of water and pre-measured baggies of dust). The reason for the rule isn't for the characters, it's for the players, for the GAME.
If you're saying that "rope" has a cost associated to it because it suggests a price for it in the source book, are you then suggesting that ink, powdered iron, and a sumac leaf wouldn't have a cost associated to them, too?
The game doesn't care how you attain the item, if you bought it, stole it, found it, were gifted it, etc. It only cares (in regards to the focus rules) if the material has a stated cost in the spell. Otherwise we assume that many normally valuable things in the world would just be...free? Worthless? That doesn't seem logical.
There's your answer - I am sorry that you do not want to accept it. As someone who has played and DM'd for over 4 decades, perhaps your group would be better served with someone else in the DM chair? As always you are free to take that advice, or ignore it - it is your table - but your question has been answered. Many times.
I am quite capable of drawing on my own decades deciding the answer for myself. The point isn't to answer the question for my table or anyone else's. The point is to discuss RAW and RAI independent of any particular table. If you can't participate within those constraints, maybe a discussion of theory is not for you. That's okay. Expend your energy where you find joy.
How your players obtain that rope, is up to you. They can find it for free, make it for free, buy it, buy the materials and make it - whatever you decide.
This is true for 25 feet of rope, mistletoe gathered with a golden sickle under a full moon, 300 GP diamonds, and bat guano. It's a non-answer for the context.
The spell requires that the caster have 25' of rope that gets consumed by the casting of the spell. No cost is specified in the spell description which means it doesn't matter how the caster acquires the rope (make it themselves, find a larger rope and cut it to size, buy rope, whatever). The 2024 player's handbook does not mention a length of rope in the price list of gear, but does list a price.
...
Your question has been answered. The Spell has a required material component that cannot be replaced with a focus (25' of rope that is consumed - it cannot be replaced because it is consumed). The spell does not list a value for the rope, so (at least as far as spellcasting is concerned) it is not a material component with cost.
So, is your position that 25 feet of rope to cast the spell [spell]Snare[/spells] costs 1 GP? It is a 2014 spell so you may want to assume 50 feet of rope per GP for compatibility. Or you could also take the odd position that unknown length - 25 feet = unknown length and therefore 1 purchase of rope fuels infinite Snares. That would be wild though.
IMO that means that as soon as strings gets thick enough to be called rope and is now 25 feet long it would work. Some though point to the 1GP rope and say they mean that rope.
Oh, I hadn't considered that take. With that in mind, braiding vine fibers into rope would be sufficient to fulfill the material component. I had suggested vines as a substitute to see if separating it from an item that has a cost defined in the equipment section changed opinions on the status, but maybe you are right and the RAI the rope in the spell component is anything rope-like and it was never intended to be related to the Equipment entry.
In addition, the spell is a 2014 spell that requires rope. Rope is a 2024 equipment entry and 2014 listed Silk Rope and Hempen Rope. In the 2014 context of the spell, the material component was just another consumed material component that had no directly corresponding entry in the equipment section. Interesting.
ALL spell components have a value. They aren't all stated in a book, but there are surely places in the world to buy bat guano, a red dragon's scale, phosphorus, etc. Just because they aren't stated doesn't mean they don't have value. Unless you're pulling the scales off of a red dragon yourself, you're probably buying them from somewhere.
Every spell material component except for 5 spells (Druid Grove, Gentle Repose, and Snare plus sometimes Summon Greater Demon, and Summon Lesser Demons) have explicit costs or are covered by a Component Pouch. Snare is weird of those because there is no cost specified in the spell description but there is a cost in the equipment section. However, as the spell is a 2014 and, in 2014, there was no rope just rope, hempen (50 feet) and rope, silk (50 feet). So technically, the potentially obvious answer to the cost in 2024 didn't exist in 2014.
If you are, by choice or circumstance, bereft of a Component Pouch or Spellcasting Focus, you would have to acquire the components separately. However, that is an edge case and not a default assumption of the game. So, what is the default assumption, RAW/RAI for ensuring that you can cast Snare? If 25 feet of rope was never intended to refer to the equipment section, then the component is in the same category as Druid Grove.
If you're saying that "rope" has a cost associated to it because it suggests a price for it in the source book, are you then suggesting that ink, powdered iron, and a sumac leaf wouldn't have a cost associated to them, too?
These would be excellent counterpoints against referring to the equipment section to ensure you are capable of casting the spell, however, spells with these items as spell components don't consume them and their cost would be typically subsumed by the cost of a Component Pouch or Spellcasting Focus. Whether they have value or not is irrelevant if the default assumption is that you would use one of those methods for having the ability to cast the spell.
I'd prefer that as it was reusable rope. This one seems to dissolve the rope and then create a band of force so I am not sure the rope really matters. Still its within the DMs discretion on how it is run.
This really isn't a good argument to make when you also complain about other posters making red herring arguments.
The rules cannot have a specified cost for every possible thing that a player can want to buy in-game, that would make the rules have more volumes than the tax code.
Do I think that rope is a commonly enough used item that it deserves a bit more specificity in the rules, yea probably. But it isn't really a bigger problem that "rope" is an item and material component that have an unclear price than it is that a "feather", "bat guano" or "eye of a newt" are material components that have unclear price. And even if an item did have a clearly specified price that doesn't mean that a player can just decided that they have that item to use, it would still have to be acquired with the consent of the DM and at a price determined by the DM. Which is just the same as the situation for the rope is.
But if you want a RAW answer then that is quite simple, "rope" costs 1GP but then you have to ask the DM how long a rope you just bought.
Then 25 feet of rope has no RAW/RAI cost. Okay. That's a fine stance.
That was my first inclination as well, but I didn't realize rope changed from 50 feet to a nebulous length in 2024.
The rules can have a specified cost for every possible item that is required for a game mechanic to function. That is a reasonable expectation. We aren't talking about everything a player can want to buy in the game. We are talking about a component required to use a feature (spellcasting) of a class. It's like saying Fighters have martial weapon proficiency but ask your DM for the cost of martial weapons.
I don't care if anyone says yes or no, but please keep the arguments within the constraint of RAW/RAI. And please avoid comparing asking that spell components that are not covered by a spell component pouch have a defined method of acquiring them to "[specifying a] cost for every possible thing that a player can want to buy in-game." That is another red herring distracting from the discussion of the thread.
These are less of an issue because the assumption is that you are going to use a spell component pouch or spellcasting focus instead of acquiring these individually.
Okay. If your stance is that 25 feet of rope has a 1 GP cost, that's a fine stance.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Perhaps the authors of the book could have included a Table of Spellcasting Components with a few hundred entries detailing the cost and weight of every individual spell component, but they didn't do that. Instead, the rules have left this detail up to the DM.
In my opinion, these individual spell components are generally meant to be treated as easily accessible, free and weightless for the purposes of any sort of encumbrance rules unless the DM determines otherwise. For example, perhaps any town large enough to have a weapon shop will also have a "Magic Shop". In this Magic Shop, it might be customary for the shop owner to provide bins full of mundane individual components that are given away as an incentive to do business there in the future. The shop takes a small loss on such items but then makes a substantial profit on the 100gp diamond, etc., that has been marked up well beyond what it cost the shop owner to acquire such an item.
This exact system is not written into the rules -- it is just one way of running it based on the rules or the lack thereof on the subject.
I have found some RAW "evidence" of the length of the rope which has a cost of 1gp in the '24 rules. See Grappling Hook, which can be thrown to a point 50ft away and then if a Rope was tied to it, can be climbed. Therefore that rope must be at least 50ft long and so can be used for at least two castings of Snare. QED.
I tried to figure out the length based on "You can bind an unwilling creature with the rope", but TBH, I've never tried to bind an unwilling creature, so my experience is basically zero.
My search on the internet suggests around 25 ft.
Careful. That sort of search on the internet risks awakening something you were not aware of...
Hyperbole is unnecessary and misrepresents the situation.
If such an approach was taken, we would need a handful of entries.
Gentle Repose is debatable, but I read it as a cost of 2 CP.
That is the list of spellcasting components missing, not "a few hundred entries". We're talking about 3 entries, 1 for the PHB and 2 for Xanathar's. Alternatively, they could take the stance that spellcasting components are free unless your DM says otherwise.
I don't think the modern concept of "loss leaders" would work in a historical setting, but this is D&D and that's an interesting concept.
Other variations could include more of a general store approach where day-to-day shopping involves bartering for goods in exchange for found components. Or components are thrown in for free with larger purchases (maintaining the appearance of a functional economy outside of adventurers). It's a little off topic for the post, but I didn't want a good idea to get lost. Thanks.
I am leaning towards that being the intention even though I started on the other side of the fence. Looking at similar spells, there's a good chance that it's a coincidence that Snare uses rope as a material component and rope has a defined cost in the equipment chapter.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Make up your mind,. You spent the entire thread shouting that rope was free.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
No. I asked for opinions from the group on RAW and RAI. I've shouted nothing. You might be projecting. I have had to put an inordinate amount of effort explaining that "ask your DM" is an invalid response in the context of this thread.
I will reserve the right to change my mind as many times as I like in this thread and every other thread on this forum. You should not enter a debate without being open to having your opinion challenged and possibly changed.
You have yet to provide a RAW/RAI interpretation. Do you wish to take a stance on what the RAW/RAI cost is?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
The RAW is "It costs whatever the DM says it costs". RAI is probably that you should use half a coil of rope.
I already did multiple times.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
You've provided snarky responses multiple times. You have never provided a RAW/RAI interpretation.
Are you of the mindset that you must buy rope from the equipment section? Are you of the opinion that it has no RAW cost? Are you of the opinion that it is free for use a spell component?
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
This has already been answered many times, it is clear you simply do not want to accept the answers given.
The spell requires that the caster have 25' of rope that gets consumed by the casting of the spell. No cost is specified in the spell description which means it doesn't matter how the caster acquires the rope (make it themselves, find a larger rope and cut it to size, buy rope, whatever). The 2024 player's handbook does not mention a length of rope in the price list of gear, but does list a price.
As with all things in a campaign, if there is any question of how to interpret - anything, or if additional information is needed to fill out gaps in info contained within any of the sourcebooks, it is up to the DM to provide. That is both RAW and RAI.
The issue appears to be, that you do not want to exercise the DM discretion that the rules clearly state is the role of a DM. I would suggest that perhaps you are not ready to be a DM? If a DM is unable to find a satisfactory answer to any question the DM has, it is their job to create an answer for themselves. It appears that you are unwilling to do so.
Your question has been answered. The Spell has a required material component that cannot be replaced with a focus (25' of rope that is consumed - it cannot be replaced because it is consumed). The spell does not list a value for the rope, so (at least as far as spellcasting is concerned) it is not a material component with cost.
How your players obtain that rope, is up to you. They can find it for free, make it for free, buy it, buy the materials and make it - whatever you decide. As for how much any of that costs, it is not specified in the PHB, so it becomes the job of the DM to decide that too.
There's your answer - I am sorry that you do not want to accept it. As someone who has played and DM'd for over 4 decades, perhaps your group would be better served with someone else in the DM chair? As always you are free to take that advice, or ignore it - it is your table - but your question has been answered. Many times.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (original Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
There really is no clear cut RAW answer. RAI, well that is almost never clear cut. All we can say is there is no set cost to the rope no weird requirements, it does not have to be fancy gold braided rope worth 100gp, it does not have to be gathered in a lightning storm, its just rope. IMO that means that as soon as strings gets thick enough to be called rope and is now 25 feet long it would work. Some though point to the 1GP rope and say they mean that rope. Since those answers vary and both fall under the spell its not really RAW. Maybe one of them is the RAI, but not both of them. Now maybe just wing it was their RAI, I kind of doubt it. it most likely falls into the overlooked category since we are talking like 3 spells that have this issue. End of the day though wing it is the best answer you will get as all the clarity you can find is n a fairly short spell description, and the answer is not there. I do wish I had a more satisfying answer to this as it kind of bothers me as well.
I'm a little confused by the argument that because rope has a suggested price in the source books that it is a "material component with a stated cost" as that would pertain to the "using a focus" rules.
ALL spell components have a value. They aren't all stated in a book, but there are surely places in the world to buy bat guano, a red dragon's scale, phosphorus, etc. Just because they aren't stated doesn't mean they don't have value. Unless you're pulling the scales off of a red dragon yourself, you're probably buying them from somewhere.
To me, the rules stating the focus cannot replace a component with an associated cost means the cost must be stated in the "materials needed" portion of the spell. "A silver rod worth 1500 gold, a piece of onyx worth 50 gold", etc. Those are stated costs, and therefore cannot be substituted by a focus. It is a "game" rule, not a "in-world" rule. It is meta. To the character, basically all material components have some cost associated with them (maybe "dust" and "water" would be an exception, but I'm guessing at the local magic shop they have "magic kits" that contain all the things you might need to cast spells, including vials of water and pre-measured baggies of dust). The reason for the rule isn't for the characters, it's for the players, for the GAME.
If you're saying that "rope" has a cost associated to it because it suggests a price for it in the source book, are you then suggesting that ink, powdered iron, and a sumac leaf wouldn't have a cost associated to them, too?
The game doesn't care how you attain the item, if you bought it, stole it, found it, were gifted it, etc. It only cares (in regards to the focus rules) if the material has a stated cost in the spell. Otherwise we assume that many normally valuable things in the world would just be...free? Worthless? That doesn't seem logical.
RAW Snare requires 25 feet of rope without any worth specified for each casting. So what else is in question exactly?
I have accepted multiple, different answers. "Ask your DM" is just not one of them as it is off topic from the intent of the thread.
I am quite capable of drawing on my own decades deciding the answer for myself. The point isn't to answer the question for my table or anyone else's. The point is to discuss RAW and RAI independent of any particular table. If you can't participate within those constraints, maybe a discussion of theory is not for you. That's okay. Expend your energy where you find joy.
This is true for 25 feet of rope, mistletoe gathered with a golden sickle under a full moon, 300 GP diamonds, and bat guano. It's a non-answer for the context.
So, is your position that 25 feet of rope to cast the spell [spell]Snare[/spells] costs 1 GP? It is a 2014 spell so you may want to assume 50 feet of rope per GP for compatibility. Or you could also take the odd position that unknown length - 25 feet = unknown length and therefore 1 purchase of rope fuels infinite Snares. That would be wild though.
Oh, I hadn't considered that take. With that in mind, braiding vine fibers into rope would be sufficient to fulfill the material component. I had suggested vines as a substitute to see if separating it from an item that has a cost defined in the equipment section changed opinions on the status, but maybe you are right and the RAI the rope in the spell component is anything rope-like and it was never intended to be related to the Equipment entry.
In addition, the spell is a 2014 spell that requires rope. Rope is a 2024 equipment entry and 2014 listed Silk Rope and Hempen Rope. In the 2014 context of the spell, the material component was just another consumed material component that had no directly corresponding entry in the equipment section. Interesting.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
Every spell material component except for 5 spells (Druid Grove, Gentle Repose, and Snare plus sometimes Summon Greater Demon, and Summon Lesser Demons) have explicit costs or are covered by a Component Pouch. Snare is weird of those because there is no cost specified in the spell description but there is a cost in the equipment section. However, as the spell is a 2014 and, in 2014, there was no rope just rope, hempen (50 feet) and rope, silk (50 feet). So technically, the potentially obvious answer to the cost in 2024 didn't exist in 2014.
If you are, by choice or circumstance, bereft of a Component Pouch or Spellcasting Focus, you would have to acquire the components separately. However, that is an edge case and not a default assumption of the game. So, what is the default assumption, RAW/RAI for ensuring that you can cast Snare? If 25 feet of rope was never intended to refer to the equipment section, then the component is in the same category as Druid Grove.
These would be excellent counterpoints against referring to the equipment section to ensure you are capable of casting the spell, however, spells with these items as spell components don't consume them and their cost would be typically subsumed by the cost of a Component Pouch or Spellcasting Focus. Whether they have value or not is irrelevant if the default assumption is that you would use one of those methods for having the ability to cast the spell.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.