so I have a sorcerer with subtle spell but my dm says I can’t cast spells without my focus even with subtle spell and that my focus glows. Well then what’s the point of subtle spell?
trying not to antagonize my dm as he does a good job but on what page does it say I have to have a focus for subtle and that my focus glows?
I’m not sure if this answers your question but this is what Crawford said about subtle spell and Counterspell. Paraphrasing, subtle spell with only V and/or S components cannot be Counterspelled because you don’t know the caster is casting a spell, there is nothing to see. If the spell has an M component there is something to see so it can be Counterspelled. So it really wouldn’t matter if your spell focus glowed or not. The fact that you have the spell focus in your hand is enough to allow the spell to be Counterspelled.
Subtle spell will always allow you to cast if you are Silenced or gagged. If the spell has an M component, you will need a free hand.
I would allow you to cast a subtle spell with M as long as the component was in your hand but the hand could be tied. I might even allow it if you were holding the M component with your mouth. In my view, eliminating the somatic component would mean you don’t have to do anything with the M component except hold it.
You don’t need to use a focus unless the spell has an M component.
Subtle spell negates the need for verbal and somatic component.
If a spell has a material component, you'll need either the component or your focus. You won't need your focus for spells that don't have a material component.
There is no rule that your focus glows when you cast spells, but that is up to the DM.
According to the RAW, you can use an Arcane Focus or a Spell Component Pouch in place of the material components for a spell if the material components don’t have a GP value in the spell description. You still have the option of using the actual material components that are listed in the spell if you want to and if you use them or you cast a spell that doesn’t have material components you don’t need an Arcane Focus.
Your DM is effectively making Subtle Spell, which costs sorcery points, so that it doesn’t work at all and is practically useless. I’d go over the rules with him outside of the session and make your case based on what’s written.
It's perfectly fair for your dm to say your focus starts to glow. However, this is not insurmountable. Your pc only needs to hold the focus in their hand. You can drape a cape over your shoulders that covers your hand, perhaps even have a cast around your hand. The fact that this impedes your hand movement doesn't matter if you use subtle spell. If nothing you do seems to work, ask your dm how they would solve it. If they are completely adamant on material spells not being affected by subtle spell, that's a bit of a bummer.
so I have a sorcerer with subtle spell but my dm says I can’t cast spells without my focus even with subtle spell and that my focus glows. Well then what’s the point of subtle spell?
trying not to antagonize my dm as he does a good job but on what page does it say I have to have a focus for subtle and that my focus glows?
What spell were you trying to cast? Did it have an M component, if so then you either need the component or the focus. If it was just a V or a S then the DM is wrong because you don't need anything to focus your power. A spell focus is just to replace M components.
I’m not sure if this answers your question but this is what Crawford said about subtle spell and Counterspell. Paraphrasing, subtle spell with only V and/or S components cannot be Counterspelled because you don’t know the caster is casting a spell, there is nothing to see. If the spell has an M component there is something to see so it can be Counterspelled. So it really wouldn’t matter if your spell focus glowed or not. The fact that you have the spell focus in your hand is enough to allow the spell to be Counterspelled.
Subtle spell will always allow you to cast if you are Silenced or gagged. If the spell has an M component, you will need a free hand.
I would allow you to cast a subtle spell with M as long as the component was in your hand but the hand could be tied. I might even allow it if you were holding the M component with your mouth. In my view, eliminating the somatic component would mean you don’t have to do anything with the M component except hold it.
You don’t need to use a focus unless the spell has an M component.
Good answer. Has Crawford said anything more about the M component? For example, with Subtle Spell and an M component, I'm at least going to make it harder for opponents to know you're casting. For example, some spells say you have to have a bit of material, but they don't say what to do with it. So holding a bit of fleece in your hand and casting using Subtle Spell is still going to be fairly subtle, in terms of the range of all spell casting. I'd require a perception roll at the least to see if people notice, that would be my instinct. Has he said anything to countermand that?
so I have a sorcerer with subtle spell but my dm says I can’t cast spells without my focus even with subtle spell and that my focus glows. Well then what’s the point of subtle spell?
trying not to antagonize my dm as he does a good job but on what page does it say I have to have a focus for subtle and that my focus glows?
Like others have pointed out, your DM's ruling is consistent with the rules if the spell has an M (Material) component. Otherwise, the focus is not only unnecessary, but unused, so there's no reason why it would glow, unless it's a particular, non-generic focus with a property that makes it glow when you cast spells. If that is the case, you can stow it, or hide it, when casting your spell, and still cast undetected. If the spell has an M (Material) component, though, then you do need the focus (or component pouch), and it will be obvious you're casting (whether it glows, or hums, or gets to be waved around in an obvious way is up to you and the DM to work out): Subtle Spell does not remove the need for, nor the obviousness of using, material components.
Subtle Spell does not remove the need for, nor the obviousness of using, material components.
Ah good, this is what I was asking about. Where does the 'obviousness of using' part come from? If the spell says just that it 'requires a bit of fleece', for example, what is the rule explaining how obviously I have to do something with that fleece? The rules on components don't say that, but I admit to not following Crawford's tweets and such all that well :)
If the spell doesn't describe the action to do with the components, I'm tempted for example to say yes if a player asks if he can make a perform or deception roll to conceal the using of the component--DC dependent on what it is, of course.
Subtle Spell does not remove the need for, nor the obviousness of using, material components.
Ah good, this is what I was asking about. Where does the 'obviousness of using' part come from? If the spell says just that it 'requires a bit of fleece', for example, what is the rule explaining how obviously I have to do something with that fleece? The rules on components don't say that, but I admit to not following Crawford's tweets and such all that well :)
If the spell doesn't describe the action to do with the components, I'm tempted for example to say yes if a player asks if he can make a perform or deception roll to conceal the using of the component--DC dependent on what it is, of course.
It's described in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Chapter 2, Spellcasting, "Perceiving a Caster at Work". I hesitate to copy it here because of legal issues, but basically: to be perceptible while casting, a spell needs components, be they verbal, material, or somatic. If the need for components is removed, the casting of the spell is imperceptible. Add that to the fact that Subtle Spell does not remove the need for material components, and you get imperceptible non-material component spellcasting.
Actually, re-reading the section, it does not say that spells with components are perceptible, just that they need to have components in order to be perceptible. (That is, logically speaking: being perceptible implies it has components. Which is not the same as "having components implies it is perceptible".) There may be other requirements for perceptibility that are not mentioned. Either that implies that the DM is free to rule that a Charisma (Deception) roll, or a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) roll, or other conditions can render spellcasting imperceptible, or the intent was that all spells with components are automatically perceptible and it was just loosely worded. I would shy away from allowing imperceptible spellcasting via skill rolls if only because it devalues Subtle Spell if allowed for V/S components, or significantly boosts spellcasters in general, and Sorcerers with Subtle Spell specifically, if allowed for M components. But that's a personal opinion, not an actual argument against doing so.
Subtle Spell does not remove the need for, nor the obviousness of using, material components.
Ah good, this is what I was asking about. Where does the 'obviousness of using' part come from? If the spell says just that it 'requires a bit of fleece', for example, what is the rule explaining how obviously I have to do something with that fleece? The rules on components don't say that, but I admit to not following Crawford's tweets and such all that well :)
If the spell doesn't describe the action to do with the components, I'm tempted for example to say yes if a player asks if he can make a perform or deception roll to conceal the using of the component--DC dependent on what it is, of course.
It's described in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Chapter 2, Spellcasting, "Perceiving a Caster at Work". I hesitate to copy it here because of legal issues, but basically: to be perceptible while casting, a spell needs components, be they verbal, material, or somatic. If the need for components is removed, the casting of the spell is imperceptible. Add that to the fact that Subtle Spell does not remove the need for material components, and you get imperceptible non-material component spellcasting.
Actually, re-reading the section, it does not say that spells with components are perceptible, just that they need to have components in order to be perceptible. (That is, logically speaking: being perceptible implies it has components. Which is not the same as "having components implies it is perceptible".) There may be other requirements for perceptibility that are not mentioned. Either that implies that the DM is free to rule that a Charisma (Deception) roll, or a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) roll, or other conditions can render spellcasting imperceptible, or the intent was that all spells with components are automatically perceptible and it was just loosely worded. I would shy away from allowing imperceptible spellcasting via skill rolls if only because it devalues Subtle Spell if allowed for V/S components, or significantly boosts spellcasters in general, and Sorcerers with Subtle Spell specifically, if allowed for M components. But that's a personal opinion, not an actual argument against doing so.
Cool, thanks for the rule location. I agree about being careful--something with verbal or somatic would still be obvious in most situations...casting with a verbal component in a noisy crowd might go unnoticed, for example, but otherwise will be heard. I'm just glad there's not a 'you are casting therefore it's automatically obvious to everyone that you are' rule.
Subtle spell is still going to make it way easier, even if the very right conditions might allow someone else to cast unnoticed.
so I have a sorcerer with subtle spell but my dm says I can’t cast spells without my focus even with subtle spell and that my focus glows. Well then what’s the point of subtle spell?
trying not to antagonize my dm as he does a good job but on what page does it say I have to have a focus for subtle and that my focus glows?
I’m not sure if this answers your question but this is what Crawford said about subtle spell and Counterspell. Paraphrasing, subtle spell with only V and/or S components cannot be Counterspelled because you don’t know the caster is casting a spell, there is nothing to see. If the spell has an M component there is something to see so it can be Counterspelled. So it really wouldn’t matter if your spell focus glowed or not. The fact that you have the spell focus in your hand is enough to allow the spell to be Counterspelled.
Subtle spell will always allow you to cast if you are Silenced or gagged. If the spell has an M component, you will need a free hand.
I would allow you to cast a subtle spell with M as long as the component was in your hand but the hand could be tied. I might even allow it if you were holding the M component with your mouth. In my view, eliminating the somatic component would mean you don’t have to do anything with the M component except hold it.
You don’t need to use a focus unless the spell has an M component.
Subtle spell negates the need for verbal and somatic component.
If a spell has a material component, you'll need either the component or your focus. You won't need your focus for spells that don't have a material component.
There is no rule that your focus glows when you cast spells, but that is up to the DM.
According to the RAW, you can use an Arcane Focus or a Spell Component Pouch in place of the material components for a spell if the material components don’t have a GP value in the spell description. You still have the option of using the actual material components that are listed in the spell if you want to and if you use them or you cast a spell that doesn’t have material components you don’t need an Arcane Focus.
Your DM is effectively making Subtle Spell, which costs sorcery points, so that it doesn’t work at all and is practically useless. I’d go over the rules with him outside of the session and make your case based on what’s written.
Professional computer geek
It's perfectly fair for your dm to say your focus starts to glow. However, this is not insurmountable. Your pc only needs to hold the focus in their hand. You can drape a cape over your shoulders that covers your hand, perhaps even have a cast around your hand. The fact that this impedes your hand movement doesn't matter if you use subtle spell. If nothing you do seems to work, ask your dm how they would solve it. If they are completely adamant on material spells not being affected by subtle spell, that's a bit of a bummer.
What spell were you trying to cast? Did it have an M component, if so then you either need the component or the focus. If it was just a V or a S then the DM is wrong because you don't need anything to focus your power. A spell focus is just to replace M components.
Good answer. Has Crawford said anything more about the M component? For example, with Subtle Spell and an M component, I'm at least going to make it harder for opponents to know you're casting. For example, some spells say you have to have a bit of material, but they don't say what to do with it. So holding a bit of fleece in your hand and casting using Subtle Spell is still going to be fairly subtle, in terms of the range of all spell casting. I'd require a perception roll at the least to see if people notice, that would be my instinct. Has he said anything to countermand that?
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
Like others have pointed out, your DM's ruling is consistent with the rules if the spell has an M (Material) component. Otherwise, the focus is not only unnecessary, but unused, so there's no reason why it would glow, unless it's a particular, non-generic focus with a property that makes it glow when you cast spells. If that is the case, you can stow it, or hide it, when casting your spell, and still cast undetected. If the spell has an M (Material) component, though, then you do need the focus (or component pouch), and it will be obvious you're casting (whether it glows, or hums, or gets to be waved around in an obvious way is up to you and the DM to work out): Subtle Spell does not remove the need for, nor the obviousness of using, material components.
Ah good, this is what I was asking about. Where does the 'obviousness of using' part come from? If the spell says just that it 'requires a bit of fleece', for example, what is the rule explaining how obviously I have to do something with that fleece? The rules on components don't say that, but I admit to not following Crawford's tweets and such all that well :)
If the spell doesn't describe the action to do with the components, I'm tempted for example to say yes if a player asks if he can make a perform or deception roll to conceal the using of the component--DC dependent on what it is, of course.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)
If your Arcane Focus is a staff, holding it is pretty subtle. If it’s an orb or a wand on the other hand, holding it is a little bit obvious.
Professional computer geek
It's described in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, Chapter 2, Spellcasting, "Perceiving a Caster at Work". I hesitate to copy it here because of legal issues, but basically: to be perceptible while casting, a spell needs components, be they verbal, material, or somatic. If the need for components is removed, the casting of the spell is imperceptible. Add that to the fact that Subtle Spell does not remove the need for material components, and you get imperceptible non-material component spellcasting.
Actually, re-reading the section, it does not say that spells with components are perceptible, just that they need to have components in order to be perceptible. (That is, logically speaking: being perceptible implies it has components. Which is not the same as "having components implies it is perceptible".) There may be other requirements for perceptibility that are not mentioned. Either that implies that the DM is free to rule that a Charisma (Deception) roll, or a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) roll, or other conditions can render spellcasting imperceptible, or the intent was that all spells with components are automatically perceptible and it was just loosely worded. I would shy away from allowing imperceptible spellcasting via skill rolls if only because it devalues Subtle Spell if allowed for V/S components, or significantly boosts spellcasters in general, and Sorcerers with Subtle Spell specifically, if allowed for M components. But that's a personal opinion, not an actual argument against doing so.
Cool, thanks for the rule location. I agree about being careful--something with verbal or somatic would still be obvious in most situations...casting with a verbal component in a noisy crowd might go unnoticed, for example, but otherwise will be heard. I'm just glad there's not a 'you are casting therefore it's automatically obvious to everyone that you are' rule.
Subtle spell is still going to make it way easier, even if the very right conditions might allow someone else to cast unnoticed.
Looking for new subclasses, spells, magic items, feats, and races? Opinions welcome :)