This is correct. But if a spell does not require a material component, then you are not wielding M, you just have a hand busied by an irrelevant object.
Also, you keep misquoting a rule:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components.
You keep cutting out the part about the spell requiring material component to perform the somatic component while holding it. It is kind of the whole thing you have been arguing against. It is important.
Are there any other places in the PHB where you need to know the rules governing a feature not at use (material components) in order to understand one that is (casting a spell with a somatic component) and that rule isn't referred to specifically?
For example, Paralyzed rules require knowing Incapacitated rules, but that is explicitly called out in Paralyzed.
This is also true. I mentioned something similar back when a movement/opportunity attack analogy was made and pointed out that these related rules specifically mentioned eachother because they overlapped. It never got answered.
Are you not reading that sentence properly? I'm saying it DOESN'T say that. You're quoting me as though I'm saying it does.
... That is what out of context means. And you have been quoting material component rules as if they applied when no material component is involved. Context. It is important.
Are there any other places in the PHB where you need to know the rules governing a feature not at use (material components) in order to understand one that is (casting a spell with a somatic component) and that rule isn't referred to specifically?
For example, Paralyzed rules require knowing Incapacitated rules, but that is explicitly called out in Paralyzed.
Paralyzed and Incapacitated are under different "Sections"(Or headings or whatever you want to call them, Large text underlined with a Green Line) in the book, and thus need to reference each other. Edit: Same with Movement and Opportunity attacks. Different "Sections" and thus need to reference those "Sections." All the rules we're discussing here for components are under the same "Section" of "Components." Referencing something in the same "Section" that was a few sentences back would be redundant, which these books try to avoid.
Are you not reading that sentence properly? I'm saying it DOESN'T say that. You're quoting me as though I'm saying it does.
... That is what out of context means. And you have been quoting material component rules as if they applied when no material component is involved. Context. It is important.
It is like arguing with a science denier.
It's great that your points make sense if you take everything out of context. I guess you're right then.
And I'm cutting that part out because it has nothing to do with holding a spellcasting focus, which is what I'm arguing, but it's still the same thing. Whether it's the material, a component pouch, or a spellcasting focus, the hand can still perform somatic components while using it. You can cut out the spellcasting focus part too and still makes sense. "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." It's really not confusing.
Edit: I like the "Arguing with a science denier" line. That's great. Science deniers tend to ignore clearly written text in order to further their own made up ideas. Definitely what I'm guilty of here.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
And I don't really disagree that it seems reasonable to be able to cast somatic components with a focus in your hand. I just stick on that self-contained point: each of the bits on Verbal, Somatic, and Material components covers the rules for each. Both S and M spells require a free hand. Between the rules for S and M, they only need one sentence (in the rule that comes last) that covers whether that means you need one or two free hands for S,M spells. That is all the last sentence is intended to be: a statement that says you don't need a free hand for somatic components and a separate free hand for material components.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
And that is where they would see:
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 “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell.
And realize: "oh, this spell doesn't specify any material components, so I can't use it to cast the spell. Since it isn't used to cast the spell, I guess I need to put it away so my hand is free like the somatic rules require."
"That is all the last sentence is intended to be: a statement that says you don't need a free hand for somatic components and a separate free hand for material components."
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
And that is where they would see:
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 “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell.
And realize: "oh, this spell doesn't specify any material components, so I can't use it to cast the spell. Since it isn't used to cast the spell, I guess I need to put it away so my hand is free like the somatic rules require."
So we don't ignore that part of the Material (M) components when casting a Somatic spell, but we do ignore a few sentences after? Okay then.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
And that is where they would see:
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 “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell.
And realize: "oh, this spell doesn't specify any material components, so I can't use it to cast the spell. Since it isn't used to cast the spell, I guess I need to put it away so my hand is free like the somatic rules require."
So we don't ignore that part of the Material (M) components when casting a Somatic spell, but we do ignore a few sentences after? Okay then.
What? We are not ignoring any part of the rule. The rule says whether or not it applies, it doesn't aplly, we don't apply it. To try to apply the fraction of a sentence later would require ignoring all the parts of the rule that say it apply to material spells including part of the sentence you are trying to apply. In fact there is not a single sentence in the material component rules that doesn't refer to the fact that it is for the material component in some way.
Uuuugh. I might as well talk to a wall. Whatever. All I can say is if you actually run things this way in your game, holy crap your campaign must be an absolute slog.
All I can say is that this thread, as well as the 4 others now on this forum, are a clear indication that the rules for casting a spell are needlessly convoluted and could use a once-over for clarity. There are too many pitfalls where you can go off course, and frankly parts of it (tracking Materials...) are largely purposeless minutia.
All I can say is that this thread, as well as the 4 others now on this forum, are a clear indication that the rules for casting a spell are needlessly convoluted and could use a once-over for clarity. There are too many pitfalls where you can go off course, and frankly parts of it (tracking Materials...) are largely purposeless minutia.
Yeah, material components are mostly a left over from older edditions when spellcasting was even more complicated. And several aspects of spellcasting can confuse new players (things like spellcasting focus, number of spells per turn, legal spell targets, multiclassed casters, etc).
It is the reason spellcasting classes are not recommended for new players.
Re-reading again this topic made me think about using a previous summoned Hommunculus to handle the required M for the next spell you could cast; and then while you are getting both hands free, perform that "mimical action" for the S ( somatical action ).
If I can do that without the failure of the spell, it's a WIN-WIN momment.... huh ???
This is correct. But if a spell does not require a material component, then you are not wielding M, you just have a hand busied by an irrelevant object.
Also, you keep misquoting a rule:
You keep cutting out the part about the spell requiring material component to perform the somatic component while holding it. It is kind of the whole thing you have been arguing against. It is important.
This is also true. I mentioned something similar back when a movement/opportunity attack analogy was made and pointed out that these related rules specifically mentioned eachother because they overlapped. It never got answered.
... That is what out of context means. And you have been quoting material component rules as if they applied when no material component is involved. Context. It is important.
It is like arguing with a science denier.
Paralyzed and Incapacitated are under different "Sections"(Or headings or whatever you want to call them, Large text underlined with a Green Line) in the book, and thus need to reference each other. Edit: Same with Movement and Opportunity attacks. Different "Sections" and thus need to reference those "Sections."
All the rules we're discussing here for components are under the same "Section" of "Components." Referencing something in the same "Section" that was a few sentences back would be redundant, which these books try to avoid.
It's great that your points make sense if you take everything out of context. I guess you're right then.
And I'm cutting that part out because it has nothing to do with holding a spellcasting focus, which is what I'm arguing, but it's still the same thing. Whether it's the material, a component pouch, or a spellcasting focus, the hand can still perform somatic components while using it.
You can cut out the spellcasting focus part too and still makes sense. "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." It's really not confusing.
Edit: I like the "Arguing with a science denier" line. That's great. Science deniers tend to ignore clearly written text in order to further their own made up ideas. Definitely what I'm guilty of here.
Say that I'm casting a spell for the first time and I choose one that has V, S components. I would go to the components section and read the rules for verbal and somatic components. The somatic rule would say that I need a free hand. The rules do try not to repeat themselves, but they also tend to be written in a way that you do not need an encyclopedic knowledge of them in order to operate. You can know the rules of the game features at play and that will allow you to understand what is at play. If material components aren't in play, then you're not expected to know those rules. That is my problem with your interpretation. You would expect that everyone who plays the game has an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.
I don't disagree with that per se, but what if while looking at that you thought "hmm, but I'm wielding a focus, can I still cast this spell?" You could then read literally 3 more sentences in the same Section and come to the conclusion that yes, yes you can.
And I don't really disagree that it seems reasonable to be able to cast somatic components with a focus in your hand. I just stick on that self-contained point: each of the bits on Verbal, Somatic, and Material components covers the rules for each. Both S and M spells require a free hand. Between the rules for S and M, they only need one sentence (in the rule that comes last) that covers whether that means you need one or two free hands for S,M spells. That is all the last sentence is intended to be: a statement that says you don't need a free hand for somatic components and a separate free hand for material components.
And that is where they would see:
And realize: "oh, this spell doesn't specify any material components, so I can't use it to cast the spell. Since it isn't used to cast the spell, I guess I need to put it away so my hand is free like the somatic rules require."
"That is all the last sentence is intended to be: a statement that says you don't need a free hand for somatic components and a separate free hand for material components."
That's... basically my point.
So we don't ignore that part of the Material (M) components when casting a Somatic spell, but we do ignore a few sentences after? Okay then.
I think we've lost the plot on this thread.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
We're still discussing the question raised in the title, so not really. It has definitely become gratuitous at this point however.
What? We are not ignoring any part of the rule. The rule says whether or not it applies, it doesn't aplly, we don't apply it. To try to apply the fraction of a sentence later would require ignoring all the parts of the rule that say it apply to material spells including part of the sentence you are trying to apply. In fact there is not a single sentence in the material component rules that doesn't refer to the fact that it is for the material component in some way.
Uuuugh. I might as well talk to a wall. Whatever. All I can say is if you actually run things this way in your game, holy crap your campaign must be an absolute slog.
All I can say is that this thread, as well as the 4 others now on this forum, are a clear indication that the rules for casting a spell are needlessly convoluted and could use a once-over for clarity. There are too many pitfalls where you can go off course, and frankly parts of it (tracking Materials...) are largely purposeless minutia.
Yeah, material components are mostly a left over from older edditions when spellcasting was even more complicated. And several aspects of spellcasting can confuse new players (things like spellcasting focus, number of spells per turn, legal spell targets, multiclassed casters, etc).
It is the reason spellcasting classes are not recommended for new players.
Obviously here wins the Octopuss/Kraken monster, IYKWIM, right ???
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
Re-reading again this topic made me think about using a previous summoned Hommunculus to handle the required M for the next spell you could cast; and then while you are getting both hands free, perform that "mimical action" for the S ( somatical action ).
If I can do that without the failure of the spell, it's a WIN-WIN momment.... huh ???
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
Ah what? The caster has to provide all of the components, if that is what you are taking about. No splitting components between creatures.
Damm rules !!!!.... aaaaarg !!!!!
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk