You produce your artificer spell effects through your tools. You must have a spellcasting focus—specifically thieves’ tools or some kind of artisan’s tool—in hand when you cast any spell with this Spellcasting feature. You must be proficient with the tool to use it in this way. See chapter 5, “Equipment,” in the Player’s Handbook for descriptions of these tools.
After you gain the Infuse Item feature at 2nd level, you can also use any item bearing one of your infusions as a spellcasting focus.
Note the use of the word “must” in that description.
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule (you can cast any spell through a focus) without considering that it is the fact that there is text making the artificer the exception and there is no such text for any other class.
Who cares about effectiveness? If the wizard wants to pick up a shield to protect their self, (s)he can do that. Its not hard to imagine a situation where a low-level wizard would want to do that.
Okay, but then that still holds true for an Arcane Focus with spells that have no M components. You can perform somatic components with the focus in your hand but cannot effectively cast the spell.
I'm not entirely sure if I'm understanding you correctly. Are you suggesting that a wizard can cast Detect Magic with a focus and a staff in their hands? If so, then it seems I misunderstood you. If you're saying they can cast it with just an arcane focus in one hand, then we are in agreement.
Not so with the shield and a free hand, assuming the wizard is non-proficient with shields- as equipping armor or a shield that one is non-proficient in means no spellcasting.
It literally says in the quoted text that a holy symbol on a shield makes the shield a holy symbol.
Unfortunately Rav has you on a 'well ackshully" there. None of the text of the holy symbol description quoted says it makes the shield the holy symbol (only that it is on the shield). What that proves is beyond me except that when they want to read things with subtlety they can, which makes their lack of understanding of the spellcasting rules all the more confounding.
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule.
The artificer isn't even an exception. They're required to have an implement in hand to cast spells, and are permitted to use that implement as a focus, but in the case of a spell that lacks material components (or has components that cannot be replaced by a focus) that just means he needs two hands -- one to hold his tools, one to perform the somatic components.
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule.
The artificer isn't even an exception. They're required to have an implement in hand to cast spells, and are permitted to use that implement as a focus, but in the case of a spell that lacks material components (or has components that cannot be replaced by a focus) that just means he needs two hands -- one to hold his tools, one to perform the somatic components.
Is that true? Has that been clarified anywhere? I wasn't sure on that particular detail.
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule.
The artificer isn't even an exception. They're required to have an implement in hand to cast spells, and are permitted to use that implement as a focus, but in the case of a spell that lacks material components (or has components that cannot be replaced by a focus) that just means he needs two hands -- one to hold his tools, one to perform the somatic components.
Is that true? Has that been clarified anywhere? I wasn't sure on that particular detail.
There's a fair chance that's not the intent of the rule, but that's the effect of the rule as written. Honestly, I suspect the original intent of the focus rules was that you could cast any spell while holding a focus and they just worded it badly.
Is there any difference between the shield being a holy symbol itself and the holy symbol emblazoned on it merely being part of the shield?
I will admit the distinction is that you can't merely hold the shield and use it as a holy symbol- it must be equipped. That is, however, consistent with every other facet of the shield- for example, a wizard can hold a shield and cast spells, but not if it is equipped.
Is there any difference between the shield being a holy symbol itself and the holy symbol emblazoned on it merely being part of the shield?
I will admit the distinction is that you can't merely hold the shield and use it as a holy symbol- it must be equipped. That is, however, consistent with every other facet of the shield- for example, a wizard can hold a shield and cast spells, but not if it is equipped.
It is the same sort of technicality that everyone jumped on me over. Like I said, is it an important distinction? No. Is there any effective change? No. Does it make Rav get to say "well ackshuylly"? probably, so we should nip it in the bud.
Is there any difference between the shield being a holy symbol itself and the holy symbol emblazoned on it merely being part of the shield?
I will admit the distinction is that you can't merely hold the shield and use it as a holy symbol- it must be equipped. That is, however, consistent with every other facet of the shield- for example, a wizard can hold a shield and cast spells, but not if it is equipped.
The Ravnodaus' misinterpretation of the rules under the holy symbol item seems so egregiously inept that I feel it is deliberate.
This is going to be long and there is no way to really TLDR it, since most of this has been stated over the course of the discussion to no avail. If you truly are trying to figure out why we're saying that the Arcane Focus can't cast non M spells, then you'll read it. Otherwise, stop claiming that you are and move on since your arguments aren't convincing us. I tried to move on, but this keeps coming up in my notifications and I'd prefer not to have to unfollow the thing.
Components
A spell's components are the physical requirements you must meet in order to cast it. Each spell's description indicates whether it requires verbal (V), somatic (S), or material (M) components. If you can't provide one or more of a spell's components, you are unable to cast the spell.
Verbal (V)
Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. 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 character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can't cast a spell with a verbal component.
Somatic (S)
Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures. If a spell requires a somatic component, the caster must have free use of at least one hand to perform these gestures.
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 chapter 5, “Equipment”) in place of the components specified for a spell. But if a cost is indicated for a component, a character must have that specific component before he or she can cast the spell.
If a spell states that a material component is consumed by the spell, the caster must provide this component for each casting of the spell.
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.
First, what is the spellcasting focus replacing in the last line, it's the words right before "-or to hold a spellcasting focus-" which are "a spell's material components.
Second, "well that just can't be!" because of the underlined portion that says that a component pouch or a spellcasting focus can be used in place of the components specified for a spell. Surely that must also mean that the somatic components are included with that. Guess that also means that the verbal components are covered by that as well. As long as we're channeling the spell through our Arcane Focus, then we're good to go. No need for verbal components, somatic components, or material components unless there is a cost or the spell uses consumes the components. Good to know. Subtle Spell Metamagic is now useless. If I can hide my arcane focus behind my back or otherwise conceal it and channel my spells through it, there is absolutely no reason to take Subtle spell. Last I checked, that is a pretty big draw for Sorcerers. Last I checked, the Sorcerer was included in the list of spellcasters that can use an Arcane Focus. "But that's not what it is saying nor what I'm trying to say". Maybe not what you are trying to say, but that is what is being implied by what you are saying.
That is not at all being implied by what I'm saying. Not even sure how you come to that idea. I've never suggested anything like that.
You may not think that you are implying that, but that's the logical conclusion of your argument. If components don't matter because they can all be replaced, then Subtle Spell doesn't matter. You aren't going exactly to that point, true. You are saying that the Arcane Focus is used to channel the spell, and the material component rules that aren't in force during a non material component spell allow you to do so. The only way that makes sense is if you are able to replace the components including the somatic components, which would lead to replacing the verbal components and therefore make Subtle Spell irrelevant.
I'm reading everything people are saying and offering rebuttals, repeatedly sometimes. But by rebuttals are not being addressed. You're reiterated you same points again that I've already rebutted and just ignored the rebuttal. I'll try again...
"An Arcane Focus isn't the same as a Holy Symbol!"
Arcane Focus. An arcane focus is a special item — an orb, a crystal, a rod, a specially constructed staff, a wand-like length of wood, or some similar item — designed to channel the power of arcane spells. A sorcerer, warlock, or wizard can use such an item as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10.
Holy Symbol. A holy symbol is a representation of a god or pantheon. It might be an amulet depicting a symbol representing a deity, the same symbol carefully engraved or inlaid as an emblem on a shield, or a tiny box holding a fragment of a sacred relic. A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
You are right, the Holy Symbol is better than an Arcane Focus because it can be held in hand, worn visibly, or borne on a shield as opposed to just being held in hand. If the symbol is being borne on the shield, then the shield effectively becomes a spellcasting focus.
No to that bolded bit. That's just not true. Having a holy symbol on something doesn't make that thing a spellcasting focus, and nothing says that it does. This is another weird invention. The text there clearly says that the holy symbol itself is the spellcasting focus. This obsession with shields in this thread is so weird.
And where is the Holy Symbol? It's emblazoned on the shield. See merriam-webster here. If the symbol is emblazoned on the shield, then it is on the shield. If it's on the shield, then you can't hold it unless you are holding the shield. Your refusal to recognize this fact is as tiring for us as I'm sure you would be with your perception that we are refusing to see reason by just telling you that the sky is in fact normally purple if we were discussing the color of the sky.
Components
Does a spell consume its material components?
A spell doesn’t consume its material components unless its description says it does. For example, the pearl required by the identify spell isn’t consumed, whereas the diamond required by raise dead is used up when you cast the spell.
If a spell’s material components are consumed, can a spellcasting focus still be used in place of the consumed component?
No. A spellcasting focus can be used in place of a material component only if that component has no cost noted in the spell’s description and if that component isn’t consumed.
What’s the amount of interaction needed to use a spellcasting focus? Does it have to be included in the somatic component?
If a spell has a material component, you need to handle that component when you cast the spell. The same rule applies if you’re using a spellcasting focus as the material component.
If a spell has a somatic component, you can use the hand that performs the somatic component to also handle the material component. For example, a wizard who uses an orb as a spellcasting focus could hold a quarterstaff in one hand and the orb in the other, and he could cast lightning bolt by using the orb as the spell’s material component and the orb hand to perform the spell’s somatic component.
Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.
If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.
Aid has components of V, S, and M. The example states that the cleric uses her holy symbol as her spellcasting focus. If is emblazoned on her shield. She is holding the shield in one hand and a mace in the other. She has no free hands. However, because her shield is effectively her spellcasting focus because the rules state that it can be when her holy symbol is borne on it, she has her spellcasting focus in her hand. It becomes the channel for the spell instead of the material components. Additionally, she waves her shield hand just so, invoking the somatic component (how that is the case is another discussion, but for the sake of simplicity, lets say its something simple like a cross, star pattern, rude gesture, or other simple action). That is the part that has been invoked ad nauseum to this point by everyone in the Buzz Lightyear camp (CAN!).
However, when the same Cleric, who has a more versatile spellcasting focus than an Arcane Focus, tries to cast Cure Wounds, she suddenly can't do so without putting away either her mace or her shield. It's not just the mace, which would make sense if she had to touch the shield to channel the spell through it. It's either one. If it was a simple matter of waving her spellcasting focus because the material components let her, then this would be a moot point and would not be mentioned at all. She can't just wave her shield around, she needs a free hand to do the somatic components. And if her spellcasting focus is more versatile than the Arcane Focus, then the Arcane Focus would follow the same rules. In this instance, it is essentially a stick and it cost you 5 gp.
The cleric in this example is wielding a shield with their hand, not a spellcasting focus. This normally prevents using that hand for spellcasting, obviously. The whole purpose of this example seems to be to explain that they intended for the shield to still be usable for S components in some cases, but the book didn't properly explain it, so they do here. That's the whole purpose of the sage advice, yeah? Explaining things the book didn't.
The spellcasting focus is on the shield. Holding the Shield is holding the spellcasting focus. It's only good for Clerics and Paladins. You know, it's part of the rules.
Holy Symbol. A holy symbol is a representation of a god or pantheon. It might be an amulet depicting a symbol representing a deity, the same symbol carefully engraved or inlaid as an emblem on a shield, or a tiny box holding a fragment of a sacred relic. A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus, as described in chapter 10. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
That's what most of the obsession about shields in this thread is all about.
BUT THE POOR ARTIFICER! As Davedamon mentioned, specific rules beat general rules. They MUST have a spellcasting focus (which isn't even something that is normally a spellcasting focus, it's artisan's tools or Thieves' Tools. Can your sorcerer use those? No.). If they must use the focus, and they have non M spells on their list, then it stands to reason that they must use their tools to cast their spells.
If you do think that because the Artificer can do it that everyone can do it, then there is no such thing as classes since everyone can now do everything.
And this makes even less sense. To that bolded bit: It does stand to reason that they can use a spellcasting focus to cast non M spell, yeah. But you've been arguing this whole time that they CANNOT do exactly that. So it stands to reason you're wrong about being unable to cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus.
And nothing in their entry tells us that they can. Really, read it again if you must but nothing at all in the Artificer spellcasting section gives them some special permission to do what you seem to say that they and they alone can do. So if it isn't a default ability that anyone can do, then they can't either. Because again, while they are required to do it in general, nothing actually lets them do it for specifically non M spells.
I'll give you this, and posit that it simply means that they have to be holding their spellcasting focus and nothing else to cast S or VS spells. It doesn't prevent them from casting those spells, it just means that they have rules that force them to go without more than other spellcasters.
I'm all for classes having unique abilities, but they actually need to be written on the page, with, like, words.
Un-ignored just so that I could read the response and quote it. That took too much effort, you'll rejoin the one other person that I've ignored shortly.
I will point out for the trolls in the audience that the apparent fascination of this thread with shields is that they provide another example of rules in the book that occur over more than one sentence. We are providing examples of places in the rules where you cannot simply cut one sentence out of the PHB and be done -- just like with spellcasting rules.
Hmm... if you say so, but if we go down that rabbit hole, one could argue that holding the shield and not having it equipped means that the holy symbol is being held. After all, it's not two separate objects. Or is it?
The notion is absurd. A holy symbol that is part of a shield makes the shield a holy symbol for all intents and purposes. Unlike other holy symbols, however, it must be equipped to be used. It would be the same if the holy symbol were on robes, armor, or a crown (though I wouldn't say that is RAW).
If we're going to refute that, then we go back to the first line, and rule that a held shield with the symbol constitutes holding a holy symbol.
Who cares about effectiveness? If the wizard wants to pick up a shield to protect their self, (s)he can do that. Its not hard to imagine a situation where a low-level wizard would want to do that.
Okay, but then that still holds true for an Arcane Focus with spells that have no M components. You can perform somatic components with the focus in your hand but cannot effectively cast the spell.
I'm not entirely sure if I'm understanding you correctly. Are you suggesting that a wizard can cast Detect Magic with a focus and a staff in their hands? If so, then it seems I misunderstood you. If you're saying they can cast it with just an arcane focus in one hand, then we are in agreement.
Not so with the shield and a free hand, assuming the wizard is non-proficient with shields- as equipping armor or a shield that one is non-proficient in means no spellcasting.
I was attempting (poorly it seems) to draw a parallel between the fact that the rules governing a PC’s ability (or lack of) to cast spells while holding a shield are not covered under the description for the shield itself. And how that is also true for a PC’s ability (or lack of) to perform the S components for a spell with no M components while holding an Arcane Focus.
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule.
The artificer isn't even an exception. They're required to have an implement in hand to cast spells, and are permitted to use that implement as a focus, but in the case of a spell that lacks material components (or has components that cannot be replaced by a focus) that just means he needs two hands -- one to hold his tools, one to perform the somatic components.
Is that true? Has that been clarified anywhere? I wasn't sure on that particular detail.
There's a fair chance that's not the intent of the rule, but that's the effect of the rule as written. Honestly, I suspect the original intent of the focus rules was that you could cast any spell while holding a focus and they just worded it badly.
I agree. Which is why I have houseruled that a character can perform the S components for any spell while holding a Spellcasting Focus. That being said, I am fully aware that I am using a houserule in direct contradiction to RAW.
Hmm... if you say so, but if we go down that rabbit hole, one could argue that holding the shield and not having it equipped means that the holy symbol is being held. After all, it's not two separate objects. Or is it?
The notion is absurd. A holy symbol that is part of a shield makes the shield a holy symbol for all intents and purposes. Unlike other holy symbols, however, it must be equipped to be used. It would be the same if the holy symbol were on robes, armor, or a crown (though I wouldn't say that is RAW).
If we're going to refute that, then we go back to the first line, and rule that a held shield with the symbol constitutes holding a holy symbol.
The symbol would have to be worn visibly for robes, armor, or a crown. That much is RAW. Whether you could cast without touching that symbol is at least clouded enough to be solely up to the discretion of the DM, though I've usually thought of it as wearing a pendant and reaching up to grasp it while casting. It is intriguing that it must be worn visibly when nothing says anything about the spellcasting focus being less effective if any particular creature is blinded or can't see the symbol.
Hmm... if you say so, but if we go down that rabbit hole, one could argue that holding the shield and not having it equipped means that the holy symbol is being held. After all, it's not two separate objects. Or is it?
The notion is absurd. A holy symbol that is part of a shield makes the shield a holy symbol for all intents and purposes. Unlike other holy symbols, however, it must be equipped to be used. It would be the same if the holy symbol were on robes, armor, or a crown (though I wouldn't say that is RAW).
If we're going to refute that, then we go back to the first line, and rule that a held shield with the symbol constitutes holding a holy symbol.
Yeah the whole thing with the shield/symbol is specifically why that was the example given in the Sage Advice because that specific case is a weird one and they needed to spell out that exact interaction's conclusion. A cleric can literally just wear a holy symbol on their person and their hand doesn't need to touch it at ALL for it to work. Holy Symbol is totally different in this regard to most/any other spellcasting focus which does indeed need to be held in hand. The shield example being the most convoluted of the options available, they spelled it out for us in all iterations.
Which is why I kept saying that a Holy Symbol and an Arcane Focus are totally different objects that work differently. But, c'est la vie.
If it were me just reading the rules text in the phb, I would have ruled that the shield hand cannot be used for S components ever, even with M components spells, because you're holding a shield, not the symbol, so you're directly interacting with a shield, not a spellcasting focus. But the sage advice gives a reasonable halfway measure, you can cast some spells like that but not others. Odd choice, tbh, but it is what it is.
What's interesting to me is that a holy symbol on a shield, that is slung over the shoulder, still works as a spellcasting focus for a cleric. They're bearing it on a shield, and wearing it visibly. They don't need to actually handle the thing in hand. They can, of course, that is one of the 3 options given for using a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. But they don't need to. Wearing it is fine. They're hands-free focus users.
Symbol on a shield is very similar in this way to wearing it visibly. They're not handling the holy symbol directly. They're handling a shield.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Wait, an emblem engraved on a shield is a different thing than the shield it is engraved on (that is, you could separate the two)? I think I am finally onto what NightskyPirate was asking for.
Hmm... if you say so, but if we go down that rabbit hole, one could argue that holding the shield and not having it equipped means that the holy symbol is being held. After all, it's not two separate objects. Or is it?
The notion is absurd. A holy symbol that is part of a shield makes the shield a holy symbol for all intents and purposes. Unlike other holy symbols, however, it must be equipped to be used. It would be the same if the holy symbol were on robes, armor, or a crown (though I wouldn't say that is RAW).
If we're going to refute that, then we go back to the first line, and rule that a held shield with the symbol constitutes holding a holy symbol.
Yeah the whole thing with the shield/symbol is specifically why that was the example given in the Sage Advice because that specific case is a weird one and they needed to spell out that exact interaction's conclusion. A cleric can literally just wear a holy symbol on their person and their hand doesn't need to touch it at ALL for it to work. Holy Symbol is totally different in this regard to most/any other spellcasting focus which does indeed need to be held in hand. The shield example being the most convoluted of the options available, they spelled it out for us in all iterations.
Which is why I kept saying that a Holy Symbol and an Arcane Focus are totally different objects that work differently. But, c'est la vie.
If it were me just reading the rules text in the phb, I would have ruled that the shield hand cannot be used for S components ever, even with M components spells, because you're holding a shield, not the symbol, so you're directly interacting with a shield, not a spellcasting focus. But the sage advice gives a reasonable halfway measure, you can cast some spells like that but not others. Odd choice, tbh, but it is what it is.
What's interesting to me is that a holy symbol on a shield, that is slung over the shoulder, still works as a spellcasting focus for a cleric. They're bearing it on a shield, and wearing it visibly. They don't need to actually handle the thing in hand. They can, of course, that is one of the 3 options given for using a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. But they don't need to. Wearing it is fine. They're hands-free focus users.
Symbol on a shield is very similar in this way to wearing it visibly. They're not handling the holy symbol directly. They're handling a shield.
Which still begs the question, if it can work just being slung over the shoulder and visible, why would the cleric not be able to cast Cure Wounds if they don't have a free hand? What is the difference between Cure Wounds and Aid that makes one require a free hand and other other not? One has an M component and the other doesn't. The fact that it is in the Component section of the SAC tells us that is the important factor and not something else within the spell.
I agree. Which is why I have houseruled that a character can perform the S components for any spell while holding a Spellcasting Focus. That being said, I am fully aware that I am using a houserule in direct contradiction to RAW.
Yes, because it's stupid for a wizard to have to put away or drop their wand or staff so they can cast a spell. That is really NOT iconic.
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?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
It literally says in the quoted text that a holy symbol on a shield makes the shield a holy symbol.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/artificer#Spellcasting-1131501
Note the use of the word “must” in that description.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
We aren't arguing that you can't cast non-M spells with a spellcasting focus in your hand, we are arguing that you have to follow the rules for the spellcasting class feature of your class and the general spellcasting rules. Those rules are still in play unless text says that they're not. You are supposing that an exception (the artificer) proves the rule (you can cast any spell through a focus) without considering that it is the fact that there is text making the artificer the exception and there is no such text for any other class.
I'm not entirely sure if I'm understanding you correctly. Are you suggesting that a wizard can cast Detect Magic with a focus and a staff in their hands? If so, then it seems I misunderstood you. If you're saying they can cast it with just an arcane focus in one hand, then we are in agreement.
Not so with the shield and a free hand, assuming the wizard is non-proficient with shields- as equipping armor or a shield that one is non-proficient in means no spellcasting.
Unfortunately Rav has you on a 'well ackshully" there. None of the text of the holy symbol description quoted says it makes the shield the holy symbol (only that it is on the shield). What that proves is beyond me except that when they want to read things with subtlety they can, which makes their lack of understanding of the spellcasting rules all the more confounding.
The artificer isn't even an exception. They're required to have an implement in hand to cast spells, and are permitted to use that implement as a focus, but in the case of a spell that lacks material components (or has components that cannot be replaced by a focus) that just means he needs two hands -- one to hold his tools, one to perform the somatic components.
Is that true? Has that been clarified anywhere? I wasn't sure on that particular detail.
There's a fair chance that's not the intent of the rule, but that's the effect of the rule as written. Honestly, I suspect the original intent of the focus rules was that you could cast any spell while holding a focus and they just worded it badly.
Is there any difference between the shield being a holy symbol itself and the holy symbol emblazoned on it merely being part of the shield?
I will admit the distinction is that you can't merely hold the shield and use it as a holy symbol- it must be equipped. That is, however, consistent with every other facet of the shield- for example, a wizard can hold a shield and cast spells, but not if it is equipped.
It is the same sort of technicality that everyone jumped on me over. Like I said, is it an important distinction? No. Is there any effective change? No. Does it make Rav get to say "well ackshuylly"? probably, so we should nip it in the bud.
TheRavnodaus' misinterpretation of the rules under the holy symbol item seems so egregiously inept that I feel it is deliberate.*Edited for clarity*
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
You may not think that you are implying that, but that's the logical conclusion of your argument. If components don't matter because they can all be replaced, then Subtle Spell doesn't matter. You aren't going exactly to that point, true. You are saying that the Arcane Focus is used to channel the spell, and the material component rules that aren't in force during a non material component spell allow you to do so. The only way that makes sense is if you are able to replace the components including the somatic components, which would lead to replacing the verbal components and therefore make Subtle Spell irrelevant.
And where is the Holy Symbol? It's emblazoned on the shield. See merriam-webster here. If the symbol is emblazoned on the shield, then it is on the shield. If it's on the shield, then you can't hold it unless you are holding the shield. Your refusal to recognize this fact is as tiring for us as I'm sure you would be with your perception that we are refusing to see reason by just telling you that the sky is in fact normally purple if we were discussing the color of the sky.
And nothing in their entry tells us that they can. Really, read it again if you must but nothing at all in the Artificer spellcasting section gives them some special permission to do what you seem to say that they and they alone can do. So if it isn't a default ability that anyone can do, then they can't either. Because again, while they are required to do it in general, nothing actually lets them do it for specifically non M spells.
I'll give you this, and posit that it simply means that they have to be holding their spellcasting focus and nothing else to cast S or VS spells. It doesn't prevent them from casting those spells, it just means that they have rules that force them to go without more than other spellcasters.
Un-ignored just so that I could read the response and quote it. That took too much effort, you'll rejoin the one other person that I've ignored shortly.
I will point out for the trolls in the audience that the apparent fascination of this thread with shields is that they provide another example of rules in the book that occur over more than one sentence. We are providing examples of places in the rules where you cannot simply cut one sentence out of the PHB and be done -- just like with spellcasting rules.
Hmm... if you say so, but if we go down that rabbit hole, one could argue that holding the shield and not having it equipped means that the holy symbol is being held. After all, it's not two separate objects. Or is it?
The notion is absurd. A holy symbol that is part of a shield makes the shield a holy symbol for all intents and purposes. Unlike other holy symbols, however, it must be equipped to be used. It would be the same if the holy symbol were on robes, armor, or a crown (though I wouldn't say that is RAW).
If we're going to refute that, then we go back to the first line, and rule that a held shield with the symbol constitutes holding a holy symbol.
I was attempting (poorly it seems) to draw a parallel between the fact that the rules governing a PC’s ability (or lack of) to cast spells while holding a shield are not covered under the description for the shield itself. And how that is also true for a PC’s ability (or lack of) to perform the S components for a spell with no M components while holding an Arcane Focus.
I agree. Which is why I have houseruled that a character can perform the S components for any spell while holding a Spellcasting Focus. That being said, I am fully aware that I am using a houserule in direct contradiction to RAW.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The symbol would have to be worn visibly for robes, armor, or a crown. That much is RAW. Whether you could cast without touching that symbol is at least clouded enough to be solely up to the discretion of the DM, though I've usually thought of it as wearing a pendant and reaching up to grasp it while casting. It is intriguing that it must be worn visibly when nothing says anything about the spellcasting focus being less effective if any particular creature is blinded or can't see the symbol.
Yeah the whole thing with the shield/symbol is specifically why that was the example given in the Sage Advice because that specific case is a weird one and they needed to spell out that exact interaction's conclusion. A cleric can literally just wear a holy symbol on their person and their hand doesn't need to touch it at ALL for it to work. Holy Symbol is totally different in this regard to most/any other spellcasting focus which does indeed need to be held in hand. The shield example being the most convoluted of the options available, they spelled it out for us in all iterations.
Which is why I kept saying that a Holy Symbol and an Arcane Focus are totally different objects that work differently. But, c'est la vie.
If it were me just reading the rules text in the phb, I would have ruled that the shield hand cannot be used for S components ever, even with M components spells, because you're holding a shield, not the symbol, so you're directly interacting with a shield, not a spellcasting focus. But the sage advice gives a reasonable halfway measure, you can cast some spells like that but not others. Odd choice, tbh, but it is what it is.
What's interesting to me is that a holy symbol on a shield, that is slung over the shoulder, still works as a spellcasting focus for a cleric. They're bearing it on a shield, and wearing it visibly. They don't need to actually handle the thing in hand. They can, of course, that is one of the 3 options given for using a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. But they don't need to. Wearing it is fine. They're hands-free focus users.
Symbol on a shield is very similar in this way to wearing it visibly. They're not handling the holy symbol directly. They're handling a shield.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Wait, an emblem engraved on a shield is a different thing than the shield it is engraved on (that is, you could separate the two)? I think I am finally onto what NightskyPirate was asking for.
Which still begs the question, if it can work just being slung over the shoulder and visible, why would the cleric not be able to cast Cure Wounds if they don't have a free hand? What is the difference between Cure Wounds and Aid that makes one require a free hand and other other not? One has an M component and the other doesn't. The fact that it is in the Component section of the SAC tells us that is the important factor and not something else within the spell.
Yes, because it's stupid for a wizard to have to put away or drop their wand or staff so they can cast a spell. That is really NOT iconic.
"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