You don't need a free hand to hold a holy symbol spellcasting focus, you can use it when you wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield as stated in Sage Advice Compendium exemple.
There's an art to being concise in your answer. Yours was. Mine wasn't.
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. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
Here is where I see the contradiction and why I believe this specific rule supersedes the general rule. The general rule for material components tells us how spellcasters use a spellcasting focus--they need a free hand to hold it. The Holy symbol tells us how clerics and paladins use the holy symbol as a spellcasting focus--the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
These are not contradictory, though. You can wear an amulet, visibly, but still reach up and hold it in hand when casting a M spell. Nothing about that interaction is contradictory. Having the holy symbol worn, or born upon a shield doesn't specifically address the need to hold it, nor are they contradictory to needing to hold it during the spellcasting process.
Is the specific rule explicit? Yes it is. It tells us how the holy symbol can be used by clerics and paladins.
Does it contradict the general rule? I believe it does by offering three ways to use it versus one way in the general rule. This includes the holding it, but provides two other options as well.
But does it contradict anything? How does having a requirement to hold it, wear it, or bear it on a shield contradict the listed requirement to have a free hand? These are not mutually exclusive states of being, nor does the item description specifically state that you can wear it or bear it on a shield in lieu of holding it. If it had wanted to provide additional ways of satisfying the M rules it should have said that these are being presented as alternative means of satisfying the hand requirements of the general rules, yet it doesn't reference those rules at all. Not even cursorily.
The holy symbol does a better job than the hat of wizardry or the dark shard amulet. Both of these items tell you they can be used as a spellcasting focus, and they IMPLY that you don't need to hold them, but as we saw above, that isn't good enough because a specific rule needs to explicitly contradict a general rule to supersede it. With these two magic items, both the general rule and the specific rules for those items apply in harmony.
The same applies to the Holy Symbol, as it fails to state the listed requirements for use are in lieu of the general rules. Thus both apply. You must reach up with a free hand to hold you wizard hat, or your dark amulet, just as you must put your hand on your worn emblem of your deity. That spellcasting rule for the free hand must be satisfied else the spell fails.
In fact, the only magic item I can think of that explicitly tells you that you don't need to hold it in order to use it as a spellcasting focus would be if you had a wand that was a spellcasting focus, and you placed in a wand sheath, as it also explicitly contradicts the general rule for using a spellcasting focus by holding it.
You are correct in that the wand sheath is a good example of an item that allows you to use it as a focus without a hand free. But you'll note it does state a whole lot of things that the holy symbol just... doesn't. Namely this: "While the wand is extended, you can use it as if you were holding it, but your hand remains free."
As written, the holy symbol lists only additional requirements for use, not alternative ones.
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.
You don't need a free hand to hold a holy symbol spellcasting focus, you can use it when you wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield as stated in Sage Advice Compendium exemple.
There's an art to being concise in your answer. Yours was. Mine wasn't.
This supports my interpretation. This is what you're referring to I presume:
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 (PH, 203). 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.
You'll note that because the shield is being held, it meets both the requirements listed in the item description AND the M spellcasting rules.
A emblem worn visibly needs to meet both requirements, too. Thus will need a free hand to reach up and hold it during the spellcasting process of spells that have a M component.
Wearing it visibly is a requirement to use it as a Holy Symbol. But having a free hand to hold it is the listed requirement to use it as a spellcasting focus to satisfy the M component. You need both.
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.
Ah, I thought that you might have been going in the complete opposite direction with your arguments so I'm glad I asked.
As for this recent clarification, I totally disagree. A spellcasting focus is an item that is used in a particular way such that using the item allows it to participate in the casting of the spell in order to satisfy the M requirement for that spell. In the case of the holy symbol we have: "To use the symbol [as a spellcasting focus], the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield". So, the rule for the holy symbol provides three different ways that it can be used in the casting of the spell to satisfy the M requirements. If we were starting from a premise that there is already a general rule that requires a hand to satisfy the M component, the holy symbol provides an exception to that rule.
Now, here is what I thought you were getting at -- I might agree with this even though it flies in the face of how pretty much everyone currently interprets these rules:
First, we start with the general rule for the M component:
A spellcaster must have a hand free to hold a spellcasting focus, but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components
Next, the above statement CAN be interpreted / rewritten as: "In order to hold a spellcasting focus, a spellcaster must have a hand free . . .". In other words -- you might decide to hold a focus to cast a spell with a material component and in order to do that you need a free hand, BUT if you do NOT hold the focus to cast that spell then you obviously don't need a free hand for the focus.
So, it's possible that there is NO rule that requires a hand to satisfy the M component -- the rule is ONLY specifying that IF you hold a focus that doing so requires a free hand.
Under such an interpretation perhaps it's good enough that the material component is simply in the caster's possession. For example, we cast a sleep spell and we have a pinch of fine sand sitting in a pouch. Perhaps this automatically participates in the casting of the spell without ever handling it? We know that IF we wish to "access" that component then we must have a free hand to do so, but if we read the entire paragraph carefully perhaps there is not actually any requirement to "access" the component in order to "provide" it for a spell that "requires particular objects".
To take it a step further, maybe the caster doesn't even have to possess the material component and instead it simply has to be in the vicinity in order for it to be "provided"? For example, the party is walking through a desert that is covered in fine sand. Perhaps the caster can cast a sleep spell and the nearby environment automatically provides the sand needed for the M component?
By extension, the rule for a spellcasting focus would work the same way. Under this interpretation, who says that an orb must be held in hand or even touched by a free hand at all for an arcane spellcaster to use it to satisfy the M component? This interpretation only says that IF we hold the orb then we must have a free hand to do so. But perhaps the orb can be attached to the end of a quarterstaff or placed into a belt pouch or sitting in a nearby cart that is being pulled by a donkey?
In the context of this discussion I bring this up only because if we were somehow using an interpretation like this THEN the rule for the holy symbol would not be an exception -- it would just be the same as things already are for any spellcasting focus, or possibly even more restrictive. I am actually sort of on the fence about what I think about the above interpretation. From a pedantic viewpoint of parsing the statements in the written rules I actually think that it might be valid, but it is certainly not the intended rule and there are clearly other (and more generally accepted) valid interpretations as well.
There's no contradiction but a case a specific vs general rule. In general, a caster must have a free hand to hold a focus, but focus such as holy symbol can specifically be used without holding them;
General: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus.
Specific: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held, rather than replaces the need for it to be held. I know that's splitting hairs, and I am not suggesting you said anything incorrect. It's just how I get to your conclusion on perhaps a slightly different route.
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held, rather than replaces the need for it to be held. I know that's splitting hairs, and I am not suggesting you said anything incorrect. It's just how I get to your conclusion on perhaps a slightly different route.
In the SAC exemple it's not the holy symbol that is held in hand, but the shield where it's emblazoned, and the reason the spellcasting focus can be used to cast M spell is because it bear it on a shield as explained in the ruled.
I would have like they also provide an exemple with a holy symbol worn visibly but they chose to only provide an exemple of a shield bearing one because i assume the most FAQ they received involved a weapon/shield.
In the SAC exemple it's not the holy symbol that is held in hand, but the shield where it's emblazoned, and the reason the spellcasting focus can be used to cast M spell is because it bear it on a shield as explained in the ruled.
Actually, this is not true because the sage advice goes on to say that the shield hand can be used for somatic components which shouldn't be possible with the above interpretation.
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held
Yes, this is the sage advice interpretation. They are considering the focus to be held because the shield is held and therefore the shield hand can perform somatic components. This is an absolutely terrible ruling imo and is NOT how the rules are written:
the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield
The "or" in that statement is very important. A focus that you bear on a shield cannot also be held in hand -- it's either/or. Sage Advice botched that one really badly.
So glad I kind of ignore some of this rubbish in my games.
If you're a wand or staff user and the wand or staff is your focus, keep it in your hand even if you don't need it for your spell. Forcing you to put it away or drop it to cast your spell breaks immersion and is very NOT iconic to wizard type characters.
Paladins and Clerics, can feel free to wear their symbol around their neck or on their shield and have it count as their focus no problem. But you have to stow your mace or your sword if you need gestures because the mace or sword is not your focus (yes, with the right item it can become so). It maintains immersion - you don't bless or cure somebody by whacking them with your mace!
Again, this is not RAW or RAI, it's just how I do it.
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?"
In the SAC exemple it's not the holy symbol that is held in hand, but the shield where it's emblazoned, and the reason the spellcasting focus can be used to cast M spell is because it bear it on a shield as explained in the ruled.
Actually, this is not true because the sage advice goes on to say that the shield hand can be used for somatic components which shouldn't be possible with the above interpretation.
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held
Yes, this is the sage advice interpretation. They are considering the focus to be held because the shield is held and therefore the shield hand can perform somatic components. This is an absolutely terrible ruling imo and is NOT how the rules are written:
the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield
The "or" in that statement is very important. A focus that you bear on a shield cannot also be held in hand -- it's either/or. Sage Advice botched that one really badly.
Exactly why it's true is laid in your last sentence. A holy symbol you bear on a shield count because a shield occupy your hand.
I don't think you could cast a S,M spell while wielding a mace and shield in hands if the holy symbol bear on shield you keep on your back or one worn visibly on a tabard because you'd have no hand holding a focus that can be the same hand used to perform somatic components.
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held, rather than replaces the need for it to be held. I know that's splitting hairs, and I am not suggesting you said anything incorrect. It's just how I get to your conclusion on perhaps a slightly different route.
I agree with you it count as laid out in the SAC exemple. I guess a holy symbol bear on a shield that you hold in your hand count as holding a spellcasting focus in your hand for the purposes of spell components.
It all only matters when casting spells with both S, M spell, those without somatic component are not impacted by a spellcasting focus that can be used while not in hand like a worn holy symbol, wand sheath, hat of wizardry or dark shard amulet for exemple.
This is the point i was essentialy trying to make.
There's no contradiction but a case a specific vs general rule. In general, a caster must have a free hand to hold a focus, but focus such as holy symbol can specifically be used without holding them;
General: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus.
Specific: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
A holy symbol has no such clauses stating what you're claiming.
To use a Holy Symbol as a spellcasting focus, the cleric needs to hold it in hand, or needs to wear it visibly, or needs to bear it upon a shield.
This is faily uncontested. The item says as much.
Where people are going wrong is inventing something to the effect of "These options are alternatives to the standard means of using a spellcasting focus" which the item absolutely does NOT say.
The listed options tell us how to use the symbol AS a spellcasting focus.
But the component rules tell us how to us a spellcasting focus. And this requirement has NOT been altered by the text of the sybol item description. It must also be satisfied.
And there is no conflict here. You absolutely CAN satisfy both requirements. They're complementary requirements.
There is no general vs specific interaction here. They BOTH apply.
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.
No. If the component rules tell us that a hand is needed when a spellcasting focus is used then the rule for the Holy Symbol is an exception to this -- a hand is not required when using a holy symbol.
There's no contradiction but a case a specific vs general rule. In general, a caster must have a free hand to hold a focus, but focus such as holy symbol can specifically be used without holding them;
General: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus.
Specific: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
A holy symbol has no such clauses stating what you're claiming.
To use a Holy Symbol as a spellcasting focus, the cleric needs to hold it in hand, or needs to wear it visibly, or needs to bear it upon a shield.
This is faily uncontested. The item says as much.
Where people are going wrong is inventing something to the effect of "These options are alternatives to the standard means of using a spellcasting focus" which the item absolutely does NOT say.
The listed options tell us how to use the symbol AS a spellcasting focus.
But the component rules tell us how to us a spellcasting focus. And this requirement has NOT been altered by the text of the sybol item description. It must also be satisfied.
And there is no conflict here. You absolutely CAN satisfy both requirements. They're complementary requirements.
There is no general vs specific interaction here. They BOTH apply.
You don't see the contradiction in what your saying?
A spellcaster must have a hand free to hold a spellcasting focus, if to use such focus you normaly need to but a holy symbol can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, OR bear it on a shield, the latters are specifically not hand held despite allowing them to be used use while meeting material component requirement. The statement is a A,B or C so they not all have to be met, any one method is valid. You can definitely use a holy symbol by any of the method suggested, including in ways you don't hold in hand.
Saying they still need a free hand to hold a holy symbol when it says it can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield is a contradiction since when worn visibly and still need to be hand held making them redundant.
Material Components: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus
Holy Symbol: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
There's no contradiction but a case a specific vs general rule. In general, a caster must have a free hand to hold a focus, but focus such as holy symbol can specifically be used without holding them;
General: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus.
Specific: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
A holy symbol has no such clauses stating what you're claiming.
To use a Holy Symbol as a spellcasting focus, the cleric needs to hold it in hand, or needs to wear it visibly, or needs to bear it upon a shield.
This is faily uncontested. The item says as much.
Where people are going wrong is inventing something to the effect of "These options are alternatives to the standard means of using a spellcasting focus" which the item absolutely does NOT say.
The listed options tell us how to use the symbol AS a spellcasting focus.
But the component rules tell us how to us a spellcasting focus. And this requirement has NOT been altered by the text of the sybol item description. It must also be satisfied.
And there is no conflict here. You absolutely CAN satisfy both requirements. They're complementary requirements.
There is no general vs specific interaction here. They BOTH apply.
You don't see the contradiction in what your saying?
Correct. Because there isn't one.
A spellcaster must have a hand free to hold a spellcasting focus, if to use such focus you normaly need to but a holy symbol can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, OR bear it on a shield, the latters are specifically not hand held despite allowing them to be used use while meeting material component requirement.
No. No, that's not it at all.
Guys.
You need to hold a spellcasting focus to use it in place of material components. That's the rule for using it instead of components.
But how do you use a Holy Symbol? You use it AS a spellcasting focus. And to be ABLE to use it AS a spellcasting focus, you need to hold it (obvs) wear it visibly, or have it on a shield. But... again, I'm stressing this part: That is to be able to use it AS a spellcasting focus.
But it at no time modifies how a spellcasting focus works. Those listed means is using it aren't alternative ways that spellcasting foci work. No. They're the requirements you must meet for the Holy Symbol to even ACT as a foci.
The statement is a A,B or C so they not all have to be met, any one method is valid.
Any one is valid to enable the symbol to function as a foci.
None of them change the way foci work.
You can definitely use a holy symbol by any of the method suggested, including in ways you don't hold in hand.
Sure, all of those means enable it to act as a foci.
Saying they still need a free hand to hold a holy symbol when it says it can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield is a contradiction since when worn visibly and still need to be hand held making them redundant.
Only a contradiction if you don't read the rules.
Material Components: A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus
Holy Symbol: A cleric or paladin can use a holy symbol as a spellcasting focus. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield. To use the symbol in this way, the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield.
Yep, exactly. To use it AS a foci you have option A, B, and C. But to use a foci to replace M components you do still need to hold it.
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.
There is a rule for how a spellcasting focus is used. The Holy Symbol provides an exception to that rule. Honestly, this is something that shouldn't even be argued. At this point you are just arguing for argument's sake.
Yep, exactly. To use it AS a foci you have option A, B, and C. But to use a foci to replace M components you do still need to hold it.
Why are you using a foci if not to replace M components? When you use a spellcasting focus, you do so in place of the M components specified for a spell unless it has a cost.
So it would be completely redundant to have A B or C but still need to hold it either way since A = must hold it in hand but not B or C.
Yep, exactly. To use it AS a foci you have option A, B, and C. But to use a foci to replace M components you do still need to hold it.
Why are you using a foci if not to replace M components? When you use a spellcasting focus, you do so in place of the M components specified for a spell unless it has a cost.
So it would be completely redundant to have A B or C but still need to hold it either way since A = must hold it in hand but not B or C.
'
So you agree there is no contradiction. Thus general vs specific is never at play. Both requirements apply. Redundant? Yes. Contradictory? No.
Sage Advice fully support this. The shield described works because it is meeting both the requirements to serve as a foci, and also is being handled in a way compatible with normal spellcasting rules.
I should point out that it helps when you realize that a holy symbol is not a spellcasting focus. It can only work as one under the right conditions. The item description tells you what those conditions are. That's it. They're not at all telling us how spellcasting foci work. it simply tells us what is required for the symbol to even start functioning as a foci to begin with.
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.
I should point out that it helps when you realize that a holy symbol is not a spellcasting focus. It can only work as one under the right conditions. The item description tells you what those conditions are. That's it. They're not at all telling us how spellcasting foci work. it simply tells us what is required for the symbol to even start functioning as a foci to begin with.
It's unclear what point you are even trying to make but this whole line of thinking is false. The holy symbol is the spellcasting focus in the described situation. Are you trying to say that there is actually no such thing as an item called a "spellcasting focus"? Like, none of the items listed under Arcane Focus are spellcasting foci, none of the items listed under Druidic Focus are spellcasting foci and so on?
You are misunderstanding the phrasing that is used. When it says that a Wizard can use an orb as a spellcasting focus, that doesn't mean that the orb is not a focus. It is a focus -- but not everyone can use it that way -- but the Wizard can.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There's an art to being concise in your answer. Yours was. Mine wasn't.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
These are not contradictory, though. You can wear an amulet, visibly, but still reach up and hold it in hand when casting a M spell. Nothing about that interaction is contradictory. Having the holy symbol worn, or born upon a shield doesn't specifically address the need to hold it, nor are they contradictory to needing to hold it during the spellcasting process.
But does it contradict anything? How does having a requirement to hold it, wear it, or bear it on a shield contradict the listed requirement to have a free hand? These are not mutually exclusive states of being, nor does the item description specifically state that you can wear it or bear it on a shield in lieu of holding it. If it had wanted to provide additional ways of satisfying the M rules it should have said that these are being presented as alternative means of satisfying the hand requirements of the general rules, yet it doesn't reference those rules at all. Not even cursorily.
The same applies to the Holy Symbol, as it fails to state the listed requirements for use are in lieu of the general rules. Thus both apply. You must reach up with a free hand to hold you wizard hat, or your dark amulet, just as you must put your hand on your worn emblem of your deity. That spellcasting rule for the free hand must be satisfied else the spell fails.
You are correct in that the wand sheath is a good example of an item that allows you to use it as a focus without a hand free. But you'll note it does state a whole lot of things that the holy symbol just... doesn't. Namely this: "While the wand is extended, you can use it as if you were holding it, but your hand remains free."
As written, the holy symbol lists only additional requirements for use, not alternative ones.
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.
This supports my interpretation. This is what you're referring to I presume:
You'll note that because the shield is being held, it meets both the requirements listed in the item description AND the M spellcasting rules.
A emblem worn visibly needs to meet both requirements, too. Thus will need a free hand to reach up and hold it during the spellcasting process of spells that have a M component.
Wearing it visibly is a requirement to use it as a Holy Symbol. But having a free hand to hold it is the listed requirement to use it as a spellcasting focus to satisfy the M component. You need both.
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.
Ah, I thought that you might have been going in the complete opposite direction with your arguments so I'm glad I asked.
As for this recent clarification, I totally disagree. A spellcasting focus is an item that is used in a particular way such that using the item allows it to participate in the casting of the spell in order to satisfy the M requirement for that spell. In the case of the holy symbol we have: "To use the symbol [as a spellcasting focus], the caster must hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield". So, the rule for the holy symbol provides three different ways that it can be used in the casting of the spell to satisfy the M requirements. If we were starting from a premise that there is already a general rule that requires a hand to satisfy the M component, the holy symbol provides an exception to that rule.
Now, here is what I thought you were getting at -- I might agree with this even though it flies in the face of how pretty much everyone currently interprets these rules:
First, we start with the general rule for the M component:
Next, the above statement CAN be interpreted / rewritten as: "In order to hold a spellcasting focus, a spellcaster must have a hand free . . .". In other words -- you might decide to hold a focus to cast a spell with a material component and in order to do that you need a free hand, BUT if you do NOT hold the focus to cast that spell then you obviously don't need a free hand for the focus.
So, it's possible that there is NO rule that requires a hand to satisfy the M component -- the rule is ONLY specifying that IF you hold a focus that doing so requires a free hand.
Under such an interpretation perhaps it's good enough that the material component is simply in the caster's possession. For example, we cast a sleep spell and we have a pinch of fine sand sitting in a pouch. Perhaps this automatically participates in the casting of the spell without ever handling it? We know that IF we wish to "access" that component then we must have a free hand to do so, but if we read the entire paragraph carefully perhaps there is not actually any requirement to "access" the component in order to "provide" it for a spell that "requires particular objects".
To take it a step further, maybe the caster doesn't even have to possess the material component and instead it simply has to be in the vicinity in order for it to be "provided"? For example, the party is walking through a desert that is covered in fine sand. Perhaps the caster can cast a sleep spell and the nearby environment automatically provides the sand needed for the M component?
By extension, the rule for a spellcasting focus would work the same way. Under this interpretation, who says that an orb must be held in hand or even touched by a free hand at all for an arcane spellcaster to use it to satisfy the M component? This interpretation only says that IF we hold the orb then we must have a free hand to do so. But perhaps the orb can be attached to the end of a quarterstaff or placed into a belt pouch or sitting in a nearby cart that is being pulled by a donkey?
In the context of this discussion I bring this up only because if we were somehow using an interpretation like this THEN the rule for the holy symbol would not be an exception -- it would just be the same as things already are for any spellcasting focus, or possibly even more restrictive. I am actually sort of on the fence about what I think about the above interpretation. From a pedantic viewpoint of parsing the statements in the written rules I actually think that it might be valid, but it is certainly not the intended rule and there are clearly other (and more generally accepted) valid interpretations as well.
There's no contradiction but a case a specific vs general rule. In general, a caster must have a free hand to hold a focus, but focus such as holy symbol can specifically be used without holding them;
Going on the SAC example, I would say that a holy symbol on a worn shield counts as the spellcasting focus being held, rather than replaces the need for it to be held. I know that's splitting hairs, and I am not suggesting you said anything incorrect. It's just how I get to your conclusion on perhaps a slightly different route.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
hi
Are you sure you want me to die?
In the SAC exemple it's not the holy symbol that is held in hand, but the shield where it's emblazoned, and the reason the spellcasting focus can be used to cast M spell is because it bear it on a shield as explained in the ruled.
I would have like they also provide an exemple with a holy symbol worn visibly but they chose to only provide an exemple of a shield bearing one because i assume the most FAQ they received involved a weapon/shield.
Actually, this is not true because the sage advice goes on to say that the shield hand can be used for somatic components which shouldn't be possible with the above interpretation.
Yes, this is the sage advice interpretation. They are considering the focus to be held because the shield is held and therefore the shield hand can perform somatic components. This is an absolutely terrible ruling imo and is NOT how the rules are written:
The "or" in that statement is very important. A focus that you bear on a shield cannot also be held in hand -- it's either/or. Sage Advice botched that one really badly.
So glad I kind of ignore some of this rubbish in my games.
If you're a wand or staff user and the wand or staff is your focus, keep it in your hand even if you don't need it for your spell. Forcing you to put it away or drop it to cast your spell breaks immersion and is very NOT iconic to wizard type characters.
Paladins and Clerics, can feel free to wear their symbol around their neck or on their shield and have it count as their focus no problem. But you have to stow your mace or your sword if you need gestures because the mace or sword is not your focus (yes, with the right item it can become so). It maintains immersion - you don't bless or cure somebody by whacking them with your mace!
Again, this is not RAW or RAI, it's just how I do it.
"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
Exactly why it's true is laid in your last sentence. A holy symbol you bear on a shield count because a shield occupy your hand.
I don't think you could cast a S,M spell while wielding a mace and shield in hands if the holy symbol bear on shield you keep on your back or one worn visibly on a tabard because you'd have no hand holding a focus that can be the same hand used to perform somatic components.
I agree with you it count as laid out in the SAC exemple. I guess a holy symbol bear on a shield that you hold in your hand count as holding a spellcasting focus in your hand for the purposes of spell components.
It all only matters when casting spells with both S, M spell, those without somatic component are not impacted by a spellcasting focus that can be used while not in hand like a worn holy symbol, wand sheath, hat of wizardry or dark shard amulet for exemple.
This is the point i was essentialy trying to make.
A holy symbol has no such clauses stating what you're claiming.
To use a Holy Symbol as a spellcasting focus, the cleric needs to hold it in hand, or needs to wear it visibly, or needs to bear it upon a shield.
This is faily uncontested. The item says as much.
Where people are going wrong is inventing something to the effect of "These options are alternatives to the standard means of using a spellcasting focus" which the item absolutely does NOT say.
The listed options tell us how to use the symbol AS a spellcasting focus.
But the component rules tell us how to us a spellcasting focus. And this requirement has NOT been altered by the text of the sybol item description. It must also be satisfied.
And there is no conflict here. You absolutely CAN satisfy both requirements. They're complementary requirements.
There is no general vs specific interaction here. They BOTH apply.
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.
No. If the component rules tell us that a hand is needed when a spellcasting focus is used then the rule for the Holy Symbol is an exception to this -- a hand is not required when using a holy symbol.
You don't see the contradiction in what your saying?
A spellcaster must have a hand free to hold a spellcasting focus, if to use such focus you normaly need to but a holy symbol can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, OR bear it on a shield, the latters are specifically not hand held despite allowing them to be used use while meeting material component requirement. The statement is a A,B or C so they not all have to be met, any one method is valid. You can definitely use a holy symbol by any of the method suggested, including in ways you don't hold in hand.
Saying they still need a free hand to hold a holy symbol when it says it can be used when you hold it in hand, wear it visibly, or bear it on a shield is a contradiction since when worn visibly and still need to be hand held making them redundant.
Correct. Because there isn't one.
No. No, that's not it at all.
Guys.
You need to hold a spellcasting focus to use it in place of material components. That's the rule for using it instead of components.
But how do you use a Holy Symbol? You use it AS a spellcasting focus. And to be ABLE to use it AS a spellcasting focus, you need to hold it (obvs) wear it visibly, or have it on a shield. But... again, I'm stressing this part: That is to be able to use it AS a spellcasting focus.
But it at no time modifies how a spellcasting focus works. Those listed means is using it aren't alternative ways that spellcasting foci work. No. They're the requirements you must meet for the Holy Symbol to even ACT as a foci.
Any one is valid to enable the symbol to function as a foci.
None of them change the way foci work.
Sure, all of those means enable it to act as a foci.
Only a contradiction if you don't read the rules.
Yep, exactly. To use it AS a foci you have option A, B, and C. But to use a foci to replace M components you do still need to hold it.
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.
What in the world are you even talking about!?
There is a rule for how a spellcasting focus is used. The Holy Symbol provides an exception to that rule. Honestly, this is something that shouldn't even be argued. At this point you are just arguing for argument's sake.
Why are you using a foci if not to replace M components? When you use a spellcasting focus, you do so in place of the M components specified for a spell unless it has a cost.
So it would be completely redundant to have A B or C but still need to hold it either way since A = must hold it in hand but not B or C.
'
So you agree there is no contradiction. Thus general vs specific is never at play. Both requirements apply. Redundant? Yes. Contradictory? No.
Sage Advice fully support this. The shield described works because it is meeting both the requirements to serve as a foci, and also is being handled in a way compatible with normal spellcasting rules.
I should point out that it helps when you realize that a holy symbol is not a spellcasting focus. It can only work as one under the right conditions. The item description tells you what those conditions are. That's it. They're not at all telling us how spellcasting foci work. it simply tells us what is required for the symbol to even start functioning as a foci to begin with.
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.
It's unclear what point you are even trying to make but this whole line of thinking is false. The holy symbol is the spellcasting focus in the described situation. Are you trying to say that there is actually no such thing as an item called a "spellcasting focus"? Like, none of the items listed under Arcane Focus are spellcasting foci, none of the items listed under Druidic Focus are spellcasting foci and so on?
You are misunderstanding the phrasing that is used. When it says that a Wizard can use an orb as a spellcasting focus, that doesn't mean that the orb is not a focus. It is a focus -- but not everyone can use it that way -- but the Wizard can.