But the material component doesn't have a cost so it was intended on being free and usable - and consequently able to be replaced by a spellcasting focus. If the intent was otherwise - it would have a gold cost associated with it.
You're not wrong.
Banishment is a weird spell in that regard because it's one of the few (only?) spells that has a material component, but that component is unspecified and variable. Realistically, it would be just as easy to make my special not-meant-to-be-banished monster have legendary resistance or hell, just make it literally banish-proof in its design.
EDIT: I stand corrected. The rules do address this case specifically. PHB 203 says "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."
Banishment does not specify its material component.
EDIT: I stand corrected. The rules do address this case specifically. PHB 203 says "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."
Banishment does not specify its material component.
I feel that's being a bit too extreme with the definition of "specified". The material component is listed.
And depending on how pedantic you feel like being - you could go for the word "distasteful" and use it literally. Get a Bittering Agent like the stuff they put in Anti-Freeze to stop it tasting sweet. I've tried that stuff - it is foul - and definitely "distasteful".
It's a silly argument - but it kind of highlights that the word itself is extremely vague and I'm sure there would be something in all wizard's component pouch that would be "distasteful" to the target in one form or another.
I like the idea of a creature planning on being banished just for its sheer complexity, but you're talking about an incredible amount of foresight required on the target's part.
It would have to know the caster would be casting banishment on it.
It would have to know ahead of time exactly which harmless demiplane (and where within the plane it would appear) it would be banished to.
It would have to have arranged ahead of time for assistance to deal with it being incapacitated when it arrived.
It would need to have a way to extend its time on that demiplane beyond the caster choosing when to end the spell.
It would have to have some purpose for doing all of this.
Any creature possessing all of these faculties and resources would likely use its abilities in a more useful way. So the short answer is "No" and the longer answer is "But why?" Then again, who knows? Maybe you can come up with an interesting story reason why this might happen. If so, then more power to you. I'll bet you will catch your players off guard :)
TL;DR - Just make your monster originate from a different plane so the banishment would last as long as you want it to and then have the creature plane shift back in at a time of its (your) choosing.
specifically for banishment: for one. Was does the hexblade have in his possession that your boss truly truly hates and despises. For the spell cost to cast? I see many a DM gloss over and just allow banish to banish no matter what. And that’s not how it works.
The caster is wearing a grey robe with brown boots--a very distasteful fashion choice.
And don't even get me started on that hair. Atrocious!
In seriousness though, for a BBEG I personally would probably use something like Plane Shift as Emmber suggests, or the Gate spell. 'Course, as the DM you can always just homebrew the specific effect you want as well.
How and why are you still arguing over what can be used as the material to cast banishment? That doesn't have anything to do with the OP's question. Which was essentially "how much can be interacted with in the plane you're banished to?"
EDIT: I stand corrected. The rules do address this case specifically. PHB 203 says "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."
Banishment does not specify its material component.
I feel that's being a bit too extreme with the definition of "specified". The material component is listed.
And depending on how pedantic you feel like being - you could go for the word "distasteful" and use it literally. Get a Bittering Agent like the stuff they put in Anti-Freeze to stop it tasting sweet. I've tried that stuff - it is foul - and definitely "distasteful".
It's a silly argument - but it kind of highlights that the word itself is extremely vague and I'm sure there would be something in all wizard's component pouch that would be "distasteful" to the target in one form or another.
I don’t know why you are eating ingredients from anti-freeze...
but I’ll go along this line here. Why do you, or we, or anyone, assume that demons and humans. Or humans and elves. Etc etc. have similar “tastes” specifically for food and taste buds?
have you ever had marmite? Most people hate it. An entire continent swears by it and loves it.
do you put vinegar in French fries? I think it’s distasteful, but in England almost everyone does it.
using the actual definition of distasteful I think it’s more clear that banishment was intended to be used after finding out (bard minimums) about the target you are casting it on.
if you think of banishment as the D&D equivalent of “go to your room”, Would you enforce a timeout without giving a reason for them to be required to go to their room?
As the thread has not respected this request to keep the conversation on-topic to the OP's question, I'm locking this thread. @Beyond_Pride, if you wish to reopen this thread to further discuss the topic, please send me a PM.
For an encounter in a homebrew setting I’m planning on having one of the bosses get banished by a teammate to outlast the effects of our hexalidin’s (hexblade paladin) curses. The question I have is: can things or people interact with him in the place he was banished to. For example can he prepare a space to be banished and have a healer prepared for him to get a safe heal mid-way through the fight or have there been statements that would refute this line of thinking
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You're not wrong.
Banishment is a weird spell in that regard because it's one of the few (only?) spells that has a material component, but that component is unspecified and variable. Realistically, it would be just as easy to make my special not-meant-to-be-banished monster have legendary resistance or hell, just make it literally banish-proof in its design.
EDIT: I stand corrected. The rules do address this case specifically. PHB 203 says "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."
Banishment does not specify its material component.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I feel that's being a bit too extreme with the definition of "specified". The material component is listed.
And depending on how pedantic you feel like being - you could go for the word "distasteful" and use it literally. Get a Bittering Agent like the stuff they put in Anti-Freeze to stop it tasting sweet. I've tried that stuff - it is foul - and definitely "distasteful".
It's a silly argument - but it kind of highlights that the word itself is extremely vague and I'm sure there would be something in all wizard's component pouch that would be "distasteful" to the target in one form or another.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
I like the idea of a creature planning on being banished just for its sheer complexity, but you're talking about an incredible amount of foresight required on the target's part.
Any creature possessing all of these faculties and resources would likely use its abilities in a more useful way. So the short answer is "No" and the longer answer is "But why?" Then again, who knows? Maybe you can come up with an interesting story reason why this might happen. If so, then more power to you. I'll bet you will catch your players off guard :)
TL;DR - Just make your monster originate from a different plane so the banishment would last as long as you want it to and then have the creature plane shift back in at a time of its (your) choosing.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Please keep this on topic.
Thanks
[ Site Rules & Guidelines ] - [ Homebrew Rules ] - [ D&D Beyond FAQ ] - [ Homebrew FAQ ] - [ Homebrew Video Tutorials ]
Standard "free" content is restricted to the D&D 5th Edition Basic Rules, SRD, and other free content.
And don't even get me started on that hair. Atrocious!
In seriousness though, for a BBEG I personally would probably use something like Plane Shift as Emmber suggests, or the Gate spell. 'Course, as the DM you can always just homebrew the specific effect you want as well.
How and why are you still arguing over what can be used as the material to cast banishment? That doesn't have anything to do with the OP's question. Which was essentially "how much can be interacted with in the plane you're banished to?"
I don’t know why you are eating ingredients from anti-freeze...
but I’ll go along this line here. Why do you, or we, or anyone, assume that demons and humans. Or humans and elves. Etc etc. have similar “tastes” specifically for food and taste buds?
have you ever had marmite? Most people hate it. An entire continent swears by it and loves it.
do you put vinegar in French fries? I think it’s distasteful, but in England almost everyone does it.
using the actual definition of distasteful I think it’s more clear that banishment was intended to be used after finding out (bard minimums) about the target you are casting it on.
if you think of banishment as the D&D equivalent of “go to your room”, Would you enforce a timeout without giving a reason for them to be required to go to their room?
Blank
As the thread has not respected this request to keep the conversation on-topic to the OP's question, I'm locking this thread. @Beyond_Pride, if you wish to reopen this thread to further discuss the topic, please send me a PM.