I have a couple pedantic questions for the group on some spell casting related things and would love to hear some of your thoughts/input on these:
1) (More of a thematic question) Spells with either an S or M component require a free hand to use. If it has both, you can use the same free hand for S and M. If the M material has no cost, you can use either a component pouch or an arcane focus to fulfill that M component. If the M material does have a cost, the book says you must "have" that component before casting, and if the M material is consumed, it says you must "provide" this component each time (component gets consumed, essentially).
Here's the question: if I thematically want to use a focus for casting, can I still use the focus to cast spells that have a material with a cost, and just have the material be used or consumed from my inventory? Or for those spells, would I need to "pull out" those materials and use them to cast instead of using the focus at all? I just thematically like the idea of using a focus more. What I'm confused about is this:
Say I'm a Bard trying to cast something that requires 1000 gp of components, which are consumed. When casting the spell, can I still "access" my instrument focus and just have the diamond be "used" from my inventory? Or would I "access" the components instead of the focus, and channel my magic through that? Or would I need both, the focus in one hand and the components in the other? This last option doesn't seem correct to me, since I'm interpreting the lines in the rulebook that say "a spellcasting focus can be used in place of the components specified" and you have to "have" and "provide" components with cost or that are consumed, but it doesn't say you have to access or handle these components for the spell, just that you have to have them and you may lose them if they get consumed.
2) This one is the more serious question that'd actually impact play. For spells with an M component, the book says "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access these components - or to hold a spellcasting focus..." So say I'm holding a quarterstaff in one hand and my other hand is empty/free. When casting a spell with an M component, I need to "access" my focus. Does accessing my focus (or components) count as my 1 free object interaction for my turn? Or is accessing my focus to fulfill the M part of a spell implicit in the act of casting a spell?
I ask because I've thought of some scenarios that are hindered if accessing my focus counts as my free interaction. If I want to cast a spell, move, and open a door or pull a lever, my free action would be taken by accessing my focus and I wouldn't be able to open the door or pull the lever. Also, if I'm holding a dagger in each hand at the start of my turn, I may want to put a dagger away (free interaction) and then cast a spell. If accessing my focus requires my free interaction, I wouldn't be able to do this since I'd also need to put my dagger away.
Even if I'm super prepared and already have my focus/component in my hand ready to go, I'd have to put it away to take my free action, but putting it away IS my free action. And then if I'm not "super prepared" and just have a free hand, accessing my focus/component for a spell would take my free action and I no longer have any other free action. Neither of these seem right/intuitive to me because that's essentially saying that Spellcasters don't get a free action on their turn if they cast a spell, except maybe in the edge case where they already have a component in their hand, the component is consumed, and then their hand is free after the spell without having to access anything since it was already in their hand.
edit: For context, I'm envisioning a Battlemage type Sorcerer who is high in Dex, proficient in shortswords (High Elf), and maybe takes the Subtle Spell Metamagic that lets them use a sorcery point to ignore V and S parts of a spell. Then I could do some good damage up close with double shortsword melee attacks and learn lots of spells with only V requirements (or use a sorcery point to ignore V and S) to cast spells while keeping my swords out. Or if I really needed, I could take a free action to sheathe one sword, then my full action to cast a spell with V, S, M requirements since accessing my focus with my now free hand doesn't use up the free object interaction. It could be a super cool build.
edit 2: My DM also suggested that I just have my focus be a crystal that's embedded somewhere on one of my swords, maybe in the pommel, and use that as my arcane focus. Then I could keep both weapons out at all times and have no hindrance casting spells. Does this fit into the Rules As Written (RAW)? What are everybody's thoughts?
1.1) That whole S vs M vs S&M thing is something that JC invented in a tweet, it isn't born out RAW. The rules state unequivocably that " 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." That means what it says, and the practical effect of it (that a caster needs to hold their focus to cast spells) is exactly RAI, and it doesn't step on Warcaster's toes at all (since that feat lets you just ignore S components while holding weapons and shields period).
1.2) Putting that aside, for the sake of argument, would you need to have the expensive component in your hand? Yes. When you're holding a focus in your hand, you're holding it "in place of" the component. If the focus is not suitable to be used "in place of" the component, then you're back to the normal M rules- "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components"
2) No, it is not your 1 free interaction. Think of it more like the Ammunition property, where you need hands to interact with something but can do it multiple times per round without implicating the Other Activity on Your Turn rules. You're not going to find anything written that explicitly states that (other than that there are various class features which make plain that you're intended to be able to shoot more than 1 or 2 arrows per round for Ammunition), but spell components aren't listed in any of the Chapter 9 sections that talk about other activity leaving it at least ambiguous whether they were meant to be included in that category, and ambiguity should usually be interpreted in the player's favor, especially for something so fundamental and essential to spellcasters as being able to cast spells.
3) Focuses embedded in other items are treated a little inconsistently in the rules. On the one hand, there's the Ruby of the War Mage, telling you that what you're describing is a common magic item that requires attunement. On the other, an item like the Staff of Adornment doesn't require attunement and arguably does the same thing. If your DM is willing to let you embed things in things, go wild, because I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to switch stances between "wielding sword" and "holding the handle attached to my spell focus" on the fly with a minimum of fuss.
These answers all make a lot of sense, and fall in line with the interpretations of RAW I had while reading them. I'm just new to D&D (making a first character for a first campaign with a big group of friends), and so are all the friends I'm playing with, so none of us really have practical experience for things like this. I appreciate the answers, thank you!
I also like that you mention that ambiguity should work in the favor of the player, and I like that there's room for these kinds of interpretations in the RAW. My DM said something very similar by saying that the rules are a little vague about exactly what a focus is (beyond the initial shape or material of it), so we should be able to have fun and be creative with the implementation of it.
Fair warning, some of what I posted above (especially 1.1) is controversial, so take it all with a grain of salt. But if I'm not right, I should be, it's close enough :)
Fair warning, some of what I posted above (especially 1.1) is controversial, so take it all with a grain of salt. But if I'm not right, I should be, it's close enough :)
Yes.
Material component rules only apply to material component spells; just like other rules only apply within their scope. With that being said, it is probably not really important. I think it IS intended that there is some barrier to prevent going from sword and shield to casting certain spells in one turn. But again, I think it isn't actually a fun rule anyway, and might not play with it. I think I actually agree that you should be right. I just don't think that's what's written.
If a group starts with “hold a focus, cast a spell, unless it’s got special costs!” but decides there would be more gritty realism in applying an unwritten rule that you CANT do that, which is only rumored to exist because of an imperfectly worded heading and a later tweet...
... well I doubt they will have much fun as a play group doing that, but on the bright side they will certainly make good Rules & Mechanics forum members :)
1 - If you want to cast a spell that had material components with a cost, you need to physically interact with those items in order to cast the spell. The arcane focus only replaces material components without a cost. A component pouch always has what you need, you reach into the pouch and pull out the material component to cast the spell.
2 - Drawing or sheathing a sword is one option for your free item interaction. Important part of that is or. If you start with two daggers and want to cast a spell you cannot sheathe one dagger AND draw your focus as your free item interaction. Drawing your focus would take an action. If the spell you want to cast is a bonus action you could cast the spell. But if the spell took an action you would have to wait a turn. For a component pouch it gets a little weird because it's already on your person. Pulling the materials out of the pouch is considered part of casting the spell (your Action) so sheathing your dagger and pulling the materials out of your pouch would seem like you can then cast the spell. But I don't think that is intended as it gives an advantage to component pouches over foci.
Regarding embedding your focus in your weapon, that still doesn't work. If a spell has a material component you need to physically interact with the focus. You need to touch it. Of course your DM can allow whatever.
Clerics can ignore of all this because they're OP and are allowed to use shields as their holy symbols so if they pick up the War Caster feat they can cast any spell with a S and M component (without a cost) while still holding their shield.
Battle mage/gish characters are (deliberately) hindered by the item interaction and spellcasting component rules.
You must be holding the valued/consumed material for spells that need them and don't need your focus for these.
Drawing (or otherwise handling) your focus/material component is your item interaction for the turn.
No, I think it has been clarified as RAW that a material component can be pulled from a pouch, or a focus can be handled, *as part of* the casting of a spell with an M component - no object interaction required. When your hand is empty grabbing the sulfur and guano is part of the Cast Fireball action, and touching your holy amulet is part of the Cast Aid action.
I also vote for a focus being able to channel and consume specific/gold-cost ingredients automatically from your inventory, though I acknowledge that is very much non-RAW. It is just cleaner for me, and feels like a very simple bit of magic that some ancient scholar would have sorted out by now...
Something else important to consider. It is generally excepted that you can smack creatures with your spellcasting staff as if it was a quarterstaff (this is actually in the rules for magic items, the debate is whether it applies to non-magic staffs, but as I said "generally excepted"). So that is 1 way to have a weapon and focus in the same hand and not have to swap.
Otherwise, you will require magic items like ruby of the war mage or specific class features like sword bard or warlock's improved pact weapon.
Battle mage/gish characters are (deliberately) hindered by the item interaction and spellcasting component rules.
You must be holding the valued/consumed material for spells that need them and don't need your focus for these.
Drawing (or otherwise handling) your focus/material component is your item interaction for the turn.
No, I think it has been clarified as RAW that a material component can be pulled from a pouch, or a focus can be handled, *as part of* the casting of a spell with an M component - no object interaction required. When your hand is empty grabbing the sulfur and guano is part of the Cast Fireball action, and touching your holy amulet is part of the Cast Aid action.
You may be right about handling a crystal, amulet, or component pouch, etc. Drawing a wand/rod/staff is still an interaction though.
I was actually thinking about this the other day about how (regardless of whether it uses your item interaction) using a crystal/amulet necklace is much easier on you action economy than the iconic use of a wand, etc. Since to cast a spell without material components you need an empty hand, and to cast spells that do have material components you can just touch the necklace. Either way you are ready without having to change equipment.
You may be right about handling a crystal, amulet, or component pouch, etc. Drawing a wand/rod/staff is still an interaction though.
I was actually thinking about this the other day about how (regardless of whether it uses your item interaction) using a crystal/amulet necklace is much easier on you action economy than the iconic use of a wand, etc. Since to cast a spell without material components you need an empty hand, and to cast spells that do have material components you can just touch the necklace. Either way you are ready without having to change equipment.
Indeed. I think I've finished my set of home rules that tries to equalise the unnecessary difference between different empty-hand/focus/component types (allows S SM & M), while maintaining restrictions on holy-shield or weapon-type focuses (SM & M only without War Caster). It's all a bit of a shambles no matter how you handle it though.
You may be right about handling a crystal, amulet, or component pouch, etc. Drawing a wand/rod/staff is still an interaction though.
I was actually thinking about this the other day about how (regardless of whether it uses your item interaction) using a crystal/amulet necklace is much easier on you action economy than the iconic use of a wand, etc. Since to cast a spell without material components you need an empty hand, and to cast spells that do have material components you can just touch the necklace. Either way you are ready without having to change equipment.
Indeed. I think I've finished my set of home rules that tries to equalise the unnecessary difference between different empty-hand/focus/component types (allows S SM & M), while maintaining restrictions on holy-shield or weapon-type focuses (SM & M only without War Caster). It's all a bit of a shambles no matter how you handle it though.
The only significant reason I can think to nerf rods, staves, and wands (besides staves being quarterstaves) is to balance magic item versions.
2 - Drawing or sheathing a sword is one option for your free item interaction. Important part of that is or. If you start with two daggers and want to cast a spell you cannot sheathe one dagger AND draw your focus as your free item interaction. Drawing your focus would take an action. If the spell you want to cast is a bonus action you could cast the spell. But if the spell took an action you would have to wait a turn. For a component pouch it gets a little weird because it's already on your person. Pulling the materials out of the pouch is considered part of casting the spell (your Action) so sheathing your dagger and pulling the materials out of your pouch would seem like you can then cast the spell. But I don't think that is intended as it gives an advantage to component pouches over foci.
The thing that gets me about the focus part of this is that it's essentially saying that Spellcasters don't get a free action on their turn if they want to cast a spell with a focus. If we forget about my ambitions for wanting a Battlemage and think about the scenario where I'm a Sorcerer with a quarterstaff in one hand and I'm using a focus to cast, we have a couple situations:
1) My offhand is empty and I need to grab my focus for the spell. With the quoted rule above, grabbing my focus takes my free action and I cannot do anything else except for bonus actions.
2) My focus is already in my offhand. I cast the spell using my action, and then put the focus away (which, with the quoted rule above, takes my free action). Now I have a free hand again, but I can't do something simple like open an unlocked door.
I think it makes the most sense that handling the focus requires the same amount of interaction as handling components (maybe I keep my focus on my belt or in a pouch on my belt, just like I would components), and that handling either a focus or a component is just part of casting a spell. I think a good analogy here, as pointed out by @Chicken_Champ, is to think of it like using a shortbow. Drawing an arrow from a quiver doesn't use up the free action when attacking, and I don't think handling a focus or grabbing components should either.
Otherwise, Spellcasters can't use a free action on their turn except in the rare case where they pulled out components for a spell that would consume those components last turn, and this turn they cast the spell with components in hand, at which point the components would be consumed and their hand would be free.
I think that's a misinterpretation since all classes should have a free action available to them to do stuff like open a door or pull a simple lever. I agree with other people in this thread that handling a focus or grabbing components is implicit in casting a spell and doesn't take the free action. This would mean that a duel light-weapon wielding Dex Battlemage could be viable since, on any given turn, you could sheath a weapon and cast a spell, or draw a weapon and attack. And in this situation, the limit on this flexible Battleage would be that they don't really get a free action to do something like open a door.
EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: I'm thinking of an arcane focus in these situations as an Orb or Crystal. I agree that it might be more difficult to use a Staff for the kind of interactions I'm describing, but I imagine an Orb or Crystal would behave very similarly to a Component Pouch
Gamelub, I think that what you're describing is fine. There's nothing saying that an arcane focus (crystal) can't be worn on a leather thong around your neck to be grasped as part of casting a spell, or that it takes up your one Free Object Interaction to do so, just that you do have to have an empty hand when you go to grasp that crystal. A lot of people want to read the rules in a way that would require a sword+staff wizard to have Warcaster to cast S and SV spells, but nothing in the rules say that, all of Warcaster's sentences already do something else other than that, and it just isn't a fun way to play. And requiring a sword-and-shield warmage to take Dual Wielder just to be able to sheathe his sword and grab his crystal pendant for a spell is again not something that RAW requires, and which definitely doesn't sound fun.
I think you've got it figured out as you've laid out, doubt your DM or group will push for a different application.
2 - Drawing or sheathing a sword is one option for your free item interaction. Important part of that is or. If you start with two daggers and want to cast a spell you cannot sheathe one dagger AND draw your focus as your free item interaction. Drawing your focus would take an action. If the spell you want to cast is a bonus action you could cast the spell. But if the spell took an action you would have to wait a turn. For a component pouch it gets a little weird because it's already on your person. Pulling the materials out of the pouch is considered part of casting the spell (your Action) so sheathing your dagger and pulling the materials out of your pouch would seem like you can then cast the spell. But I don't think that is intended as it gives an advantage to component pouches over foci.
The thing that gets me about the focus part of this is that it's essentially saying that Spellcasters don't get a free action on their turn if they want to cast a spell with a focus. If we forget about my ambitions for wanting a Battlemage and think about the scenario where I'm a Sorcerer with a quarterstaff in one hand and I'm using a focus to cast, we have a couple situations:
1) My offhand is empty and I need to grab my focus for the spell. With the quoted rule above, grabbing my focus takes my free action and I cannot do anything else except for bonus actions.
EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: I'm thinking of an arcane focus in these situations as an Orb or Crystal. I agree that it might be more difficult to use a Staff for the kind of interactions I'm describing, but I imagine an Orb or Crystal would behave very similarly to a Component Pouch
Sorry I should clarify, interacting with your focus for the purpose of using the material component of a spell is part of casting the spell. So in your example if your offhand is empty and you need to get your focus (maybe it's on your belt). Drawing the focus is your item interaction so you still have your Action to cast the spell.
Visualizing it might be easier - You want to cast Fireball which has a V, S, and M component (bat guano and sulfur). Your arcane focus works as the bat guano and sulfur. You go into battle wielding your Longsword as a 2H weapon (both hands on it). You take one hand off of your sword (Longsword is versatile) and grab your focus (an Orb) off of your belt. This is your free interaction. You then wave your hand in a spiral (somatic component) and say a few arcane words (vocal component) and cast Fireball. If you had a component pouch instead, your free item interaction would be pulling the guano and sulfur from the pouch.
If that’s the case, sorcerers can’t cast both a quickened Fireball and a regular Fireball unless they have Dual Wielder, or are holding a focus. Not RAW, and not fun. No.
If that’s the case, sorcerers can’t cast both a quickened Fireball and a regular Fireball unless they have Dual Wielder, or are holding a focus. Not RAW, and not fun. No.
Bad example. Quickened doesn’t change the general restriction on spellcasting: if you cast a spell as a bonus action, you can only cast a cantrip with your action.
Bleh, I find that I keep saying this because it's a dumb thing in the rules, but here's a couple of things to keep in mind (and yes, I appreciate that I'm using a combination of both logic and the RAW rules, but that's what DnD is) :
1) Making gestures is totally free, it's not even a Free Action - PhB p190 - "You can communicate however you are able through brief utterances and gestures on your turn." Since a brief gesture clearly includes opening your hand to wave at someone, you can drop anything you are carrying, freeing up a hand to use for Somatic components on your turn. The only minor downside is that this drops the item in your hand onto the floor.
2) Picking an item up from the floor is a Free Action - PhB p190. So if you want to drop an item, cast a spell using a free hand, then use a Free Action to pick up your dropped item immediately after then you can do so.
3) If you're using your Reaction, you don't get to make gestures... but if your Somatic Component needs you to open your hand, then you will drop your item anyway. But if it doesn't need you to open your hand, it's hard to argue that you need to drop it anyway... So either you do need to open your hand, in which case you drop your item, or you don't need to, in which case it's irrelevant that you're holding something.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1.1) That whole S vs M vs S&M thing is something that JC invented in a tweet, it isn't born out RAW. The rules state unequivocably that " 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." That means what it says, and the practical effect of it (that a caster needs to hold their focus to cast spells) is exactly RAI, and it doesn't step on Warcaster's toes at all (since that feat lets you just ignore S components while holding weapons and shields period).
1.2) Putting that aside, for the sake of argument, would you need to have the expensive component in your hand? Yes. When you're holding a focus in your hand, you're holding it "in place of" the component. If the focus is not suitable to be used "in place of" the component, then you're back to the normal M rules- "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components"
2) No, it is not your 1 free interaction. Think of it more like the Ammunition property, where you need hands to interact with something but can do it multiple times per round without implicating the Other Activity on Your Turn rules. You're not going to find anything written that explicitly states that (other than that there are various class features which make plain that you're intended to be able to shoot more than 1 or 2 arrows per round for Ammunition), but spell components aren't listed in any of the Chapter 9 sections that talk about other activity leaving it at least ambiguous whether they were meant to be included in that category, and ambiguity should usually be interpreted in the player's favor, especially for something so fundamental and essential to spellcasters as being able to cast spells.
3) Focuses embedded in other items are treated a little inconsistently in the rules. On the one hand, there's the Ruby of the War Mage, telling you that what you're describing is a common magic item that requires attunement. On the other, an item like the Staff of Adornment doesn't require attunement and arguably does the same thing. If your DM is willing to let you embed things in things, go wild, because I don't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to switch stances between "wielding sword" and "holding the handle attached to my spell focus" on the fly with a minimum of fuss.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
These answers all make a lot of sense, and fall in line with the interpretations of RAW I had while reading them. I'm just new to D&D (making a first character for a first campaign with a big group of friends), and so are all the friends I'm playing with, so none of us really have practical experience for things like this. I appreciate the answers, thank you!
I also like that you mention that ambiguity should work in the favor of the player, and I like that there's room for these kinds of interpretations in the RAW. My DM said something very similar by saying that the rules are a little vague about exactly what a focus is (beyond the initial shape or material of it), so we should be able to have fun and be creative with the implementation of it.
Fair warning, some of what I posted above (especially 1.1) is controversial, so take it all with a grain of salt. But if I'm not right, I should be, it's close enough :)
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yes.
Material component rules only apply to material component spells; just like other rules only apply within their scope. With that being said, it is probably not really important. I think it IS intended that there is some barrier to prevent going from sword and shield to casting certain spells in one turn. But again, I think it isn't actually a fun rule anyway, and might not play with it. I think I actually agree that you should be right. I just don't think that's what's written.
If a group starts with “hold a focus, cast a spell, unless it’s got special costs!” but decides there would be more gritty realism in applying an unwritten rule that you CANT do that, which is only rumored to exist because of an imperfectly worded heading and a later tweet...
... well I doubt they will have much fun as a play group doing that, but on the bright side they will certainly make good Rules & Mechanics forum members :)
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Battle mage/gish characters are (deliberately) hindered by the item interaction and spellcasting component rules.
You must be holding the valued/consumed material for spells that need them and don't need your focus for these.
Drawing (or otherwise handling) your focus/material component is your item interaction for the turn.
I asked similar questions in this thread https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/tips-tactics/52160-swapping-weapons-shield
1 - If you want to cast a spell that had material components with a cost, you need to physically interact with those items in order to cast the spell. The arcane focus only replaces material components without a cost. A component pouch always has what you need, you reach into the pouch and pull out the material component to cast the spell.
2 - Drawing or sheathing a sword is one option for your free item interaction. Important part of that is or. If you start with two daggers and want to cast a spell you cannot sheathe one dagger AND draw your focus as your free item interaction. Drawing your focus would take an action. If the spell you want to cast is a bonus action you could cast the spell. But if the spell took an action you would have to wait a turn. For a component pouch it gets a little weird because it's already on your person. Pulling the materials out of the pouch is considered part of casting the spell (your Action) so sheathing your dagger and pulling the materials out of your pouch would seem like you can then cast the spell. But I don't think that is intended as it gives an advantage to component pouches over foci.
Regarding embedding your focus in your weapon, that still doesn't work. If a spell has a material component you need to physically interact with the focus. You need to touch it. Of course your DM can allow whatever.
Clerics can ignore of all this because they're OP and are allowed to use shields as their holy symbols so if they pick up the War Caster feat they can cast any spell with a S and M component (without a cost) while still holding their shield.
No, I think it has been clarified as RAW that a material component can be pulled from a pouch, or a focus can be handled, *as part of* the casting of a spell with an M component - no object interaction required. When your hand is empty grabbing the sulfur and guano is part of the Cast Fireball action, and touching your holy amulet is part of the Cast Aid action.
I also vote for a focus being able to channel and consume specific/gold-cost ingredients automatically from your inventory, though I acknowledge that is very much non-RAW. It is just cleaner for me, and feels like a very simple bit of magic that some ancient scholar would have sorted out by now...
Something else important to consider. It is generally excepted that you can smack creatures with your spellcasting staff as if it was a quarterstaff (this is actually in the rules for magic items, the debate is whether it applies to non-magic staffs, but as I said "generally excepted"). So that is 1 way to have a weapon and focus in the same hand and not have to swap.
Otherwise, you will require magic items like ruby of the war mage or specific class features like sword bard or warlock's improved pact weapon.
You may be right about handling a crystal, amulet, or component pouch, etc. Drawing a wand/rod/staff is still an interaction though.
I was actually thinking about this the other day about how (regardless of whether it uses your item interaction) using a crystal/amulet necklace is much easier on you action economy than the iconic use of a wand, etc. Since to cast a spell without material components you need an empty hand, and to cast spells that do have material components you can just touch the necklace. Either way you are ready without having to change equipment.
Indeed. I think I've finished my set of home rules that tries to equalise the unnecessary difference between different empty-hand/focus/component types (allows S SM & M), while maintaining restrictions on holy-shield or weapon-type focuses (SM & M only without War Caster). It's all a bit of a shambles no matter how you handle it though.
The only significant reason I can think to nerf rods, staves, and wands (besides staves being quarterstaves) is to balance magic item versions.
The thing that gets me about the focus part of this is that it's essentially saying that Spellcasters don't get a free action on their turn if they want to cast a spell with a focus. If we forget about my ambitions for wanting a Battlemage and think about the scenario where I'm a Sorcerer with a quarterstaff in one hand and I'm using a focus to cast, we have a couple situations:
1) My offhand is empty and I need to grab my focus for the spell. With the quoted rule above, grabbing my focus takes my free action and I cannot do anything else except for bonus actions.
2) My focus is already in my offhand. I cast the spell using my action, and then put the focus away (which, with the quoted rule above, takes my free action). Now I have a free hand again, but I can't do something simple like open an unlocked door.
I think it makes the most sense that handling the focus requires the same amount of interaction as handling components (maybe I keep my focus on my belt or in a pouch on my belt, just like I would components), and that handling either a focus or a component is just part of casting a spell. I think a good analogy here, as pointed out by @Chicken_Champ, is to think of it like using a shortbow. Drawing an arrow from a quiver doesn't use up the free action when attacking, and I don't think handling a focus or grabbing components should either.
Otherwise, Spellcasters can't use a free action on their turn except in the rare case where they pulled out components for a spell that would consume those components last turn, and this turn they cast the spell with components in hand, at which point the components would be consumed and their hand would be free.
I think that's a misinterpretation since all classes should have a free action available to them to do stuff like open a door or pull a simple lever. I agree with other people in this thread that handling a focus or grabbing components is implicit in casting a spell and doesn't take the free action. This would mean that a duel light-weapon wielding Dex Battlemage could be viable since, on any given turn, you could sheath a weapon and cast a spell, or draw a weapon and attack. And in this situation, the limit on this flexible Battleage would be that they don't really get a free action to do something like open a door.
EDIT FOR CLARIFICATION: I'm thinking of an arcane focus in these situations as an Orb or Crystal. I agree that it might be more difficult to use a Staff for the kind of interactions I'm describing, but I imagine an Orb or Crystal would behave very similarly to a Component Pouch
Gamelub, I think that what you're describing is fine. There's nothing saying that an arcane focus (crystal) can't be worn on a leather thong around your neck to be grasped as part of casting a spell, or that it takes up your one Free Object Interaction to do so, just that you do have to have an empty hand when you go to grasp that crystal. A lot of people want to read the rules in a way that would require a sword+staff wizard to have Warcaster to cast S and SV spells, but nothing in the rules say that, all of Warcaster's sentences already do something else other than that, and it just isn't a fun way to play. And requiring a sword-and-shield warmage to take Dual Wielder just to be able to sheathe his sword and grab his crystal pendant for a spell is again not something that RAW requires, and which definitely doesn't sound fun.
I think you've got it figured out as you've laid out, doubt your DM or group will push for a different application.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Sorry I should clarify, interacting with your focus for the purpose of using the material component of a spell is part of casting the spell. So in your example if your offhand is empty and you need to get your focus (maybe it's on your belt). Drawing the focus is your item interaction so you still have your Action to cast the spell.
Visualizing it might be easier - You want to cast Fireball which has a V, S, and M component (bat guano and sulfur). Your arcane focus works as the bat guano and sulfur. You go into battle wielding your Longsword as a 2H weapon (both hands on it). You take one hand off of your sword (Longsword is versatile) and grab your focus (an Orb) off of your belt. This is your free interaction. You then wave your hand in a spiral (somatic component) and say a few arcane words (vocal component) and cast Fireball. If you had a component pouch instead, your free item interaction would be pulling the guano and sulfur from the pouch.
If that’s the case, sorcerers can’t cast both a quickened Fireball and a regular Fireball unless they have Dual Wielder, or are holding a focus. Not RAW, and not fun. No.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Bad example. Quickened doesn’t change the general restriction on spellcasting: if you cast a spell as a bonus action, you can only cast a cantrip with your action.
Oh, lol, yeah. Okay, a quicked Infestation and a regular Fireball then, whoops.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Bleh, I find that I keep saying this because it's a dumb thing in the rules, but here's a couple of things to keep in mind (and yes, I appreciate that I'm using a combination of both logic and the RAW rules, but that's what DnD is) :
1) Making gestures is totally free, it's not even a Free Action - PhB p190 - "You can communicate however you are able through brief utterances and gestures on your turn." Since a brief gesture clearly includes opening your hand to wave at someone, you can drop anything you are carrying, freeing up a hand to use for Somatic components on your turn. The only minor downside is that this drops the item in your hand onto the floor.
2) Picking an item up from the floor is a Free Action - PhB p190. So if you want to drop an item, cast a spell using a free hand, then use a Free Action to pick up your dropped item immediately after then you can do so.
3) If you're using your Reaction, you don't get to make gestures... but if your Somatic Component needs you to open your hand, then you will drop your item anyway. But if it doesn't need you to open your hand, it's hard to argue that you need to drop it anyway... So either you do need to open your hand, in which case you drop your item, or you don't need to, in which case it's irrelevant that you're holding something.