After reviewing the spell components rules and comparing them to the weapon use rules, one seems clearer than the other. No one asks if their character can wield three longswords, or seven shields, but the casting of spells while already holding things in your hands is less clear. I've also seen many DM's ignore this rule, essentially granting everyone one of the three aspects of warcaster. Perhaps adding a line in the spell header to delineate between zero, one, and two-handed spells could make this simpler and far easier to understand. The extra line item could also be used to balance spells against one another. The Warcaster feat or something similar could be altered to provide the character with a virtual hand to be used to satisfy this line item requirement.
For instance,
Someone with both of their hands free, could cast zero, one, and two-handed spells
Someone with a one-handed weapon, could cast zero and one-handed spells
Someone with a two-handed weapon, could only cast zero-handed spells
Someone with a one-handed weapon and shield, could only cast zero-handed spells
Someone with Warcaster and a one-handed weapon, could cast zero, one, and two-handed spells, because warcaster would grant a virtual hand
Someone with Warcaster and a two-handed weapon, could cast zero and one-handed spells, because warcaster would grant a virtual hand
Someone with Warcaster, a one-handed weapon, and shield, could cast zero and one-handed spells, because warcaster would grant a virtual hand
Has anybody tried some homebrew like this?
Does anybody think this would be a good change to 5.5e?
This seems incredibly complicated, and adds pretty much no actual depth, this a fairly bad idea that goes directly against 5e's (and 5.5e's) design philosophy and standards. Plus just boggling the game down by adding complexity without depth.
The somatic material currently as is fairly simple : do you have things in both of your hands, or are unable to move? yes, then you cannot provide this component (and usually thus cannot cast the spell).
I appreciate the feedback. My suggestion isn't trying to add depth or complexity, but rather clarity. I'd beg to differ about the current rules being simple or clear based on the number of times I find people explaining it differently. Case in point, your explanation differs from many of the others I have found. The mere fact that there are so many different interpretations illustrates the problem I am seeking to correct.
Thanks again. I'll work on making the concept more clear. Even though I might have failed on communicating the concept clearly, do you understand the main thrust behind this inquiry?
Perhaps a paragraph such as:
"The somatic and material components differ from spell to spell and in complexity. The most complex spells require 2 free hands to cast, while less complex spells require one free hand to cast, and the simplest spells do not require any free hands to cast. These 'free' hands are used to manipulate the focuses or components and perform the hand gestures required of spellcasting. Therefore, a spellcaster with an occupied hand(s) would be limited on the spells they could cast."
For instance, reading Burning hands seem to indicate that the somatic components require two hands.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
After reviewing the spell components rules and comparing them to the weapon use rules, one seems clearer than the other. No one asks if their character can wield three longswords, or seven shields, but the casting of spells while already holding things in your hands is less clear. I've also seen many DM's ignore this rule, essentially granting everyone one of the three aspects of warcaster. Perhaps adding a line in the spell header to delineate between zero, one, and two-handed spells could make this simpler and far easier to understand. The extra line item could also be used to balance spells against one another. The Warcaster feat or something similar could be altered to provide the character with a virtual hand to be used to satisfy this line item requirement.
For instance,
Has anybody tried some homebrew like this?
Does anybody think this would be a good change to 5.5e?
Thoughts?
Very Respectfully,
Listener
This seems incredibly complicated, and adds pretty much no actual depth, this a fairly bad idea that goes directly against 5e's (and 5.5e's) design philosophy and standards. Plus just boggling the game down by adding complexity without depth.
The somatic material currently as is fairly simple : do you have things in both of your hands, or are unable to move? yes, then you cannot provide this component (and usually thus cannot cast the spell).
My homebrew content: Monsters, subclasses, Magic items, Feats, spells, races, backgrounds
I appreciate the feedback. My suggestion isn't trying to add depth or complexity, but rather clarity. I'd beg to differ about the current rules being simple or clear based on the number of times I find people explaining it differently. Case in point, your explanation differs from many of the others I have found. The mere fact that there are so many different interpretations illustrates the problem I am seeking to correct.
Yeah, that's why I'm complaining about complexity, because this thing is pretty much on the other side of the planet from clear.
My homebrew content: Monsters, subclasses, Magic items, Feats, spells, races, backgrounds
Thanks again. I'll work on making the concept more clear. Even though I might have failed on communicating the concept clearly, do you understand the main thrust behind this inquiry?
Perhaps a paragraph such as:
"The somatic and material components differ from spell to spell and in complexity. The most complex spells require 2 free hands to cast, while less complex spells require one free hand to cast, and the simplest spells do not require any free hands to cast. These 'free' hands are used to manipulate the focuses or components and perform the hand gestures required of spellcasting. Therefore, a spellcaster with an occupied hand(s) would be limited on the spells they could cast."
For instance, reading Burning hands seem to indicate that the somatic components require two hands.