for example,if i put the sulfer and batpoop inside my quarter stalf (like in a small hollow part) and held it in my hand,pointed at the enemy,and cast fire ball,would that work?
side note:do i need the M componets in my hand,or just on my person?
I will never shake hands with a wizard ever again.
Given some of the components, I'm guessing that always needing to hold them might be problematic. I'm thinking GM-discretion on this, and if it were me (and it's not), I would allow containers for the components, but the components would still be used up for the casting regardless if it's in the container.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
In Chapter 10: Spellcasting, it provides that "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components." It does not say explicitly that those components must actually ever be held directly in that hand, only that the hand is used to "access" them. So long as you're respecting whether or not a hand was free during the casting and involved in the "access" of the components, I don't see a reason why your DM couldn't allow them to be used within a container that you interact with, instead of used by being held directly.
I agree with Chicken_Champ. We're I your DM, I'd say having the components in a hollow portion of your staff is totally fine, but if you had them lodged in the bottom of your backpack, that would be a different story. Check with your DM, but I think your request is a reasonable one.
I will never shake hands with a wizard ever again.
Given some of the components, I'm guessing that always needing to hold them might be problematic. I'm thinking GM-discretion on this, and if it were me (and it's not), I would allow containers for the components, but the components would still be used up for the casting regardless if it's in the container.
Yeah, I think it would be ok. It feels like a flavor thing, some people use a pouch, you have a hollow part on your staff. I don’t see a real difference in game terms do long as you have that free hand.
In Chapter 10: Spellcasting, it provides that "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components." It does not say explicitly that those components must actually ever be held directly in that hand, only that the hand is used to "access" them. So long as you're respecting whether or not a hand was free during the casting and involved in the "access" of the components, I don't see a reason why your DM couldn't allow them to be used within a container that you interact with, instead of used by being held directly.
It takes a very special understanding of language to read a sentence that requires a free hand and access to something and come to the conclusion that those two things are completely unrelated. I guess you can say "what does access even mean? It is never defined in the rules." But my rebuttal would be it is obvious in context of the sentence here using English: you need a hand free and one of the meanings of "access" is to "get hold of." Sometimes you just have to use context clues and what we already know about what things mean in order to understand what is written in these books; they're not as strongly codified in all places as one might like.
Now, whether you can reflavor that or not is somewhat up to the DM. If you are holding an object that takes the place of components, you are essentially holding a focus. If you want that to be a weapon then ruby of the war mage is your ticket (or finding a staff and using it as a quarterstaff, or in terms of mechanics, there wouldn't be much difference with just saying that you tied your component pouch to your staff).
I would be lenient on how you flavor things, as long as the change is flavorful. If you want to use a weapon as a focus, then you have to do it in one of the ways that is mechanically allowed.
I would likely consider not allowing the staff to be used as a weapon without breaking it (or a save every time you hit or something).
This feels like you have some particular interaction in mind. That’s what you should be asking your DM or group for a ruling on. D&D rules are so open ended that’s its easy to game the system by asking for a ruling on something indirect to what you actually want and then claiming that ruling allows some rule bending effect.
if you simply want to have a secret compartment to hide the components from a full body search as you infiltrate, or have some visual in mind during combat, I’d rule absolutely yes. If it is to skip a required action during combat or allow you to have two weapons and not drop/sheath one to cast the spell or something like that, then no.
If a spell told me that it consumed a hag eyeball, I don’t see that the rules require me to necessarily unscrew my pickle jar full of eyeballs, fish one out, and squish it around in my fingers. Skin to eye (or any other M) contact is not described as needed, I can still use that eye if I’m holding it in a gloved hand, or a gauntlet, or holding a jar full of eyes, or crush a doll that the eye is sewn inside of, or I swing an entire hag head around that still has eyeballs, etc etc. what is important is that (1) there is a hag eyeball on your person, (2) you do something with your hand that “accesses” it in some way while the hand is not otherwise occupied, and (3) the eye is consumed. Belaboring direct hand-to-M contact is not RAW and not fun for a caster that thinks it’s cool to describe their components a different way.
I think this is one of those rules left general enough to allow for DM and player to come to a consensus based on what they find fun and reasonable. Though it's interesting that the rule says " A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." The rule is specific about holding the focus, but only having access to the components.
Now I want to create a material component book. Just chunks of material components attached to thick book pages in alphabetical order, that a caster can quickly flip through in order to find the right one to use for spells. "Don't touch that page, it's the bag guano page!"
for example,if i put the sulfer and batpoop inside my quarter stalf (like in a small hollow part) and held it in my hand,pointed at the enemy,and cast fire ball,would that work?
side note:do i need the M componets in my hand,or just on my person?
Batpoop?
I will never shake hands with a wizard ever again.
Given some of the components, I'm guessing that always needing to hold them might be problematic. I'm thinking GM-discretion on this, and if it were me (and it's not), I would allow containers for the components, but the components would still be used up for the casting regardless if it's in the container.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
In Chapter 10: Spellcasting, it provides that "A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components." It does not say explicitly that those components must actually ever be held directly in that hand, only that the hand is used to "access" them. So long as you're respecting whether or not a hand was free during the casting and involved in the "access" of the components, I don't see a reason why your DM couldn't allow them to be used within a container that you interact with, instead of used by being held directly.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I agree with Chicken_Champ. We're I your DM, I'd say having the components in a hollow portion of your staff is totally fine, but if you had them lodged in the bottom of your backpack, that would be a different story. Check with your DM, but I think your request is a reasonable one.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/fireball bat guano (aka bat poop) is a item requirement for the spell.
Yeah, I think it would be ok. It feels like a flavor thing, some people use a pouch, you have a hollow part on your staff. I don’t see a real difference in game terms do long as you have that free hand.
It takes a very special understanding of language to read a sentence that requires a free hand and access to something and come to the conclusion that those two things are completely unrelated. I guess you can say "what does access even mean? It is never defined in the rules." But my rebuttal would be it is obvious in context of the sentence here using English: you need a hand free and one of the meanings of "access" is to "get hold of." Sometimes you just have to use context clues and what we already know about what things mean in order to understand what is written in these books; they're not as strongly codified in all places as one might like.
Now, whether you can reflavor that or not is somewhat up to the DM. If you are holding an object that takes the place of components, you are essentially holding a focus. If you want that to be a weapon then ruby of the war mage is your ticket (or finding a staff and using it as a quarterstaff, or in terms of mechanics, there wouldn't be much difference with just saying that you tied your component pouch to your staff).
I would be lenient on how you flavor things, as long as the change is flavorful. If you want to use a weapon as a focus, then you have to do it in one of the ways that is mechanically allowed.
I would likely consider not allowing the staff to be used as a weapon without breaking it (or a save every time you hit or something).
This feels like you have some particular interaction in mind. That’s what you should be asking your DM or group for a ruling on. D&D rules are so open ended that’s its easy to game the system by asking for a ruling on something indirect to what you actually want and then claiming that ruling allows some rule bending effect.
if you simply want to have a secret compartment to hide the components from a full body search as you infiltrate, or have some visual in mind during combat, I’d rule absolutely yes. If it is to skip a required action during combat or allow you to have two weapons and not drop/sheath one to cast the spell or something like that, then no.
If a spell told me that it consumed a hag eyeball, I don’t see that the rules require me to necessarily unscrew my pickle jar full of eyeballs, fish one out, and squish it around in my fingers. Skin to eye (or any other M) contact is not described as needed, I can still use that eye if I’m holding it in a gloved hand, or a gauntlet, or holding a jar full of eyes, or crush a doll that the eye is sewn inside of, or I swing an entire hag head around that still has eyeballs, etc etc. what is important is that (1) there is a hag eyeball on your person, (2) you do something with your hand that “accesses” it in some way while the hand is not otherwise occupied, and (3) the eye is consumed. Belaboring direct hand-to-M contact is not RAW and not fun for a caster that thinks it’s cool to describe their components a different way.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
InsiderI think this is one of those rules left general enough to allow for DM and player to come to a consensus based on what they find fun and reasonable. Though it's interesting that the rule says " A spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components -- or to hold a spellcasting focus -- but it can be the same hand that he or she uses to perform somatic components." The rule is specific about holding the focus, but only having access to the components.
Now I want to create a material component book. Just chunks of material components attached to thick book pages in alphabetical order, that a caster can quickly flip through in order to find the right one to use for spells. "Don't touch that page, it's the bag guano page!"
Find me on Twitter: @OboeLauren