D&D (2024) Playtest 8 Spell Discussion

[Yaarel]

Huh, it seems Max blocked me. Never thought I'd see the day.

Heh, you two do argue ... expansively.

 

[Maxperson]

I am saying, they are not speaking the same language. They dont all use the "sound" "ra" in the same way with the same meaning. Some dont have the phonemes "r" or "a" at all. For example, in Norwegian jo means one thing, and in English the similar sound yo means something else.

Not................relevant. They can use the "ra" sound to mean goonygoogoo for all that it matters(it doesn't), when they use it in spellcasting it is ALSO a mystical power sound that when combined with the others results in sleep.

D&D can change the rules for 2024. Then, the "Verbal component" is the Wizard describing the spell effect in any language of the Wizards choice, with the proper inner intention.

They can change it, yes. They won't, though, because I doubt that even 1% of players are having the same issues you are having here.

So for example, in the spell from Shakespeare, "Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble," the witches are performing a ritual that literally brews turmoil. This spell is in the English language.

Not relevant. The mystic elements there are Bu, which is also in BU, BUtt, hubBUb, etc. The entire word has no need to be mystical per RAW. Only sounds within the word. In virtually any language you can come up with a BU sound, and if you can't, well then that wizard will need to make up a nonsense word with BU in it.

You still need to take verbal RAW into account instead of continuing to ignore it.

 

[Maxperson]

Heh, you two do argue ... expansively.

Threads will be better off for it. I hated to do it since I have a personal belief in not blocking folks.

 

[Yaarel]

But Combining all three books into one is too much. And I think there is value in having the monster section separated from the player book.

I dont mean to combine all three books into one book.

I mean, the 2024 Players Handbook needs all the rules to play a complete game of D&D.

We know the 2024 Players Handbook will have an expanded appendix for Beasts. These are mainly for Wild Shape, Familiar, Mount, etcetera. I hope they make nonmagical animal amalgums, like Owlbear and Griffon, into the Beast creature type.

But the DM can also use these same Beasts in combat encounters against the player characters.

The Player Handbook wont have every Beast in the came, only a "core" selection.

The DM can also create full characters to use to challenge the players, as Humanoid opponents.

But there needs to be NPCs with monster statblocks anyway, such as for hirelings in the economy sections. These statblocks can also represent player friends and relations.

Rules for the DM to create NPC Humanoid statblocks can also serve as opponents against the player characters.

In this way, with only the Players Handbook, the DM can use this selection of Humanoids and Beasts to run a satisfying game, pitting mainly Humanoid opponents, such as Thieves and hostile Mages, against the player characters.

 

[Yaarel]

The mystic elements there are Bu, which is also in BU, BUtt, hubBUb, etc.

What you are describing is called an "agglutinative language". It squishes together many word elements (morphemes) to form a complex word for various semantic and grammatical meanings. The meaning of the complex word can be a lengthy phrase in other languages.

But there is no shared language in the first place.

There is no word element "BU" that all caster use and understand in common for the same purpose for the same spell.

The casters cant understand each other.

 

[Yaarel]

You still need to take verbal RAW into account instead of continuing to ignore it.

The Raw only says: "Verbal" is "specific" "sounds".

(All sounds have pitch and resonance.)

The only RAW is that the caster makes a "sound", whether quiet or loud. Any "sound".

The rest of what you add is your own houserules.

 

[Maxperson]

What you are describing is called an "agglutinative language". It squishes together many word elements (morphemes) to form a complex word for various semantic and grammatical meanings. The meaning of the complex word can be a lengthy phrase in other languages.

No I'm not. I'm describing the language using a normal word for that language, but which includes the mystic syllable, which along with the other syllables and perhaps the other two components, trigger magic. The sentence could be, "The button is loose." with the mystic syllables being "he," "bu," and "oo." The sounds don't have to be put together to form a complex word or any word. Or they can be a single word that isn't in the caster's language, "Hebuoo." as a "magical word."

But there is no shared language in the first place.

Which, AGAIN, isn't relevant at all to what I'm saying. I don't understand why you keep trying to shove me into something that I'm not saying and am nowhere near. There can be a shared language, unshared language or even no language and just have sounds.

There is no word element "BU" that all caster use and understand in common for the same purpose for the same spell.

Again, NOT RELEVANT.

The casters cant understand each other.

By RAW they can. They may not know what spell is being cast, but they will in fact recognize the mystical sounds when they hear them and know a spell is being cast. If you option in the Xanathar's rule, they can even make an arcana check to know what spell is being cast as it is being cast, which applies even if the caster and arcana user share no languages.

 

[Maxperson]

The Raw only says: "Verbal" is "specific" "sounds".

(All sounds have pitch and resonance.)

But not ones specific to a given spell.

The only RAW is that the caster makes a "sound", whether quiet or loud. Any "sound".

Any sound =/= specific sound and you are arguing that the caster can literally use any sound of any pitch he wants to cast his "personal" spell. That's not RAW.

 

[Yaarel]

No I'm not. I'm describing the language using a normal word for that language, but which includes the mystic syllable, which along with the other syllables and perhaps the other two components, trigger magic. The sentence could be, "The button is loose." with the mystic syllables being "he," "bu," and "oo." The sounds don't have to be put together to form a complex word or any word. Or they can be a single word that isn't in the caster's language, "Hebuoo." as a "magical word."

What you are calling a "mystical syllable" (bu) is a "morpheme". It is a language. This morpheme would be meaningful information about a specific spell and its effect.

But there is no language − including no morpheme such as a mystical syllable "bu" − that all casters would recognize and understand.

 

[Yaarel]

But not ones specific to a given spell.

Any sound =/= specific sound and you are arguing that the caster can literally use any sound of any pitch he wants to cast his "personal" spell. That's not RAW.

Each caster develops ones own specific sounds. These sounds arent meaningful to anyone else. But they are meaningful to oneself.

What is RAW is, the casters cant understand each others Verbal component or any other aspect of a spellbook.

If one caster says "bu" as a Verbal component of a certain spell. No other caster recognizes its meaning or purpose. The other casters dont use "bu" in the same way if at all.

For one caster "bu" might cause Sleep. For an other caster "bu" might cause Fireball.