D&D 5E Somatic and Verbal - Value Added?

[Warmaster Horus]

The only time I make a big deal out this is when it's pertinent to the story or a really pricey component is necessary. Other than that we rarely touch on it.

 

[happyhermit]

Personally I think they are worth the added complication, mostly because I don't really see much complication at all. I see them as something cool that can be used in particular circumstances but most of the time requires no overhead, that is a plus for me. I understand that some people have issues with the whole "hand economy" or whatever, but that hasn't been an issue IME, I think they are playing very RAW and yet against type in a particular way.

Many people seem to still think that wizards/casters are overpowered, this is another way to potentially make them more situation/resource dependent if wanted. Spell components are the same way, something cool if you want to use it, but no overhead otherwise. For example if one wants to reduce resurrection type magic, availability of diamonds can be used, otherwise it can be handwaved as GP=GP of diamonds.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Considering that the "complication" added by verbal and somatic components is that there are ways to reduce a spell caster's options just like there are ways to reduce a non-spell caster's options (binding and gagging, and disarming when you consider material components), I find it absolutely "worth it."

 

[discosoc]

For the most part I would say "no".

I think there are fairly easy ways to make the component system worthwhile, but as-written I'm inclined to ignore it except for 'costly' material components.

I that's intended, based on the arcane focus or component pouch items existing. I don't like it, because I think it just commoditizes the caster classes, but I guess that's why I've largely moved back to 2e again.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I think it is obvious, but since some of you missed it, I'll expound.

Verbal and Somatic components could be replaced with a flat rule that _all_ spells have verbal and somatic components or that none of the spells have them. The added complication is in keeping track of which spells do and which spells do not have verbal and/or somatic components.

 

[Sunseeker]

What "added complication" would that be?

As a player you don't have to actually move your hands or say any magic words...you know that right?

Until you get a DM that demands you do, or you can't cast spells, or because you didn't say your magic words or wiggle your fingers the same way your spell goes haywire. Been there, sooooo not there anymore.

So yeah, typically I ignore it, though I like to encourage players to take ownership of their spells and give me a little fluff, but I'm not going to force the issue. Overall I don't think the V/S components are worth it. They're just useful to clarify if you can cast a spell at all while doing certain things.

Like sneaking: if you have a V spell component, it breaks stealth, magic is kinda deaf, so you have to speak up for it to respond to you.
Or being restrained: if your hands are bound you can't wave your arms and get magic's attention, he needs better glasses.
Or if a sock is stuck in your mouth.

 

[mrpopstar]

I think it is obvious, but since some of you missed it, I'll expound.

Verbal and Somatic components could be replaced with a flat rule that _all_ spells have verbal and somatic components or that none of the spells have them. The added complication is in keeping track of which spells do and which spells do not have verbal and/or somatic components.

Ah. In that case, I think you meant to ask: Are verbal and somatic components worth the added complexity?

I agree, the complexity is rather hollow, which complicates the play experience instead of enriching it. It would certainly be preferable to assume that all spells require verbal and somatic components.

As far as material components go, I think it would make more sense to associate their need with class as opposed to spells themselves (excepting those spells that have material components with an associated cost). That way, wizards would require component pouches to cast their spells, but bards have no need to be packing guano.

 

[delericho]

Verbal is definitely run with RAW, as not enforcing it makes silence pretty useless.

Actually, the silence spell is one of my biggest bugbears wrt spell components. As it stands it's wildly overpowered - a 2nd level spell that can most likely shut down an enemy spellcaster completely? It was bad enough in earlier editions, where at least vocalise or Silent Spell might offer a workaround, but in this edition even those are almost non-existent.

IMO, silence should be a utility stealth spell that stops the recipient from causing noise unintentionally, but which can be broken by the simple expedient of someone clapping their hands. Failing that, there really should be some sort of workaround, even if that amounts to an enemy caster requiring a whole extra action to cast a spell without the V component.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Are verbal and somatic components worth the added complication?

Can be! You can ignore them, but they force Interesting Choices when being a sneaky spellcaster, or when dealing with hand-juggling.

(I like the former, the latter...meh)

 

[delericho]

I that's intended, based on the arcane focus or component pouch items existing.

Yeah. I think the listed components are one of the game's nods to "realism" - spellcasters have long been depicted as using weird phrases, gestures, and paraphenalia when casting their spells, and so that's the case here... but the focus and/or component pouch is the way to quickly handwave these.

I think that's fine, but I'm inclined to think it's too much hassle for too little gain for the most part.

Verbal and Somatic components could be replaced with a flat rule that _all_ spells have verbal and somatic components or that none of the spells have them.

Yeah. I actually gave a little thought to this about a year ago, and came up with something similar (but note that this is completely untested - it was off-the-cuff musing):

1) Ignore the listed components. Instead, all spells require Verbal, Somatic, and Focus components. Additionally, casters must have both hands free to cast spells, although one or both may hold their focus (Clerics and Paladins, in particular, may incorporate their holy symbols into a shield. Amongst other things, this explains why the staff is the Wizard's weapon of choice. )

2) If a spellcaster ever needs to cast a spell while missing one of the components, she can do so, but must give up all her movement in her turn. (Needless to say, this is the bit I'm least happy with. )

3) When casting a spell, especially outside of combat, the player is encouraged (but not required) to describe some of the components used, including strange material components if he wishes. As noted, this is strictly optional, though!

4) I was also inclined to introduce a number of special or power components (unicorn horn, demon's blood, dragon scales, etc). A character could optionally add these when casting a spell (at a cost of 50gp per level of the spell). Doing so would cause the spell to be treated as if cast in a slot one level higher - to a maximum of the highest spell level the character could cast normally. (For example, a 7th level Wizard could add 150gp of dragon scales to a fireball and thus treat it as a 4th level spell. A 5th level Wizard could not, since she can't cast 4th level spells yet.)

I'm also less than enamoured of the use of 'costly' material components as a balancing mechanism for spells. But I think those may be a necessary evil - the spells involved are probably a bit too powerful if the components are simply removed and yet wouldn't be powerful enough if pushed to the next level up.