D&D 5E The Limits of Minor Conjuration

[jaelis]

Just to be clear, I don't claim that RAW says conjured items can be used as components. RAW seems ambiguous to me. My claim is that the better ruling is that they can.

Here is Crawford's take:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/12/25/minor-conjuration-questions/

He seems to be applying the "it has no value" argument, which is fine but I would say not RAW.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Also, just to address this argument: if you accept this reasoning, then what keeps the rogue from offering to buy a tiny diamond chip from the cleric for 1000 gp, thus making the chip worth 1000 gp and therefore usable as a component for resurrection?

This has been a serious issue with the economy, ever since AD&D.

It seems as though the true nature of a D&D world is that things have intrinsic value, regardless of what anyone will pay for it. (The reason the jeweler won't pay for a huge perfect diamond is that conjured goods are intrinsically worthless.)

 

[5ekyu]

FWIW mearls and crawford seem to have both issues thru Sage/tweets that this can produce your material components but not ones with GP cost.

As for this "Sure, and every once in a blue moon you will need one of those things and not have any other way to get it. In the meantime, diviners get portent, abjurers get a sweet ward, bladesingers get awesome AC, etc. IMO, letting a conjurer bypass expensive components is about what it takes to make the subclass worthwhile."

its almost always a bad idea to compare in isolation one sub-element of a package (class/sub-class) to another sub-element of another package and make any decisions about "balance." Each spell school is not in and of itself balanced against the others - different numbers of spells, different needs for common situations etc.) so some traditions have better sub-elements than others. Certainly scult spell has its uses as an evoker, but it is no portent or abjuring ward either. Meanwhile, not losing concentration on conjures due to damage at 10th seems to me to be superior to the diviner's 10th level "pick a low level sight effect" at least in more common use cases.

I think one key thing to most all of the traditions is that they are quite "campaign dependent." The kinds of challenges they can deal with are not universally even. getting a look at someones key and then being able to conjure a copy on demand seems like it would be very useful in quite a few cases that the abjurer's ward isn't.

 

[Dausuul]

OK, but it seems you are positing that, along with the form of an item, the conjuration acquires some of its properties. A shield will block a blow, you can stand on a stool, a lens will transmit light? None of those features follow directly from the form of the object, as can be seen by considering cardboard replicas of those items. So how (by RAW alone) can you decide which properties carry over and which do not?

By RAW alone, you can't. There is no RAW definition of "form," and the wording of the ability leaves a great deal up to DM interpretation. I'd be inclined to include gross physical properties, such as weight and rigidity, but not necessarily chemical properties or mystical ones.

I do think that the material component rules calling for the specific object excludes a Minor Conjuration, on the grounds that when it is reasonably possible to read RAW in such a way as to fulfill the obvious design intent, that is the way to read it. I believe the word "form" provides enough ambiguity to justify such a reading.

 

[jaelis]

its almost always a bad idea to compare in isolation one sub-element of a package (class/sub-class) to another sub-element of another package and make any decisions about "balance." Each spell school is not in and of itself balanced against the others - different numbers of spells, different needs for common situations etc.) so some traditions have better sub-elements than others. Certainly scult spell has its uses as an evoker, but it is no portent or abjuring ward either. Meanwhile, not losing concentration on conjures due to damage at 10th seems to me to be superior to the diviner's 10th level "pick a low level sight effect" at least in more common use cases.

Sure, and maybe you just think conjuration spells are awesome and that balances the subclass. I'm not really trying to say that conjurers suck. I'm trying to say that, with a conservative interpretation, minor conjuration sucks. I think that if it is reasonable to rule in a way to make abilities more usable, you should.

Now, maybe you think that letting minor conjuration work for components is unbalancing and makes conjurers too good. If so, why? Essentially every game I've played, the component costs for a given level spell are fairly minor in comparison to the amount of treasure the party has accumulated. And if you play in a low treasure game, then it seems to me you are basically just banning those spells anyway (or, effectively making them higher level). If there are particular spells that you feel deserve that adjustment, why not just adjust them? And if not, then giving players a way to access them should be a plus.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Now, maybe you think that letting minor conjuration work for components is unbalancing and makes conjurers too good. If so, why?

I'm trying to maintain the semblance of a functional economy, and that extends beyond just the PCs.

 

[jaelis]

I'm trying to maintain the semblance of a functional economy, and that extends beyond just the PCs.

Where do you see minor conjuration causing problems in that regard?

A pretty easy adjustment would be to say the value of the created object can't exceed, say 100 gp per wizard level.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

I would rule towards the word 'minor'. If you can churn out gold, diamonds, or other imbalancing things, why is it labeled 'minor'? "The magic simply isn't powerful enough for that" would probably fly at my table.

I would say you could use the spell to churn out a little silver or copper if you want to screw the local innkeeper or supply shop, but if you try to use it to create larger amounts of wealth then your spending it with people who at the very least know such magic exists and are not going to fall for "cantrip coin".

Even screwing the local innkeeper has his risks as when you defrauded him with your illusionary coin you likely broke a major law of the local kingdom. The punishment of which may far far exceed the benefit of getting a meal for free.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Where do you see minor conjuration causing problems in that regard?

A pretty easy adjustment would be to say the value of the created object can't exceed, say 100 gp per wizard level.

That's more than enough for Resurrection, and I always imagined that the diamond was the limiting factor for that spell in the Forgotten Realms. Suddenly, a cleric and a conjurer can bring back entire towns that were flattened by the Tarrasque.

 

[jaelis]

That's more than enough for Resurrection, and I always imagined that the diamond was the limiting factor for that spell in the Forgotten Realms. Suddenly, a cleric and a conjurer can bring back entire towns that were flattened by the Tarrasque.

An 20th-level cleric can resurrect 4 people per day. So a town of 1500 would tie them up for a year. I guess I would say the cleric's deity would rather have them doing something more useful in that time, like saving the multiverse or something. The point being that the slot cost is already a pretty good limiting factor.

For that matter, would it really be that hard for a 20th level character to come up with 1.5 million gp?