D&D General Do you track material components?

[el-remmen]

Anything that has a listed cost in the spell must be purchased and accounted for - otherwise, we assume more than enough is gathered during downtime.

Tracking components has diminishing returns in terms of fun, but I do want to keep the option open through the "expense" part for an adventure or task built around finding some rare/expensive component. In other words, keep it as flavor/story hook, but never penalize someone if they didn't specifically say they were collecting bat guano.

 

[tetrasodium]

Spell focus is a feat? A 5e thing I guess. Anyway, if it is a feat that allows you to ignore material components then that's the point of taking it right? So then you can ignore the material component part of the requirements of the spell. Without it you would need to have those components, thus I would have to track them.

Why are so many people in this tread seemingly copletely unaware of basic 5e mechanics?

in chapter 10 you will find this....

 

[zarionofarabel]

Why are so many people in this tread seemingly copletely unaware of basic 5e mechanics?
View attachment 129575
View attachment 129576
in chapter 10 you will find this....
View attachment 129574

Well. It's listed under General, not 5e. Also, many posters on this forum don't play 5e, or have even read it. Like me! I haven't read 5e, don't own any of the books, and have no interest in buying or reading said books.

 

[John R Davis]

Well. It's listed under General, not 5e. Also, many posters on this forum don't play 5e, or have even read it. Like me! I haven't read 5e, don't own any of the books, and have no interest in buying or reading said books.

Yeah. I meant a focus in 5e bypasses cheap components. Reading the title listing heading, shocking!! In many games the components are a solid part of the game, and finding them is part of the adventure!!

 

[wingsandsword]

Not anymore.

I used to, back in 2nd Edition. Spellcaster characters would literally have an extra sheet just for tracking components back then.

The 3e concept of the component pouch, and the assumption that if you had one you were presumed to have any material components that didn't have a specific cost was a game innovation that was widely adopted, in my experience.

 

[wingsandsword]

Why are so many people in this tread seemingly copletely unaware of basic 5e mechanics?

Do you realize this isn't a message board or website that is exclusive to 5e, and there are people here who know and play other editions? This site/board was founded originally as a fansite for 3e, and there are fans here of editions going back to OD&D in the 1970's.

This thread wasn't tagged as a 5e thread, it was tagged as "general".

If it was 5e, I wouldn't have even posted in it.

 

[BacchusNL]

Spell focus is a feat? A 5e thing I guess. Anyway, if it is a feat that allows you to ignore material components then that's the point of taking it right? So then you can ignore the material component part of the requirements of the spell. Without it you would need to have those components, thus I would have to track them.

It's a very basic 5E rule, given to every caster in some form. Not a feat or whatever.

 

[tetrasodium]

Well. It's listed under General, not 5e. Also, many posters on this forum don't play 5e, or have even read it. Like me! I haven't read 5e, don't own any of the books, and have no interest in buying or reading said books.

oops, didn't notice

 

[wingsandsword]

It's a very basic 5E rule, given to every caster in some form. Not a feat or whatever.

Giving every caster a +1 bonus to the DC's of one school of magic they can cast is a basic 5e rule?

I think we might be having some very different ideas when you say "Spell Focus".

 

[el-remmen]

I think we might be having some very different ideas when you say "Spell Focus".

I think 3E called it "Arcane Focus" - casting spells through a focus (like a holy symbol) rather than needing/consuming component.