D&D 5E Spell focus needs an errated rule

[Swarmkeeper]

There are no heal spells requiring a focus. But yes, depending on the reading, the usage of those things as focuses could imply that you may use them on ay spells. But I think that needs more clarity. And this would make spellcasting a lot less annoying.

I'm not understanding the issue. A spellcasting focus has always been an available option to replace material components of a spell for any class (well, maybe not Rangers, one could argue, but that was fixed with Tasha's).

The special ability of the College of Spirits Bard doesn't invalidate that general rule. The focus just allows the spirits to enhance the healing or damage of spells, regardless of whether the spells require material components or not.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I'm not understanding the issue. A spellcasting focus has always been an available option to replace material components of a spell for any class (well, maybe not Rangers, one could argue, but that was fixed with Tasha's).

The special ability of the College of Spirits Bard doesn't invalidate that general rule. The focus just allows the spirits to enhance the healing or damage of spells, regardless of whether the spells require material components or not.

Look up how many healing spells that a bard has access to requires a focus. Not a s single one from below level 5.
So it does not enhance healing spells.
And argumenting that part of the ability is useful does not matter here: if you read the ability your expectation is, that the ability does something. Otherwise it is just misleading.
So either implement it the way thait it actually enhances healing spells or just limit the ability to damage dealing spells.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which just means that part of the feature is currently useless. Unless bards also have no damage dealing spells requiring a focus, the ability still has it use.

The bread and butter bard damage spell, vicious mockery, does not require a focus.

Indeed, going through the bard spell list, there are NO damage or healing spells that require a focus.

Correction, I have found 2 damage - Phantasmal Force and Cloud of Daggers.

 

[Flamestrike]

There are no heal spells requiring a focus.

Bards run into this problem as well with Instruments of the Bards that impose disadvantage on saves vs Charm effects, when you use the Instrument as a focus.

As written, there are few Bard spells that both a) Impose the Charmed condition and b) Have an M component attached.

Pretty sure the ruling (from JC) was that bards can use those items as M foci for any spell that imposes the Charmed condition, regardless of whether the spell has an M focus or not.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

Look up how many healing spells that a bard has access to requires a focus. Not a s single one from below level 5.
So it does not enhance healing spells.
And argumenting that part of the ability is useful does not matter here: if you read the ability your expectation is, that the ability does something. Otherwise it is just misleading.
So either implement it the way thait it actually enhances healing spells or just limit the ability to damage dealing spells.

I’m not clear why the wording is found to be so objectionable or how one reads the ability as being “useless”. The fiction works. If you must, think of it as Specific beats General. In the General rule, a Focus replaces Material components. In the Specific rule for Spiritual Focus, the Focus also enhances certain spells, regardless of components.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

In the Specific rule for Spiritual Focus, the Focus also enhances certain spells, regardless of components.

The point is, it doesn't say that. It obvious that the intent is the focus buffs healing spells, but we know that, without clarification, some DMs will rule RAW it only buffs spells that require material components, and therefore does not actually do anything for healing or most damage spells.

NB, this issue also applies to magic focus items that buff spell attacks and DCs. Some DMs rule that you can only benefit from such an item if the spell requires a material component.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

The point is, it doesn't say that. It obvious that the intent is the focus buffs healing spells, but we know that, without clarification, some DMs will rule RAW it only buffs spells that require material components, and therefore does not actually do anything for healing or most damage spells.

Seems like an overly restrictive reading of Focuses (Foci?) then, IMO.

There is nothing that I see in the rules preventing a PC from casting a spell through a focus if said spell doesn't use material components. Most often, there is no benefit so it doesn't matter except for descriptive flare.

Anyway, at our table, I would rule it works. I guess others might not.

NB, this issue also applies to magic focus items that buff spell attacks and DCs. Some DMs rule that you can only benefit from such an item if the spell requires a material component.

Can you provide an example of this that might shed light on the more narrow Spiritual Focus interpretation?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Bards run into this problem as well with Instruments of the Bards that impose disadvantage on saves vs Charm effects, when you use the Instrument as a focus.

As written, there are few Bard spells that both a) Impose the Charmed condition and b) Have an M component attached.

Pretty sure the ruling (from JC) was that bards can use those items as M foci for any spell that imposes the Charmed condition, regardless of whether the spell has an M focus or not.

This is why it should be errated. Because it cleary is an error and needs clarification (only officially, since you would get the bonus at my table).
It is something that of course can happen, and it can easily be remedied, like the stacking of any game element instead of just spells.

And while we are at it: Tenser´s transformation needs an overhaul too, because as written it has a (nearly)useless trait -> A wizard can´t don heavy armor while the spell is active...so either remove the ability or make it useful. Because right now it is not doing what is advertised. (From a pure RAW point of view which is not always the best wa to handle things.)

 

[Nefermandias]

This issue goes in line with the 5e approach of "almost like 4e but not quite".
The ability would make perfect sense back in 4e because every power was either a "weapon power" or "implement power". It's almost like 5e take on spells is a hybrid between 4e and every other edition.

 

[Krachek]

The Arcane focus are described to be designed to channel the power of arcane spell.
It’s not specified spell with material component, so we can assume that they work for any spell!