Search results

It's already been said, but it doesn't matter because the game itself doesn't fit either mechanically. The fact that most costly spell components are not consumed during casting causes problems for both & that just gets worse when you look at some common components where one spell consumes it...

The answer is

There is a line where a pile of trade goods is more trouble than it's worth and taking it means ignoring it or setting everything else aside in order to sell it immediately rather than taking it & continuing to adventure even while carrying something bulky enough to potentially complicate that...

No. I posted the current items for several spells and talked at length about the problems present in that list. That has been talked about. The current items are both uselessly varied to the point of being unrecognizable when found while simultaneously being careless on doubling up spells...

Yand how exactly does that provide the GM with a useful tool like a shared list of costly spell components the players can be exited to find items from even if they don't immediately know what that particular find can be used for without crashing into the problems faced in creating such a...

I feel like you are actively putting in work in order to avoid the point, this has been covered quite a few times through the thread. In order to create the shared commodity/tradegood style list for spells with costly components to draw from you need a unit☆ other than the cost of that unit...

You literally quoted one "Having the spells drawing from a GM side list would allow the GM to make use of that list as a subjectively desirable form of treasure that players should logically be excited about"

Going to swing back to that because the rest of this is relevant to that why. No... only the player can & not in a way that impacts actual play like a shared trade good/commodity style list would allow the GM to adjust accordingly in price or specific items fitting the setting & campaign...

Like this (don't overlook the quoted post)? The mechanics actively resist the GM's ability to make that happen through the creation of a tradegood/commodity list of costly spells that is shared among spells.

do you not see the difference between the price of something & the amount of that thing? Sooo.... If it IS already "a fixed amount of material for the spell, rather than anything to do with price." What is the unit or volume for so I can list them on a tradegoods/commodity style list tuned for...

I'm having a hard time remembering any UA material written for DMs. That's not discounting the possibility that there could have been an edge case, but the vast majority of it by far is player options & player toys with little if any regard for the needs of DMs. Can you name a few GM focused 5e...

It's a 5e problem not a d&d problem. 4e was a bit too different for comparison but ad&d2e and 3.x had a lot of things that could interrupt spellcasting with a concentration check for a spell of the level being cast (or worse).

Adventures are ok enough but as a GM I don't really get anything out of new player options or more magic items in an edition with math designed to kick me in the teeth while proclaiming "MagicItemsAreOptional". Having one book/year with dm stuff (monster book like volos & mords/player facing...

Again... The problem is that they present a commodity that would normally allow the GM to make use of it as a subjectively desirable form of treasure that players should logically be excited about, but they fail to provide a relevant commodity/trade good list for spells to share. If I give...

I'm pretty sure that this is a problem unique to 5e going by memory. In d&d 2e , material components were an optional rule that allowed. Caster to find/invent them so they could skip a verbal or somatic component. In 3.x spell components were closer to 5e mechanically but at least for the...

Why not? I could attach an automated blood pressure cuff & o2 monitor to report my current blood pressure & blood oxygen levels right now. There are almost certainly folks on this forum who could do similar & add blood glucose levels. Bathroom scales are so common that adding things like...

No. It would only make for equal value between a cut gem & dust made from that gem being ground up unless the unknowable far realm has a situation where it only produces gems of a certain size & quality but never lower. Gem dust is less expensive than gems because it can be made with waste...

Wrong side of the discussion. That's one of the many reasons why"[gemtype] worth xxxgp & "xxxgp worth of [gemtype] dust"over a standardized tradegood/mount/etc style per pound/per unit list that spells draw from and why xxxgp of [gemtype] dust should obviously not be interchangeable with...

Q So are you describing play that takes place on a world set in the unknowable far realm? Drawing on "because fantasy" or "it's only a game" doesn't cover for the claims you are trying to make unless you admit that your posts are describing the unknowable far realm. Not all diamonds pulled from...