D&D 4E Any word on spell components for 4E?

vic20 said:
Would somebody who uses the RAW for spell components please raise your hand? Please don't think I'm looking to start any sort of debate. I seriously have wondered if there was no larger than 2-5% of the d&d population. There must have been an ENWorld poll on this topic at some point.
The RAW that says that everything except the expensive stuff is in the 5g spell component pouch? Pretty much everyone I know does.

SRD said:
Spell Component Pouch: A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

The RAW already hand-waves this stuff. People just keep thinking the system is the same as the 1E and 2E one, which it ain't.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Whizbang Dustyboots said:
The RAW already hand-waves this stuff. People just keep thinking the system is the same as the 1E and 2E one, which it ain't.
Just another complaint that can be fixed by actually reading the rules. Who would have thought?
 

Fifth Element said:
Just another complaint that can be fixed by actually reading the rules. Who would have thought?

Just another rude comment that can be fixed by actually reading my post? ;)

As I said, I wasn't trying to start a debate or insinuate anything about anyone's play style. I just was asking for a hand wave if you played RAW, and, as has been pointed out, the RAW say to hand wave it (for the little stuff).

I play Iron Heroes these days, so spell components aren't something I deal with at all. I did play 3E for a number of years, but you'd be surprised at what I still don't understand about Grappling.

From ignorant to wise as many times a day as I can get away with,
vic20
 

Stormtalon said:
I can see components being kept and made more distinct in the case of Rituals, but for the everyday spells and powers, they'll probably be minimized.

I hope you're right. No matter what the rules say, I will do away with material components IMC, letting the focus take their place. I expect verbal and somatic components to still exist, although it would appear (with spell failure going away) that somatic components will no longer be so complex and extreme (interpretive dance, anyone?).

In any event, no matter the RAW I will probably run it this way IMC.
 

vic20 said:
Would somebody who uses the RAW for spell components please raise your hand?

I always have, from AD&D onward. Heck, I've even kept the encumbrance on my spell components in the old days, for the fun of it. Nowadays, we've got it nice, cushy, and easy, because it's one little bag for x gold and a couple of pounds. In the olden days, I made reaction check adjustments because of the rotten eggs I was carrying for my stinking cloud spells. :D

But seriously, I've always used them, whether the edition said to use materials (AD&D) or not (Basic D&D).

Personally, I like the way Warhammer handles it: You don't need components for spells, but a sympathetic component does give a small bonus to casting the spell. Rituals are complex affairs, very powerful, but which take some rare components that you can't just plop down gold to buy.
 

Henry said:
I always have, from AD&D onward. Heck, I've even kept the encumbrance on my spell components in the old days, for the fun of it. Nowadays, we've got it nice, cushy, and easy, because it's one little bag for x gold and a couple of pounds. In the olden days, I made reaction check adjustments because of the rotten eggs I was carrying for my stinking cloud spells. :D

But seriously, I've always used them, whether the edition said to use materials (AD&D) or not (Basic D&D).

In my Gurps days, I remember tracking every match-stick. I had a lot of fun with it, and made the players feel the agony of the cold rain, with only half a day's food and 2 days to walk.
 


There's a passage discussing spell components in one of the 'Behind the Curtain' sidebars in the Rules Compendium, I believe, where they're described as something that adds flavor to the game without much mechanical hassle.

I'd expect they'll be kept, maybe called out more as optional, and that in many cases spells with expensive components will be replaced with whatever system they're using for rituals.

Personally, I'd scrap them for non-ritual spells and let implements take the place of 'flavor enhancement to spellcasting/ability to handicap wizards by removing equipment', but I like the Tolkien/Rowling flavors of magic over the Vance/Gygax ones. :)
 

Matthew L. Martin said:
There's a passage discussing spell components in one of the 'Behind the Curtain' sidebars in the Rules Compendium, I believe, where they're described as something that adds flavor to the game without much mechanical hassle.

I'd expect they'll be kept, maybe called out more as optional, and that in many cases spells with expensive components will be replaced with whatever system they're using for rituals.

Personally, I'd scrap them for non-ritual spells and let implements take the place of 'flavor enhancement to spellcasting/ability to handicap wizards by removing equipment', but I like the Tolkien/Rowling flavors of magic over the Vance/Gygax ones. :)

That chance wouls slim down if you played the LotR game system. I do not know who puts it out, but it is a 2d6 system. while there idea was cool, a caster was gimped due to needing awesome rolls all the time for even basic spells. And once you fail a spell you cant cast for the rest of the day. More often then not, The caster was boned by 10 am.

As far as the magic system is concerned, I'd like to see the system that has been in place come back in 4th edition. But I don't want it to be exclusive. I hope fourth with push diverse casting systems, and not one universal one.

---Rusty
 

Remove ads

Top