Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 7640846" data-attributes="member: 23751">I disagree that it has to be a house rule.&nbsp; More of a ruling than a house rule, since both spells say you need to have a hand free to engage the somatic component, but it's clearly impossible to do two different somatic components simultaneously, so one hand is no longer free for the fireball while the fireball is being cast.&nbsp; The DM is free to engage a ruling that without the free hand for fireball, the fireball fails or needs a concentration check due to you reacting and casting counterspell.&nbsp; The DM could also rule that there's no need for either one.&nbsp; No matter which way it's ruled, though, the ruling is solidly based on a game rule and is not going to be a house rule.True, but as I mentioned, the other hand is not in fact free.&nbsp; It is holding the bat guano and sulfer, and so it's incapable of being used for the somatic component.That's one way to do it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 7640846, member: 23751"] I disagree that it has to be a house rule. More of a ruling than a house rule, since both spells say you need to have a hand free to engage the somatic component, but it's clearly impossible to do two different somatic components simultaneously, so one hand is no longer free for the fireball while the fireball is being cast. The DM is free to engage a ruling that without the free hand for fireball, the fireball fails or needs a concentration check due to you reacting and casting counterspell. The DM could also rule that there's no need for either one. No matter which way it's ruled, though, the ruling is solidly based on a game rule and is not going to be a house rule. True, but as I mentioned, the other hand is not in fact free. It is holding the bat guano and sulfer, and so it's incapable of being used for the somatic component. That's one way to do it. [/QUOTE]

Verification