Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Erechel" data-source="post: 7409497" data-attributes="member: 6784868">I understand your line of thought. But I digress in your conclussion: gagging someone is specifically quoted as a way to impede verbal components, and verbal components are rules. And any attempt of gagging someone would quickly lead to a combat, in some way or another. And it is mostly relevant in combat, not outside it. And it is an order of magnitude more powerful under specific circumstances: it only impedes casting with verbal components, but there are multiple actions that said caster could take, including casting spells without verbal components. And there are spells and actions a caster could do to invalidate this very easily: spells like freedom of movement that renders your caster immune to this, and spells like misty step, that allow you to escape. And there are more than one physical approach: Athletics or Acrobatics. Furthermore, why do even include verbal components if they aren't relevant?The fact is, there are spells that do something like that, and worse. Hold Person, that paralyzes and imposes a Saving Throw no martial has. Forcecage. Control Water to create a wave to knock a fighter. Tsunami, for a more gruesome way to do the same. And, as I've said earlier, this is in the same order of magnitude than a disarm. It doesn't disable a caster in every possible way, such as an ethereal tornado or a hold person. It just prevents certain spells with verbal components. Furthermore, it isn't impossible: it is a valid approach, using the existing rules. You could rule it otherwise, [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION], and increase the difficulty accordingly. I'm not complaining on that. This mechanic, specifically, could be flawed by being too easy, but not by intent. If the rogue would try to use its expertise in Sleight of Hands to steal the material components of a spell, such as a crystal that acts as an arcane focus, you would say the same? That it is an abuse? I'm taking advantage of an already existant ruleset (spells components), and using them in advantage.As for your specific example, Arcana checks aren't used for spellcasting, spellcasting has its own rules. Managing ethereal storms would fall under spellcasting, unless you are in the ethereal plane (in which I would allow an Arcana check to manage the storm against the martial). Even more, I could allow a Very Difficult arcana check, then expend a spell slot, and then renounce to half the movement and both hands to do something like what you said without being in the ethereal plane (I usually allow improvising with existing spells with arcana checks). But Athletics are used for attacks, I've specifically quoted when. And they can function as a model of how to do something like that. That's why I've proposed to be two successive Athletics checks, with both free hands as an option, and at disadvantage. Choking someone isn't something fantastical, implausible or in the order of the supernatural, it is a very common way to fight; grabbing someone and shut the mouth is also something very common, both in fiction and reality. Saying that it is impossible... it is limiting a great deal the fighters, denying things that they really aren't all that difficult, while pumping the casters by ignoring the components rules.Of course, as I've said, if you come with a better way to do it, one you think it is more balanced, I'll be glad to hear them.</blockquote>

Verification