Dragons, Casting as a Sorceror and Material Components

[youspoonybard]

Ok. We were finishing up the campaign today, and to help him in the battle, Bahamut allowed the Dragon Disciple PC to turn into a real adult copper dragon. The party did need it at this point. This gave him some spellcasting ability. Since it was the last time, he rolled up randomly the spells he learned...but then I ran into conflicting information on whether or not he had to provide the material components.

The actual battle was fairly fought, using only Resist Energy (which saved the day, lucky PC!) but in the back of the MM 3.5, under spells it says that you need to provide components. In Draconomicon, page 24, it says "As noted in the MM, creatures with innate spellcasting abilities, usch as dragons, do not require material components to cast their spells."...

Huh?

This isn't a spell-like ability, am I missing something?

 

[Thanee]

Normally sorcerers do need material components, but dragons are not sorcerers, they are innate casters, that use spells like sorcerers do, but do not need material components (you quoted the section yourself).

Bye
Thanee

 

[shilsen]

The Draconomicon does clarify that dragons don't need material components, but it misrepresents what the MM says on the subject. The MM does not differentiate between dragons casting spells as sorcerers and any other such creature and they would normally need material components. The Draconomicon vetoes it.

 

[youspoonybard]

Well, the obvious next question is, which creatures do need to provide material components, and which don't?

 

[shilsen]

Going by the MM, all of them do. As posted above, the Draconomicon lets dragons off the list.

 

[Urbannen]

So lame. They could have avoided this problem from the start by giving sorcerers spell-like abilities and changing spell-like abilities so that they require a somatic component. Now they realize that dragons actually casting spells with components doesn't make sense. Oh well.

 

[shilsen]

So lame. They could have avoided this problem from the start by giving sorcerers spell-like abilities and changing spell-like abilities so that they require a somatic component. Now they realize that dragons actually casting spells with components doesn't make sense. Oh well.

Even easier would be to give sorcerers the Eschew Materials feat and let monsters that cast spells as sorcerers get the same. That's what I ended up doing.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Going by the MM, all of them do. As posted above, the Draconomicon lets dragons off the list.

I can't see how the Draconomicon can let just dragons off.

Either it has the authority to create a new ruling that states what it incorrectly suggests the MM does, in which case all creatures with innate spellcasting abilities are excused material components; or it doesn't, in which case no creatures with innate spellcasting abilities are excused.

If Draconomicon said "dragons do not require material components to cast their spells", I'd agree with you... but it says "creatures with innate spellcasting abilities, such as dragons, do not require material components to cast their spells"... and that includes araneae, nymphs, and the like.

-Hyp.

 

[shilsen]

I can't see how the Draconomicon can let just dragons off.

Either it has the authority to create a new ruling that states what it incorrectly suggests the MM does, in which case all creatures with innate spellcasting abilities are excused material components; or it doesn't, in which case no creatures with innate spellcasting abilities are excused.

If Draconomicon said "dragons do not require material components to cast their spells", I'd agree with you... but it says "creatures with innate spellcasting abilities, such as dragons, do not require material components to cast their spells"... and that includes araneae, nymphs, and the like.

-Hyp.

Sorry. It's the first, i.e. the Draconomicon makes a misruling and claims that's what the MM says (which it doesn't).