Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="TheCosmicKid" data-source="post: 7159046" data-attributes="member: 6683613">You repeatedly use very colorful language to say all this doesn't make sense, but you don't give us much indication what exactly you don't think makes sense about it. The spellcasting rules say that these spells have a somatic component and a material component, meaning you need to hold something in your hand and manipulate it in order to cast the spell. Just like the fighter needs to hold a sword in his hand and manipulate it in order to attack enemies. All of these facts you list are natural consequences of this requirement: you can't use a symbol on your armor or around your neck because you can't manipulate it, just like the fighter can't attack with a sword strapped to his back. You can't use a symbol that casts spells for one class to cast for another class, just like the fighter can't use a sword in his hand to shoot arrows.Look, I know you said you don't want people defending the rules, that you're trying to fix what's broken, but I honestly can't get a good read on what you think is broken about this, and so I can't give you much in the way of advice on fixing it. What in-universe logic are you envisioning here that these bullet points contradict, and what do you think should be happening instead? If I try to figure that out by simply reversing the bullet points, I get results like &quot;You should be able to cast using a material component pouch even if both your hands are occupied&quot; and &quot;You should be able to cast warlock spells with a holy symbol&quot;, but that doesn't seem right either. Do you perhaps just feel that cleric spells shouldn't have material and/or somatic components? Maybe try that?See, this is different, because this actually doesn't make sense. A rules patch saying that a hand holding an appropriate focus can always be used to perform somatic components does seem to be in order.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="TheCosmicKid, post: 7159046, member: 6683613"] You repeatedly use very colorful language to say all this doesn't make sense, but you don't give us much indication what exactly you don't think makes sense about it. The spellcasting rules say that these spells have a somatic component and a material component, meaning you need to hold something in your hand and manipulate it in order to cast the spell. Just like the fighter needs to hold a sword in his hand and manipulate it in order to attack enemies. All of these facts you list are natural consequences of this requirement: you can't use a symbol on your armor or around your neck because you can't manipulate it, just like the fighter can't attack with a sword strapped to his back. You can't use a symbol that casts spells for one class to cast for another class, just like the fighter can't use a sword in his hand to shoot arrows. Look, I know you said you don't want people defending the rules, that you're trying to fix what's broken, but I honestly can't get a good read on what you think is broken about this, and so I can't give you much in the way of advice on fixing it. What in-universe logic are you envisioning here that these bullet points contradict, and what do you think should be happening instead? If I try to figure that out by simply reversing the bullet points, I get results like "You should be able to cast using a material component pouch even if both your hands are occupied" and "You should be able to cast warlock spells with a holy symbol", but that doesn't seem right either. Do you perhaps just feel that cleric spells shouldn't have material and/or somatic components? Maybe try that? See, this is different, because this actually [I]doesn't[/I] make sense. A rules patch saying that a hand holding an appropriate focus can always be used to perform somatic components does seem to be in order. [/QUOTE]

Verification