Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 7159183" data-attributes="member: 20564">The question becomes: what is the purpose of verbal, somatic, and material components in 5e.&nbsp; You need to know that to have a goal for redesigning.There are two design goals I could see as fitting, but that doesn't eman that they /should/ both be in play.&nbsp; (Also, I'm ignoring the sacred cow aspect.)First is weapon equivalency:&nbsp; If it takes (at least) one hand to wield a weapon, it should take one hand to cast a spell.&nbsp; So you can't benefit from weapon (to make attacks as your action or reaction), shield (to boost your AC) and many spells in the same round.&nbsp; A simplification that fits this is:&nbsp; you need a hand free to cast any spell with S or M components.My *guess* is that spell focus was&nbsp; away to have half-casters like paladins who could actually handle all three by overloading one, but it's done in an ugly way.The second is disarming:&nbsp; If there is a way to as-needed-by-plot minorly and majorly reduce the effectiveness of a weapon wielder, plot should be able to do the same for a caster.&nbsp; For example, if you're captured they might take your weapons and components, but you still can punch, grab weapons, have hidden daggers, and cast spells with V or S.&nbsp; The far end of what plot needs is you're locked up and have no weapons or armor, and no gestures or components.&nbsp; Both give the occasional move out of the comfort zone where you try to work out given what you have.If you think one or both of those are reasonable design goals (or good bases to start with), it's pretty straightforward to design a component rule to satisfy them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 7159183, member: 20564"] The question becomes: what is the purpose of verbal, somatic, and material components in 5e. You need to know that to have a goal for redesigning. There are two design goals I could see as fitting, but that doesn't eman that they /should/ both be in play. (Also, I'm ignoring the sacred cow aspect.) First is [B]weapon equivalency[/B]: If it takes (at least) one hand to wield a weapon, it should take one hand to cast a spell. So you can't benefit from weapon (to make attacks as your action or reaction), shield (to boost your AC) and many spells in the same round. A simplification that fits this is: you need a hand free to cast any spell with S or M components. My *guess* is that spell focus was away to have half-casters like paladins who could actually handle all three by overloading one, but it's done in an ugly way. The second is [B]disarming[/B]: If there is a way to as-needed-by-plot minorly and majorly reduce the effectiveness of a weapon wielder, plot should be able to do the same for a caster. For example, if you're captured they might take your weapons and components, but you still can punch, grab weapons, have hidden daggers, and cast spells with V or S. The far end of what plot needs is you're locked up and have no weapons or armor, and no gestures or components. Both give the occasional move out of the comfort zone where you try to work out given what you have. If you think one or both of those are reasonable design goals (or good bases to start with), it's pretty straightforward to design a component rule to satisfy them. [/QUOTE]

Verification