Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 7160072" data-attributes="member: 6801845">I don't know if my ideas are &quot;better&quot;.&nbsp; I think the rules could be explained better without changing anything.Something like: I have a house rule which overrides those rules:&nbsp; You can use a weapon (or wand/magical staff) to complete the somatic components of a spell as long as you can move the weapon.

For example you may complete the somatic component of a spell such as pointing at your target by pointing at it with your weapon.My house rule seems to be a pretty common solution to the problem.The &quot;stance&quot; solution bothers me because it feels like we're adding to the rules and burying the house rule (weapon and shield can cast) in amongst other stuff.EDIT: Just to be clear, my point is that if you want to clarify the existing rules, then clarify the existing rules.&nbsp; Don't add extra labels or layers of complexity.If you're going to make a house rule, be clear and consistent.&nbsp; Don't over-explain it by including the fact that you are not overriding other rules.&nbsp; For example there's no reason to state that if you have a free hand you can cast spells with somatic components.&nbsp; That's a given and by adding it to your home rule you're just confusing the issue.If you have a ruling that may differ from some other people's, you may want to explain your ruling.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 7160072, member: 6801845"] I don't know if my ideas are "better". I think the rules could be explained better without changing anything. Something like: I have a house rule which overrides those rules: [INDENT]You can use a weapon (or wand/magical staff) to complete the somatic components of a spell as long as you can move the weapon. For example you may complete the somatic component of a spell such as pointing at your target by pointing at it with your weapon.[/INDENT] My house rule seems to be a pretty common solution to the problem. The "stance" solution bothers me because it feels like we're adding to the rules and burying the house rule (weapon and shield can cast) in amongst other stuff. EDIT: Just to be clear, my point is that if you want to clarify the existing rules, then clarify the existing rules. Don't add extra labels or layers of complexity. If you're going to make a house rule, be clear and consistent. Don't over-explain it by including the fact that you are not overriding other rules. For example there's no reason to state that if you have a free hand you can cast spells with somatic components. That's a given and by adding it to your home rule you're just confusing the issue. If you have a ruling that may differ from some other people's, you may want to explain your ruling. [/QUOTE]

Verification