D&D 4E Material components and spell books? Get rid of them for 4e!

[italianranma]

The only thing about spell components in (A)D&D that bothere me was that there was not a single comlete table of component costs anywhere! I don't mind having to track my units of bat guano for my Fireball, but it's damn hard, as player as well as DM, to track something that is important to use but has not one cp of cost associated.

Spells and Magic (part of the Player's Choice series for 2nd edition) had a complete table of spell components. It also has their relative availability (which is modified by the size of the city you are in) and mechanics for finding them in the wild. I still have that book and I think it's highly entertaining, although I've never once used that spell components section.

 

[Lanefan]

Keep spellbooks, and keep it as a considerable expense to scribe new spells in.

Components...while I like the flavour, I also tend to handwave the basic ones. If there's any cost involved, however (the 100 g.p. pearl for Identify being a classic example) then I make sure that cost gets knocked off; either from the caster's personal wealth or the party treasury, whatever the players decide.

As for getting new spells at training, I give one, at random. ("here's the spell your trainer decided to teach you; take it or leave it")

The 3e component for Raise Dead being limited to diamond dust irks me somewhat...seeing as the component is essentially being sacrificed to the raising deity anyway, shouldn't it instead be something appropriate to that deity, as long as it's worth at least 5000 g.p.?

Lanefan

 

[Li Shenron]

Spellbook

Flawed concept, and terrible practical rules.

Every other caster simply "knows" spells, while the wizard cannot prepare any spell except Read Magic without a spellbook but OTOH he cannot use someone else's spellbook to prepare a spell he hasn't "learned"... so does he really "know" the spells or not? Why does it have to be ambiguous.

My guess is that most gaming groups ignore the issue of a wizard having to carry around a spellbook. It is known that destroying or stealing a wizard's spellbook is a great damage, so basically there is an unwritten rule that says "don't mess with the wizard's spellbook". A DM that does that is seriously at risk of pissing off the wizard player who may feel penalized for being targetted directly. You can do this ONCE, just like you can use once the idea of the cleric deity's "shut off" her spells for some mysterious reason. But if you do it twice, it's already dead boring and frustrating, since the character is seriously limited during that time.

And then there is the rule about page count... unnecessary at best. Who cares to keep track of how many pages are left in the book? This is much less interesting than for example keeping track of ingredient doses, which is not commonly done either. Not to mention the sillyness of "every spellbook has exactly 100 pages".

I think the main reason for spellbooks is because wizards in fantasy literature are usually depicted as scholars who study tons of ancient books to unveil magical secrets... which is cool, but can be effectively maintained for LEARNING spells without involving preparation.

Material components

Ingredients are cool, but certainly keeping track of them carefully should be an optional rule. I don't see any damage in writing material components in the spell description, since the space taken is minimal. But if they were removed, no big deal, the PHB may simply mention that spells often use ingredients, but the players is free to make up her own.

OTOH I hope they remove the rule about the need to "manipulate" the material components, because it adds nothing to the game. Somatic and verbal components are way enough and have more clear implications in the game, while material components in 3e only mattered during a grapple (but grapple was an overpowered tactic against spellcasters).

IMHO a good change would be to make it easier to cast a Silent or Still spell (perhaps on the fly, or otherwise automatically apply these metamagic to all casting of a certain group of spells, if the character has the appropriate ability/feat), so that the Silence spell and Grappling are not universal anti-caster tactics anymore, and then get rid completely of any restriction/penalty coming from material components.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Spells and Magic (part of the Player's Choice series for 2nd edition) had a complete table of spell components. It also has their relative availability (which is modified by the size of the city you are in) and mechanics for finding them in the wild. I still have that book and I think it's highly entertaining, although I've never once used that spell components section.

Yep...bloody typical...I knew I had to miss SOMEthing when I skipped those "Player's Options" books 10 years ago. Argh!

Thanks for the heads-up! Will see if I can find one.

 

[ruemere]

Just a few ideas...

Unstoppable wizard syndrome:
A wizard, who cannot be prevented from spellcasting.

Solutions (old):
Breaking fingers (S components), tearing out tongue or gagging (V components), robbing (M components).

Drastic, somewhat unsupported by D&D (hitpoints and broken fingers do not really work together as d20 concepts) and paperwork intensive ("200 pinches of guano later...").

Solution (unoriginal though not canonical):
Introduce spell focus, an item required for successful spellcasting. Average quality version of the item should be easily accessible (think nonmagical longsword), improvised version should be widely obtainable -- however, they would require spellcaster to attune to the new focus. Also, use of improvised version of spell focus would impose spellcasting penalties (in terms of 3.5: worse save DC, shorter spell duration).

Sample spell foci:
Improvised: See Average below.
Average: Size as per Two-handed weapon - Quarterstaff.
Mastercraft: Size as per One-handed weapon - Wand.
Superior masterwork: Size as per light weapon - Athame (ceremonial dagger).

Role of spellbooks:
As spells require study and research, spell books could fulfil three important functions for their owners, which are skill retraining, researching spell variants and storing spell power.

Skill retraining - spells are complex, their proficient use could require retraining every day. Lack of spellbook containing known spells would impose spellcasting penalties while casting a known spell not retrained during last retraining session. Such session should occur once per day and should not affect game in other ways than simple event of canonical "one hour for spellcasters".

Researching spell variants - using a spellbook and with GM's permission, a spellcaster could record a new version of already known spell.

Spell power storage - should the vancian system were to be used: spellcasters lacking spellbook during retraining session have fewer spell slots.


Regards,
Ruemere

 

[Sun Knight]

Where were the spell components in OD&D?

Don't remember, to tell the truth. I know 2e and up had spell components and such. Just arbitrarily removing them just seems wrong to me. They add to the feel of the game. Then again the changes they are making the magic system is pretty much gutting the game to the point I don't even consider it D&D any more.

 

[Cadfan]

I vote:

Foci for at will and per encounter abilities. No material components.
Spellbook and Foci for per day abilities. Material components for some of these, as appropriate.

I don't know if I'll get that. But I like it.

The foci option is a pretty big departure from previous versions of the rules and the fluff, so I'm not sure it will be used. But it would be neat to have a choice to use it, if possible.

We sort of use the foci option for clerics, but since the foci is just a holy symbol, it invariably ends up inscribed on somebody's shield, armor, or belt buckle, or hung from their hip, and resolutely ignored for the rest of the game. This has to be done for clerics, because we expect them to fight with a weapon and a shield, and they have no third hand to hold their holy symbol. But thematically, I like the idea of a wizard who holds a foci in one hand and a knife in the other, and casts his spells. And then puts the knife down to pick up components with that hand for the really big spells.

 

[D.Shaffer]

Then again the changes they are making the magic system is pretty much gutting the game to the point I don't even consider it D&D any more.

Ya know, there comes a point where a rational person would figure out that maybe the game is no longer for him and go find something else he finds enjoyable, like playing a different game. Do you really think this sort of post helps your case at all? How about organizing a group of 3rd ed players to make your own variation that you would enjoy? It HAS to be healthier then constantly being Mr. negativity all the time.

 

[helium3]

As a counterpoint, knowing what the material components for a spell are can be cool from a purely role-playing standpoint. It was tres cool when Disintegrate was cast by a player for the first time and he actually bothered to describe pulling the lodestone out of his belt pouch.

Of course, every time after that he just yelled Disintegrate . . .

 

[Zaruthustran]

Spellbooks are fun. They exist in fantasy literature, they add to that whole wizard library archetype.

I suggest that instead of the 3E incarnation of an item that essentially contains your character's abilities, spellbooks should be magic items. Each spell in a spellbook can be cast as a ritual (casting time measured in minutes). The book itself provides some of the power for the spell. Once cast, that spell can't be cast again for X days. So essentially, a spellbook is like a collection of scrolls that never burn out.

This change puts a wizard's class abilities where they belong--with the wizard himself--while encouraging a wizard to find and keep spells. It also introduces the fun fantasy trope of coming upon an obstacle, and the wizard then pores over his various books for the right spell (which then takes several minutes to actually cast).

Components are also fun, and flavorful. In my opinion, the common practice of handwaving the wizard's bottomless component pouch is no better or worse than the common practice of handwaving the archer's bottomless arrow quiver. I suggest that most core wizard arcane abilities (careful not to use the word "spell", there*) shouldn't require components. However, certain spells should require components. Those components should be tracked as diligently as arrows are tracked.

And I'm totally in favor of a wand or staff being a "focus" needed for certain spells or abilities, much like the cleric's holy symbol.

-z

* I think it'd be cool if spells in 4E were like a fighter's sword: a tool that can be used with proper training, but is essentially external to the character. Arcane abilities would be more like the fighter's swordarm/Str bonus; an internal power able to be used at will. It may be too subtle a distinction, but hey that's my wishlist.