Level Up (A5E) Object interaction, spell components, unarmed attacks and hand usage

[CapnZapp]

I've always interpreted that to mean the dust of a 100gp diamond.

(And, yes, I realize that this still makes no sense. A 1,000gp diamond would not produce the same amount of dust as 20 50gp diamonds.)

Don't use logic to evaluate magic!

Of course it makes sense: the magic draws its power from the fact you have destroyed a fortune, and not just any old money, but the idealized perfection of wealth. It's the energy vibrations of this conceptual sacrifice that is stored into the diamond dust, which then fuels the spell. (Or something )

Doing things like weighing the dust means thinking like a scientist. Don't. Think like an alchemist, an astrologer, ... or a game-balancing designer...!

Zapp

PS. And no, I am not suggesting the game stops listing spell components like bat guano. That provides value for those who like it while being easily ignored by those that don't. Removing it therefore doesn't simplify the game, which is why I don't suggest taking it away.

Simplifying verbal and somatic components, and their interaction with hand usage, on the other hand.... THAT would be a huge relief!

 

[CapnZapp]

The reason people don't use them is because the designers in their infinite lack of wisdom have provided so many workarounds.

Yes, it's time to take the consequences of that and just dump the hand usage and object interaction legacy rules as the hot garbage they are!

 

[DEFCON 1]

The reason people don't use them is because the designers in their infinite lack of wisdom have provided so many workarounds.

Time was, S-component meant you had to have BOTH hands free and have your movements otherwise completely unrestricted for as long as it took you to cast the spell, otherwise you flat-out could not cast. Toning this down - which started with 3e and has continued since - has IMO done more to enhance casters than any other single change - well, other than Combat Casting; another dumb idea.

V-component is easy: you can't cast if you can't speak clearly and-or cannot make sound. No reason ever not to use this one.

M-component is the tricky one. Yes, tracking them all is a pain and for those components that don't cost anything the 3e idea of the 'components pouch' is a decent compromise. But components with a cost do need to be tracked just like any other significant expenses the character undertakes or possessions the character has.

For brevity, I also added a fourth component to all my spell write-ups (which I've redone from scratch over the years): L. L means line of sight is required between the caster and (usually) the target; absence of L means the spell can be cast into an unseen space or behind a closed door. I did this to save having to type into every single bloody spell description whether line of sight was required or not.

Heh heh... chicken and the egg innit? Did people not use components because designers provided workarounds, or did designer provide workarounds because players were already not using them?

Truth be told, I'd have no problem with this game including what you posted. As I said originally... I think that if Morrus actually provided a set of Advanced rules on both spell components and handiness/object interactions (cleaned up, solidified, made into their own complete game system) then that'd be great. Useful to a lot of people who already use it... and a new, more complex system for others who might actually want to try and adopt it. Heck, I'd throw Encumbrance into this pot as well-- another system barely touched upon in 5E but which could have far-ranging consequences if their rules system was actually incorporated more fully into the game.

But I suspect the ultimate problem is that even if Morrus was to create a more Advanced system for martials and casters on how to carry their equipment, pulling items in and out of their belts/pouches/backpacks during combat with one or more of their hands full, and the ease or difficulty of pulling certain types of things out for use... will that be a game system that most players would actually use? Honestly? I don't know. There are a lot of "mini-games" within D&D, and I've never suspected the equipment handling "mini-game" to be one most people bothered with (which is why 5E provided all these workarounds in the first place.)

So long story short... I think it will be kind of pointless for Morrus to just include 5E's current encumbrance / handiness / component systems as they currently are in this new game, because they don't serve either side. He should either make the system truly Advanced to be a fully integrated "mini-game" for players to deal with... or just remove almost all of the unnecessary chaff like @CapnZapp suggested and just simplify it down to its base (since that's what most tables already do anyway.)

 

[aco175]

If we did away with material components, we would need to change some of the spells. Something with 5,000gp component is meant to limit the spell being used or make it a lower level. Not playing with the limit would cause us to raise the level of the spell to keep it in line or just do away with some spells.

I have seen this with Chromatic Orb at first level needing a 50gp component. without the component, is it more a 2nd level spell, or does it need a boost to make it 2nd level since it is more a 1.5 level. Same with Raise Dead and all the PCs carrying around a diamond in their med pouch so they can be raised.

There is also a more granular problem with components with costs, but it is mostly handwaved across the whole system. A spell with 100gp of diamond dust in one land may be more or less than in another. The base diamond can also be valued as more or less in certain lands or where it is mined. What about an uncut diamond- do I need a larger amount to make 100gp. What about if I go buy one and get scammed, paying 100gp for one normally valued at 50gp. Would that still count. I know not many people want to get this deep in the weeds and the whole system is handwaved a lot. Similar to all the weapons and gear where you could do the same.

 

[Phoebasss]

If we did away with material components, we would need to change some of the spells. Something with 5,000gp component is meant to limit the spell being used or make it a lower level. Not playing with the limit would cause us to raise the level of the spell to keep it in line or just do away with some spells.

I don't think most people suggesting we eliminate spell components with a cost. That's meant to give the party wizard something to do with money, since money is largely useless in 5e. Chromatic Sphere is its own problem since its a level one spell that's uncastable at that level and not great by level 3. This thread is mostly about hand use rules and how (jn their current state) they mostly serve to slow down gameplay without providing much mechanical or narrative benefit in exchange.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Don't use logic to evaluate magic!

Of course it makes sense: the magic draws its power from the fact you have destroyed a fortune, and not just any old money, but the idealized perfection of wealth. It's the energy vibrations of this conceptual sacrifice that is stored into the diamond dust, which then fuels the spell. (Or something )

Doing things like weighing the dust means thinking like a scientist. Don't. Think like an alchemist, an astrologer, ... or a game-balancing designer...!

Zapp

PS. And no, I am not suggesting the game stops listing spell components like bat guano. That provides value for those who like it while being easily ignored by those that don't. Removing it therefore doesn't simplify the game, which is why I don't suggest taking it away.

Simplifying verbal and somatic components, and their interaction with hand usage, on the other hand.... THAT would be a huge relief!

Oh, completely agree. I should have appended “...and I don’t care” to that 2nd part. I was just pointing out that I was aware of that paradox before somebody said “But it makes no sense!!!”

 

[Guest 6801328]

Okay. Just make sure it's much clearer than in 5E which horns/shells/etc are meant to be useful and which are only ornamental.

My point is something slightly different: have natural weapons that really are useful. Don't have only natural weapons that in the end turn out to be useless, except in corner cases at very low level.


I am not suggesting you should be able to switch instantly between loadouts.

I am suggesting that "switch between loadouts" become a standardized action that doesn't force players to keep track of (and thereby optimize) hand usage.

As for the torch example, well, that's special. The D&D game simply isn't doing a good job balancing between "sword and torch" and other weapon loadouts. Meaning that if you don't have darkvision, you're simply worse off. Designers usually take same effort to balance two weapons, greatweapon and sword-and-board, but I see zero evidence sword-and-torch is given a balanced design. Especially since it is so trivial to avoid the non-darkvision races, and/or have a caster use magical light.

The idea that every fighter pretty much needs his own light source to fight effectively just isn't supported by D&D. (Have you ever been in a dark place where your buddy holds the flashlight? If you have, you realize the idea of "I put magical light on the tip of my blade" should really make it impossible for everyone else to see anything, since your light source would pretty much cause a dizzying kaleidoscope rather than the steady light everyone assumes is given off by somebody else's torch)

This is especially evident in Pathfinder 2 with much more fiddly hand usage rules. Basically, my players don't even consider reserving one hand to hold a torch, as that would lower DPS dramatically. Rangers are simply expected to use both hands on their knives or longbow. Barbarians are simply expected to use a greatweapon with both hands. The only characters that can afford to keep one hand free are the casters that don't need to, since they'd rather use magic than mundane equipment. Plus, it's so damn easy to go around the "use torch" idea - a human can simply multiclass into Wizard to get a light cantrip and thereby solve his own lighting issue.

So let's not force characters to count hands and spend a different amount of actions just to open doors! Simply say it takes one action to open the goddamn door, and every hand interaction with your weapon loadout is included. Nobody's interested in the difference between the sword and boarder having to sheathe his sword, open the door, and draw his sword again vs the greatweapon wielder releasing the grip to use hand to open the door vs the two daggers guy having to hold both daggers in one hand while opening the door. Move next to the door, spend your action, and... you're back in action! Ready to move into the next room, every hand and every weapon right where it needs to be!

Simplify the game for an universally positive benefit.

I'm arguing that we need to open our eyes to realize nothing is lost by dropping the old byzantine hand usage rules.

A big part of the problem is that Darkvision is too good and too widely available.

 

[Lanefan]

Yes, it's time to take the consequences of that and just dump the hand usage and object interaction legacy rules as the hot garbage they are!

Disagree.

It';s time to remove all the workarounds and get spells back to being difficult to cast (and impossible if in melee). Once that's done, a bunch of nerfs can come off of various spells such that when they do get successfully cast you get some bang for your buck.

 

[Phoebasss]

Disagree.

It';s time to remove all the workarounds and get spells back to being difficult to cast (and impossible if in melee). Once that's done, a bunch of nerfs can come off of various spells such that when they do get successfully cast you get some bang for your buck.

I feel like these games already exist, and really aren’t what a 5e+ game should look for. Base 5e is so far from this it would take removing key features of multiple archetypes to pull this back to the kind of balance you’re looking for.

 

[tetrasodium]

I feel like these games already exist, and really aren’t what a 5e+ game should look for. Base 5e is so far from this it would take removing key features of multiple archetypes to pull this back to the kind of balance you’re looking for.

No, all of those restrictions make casters really pigeonholed for blasting & most of them aren't even very good at that. Sure you can do the other buff/debuff/battlefield control stuff but the results are generally uninspiring & even their blasting is not the kind of thing that saves the day or really feels like they saved anyone's bacon like it could in the past for a specialized $niche caster. I started a thread about how removing the shackles on wizard would allow it to embrace the class's own niche while freeing up designspace to allow improving sorcerer & warlock into their own niche over here earlier on that might help shed some light on it for you.