D&D 5E The Limits of Minor Conjuration

[The Crimson Binome]

An 20th-level cleric can resurrect 4 people per day. So a town of 1500 would tie them up for a year. I guess I would say the cleric's deity would rather have them doing something more useful in that time, like saving the multiverse or something. The point being that the slot cost is already a pretty good limiting factor.

Saving the multiverse doesn't take all that much time, and Faerun seems to have a lot of high-level spellcasters. I'm less concerned with a cleric stopping to do this in the middle of an adventure, and more concerned with what the cleric does when they aren't adventuring.

For that matter, would it really be that hard for a 20th level character to come up with 1.5 million gp?

It should. That's kind of a lot of money, and a cleric who spends all day resurrecting commoners is probably not earning adventure-grade income during this time. There's also the issue that, even if you have 1000gp to spend on every random commoner, there may not always be a 1000gp-quality diamond available anywhere in the world.

 

[jaelis]

So fair enough, you think it would make resurrection too easy. Any other spells with similar issues?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Also, just to address this argument: if you accept this reasoning, then what keeps the rogue from offering to buy a tiny diamond chip from the cleric for 1000 gp, thus making the chip worth 1000 gp and therefore usable as a component for resurrection?

Most campaign worlds have a god of trade/wealth, and resurrection typically falls to divine casters. I've always ruled that they and their servants are the one's who determine a valuable item's "Platonic worth". Their celestial bookkeepers look at the item offered, chuckle, and rubber stamp the resurrection request with a "nope".

Alternately, it fails cuz magic isn't an exact science. If it was... it would be science.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

So fair enough, you think it would make resurrection too easy. Any other spells with similar issues?

I'd say any consumed component with a value over a few gp would fail at the DM's discretion. It's basically glamoured into existence, so not suitable for magical purposes.

Side note, I would let it make holy water, alchemist fire, etc.

 

[jaelis]

I'd say any consumed component with a value over a few gp would fail at the DM's discretion. It's basically glamoured into existence, so not suitable for magical purposes.

Well, I agree with your first statement, and the second would be, as you say, a DM ruling. So what's your reason for ruling that it is not suitable for magical purposes? Seems like a magical component would be just what you want for a magic spell

 

[5ekyu]

I'm trying to maintain the semblance of a functional economy, and that extends beyond just the PCs.

But MC items glow so wouldnt a normal safeguard for buying glowy good of "i hold it for 24 hours or until my local expert approves it" handle larger economy issues?

I am pretty sure if i tired to pay for supper with glowing (or just funny lookin') 20 dollar bills the cashier would be calling a manager.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[5ekyu]

Sure, and maybe you just think conjuration spells are awesome and that balances the subclass. I'm not really trying to say that conjurers suck. I'm trying to say that, with a conservative interpretation, minor conjuration sucks. I think that if it is reasonable to rule in a way to make abilities more usable, you should.

Now, maybe you think that letting minor conjuration work for components is unbalancing and makes conjurers too good. If so, why? Essentially every game I've played, the component costs for a given level spell are fairly minor in comparison to the amount of treasure the party has accumulated. And if you play in a low treasure game, then it seems to me you are basically just banning those spells anyway (or, effectively making them higher level). If there are particular spells that you feel deserve that adjustment, why not just adjust them? And if not, then giving players a way to access them should be a plus.

Ok so let me be clear... "Balance in play" comes from the intersection of need and have, lock and key, challenge and response.

An evoker might be feeling pretty unloved in a game with a lot less combat and a lot of sneak and infiltrate where an illusionist or a conjurer might be feeling pretty good.

In a campaign that mixes those ingredients up in the right proportions and in the right ways the final stew can be quite fulfilling and satisfying for everybody at the table.

With the conjuration school covering goods, beasties and porting about i *do* in fact think it provides a great versatility and that in a robust game is just fine.

On the other hand, i think if one takes it into some white room combat sim looking for DPR, it likely does not do as well at that test.

Frankly i consider the conjurer sub-class with expectation that your spellbook will gravitate towards those is actually more "easily in balance" than the evoker since the evoker gets to "shine" in fewer types of circumstances.

But that will by nature vary by campaign and challenges chosen.

Sent from my [device_name] using EN World mobile app

 

[Kobold Boots]

Also, just to address this argument: if you accept this reasoning, then what keeps the rogue from offering to buy a tiny diamond chip from the cleric for 1000 gp, thus making the chip worth 1000 gp and therefore usable as a component for resurrection?

When a value is given in the rulebook it is assumed that we're talking fair market value, not situational value.

 

[Kobold Boots]

On spell foci and minor conjuration - there's actually an official answer for this.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/11/1...tion-to-get-usable-spell-components-and-foci/

Answer from Mearls - Any component that does not have a gp cost can be generated.

 

[Kobold Boots]

It seems that there is no gp limit to what you can create with Conjurer's Minor Conjuration feature. The only limits specified in the feature are that the item has to be non-magical, it can't be larger than 3 feet on a side and it can't weigh more than 10 lbs. So it looks like you can use it to create anything that is within those limits, no matter how expensive. The only item in the equipment chapter you can't create is a potion of healing, since that's magical. But if you want to create expensive consumables such as alchemist's fire, acid, holy water, etc., it looks like that's totally legal. And hey, I have no problem with that. That's pretty cool!

The lack of a gp limit does seem to run into some serious issues, however, when it comes to material components. Need a 300gp diamond for the cleric's revivify spell? Well, it's not magical, isn't more than 3 feet wide and doesn't weight more than 10 lbs. So by the RAW, there doesn't seem to be anything that's stopping you from conjuring it and letting the cleric use it as the material component for the spell. Am I missing something, or is there something in the rules that prohibits this?

Quoting you directly so the answer can be visible. I've already posted later in the thread.

1. Any creation of MC is non-magical. It glows so it's known fake but has no other magical properties.
2. Any creation of MC can not have a gp cost because it's not a permanent item. (1hr)
3. Spell components can be created so long as they don't have a gp value - per Mearls. Tweet in thread.

Thanks
KB

Edit: covering add-on questions.

1. Spell components that "have a gp value" are defined in the spell description as such. "1000 GP gem" for example. All spell components have a fair market cost, but unless the exact price is defined in the spell description it's ok to use MC.

2. Someone being silly enough to buy a fake item for 1000 gold does not make the item worth 1000 gold. This situation is not a "gap" in the rules but either wishful thinking or a lack of common sense at the table.