D&D (2024) Uncommon items - actually common?

[Jfdlsjfd]

On the flip side, I can envision a setting where emotional value is what determines the component for every spell. A chaste and moral wizard might need tears of a virgin as the component for Charm Person, where a lecherous individual might need a coin from a brothel to cast Charm Person. Each spell would need to be researched and the proper personal component would need to be discovered.

That would mean that scrolls which have the magic imparted by the inscriber would be usable by any wizard as a scroll, but not so much for putting in a spellbook. Research would have to be done on each spell, but since that would be cumbersome, some new rules to make it a bit quicker than a long quest or lengthy project would have to be enacted. It could be a very fun way to play magic.

There was (is there still? I never bothered with it) a cost and time value for scribing spells. Maybe it can be explained, in setting, because the wizard does this work to determine the spells components that work for him? Not default, but it would be a more flavourful magic if integrated to the setting.

 

[Xetheral]

So where do people fall between these two positions?

1) Spells with components operate under emotional and symbolic constraints. The diamonds are meant to represent a non-trivial sacrifice on behalf of the caster; if diamonds somehow became cheap and common, the spell would no longer function without a relative wagonload of diamonds.

2) Spells with components operate under mechanistic constraints. The spell needs diamonds to act as fuel under the impersonal rules governing magic; if someone finds a treasure trove of diamonds or a portal to the Elemental Plane of Diamonds(tm), then revivify and raise dead will become cheap and accessible.

Largely the second, although I'm sure there are spells out there written with components that effectively require the first.

I would also add that while my take on the mechanistic approach doesn't consider "sacrifice value," it's not just raw material cost. If a spell requires finished products, the impersonal rules governing magic can still take into account craftsmanship. (And while craftsmanship has a subjective component that's doesn't necessarily play nice with the idea of impersonal rules, I'm comfortable with ignoring that tension as part of the abstraction.) I just don't see gem dust as a finished product to which the concept of craftsmanship applies.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

None of that makes any sense in the context of the setting the characters actually live and adventure in.

In setting, one of the problem I see with that is if I go to a jeweller and see a marvelously cut diamond, and the price tag is 10,000 gp, how can I determine how much diamond's dust worth of it I will extract from it?

 

[TwoSix]

On the flip side, I can envision a setting where emotional value is what determines the component for every spell. A chaste and moral wizard might need tears of a virgin as the component for Charm Person, where a lecherous individual might need a coin from a brothel to cast Charm Person. Each spell would need to be researched and the proper personal component would need to be discovered.

That would mean that scrolls which have the magic imparted by the inscriber would be usable by any wizard as a scroll, but not so much for putting in a spellbook. Research would have to be done on each spell, but since that would be cumbersome, some new rules to make it a bit quicker than a long quest or lengthy project would have to be enacted. It could be a very fun way to play magic.

Yea, I think that would be a pretty fun concept to build a game around.

I would probably have those individual concepts be non-consumable (a quest to gain the tears of a virgin is fun once, if you try to industrialize it then it's more like a Rick and Morty episode), or as part of a larger ritual.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It actually all makes sense if you sit and contemplate it. You may not agree with it, but it absolutely makes sense as I've laid it out.

It makes sense mechanically, but I don't see how it makes sense in any setting resembling one I've ever seen or made.

 

[Maxperson]

There was (is there still? I never bothered with it) a cost and time value for scribing spells. Maybe it can be explained, in setting, because the wizard does this work to determine the spells components that work for him? Not default, but it would be a more flavourful magic if integrated to the setting.

It could absolutely be run that way. For me, though, since the very personal nature of magic and the components is a major part of this hypothetical setting, I'd want it to stand out as more than the default time and cost to scribe.

 

[TwoSix]

It actually all makes sense if you sit and contemplate it. You may not agree with it, but it absolutely makes sense as I've laid it out.

Agreed. Having objects with a fixed "valuation" intrinsic property is actually pretty much identical to a spell requiring, say, 10 grams of diamond dust. Every object in the universe would have a demonstrable conversion rate from "value" to mass.

 

[Maxperson]

It makes sense mechanically, but I don't see how it makes sense in any setting resembling one I've ever seen or made.

Because you're still trying to merge the two ideas together and they are separate things.

The magic only cares that there is X amount of diamond of Y quality. That amount and quality is listed in the DMG for diamonds as 5000gp. It doesn't matter to the magic whether the local setting folks value that X amount of diamond of Y quality as 1 copper piece or 1 billion platinum. The local values won't matter to the spell. Those local values only matter in how easy or hard it is for the caster to obtain the proper amount and quality of the gem.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In setting, one of the problem I see with that is if I go to a jeweller and see a marvelously cut diamond, and the price tag is 10,000 gp, how can I determine how much diamond's dust worth of it I will extract from it?

Agreed. Hence my position that amount of material makes more sense IMO than price.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I'm not saying I agree or disagree, but "value" being a multiversal constant that's an inherent, discoverable property within materials has fascinating worldbuilding considerations. Pretty much the ideal of my scenario 2 from post #433.

I don't think that there is actually any universal objective value that the spell "knows." It is just that the spell requires a gem with certain properties, and such gems generally cost about X, and this what is listed for your convenience, so that you don't need to flip to another part of the book to learn how much you can be expected to pay for such a gem when you go to buy it. That's all.