Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 9511944" data-attributes="member: 93670">No that's not really the case either because the unit there is the singular diamond itself, carats only came up in reference to diamond dust&nbsp; not being measured in a standard in a standard unit☆ because the source makes it dirt cheap &amp; people were&nbsp; asking economic questions &amp; complaining d&amp;d is not an economics simulator while taking the <a href="https://lemonadeday.org/" target="_blank">obvious</a> economics answers answers to make bonkers 1:1 conversions that only served to demonstrate how the current setup invites trouble. That single gem worth X simplicity breaks down when the&nbsp; component is some kind of commodity like <a href="https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2618902-programmed-illusion" target="_blank">[gem] dust worth x</a> , <a href="https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2618882-augury" target="_blank">literal trash worth x</a> (should be trash &amp; [expensive thing worth x] or the labor involved in engraving that trash should be part of the casting time.&nbsp; Multiple diamonds worth x so on furthers that problematic trend since the higher tier spells can be ungated &amp; unthrottled by buying costly components for lower tiered spells. &nbsp;There are further problems involving overuse of a singular component defeating the entire purpose of gating spells behind a costly but not consumed component used by a laundry list of spells though.Your 295 gp diamond does not work for a spell that requires a 300gp diamond☆ ie one pound, three standard vials, etc</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 9511944, member: 93670"] No that's not really the case either because the unit there is the singular diamond itself, carats only came up in reference to diamond [I]dust[/I] not being measured in a standard in a standard unit[B]☆[/B] because the source makes it dirt cheap & people were asking economic questions & complaining d&d is not an economics simulator while taking the [URL='https://lemonadeday.org/']obvious[/URL] economics answers answers to make bonkers 1:1 conversions that only served to demonstrate how the current setup invites trouble. That single gem worth X simplicity breaks down when the component is some kind of commodity like [URL='https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2618902-programmed-illusion'][gem] dust worth x[/URL] , [URL='https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells/2618882-augury']literal trash worth x[/URL] (should be trash & [I][expensive thing worth x] [/I]or the labor involved in engraving that trash should be part of the casting time. Multiple diamonds worth x so on furthers that problematic trend since the higher tier spells can be ungated & unthrottled by buying costly components for lower tiered spells. There are further problems involving overuse of a singular component defeating the entire purpose of gating spells behind a costly but not consumed component used by a laundry list of spells though. Your 295 gp diamond does not work for a spell that requires [U][I]a[/I][/U] 300gp diamond [B]☆ [/B]ie one pound, three standard vials, etc [/QUOTE]

Verification