Is the Eschew Materials feat useless? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Feint's End

2014-05-26, 01:24 PM

Since they say every caster has a material component pouch, and can basically grab what they want at will, why does this feat exist?

Note that is kinda odd that spontaneous casters still have to use material components (the natural talent part and all). Pathfinder fixed that for sorcerers but I generally houserule that every spontaneous caster has the feat for free.

Back on topic. It has been mentioned that it can be stolen, damaged, lost etc but this is all entirely dm dependant. If the dm never cares about it and you never get thrown in jail it's practically useless. If however the dm uses it against you then it can become a very strong feat.
Most people don't use it in TO or even PO because in most groups people just forget about it.

Urpriest

2014-05-26, 02:21 PM

Note that is kinda odd that spontaneous casters still have to use material components (the natural talent part and all). Pathfinder fixed that for sorcerers but I generally houserule that every spontaneous caster has the feat for free.

The same logic could equally well apply to verbal and somatic components. Sorcerors aren't Psions, they don't just manifest magic out of their minds. What they have is talent, the ability to know what gestures, words, and components are needed for spells intuitively, without the study required by Wizards.

Think about someone who can publish work in mathematics without every having taken a class or read a textbook, and you have a Sorceror.

Jack_Simth

2014-05-26, 02:39 PM

As quite a few others have mentioned, how useful the feat is depends entirely on the DM, campaign, and character.

The Character:
A character that doesn't want to be known as a caster might very well forgo all the normal accoutrements - in which case, a spell component pouch would be a bad thing to have. Likewise, a character that uses effects which would leave the caster without their normal equipment (posession, polymorph) benefits from not needing to worry about material components.

The Campaign:
At low levels, grappling is an effective anti-caster technique - among other things, in a grapple, it takes a full-round action to get spell components (at medium levels, of course, such things as Dimension Door take care of this). Eschew materials, along with Still Spell, can give the melee character that tries it a nasty surprise, even as low as 3rd level (sometimes 1st).

The DM:
Spell Component pouches can be sundered, stolen, or confiscated in battle, while resting, or when captured (mostly respectively). If the DM is fond of such things, then the feat becomes more useful.

In a high-level campaign with a DM that doesn't target spell component pouches where you mostly use your own body, Eschew Materials is completely irrelevant.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-26, 02:58 PM

It's one of the dumber things about the item because, by RAW you have an infinite number of severed hands in there for instance.

I'm not sure if it's the case for severed hands, but there are costs in BoV for various body parts as spell components.

Story

2014-05-26, 03:25 PM

Obviously it's so that you can cast Apocalyspe From The Sky without burning artifacts. Or Ice Assassin anything.

Rubik

2014-05-26, 03:27 PM

Obviously it's so that you can cast Apocalyspe From The Sky without burning artifacts. Or Ice Assassin anything.Or Teleport Through Time at any point and without restrictions.

...Why is that text blue?

HighWater

2014-05-26, 03:36 PM

Alter self and polymorph will mean you lose access to your spell component pouch (including those ones sequestered in unmentionable places) unless you do some trickery, which burns actions. Magic jar casters also will often not have access to a pouch, or at least not know where on their person it is. It has niche uses, but it is crucial in some builds.
This is not true for Alter Self, at least if you're a humanoid:

When the change occurs, your equipment, if any, either remains worn or held by the new form (if it is capable of wearing or holding the item), or melds into the new form and becomes nonfunctional.
Any humanoid you morph into is perfectly capable of wearing a spell component pouch.

Eschew Materials is also, ironically very important if you want to go sneaky caster with Still Spell and Silent Spell. Still Spell removes the somatic components, but you still have to grab and manipulate the materials, so people can still see you're casting. Stupid really, but there you have it...

squiggit

2014-05-26, 03:57 PM

I'm not sure if it's the case for severed hands, but there are costs in BoV for various body parts as spell components.
What I was thinking of was "Crushing Fist of Spite" which requires "The severed hand of a good aligned cleric" as a material component, which AFAIK doesn't have a cost listed anywhere.

Feint's End

2014-05-26, 04:39 PM

The same logic could equally well apply to verbal and somatic components. Sorcerors aren't Psions, they don't just manifest magic out of their minds. What they have is talent, the ability to know what gestures, words, and components are needed for spells intuitively, without the study required by Wizards.

Think about someone who can publish work in mathematics without every having taken a class or read a textbook, and you have a Sorceror.

Fair point. It's just that I don't know how they should figure out that they need, say, the leg of a spider to cast the spell. Does it just magically appear in their mind?
I can understand how they don't need training for the gestures and just intuitively know how to cast spells but the need for material components (cheap ones that is) was always mind boggling for me.

I think pathfinder made a step in the right direction but I just feel like it should be default for spontaneous casters.

Bakkan

2014-05-26, 04:42 PM

Fair point. It's just that I don't know how they should figure out that they need, say, the leg of a spider to cast the spell. Does it just magically appear in their mind?
I can understand how they don't need training for the gestures and just intuitively know how to cast spells but the need for material components (cheap ones that is) was always mind boggling for me.

I think pathfinder made a step in the right direction but I just feel like it should be default for spontaneous casters.

I think that it's kind of like how someone with a great natural talent for cooking will know what a dish needs to make it better. You could figure out that the chicken needs a splash of lemon by experimenting with a lot of different flavors and working through culinary theory, or you could just taste it and know intuitively what ingredient to add. Similarly, to a sorcerer it just "feels right" that bat guano should be used when creating a fireball.

Psyren

2014-05-26, 04:50 PM

Natural Spell is another interesting case - lets you access your components from the pouch even melded (at least, the PF version.)

Think about someone who can publish work in mathematics without every having taken a class or read a textbook, and you have a Sorceror.

I'd say it's more that he knows the answer without being able to show his work. Not able to publish, and from the outside looks like he's good at guessing, but he just plain gets the right result without really knowing how or why. Like a prodigy who can replay a piano song perfectly by hearing it but not read sheet music.

Just buy more component pouches. Hide them in various places on your person, your party's persons, and familiars persons, and a few other places. It's significantly cheaper than a feat.

Start doing that and your DM is probably going to start tracking components. "That's not the one you had on you when you fell into the spider cave and collected bits of web" etc.

Spore

2014-05-26, 04:57 PM

Since they say every caster has a material component pouch, and can basically grab what they want at will, why does this feat exist?

Because most DMs suck at keeping Wizards at bay and letting Eschew Materials, more direct approaches to problem solving or unusual situations slide.

I understand that you can't force situations in which component pouches, spellbooks and one hour of defenseless preparing of spells are vitally important but if you have a decently competent wizard in the group, you may rename your group: "The great Wizard xyz and his distraction entourage".

My DMs so far: Have thrown Wizards in jails trice, made the retaking of an Wizard spellbook an objective in a dungeon and had the Wizards remove their pouches before entering a peaceful city (much like the Warrior types).

Story

2014-05-26, 05:13 PM

Because most DMs suck at keeping Wizards at bay and letting Eschew Materials, more direct approaches to problem solving or unusual situations slide.

I understand that you can't force situations in which component pouches, spellbooks and one hour of defenseless preparing of spells are vitally important but if you have a decently competent wizard in the group, you may rename your group: "The great Wizard xyz and his distraction entourage".

My DMs so far: Have thrown Wizards in jails trice, made the retaking of an Wizard spellbook an objective in a dungeon and had the Wizards remove their pouches before entering a peaceful city (much like the Warrior types).

I think that there's an unwritten contract not to go after the Wizard too harshly like that. But if you know you're going to be in a campaign like that, you can just make an Easy Bake Wizard anyway. Or a Druid.

...Why is that text blue?

It's convention to write sarcasm in blue here.

torrasque666

2014-05-26, 05:15 PM

It's convention to write sarcasm in blue here.

Do I have to go and pull up the quote from the Giant?

Jeff the Green

2014-05-26, 05:20 PM

Do I have to go and pull up the quote from the Giant?

It's not mandatory or recommended, but it has (somewhat) become convention.

And the question was a joke.

Rubik

2014-05-26, 05:25 PM

It's convention to write sarcasm in blue here.Yes, I know it is. My question was regarding why that text was sarcasm. It seems perfectly appropriate that the feat actually remove important material components, making it an actually useful choice (as opposed to simply removing the requirement to eat spiders and throw poo at your enemies).

Psyren

2014-05-26, 05:39 PM

It's convention to write sarcasm in blue here.

I think he knows that and was being tongue in cheek, i.e. taking your sarcastic statement at face value.

Do I have to go and pull up the quote from the Giant?

*points at sig*

ryu

2014-05-26, 06:15 PM

Natural Spell is another interesting case - lets you access your components from the pouch even melded (at least, the PF version.)

I'd say it's more that he knows the answer without being able to show his work. Not able to publish, and from the outside looks like he's good at guessing, but he just plain gets the right result without really knowing how or why. Like a prodigy who can replay a piano song perfectly by hearing it but not read sheet music.

Start doing that and your DM is probably going to start tracking components. "That's not the one you had on you when you fell into the spider cave and collected bits of web" etc.

Oh by all means go ahead. I'll just buy a few hundred of bloody things, or alternatively like fifty every time we hit town. They aren't expensive. You can't sensibly make material components an actual limiting factor. All you can do is make them more annoying to keep track of. Considering I already make and maintain character sheets in excel? No skin off my nose.

Psyren

2014-05-26, 06:33 PM

Oh by all means go ahead. I'll just buy a few hundred of bloody things, or alternatively like fifty every time we hit town. They aren't expensive. You can't sensibly make material components an actual limiting factor. All you can do is make them more annoying to keep track of. Considering I already make and maintain character sheets in excel? No skin off my nose.

You're forgetting it is the DM who determines what is "in town" for you to purchase.

Anything can sensibly be a limitation. The DM could even go to measures like keeping you from getting any form of restful sleep. I personally see no purpose in an arms race like that - I would settle the issue of an omnipotent player out of game for expediency - but there are more than enough levers in-universe to solve such problems there too if necessary.

atemu1234

2014-05-26, 06:40 PM

The reason I brought this up is because I have a wizard who didn't have the feat, so I charged him something like 1 gp/mission for them, and he complained.

Story

2014-05-26, 08:13 PM

The reason I brought this up is because I have a wizard who didn't have the feat, so I charged him something like 1 gp/mission for them, and he complained.

By default, a spell component pouch lasts forever. So if you didn't tell him about this houserule ahead of time, I can understand why, though it does seem a bit petty.

Rubik

2014-05-26, 08:26 PM

By default, a spell component pouch lasts forever. So if you didn't tell him about this houserule ahead of time, I can understand why, though it does seem a bit petty.Yeah, I'd be a bit annoyed, too. He already has to pay for most of his class features, after all, what with buying component pouches, spellbooks, and spells.

1 gp isn't much, but it's still annoying.

Grayson01

2014-05-26, 08:26 PM

It really depends completly on the DM and the Campaign (as has been said). I have had a DM who compeltely ignored "non" Costly Components. I was also thinking of a Hunger Games type campaign in which PCs are dropped off in the middle of an Island or desert or whatever with nothing. The feat would be almost necessery in that circumstance. Or (Haven't played it but herd about it) Worlds Biggest Dungeon I could see it being very useful in that model with a strict DM.

Grayson01

2014-05-26, 08:28 PM

Yeah, I'd be a bit annoyed, too. He already has to pay for most of his class features, after all, what with buying component pouches, spellbooks, and spells.

1 gp isn't much, but it's still annoying.

It's not really petty or that much to ask for concedering how powerful the Wiz is. It's kinda of a check on their power.

Rubik

2014-05-26, 08:29 PM

It's not really petty or that much to ask for concedering how powerful the Wiz is. It's kinda of a check on their power.Buying spells, sure, but 1 gp per adventure isn't enough to put a stop to anything -- it's just enough to annoy the player.

Graypairofsocks

2014-05-27, 07:26 AM

It is so you do not have to eat a live spider when you cast Spider Climb

Obviously it's so that you can cast Apocalyspe From The Sky without burning artifacts. Or Ice Assassin anything.

Note that Apocalypse from the Sky was fortunately updated to use the Artifact as a focus component instead.

OrlockDelesian

2014-05-27, 07:37 AM

erikun

2014-05-27, 07:42 AM

Fun fact: an Illusionist with Eschew Materials and Illusion Mastery (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#illusionistVariants) can memorize and prepare all illusion spells (and Read Magic) while completely naked and without equipment.

It also works well with Disguise Spell (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/divine/divineAbilitiesFeats.htm#disguiseSpell).

Eschew Materials isn't something that comes up as relevant in a lot of games, but there are some where it can become important by allowing spellcasters to cast their spells without digging up components. It's something that will allow a caster to be prepared but said preparation may turn out unnecessary.

nyjastul69

2014-05-27, 08:07 AM

Spore

2014-05-27, 08:31 AM

I think that there's an unwritten contract not to go after the Wizard too harshly like that. But if you know you're going to be in a campaign like that, you can just make an Easy Bake Wizard anyway.

I know that it is not nice to bully one player like that. But sometimes a DM needs to introduce thinking henchmen that take advantage of the group's weaknesses. The Elven Rogue gets poisoned, the Fighter dominated, the Cleric restrained and the Wizard? Well, they ambush during the spell preparation.

Yes, I know it's unfair but when you sign up to play a character you should see its weaknesses as part of the character. Same goes for flaws that are never part of your character. The DM WILL find a way to play onto them.

HighWater

2014-05-27, 08:36 AM

When I DM, I expect any caster without the Feat to hold a complete list of the contects of his component pouch and keep track of them as he casts. If he doesn't want to be bothered by that I expect him to take the feat.

This is a houserule directly opposed to DnD 3.5 RAW though, as RAW the spell component pouch is both infinite in number as well as variation of content. You don't need to track your live spiders, because you have infinity of them. You can housrule this back to pre-DnD 3.0 keeping-track-of-components-and-collecting-them-madness, but it's still a houserule. Then the feat suddenly becomes an OOC "I want to play a wizard but still have fun"-tax rather than a means of improving and personalising a character. Houserules can make any feat viable.

Eschew Materials without houserules still has a few situations in which it is useful, but it depends on the DM and the Player for them to come up.

OrlockDelesian

2014-05-27, 09:08 AM

This is a houserule directly opposed to DnD 3.5 RAW though, as RAW the spell component pouch is both infinite in number as well as variation of content. You don't need to track your live spiders, because you have infinity of them. You can housrule this back to pre-DnD 3.0 keeping-track-of-components-and-collecting-them-madness, but it's still a houserule. Then the feat suddenly becomes an OOC "I want to play a wizard but still have fun"-tax rather than a means of improving and personalising a character. Houserules can make any feat viable.

Eschew Materials without houserules still has a few situations in which it is useful, but it depends on the DM and the Player for them to come up.

Yes I know that but RAW is stupid. Do you expect me to believe that an item that holds 2lbs (less than a kilo) has inside it four hundred live spiders, fity dragon scales, and ninety thousand tons of bat guano and sulfur?
It makes no sense, and thus i do not allow it in my game, nor should anyone as far as I believe. The Image of the wizard with countless pouches around his waste is quintisensial for me, ever since I read Raistlin Majere's introduction in Dragons of Autumn twilight.

But I also always use the Curse of the Magi optional rule from dragonlance campaign setting, so I am a bit harsh towards wizards :P

Rubik

2014-05-27, 09:21 AM

When I DM, I expect any caster without the Feat to hold a complete list of the contects of his component pouch and keep track of them as he casts. If he doesn't want to be bothered by that I expect him to take the feat."All material components without a listed material cost."

Done.

And it even functions the way RAW says it's supposed to.

Telonius

2014-05-27, 09:26 AM

It's also a feat that's a prerequisite for the Epic Feat Ignore Material Components:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#ignoreMaterialComponents

You may cast spells without any material components.

So without that feat, you're not allowed to cast spells with no material components? :smallbiggrin: [/grammar police]

Chronos

2014-05-27, 10:36 AM

Just because the rules say not to track components in a pouch does not mean that the pouch is meant to contain an infinite supply of all components. Rather, it's assumed that the caster knows roughly how many of each item she'll need, and that she keeps that many of those items plus some safety margin, and replaces used items for very cheap during downtime whenever she has a chance. If you actually require players to keep a spreadsheet of their components, then this is exactly what happens, but the end result of it will still almost always be that the caster has all needed components at all times. If you can get almost exactly the same result by using a spreadsheet or not using a spreadsheet, and you're playing a game which is supposed to be fun, then you should not use the spreadsheet.

Story

2014-05-27, 10:51 AM

Yes I know that but RAW is stupid. Do you expect me to believe that an item that holds 2lbs (less than a kilo) has inside it four hundred live spiders, fity dragon scales, and ninety thousand tons of bat guano and sulfur?
It makes no sense, and thus i do not allow it in my game, nor should anyone as far as I believe. The Image of the wizard with countless pouches around his waste is quintisensial for me, ever since I read Raistlin Majere's introduction in Dragons of Autumn twilight.

What's actually stupid are the material components themselves. Most of them are just dumb jokes carried over from previous editions and it really makes no sense from a flavor, gameplay, or fun perspective. The SPC is just a workaround.

Doc_Maynot

2014-05-27, 10:55 AM

What's actually stupid are the material components themselves. Most of them are just dumb jokes carried over from previous editions and it really makes no sense from a flavor, gameplay, or fun perspective. The SPC is just a workaround.

Like when scrying pretty much required building a magic tv?

Story

2014-05-27, 10:57 AM

I know that it is not nice to bully one player like that. But sometimes a DM needs to introduce thinking henchmen that take advantage of the group's weaknesses. The Elven Rogue gets poisoned, the Fighter dominated, the Cleric restrained and the Wizard? Well, they ambush during the spell preparation.

If you really wanted intelligent enemies, then most encounters would result in getting TPKed in the surprise round. It's just a matter of degree. And at some point you have to make concessions so that the game is actually fun.

Like when scrying pretty much required building a magic tv?

I think my favorite is the one where you toss tarts at people to make them laugh.

LTwerewolf

2014-05-27, 10:58 AM

I houserule that each pouch has 10 uses before it needs to be refilled. 1 silver per spell hasn't really made or broken anyone yet, and makes sure they actually keep track of their resources.

Story

2014-05-27, 11:05 AM

and makes sure they actually keep track of their resources.

But this isn't necessarily a good thing. I think you should only keep track of stuff that makes a meaningful difference. When it gets to the point where I'm carrying around 100k worth of gear, I don't even bother keeping track of stuff that costs 50gp.

In fact, I don't think I've ever bothered writing down a silver piece on my character sheet.

Chronos

2014-05-27, 11:18 AM

Quoth Doc_Maynot:

Like when scrying pretty much required building a magic tv?
Why does everyone keep using this example? Scrying doesn't involve building a magic TV; it involves producing noxious intoxicating fumes to put you into an oracular trance, like at Delphi. Nitric acid acts upon copper (http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/kboudrea/demos/copper_HNO3/Cu_HNO3.htm).

Rubik

2014-05-27, 11:21 AM

I think my favorite is the one where you toss tarts at people to make them laugh.Basically, throwing pies.

That's pretty much the antithesis of "funny."

Graypairofsocks

2014-05-27, 11:26 AM

Basically, throwing pies.

That's pretty much the antithesis of "funny."

They are laughing at the caster who still thinks the jokes are funny.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 11:30 AM

Why does everyone keep using this example? Scrying doesn't involve building a magic TV; it involves producing noxious intoxicating fumes to put you into an oracular trance, like at Delphi. Nitric acid acts upon copper (http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/kboudrea/demos/copper_HNO3/Cu_HNO3.htm).

I think you're right, but I'm not sure what's worse: they use the modern term nitric acid instead of the more appropriate aqua fortis, the fact that they confuse nitric oxide or nitrogen dioxide with nitrous oxide, or the fact that it's a stupid joke.

Spore

2014-05-27, 11:52 AM

If you really wanted intelligent enemies, then most encounters would result in getting TPKed in the surprise round. It's just a matter of degree. And at some point you have to make concessions so that the game is actually fun.

Please do not try and put my argument into the extreme. This has been overdone in discussions for far too long. You'd poison the rogue with a cheap poison (because henchmen aren't made of money). You restrain a cleric and if he has freedom of movement cast or some other trick to get loose, he can free the fighter from mental dominance. Also maybe your grappler isn't made out to be the grappler but was the strongest and best grappler in the ambush group. If you dominate the fighter successfully, turn him against the group. But do not let him destroy the group with efficiency but rather be a cocky magic user and show off. And if you're ambushing during the wizards prep phase, give him partial access to refreshed spells or ask for concentration checks to remember the spell.

Not every intelligent ambush group is built up by the core. Maybe the BBEG just says: "You there, Bob. Take three men and take out those highly geared and professional adventurers." I am sure Bob wouldn't want to further decrease his chances by openly stopping the group claiming: "Stop there, completely improbable heap of magical items and combat skill. By the name of the Dark Lord, I - Bob the Painfully Average - hereby challenge you and your comrades to open combat.

squiggit

2014-05-27, 11:52 AM

It makes no sense, and thus i do not allow it in my game, nor should anyone as far as I believe
Couldn't disagree more. Spell component pouch is a brilliant idea because telling a player he needs to track how many balls of bat guano, pieces of fleece, licorice root and dead octopi he has around is honestly the stupidest idea I've ever heard. It's the definition of pointless, spiteful bookkeeping honestly.

Then again I don't make archers or gunslingers track mundane ammunition either for the same reason (and because I don't see why a combat style that isn't that great needs a gold tax).

If the campaign is specifically designed to be a survival campaign? That's different, otherwise if I want to punish a player or make his life harder I'll find a less petty way to do it. Like a 60 HD elder evil with the nightmare powers and the alien sky sign.

Angelalex242

2014-05-27, 12:08 PM

I wouldn't want to bother keeping track of stuff. Arcane and even Divine casters should really have eschew materials as a bonus feat. And by casters, I mean even bards/paladins/rangers.

I guess they need to make eschew materials 'the normal way things work' and then the epic feat 'ignore material components' the normal feat.

And ignore material components at low levels, that'd be valuable. Stupid 100 gp pearls for identifying magic items? No more!

aleucard

2014-05-27, 02:42 PM

I think the general concensus on the utility of a SCP (wow I didn't realize that connection before) is that, outside of a survival campaign where doing otherwise makes perfect sense, it should be assumed to have whatever non-costly and non-rare (severed hand of a Good Cleric springs to mind) components your spells need at all times. Otherwise, we end up playing Accounting: the Game rather than DnD, and for no noticeable benefit to boot. I'd be sorely tempted to bean any DM who's this much of a prick with a hammer.

The utility of the Eschew Materials feat depends entirely on three things.

1, how much you use spells that actually have material components that fit the bill. Granted, this is a very large percentage of them, but still.

2, the chances of your character being deprived of his pouch when he needs it. This depends entirely on the DM and the campaign. We can't answer this one for you.

3, whether or not you're getting the Epic feat that lets you ignore ALL material components. This is a prereq, dummy. Do we really need to be asked about it in this case?

In the VAST majority of situations, you won't have to worry about your SCP unless if you do something (certain polymorphs, for instance) that deprives you of it. Are these instances enough reason for you to get the feat? Ask this, and as long as your DM doesn't have plans to nuke the pouch later, you have your answer.

pwykersotz

2014-05-27, 03:34 PM

Or Teleport Through Time at any point and without restrictions.

...Why is that text blue?

I legitimately don't understand this mentality. If you want to have all the power all the time, what's the point in playing D&D? If you're going to interpret the RAW in the most abusable way to unlock tricks that are firmly in the realm of TO and then advise that's the way the game ought to be played, where's the fun in overcoming challenges? In surviving incredible odds? In deep character moments that force difficult decisions because there is no easy answer?

The only reason I can see doing this is if you have a DM who Tippy level and makes his challenges cosmic ones. And admittedly, that could be awesome. I don't see the point in advising this stuff for general gameplay though. Picking generic artifacts out of your spell pouch or negating their special use with a feat that has virtually no prerequisites just seems silly for what most people want out of a fantasy adventure.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 03:45 PM

I legitimately don't understand this mentality. If you want to have all the power all the time, what's the point in playing D&D? If you're going to interpret the RAW in the most abusable way to unlock tricks that are firmly in the realm of TO and then advise that's the way the game ought to be played, where's the fun in overcoming challenges? In surviving incredible odds? In deep character moments that force difficult decisions because there is no easy answer?

The only reason I can see doing this is if you have a DM who Tippy level and makes his challenges cosmic ones. And admittedly, that could be awesome. I don't see the point in advising this stuff for general gameplay though. Picking generic artifacts out of your spell pouch or negating their special use with a feat that has virtually no prerequisites just seems silly for what most people want out of a fantasy adventure.

Teleport through time is wonky enough with the material component, but at level 17 10d6 damage, even in a 10 mile/CL radius, is not out of line for a normal spell. It's not going to do anything other than kill a ton of creatures that can't possibly be a threat to you, piss off those that could, and kill you/drive you insane if your Constitution and Wisdom aren't high enough/you're not immune to ability damage.

ryu

2014-05-27, 03:49 PM

I legitimately don't understand this mentality. If you want to have all the power all the time, what's the point in playing D&D? If you're going to interpret the RAW in the most abusable way to unlock tricks that are firmly in the realm of TO and then advise that's the way the game ought to be played, where's the fun in overcoming challenges? In surviving incredible odds? In deep character moments that force difficult decisions because there is no easy answer?

The only reason I can see doing this is if you have a DM who Tippy level and makes his challenges cosmic ones. And admittedly, that could be awesome. I don't see the point in advising this stuff for general gameplay though. Picking generic artifacts out of your spell pouch or negating their special use with a feat that has virtually no prerequisites just seems silly for what most people want out of a fantasy adventure.

Because I actually prefer actual cosmic challenges to begin with? If we're playing mythic, legendary, one in a few billion heroes the likes of which only show up every few centuries if you're lucky the opposition should actually be a legitimate threat to the world as we know it. Anything less brings questions of why the several mid to high mid level NPCs in any given city isn't taking care of it.

atemu1234

2014-05-27, 03:49 PM

Teleport through time is wonky enough with the material component, but at level 17 10d6 damage, even in a 10 mile/CL radius, is not out of line for a normal spell. It's not going to do anything other than kill a ton of creatures that can't possibly be a threat to you, piss off those that could, and kill you/drive you insane if your Constitution and Wisdom aren't high enough/you're not immune to ability damage.

It's out of line if you throw in Sadism.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 04:01 PM

It's out of line if you throw in Sadism.

Sadism and masochism are so easily borked I don't see that as a point against a spell.

atemu1234

2014-05-27, 04:12 PM

Sadism and masochism are so easily borked I don't see that as a point against a spell.

Except the spell deals damage in a ten mile per level radius. Obvious difference is obvious.

FidgetySquirrel

2014-05-27, 04:34 PM

ryu

2014-05-27, 04:48 PM

I had a rather paranoid gnome wizard who walked around with a component pouch even though he had the feat. I even had him pretend to use the components. The idea was that if anybody captured me, they'd assume I'm useless w/o the pouch, and then they pay.

I guess it's not the most practical justification for taking eschew materials, but I liked it.

Oh yeah if you have eschew materials you should still totally keep your pouch of infinite components. It just has so many practical uses. Infinite food in the form of tarts for instance.

icefractal

2014-05-27, 04:49 PM

I think the idea of material components is interesting, but the implementation is kind of stupid. A lot of them are bad jokes, and there's not really any correlation between the power of the spell and whether it requires a tricky component. A better route would be to only have material components with an actual cost, make them an actual disadvantage, and make the spells that used them a bit better than normal for their level.

Or just use material components for ritual magic. I had an idea to fix 4E's rituals that was kind of like this. When you do a ritual, you pick one:
* It takes a while (varies by ritual, usually 10 minute to an hour).
* It uses expensive components (varies by ritual)
* It's exhausting (burns a healing surge or daily power; in 3E this would be stat damage or spell slots, perhaps).

Some of the stronger rituals, you have to pick two or all three, and some rituals require a particular choice (rituals that create permanent resources should probably require components, for example).

Edit: Regarding using it to ignore artifacts, Ice Assassin parts, etc.
I'm against that. Now sure, some of the spells in question would be fine without those components (Apocalypse from the Sky), and some of them should be banned even with components (Teleport through Time). But let's look at Ice Assassin, for example.

Ok, in some campaigns, Simulacrum and Ice Assassin should be banned too. But in a Tippy-verse type of game, they have some interesting gameplay around them. On the one hand, you want hair/blood/whatever from the most powerful creatures out there. On the other hand, many of those creatures do not want anyone to have that, because it gives away a lot of their secrets. So you get some nice espionage-ish gameplay in trying to get / keep that stuff. All gone if you ignore the components. In fact, for that reason, I treat those as part of the target of the spell, not any kind of component, so even a Wish-powered usage needs it.

SiuiS

2014-05-27, 04:57 PM

No. The RAW says that a spell caster with a component pouch is assumed to have any component without a specific cost.

It's one of the dumber things about the item because, by RAW you have an infinite number of severed hands in there for instance.

Each pouch had 50 spells' worth of components. You can and will run out if you're trekking into abandoned wilderness without teleport shenanigans, as is likely to happen when exploring whole new worlds.

Rubik

2014-05-27, 05:46 PM

I had a rather paranoid gnome wizard who walked around with a component pouch even though he had the feat. I even had him pretend to use the components. The idea was that if anybody captured me, they'd assume I'm useless w/o the pouch, and then they pay.

I guess it's not the most practical justification for taking eschew materials, but I liked it.I've done that with psions. One in particular was a serious sadist, and he enjoyed causing pain to those who thought he was easily beaten just because he was a goblin.

Story

2014-05-27, 05:57 PM

Oh yeah if you have eschew materials you should still totally keep your pouch of infinite components. It just has so many practical uses. Infinite food in the form of tarts for instance.

I think there's an unwritten contract that the DM agrees not to bother you about spell components if you agree not to exploit what RAW says is actually in the pouch. (It also has infinite copper pieces and infinite potions of Bull's Strength by the way).

Each pouch had 50 spells' worth of components. You can and will run out if you're trekking into abandoned wilderness without teleport shenanigans, as is likely to happen when exploring whole new worlds.

Again, this is a houserule. Normally SCPs last forever.

Anyway, I just thought of one non TO case where Eschew Materials is actually useful: Snowcasting.

Chronos

2014-05-27, 05:59 PM

Piggy Knowles

2014-05-27, 06:02 PM

I know that this moves us from RAW into RAI, but under the spellcasting section of the PHB, it says to assume that anything of negligible cost can be assumed to be in your spell component pouch. In the goods and services section, it simplifies that by saying "that [don't] have a specific cost," but while intent is often considered a dirty word, I think it's pretty fair to assume that the intent was for difficult to find things without listed costs (like severed hands of good clerics) to not necessarily be hanging out in a component pouch.

Also, don't forget this restriction:

A spellcaster with a spell component pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting, except for those components that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.

As a DM, though, I tend to do away with specific and non-costly material components altogether, unless it's a focus for a particular spell.

EDIT:
(It also has infinite copper pieces and infinite potions of Bull's Strength by the way).

Pretty sure potions of Bull's Strength DO have a listed cost. And you might even be able to argue that copper pieces have a listed cost as well - they're listed as being worth one tenth of a silver piece. Whether you consider that a cost or not is between you and your DM, I suppose...

Captnq

2014-05-27, 06:33 PM

Because you can scribe up to 12 pages of spells into your skin, arcane shorthand lets you double that to 24 pages, and spontaneous diviner gives you unlimited access to divination spells. Eschew Materials makes it so you can be dropped buck naked anywhere and still get your wizard on.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 07:14 PM

Apocalypse from the Sky is extremely powerful even for a ninth-level spell, if you remove the component requirement. Sure, nothing at that level is going to be killed by 10d6 damage... But why do only that? Make a few scrolls, and then fill up your ninth-level slots with it. With a range of hundreds of miles, you can probably hit opponents several times before they can show up to stop you, and even if you still can't kill them that way, you can seriously weaken them.

Honestly, at that level anyone without the ability to teleport away, divine the location of the caster, and teleport back for the real battle deserves to die.

Graypairofsocks

2014-05-27, 07:31 PM

Apocalypse from the Sky is extremely powerful even for a ninth-level spell, if you remove the component requirement. Sure, nothing at that level is going to be killed by 10d6 damage... But why do only that? Make a few scrolls, and then fill up your ninth-level slots with it. With a range of hundreds of miles, you can probably hit opponents several times before they can show up to stop you, and even if you still can't kill them that way, you can seriously weaken them.

Again, Apocalypse from the Sky uses the Artifact as a Focus Component.

Also the point of AftS is to rain destruction upon the innocent.

Though (more) seriously, the spell seems like it was designed for use by a BBEG who planned to destroy all peasants in a 17+ mile radius, which the PCs are supposed to stop.

I think it was one of those spells not really designed with the player in mind.

RSSwizard

2014-05-27, 07:33 PM

Absolutely not.

Some spell components are pretty rare, maybe not with a significant gold piece value but because of rarity the DM might say "no they dont have any of that here" or "that only exists in some far off island nobody knows how to get to".

Also even if a spellcastor has the Still Spell and Silent Spell feats, if they are held in place or paralyzed they can't grab their spell component pouch.

In fact I think its so vital that almost every single castor I make has it as their Level 1 Feat. Then I dont have to worry about it ever again.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 08:16 PM

Again, Apocalypse from the Sky uses the Artifact as a Focus Component.
White text and stuff.

Material Component: An artifact, usually one of good perverted to this corrupt use.

squiggit

2014-05-27, 08:42 PM

White text and stuff.
The Book of Vile Darkness FAQ says that they're supposed to be focuses, not components.

ryu

2014-05-27, 08:52 PM

The Book of Vile Darkness FAQ says that they're supposed to be focuses, not components.

You mean the FAQs by sage? The ones this forum openly regards as official RAI rather than actual RAW? Those FAQs?

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 08:55 PM

You mean the FAQs by sage? The ones this forum openly regards as official RAI rather than actual RAW? Those FAQs?

It's certainly not in the errata, which as far as I know is the only official way WotC changes rules other than splats.

squiggit

2014-05-27, 08:55 PM

You mean the FAQs by sage? The ones this forum openly regards as official RAI rather than actual RAW? Those FAQs?

Well yes, and I never said it did match the RAW... in fact it explicitly contradicts it by saying the entry in the book was written wrong.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 08:58 PM

Well yes, and I never said it did match the RAW... in fact it explicitly contradicts it by saying the entry in the book was written wrong.

In that case, it's a reasonable house rule. It's still a house rule because it's not actually in D&D's corpus.

Urpriest

2014-05-27, 09:24 PM

Well yes, and I never said it did match the RAW... in fact it explicitly contradicts it by saying the entry in the book was written wrong.

In that sort of situation, someone actually interested in correcting the matter would add errata, so that it would be corrected in future printings. The only reason to say it in the FAQ and not in errata is to make the rules intentionally harder to use.

Jeff the Green

2014-05-27, 09:34 PM

In that sort of situation, someone actually interested in correcting the matter would add errata, so that it would be corrected in future printings. The only reason to say it in the FAQ and not in errata is to make the rules intentionally harder to use.

Or poor corporate organization. If I recall correctly, the FAQ is written by Customer Service and the errata is done by the writers, and at WotC never the twain shall meet.

squiggit

2014-05-27, 09:43 PM

In that sort of situation, someone actually interested in correcting the matter would add errata, so that it would be corrected in future printings. The only reason to say it in the FAQ and not in errata is to make the rules intentionally harder to use.

Well yes.

And to make it even more confusing the start of the magic entry in the BoVD says that corrupt spells don't have material components.

The FAQ entry doesn't lean on that previous statement though, it says both that that's wrong and that the apocalypse from the sky entry is also wrong.

The only reason it stands out to me is that usually FAQs are "This is my interpretation of the rules" leaning on safe RAI over loose RAW... but this one outright contradicts the book explicitly and says it's entirely wrong, which is a bit different.

Zweisteine

2014-05-27, 10:26 PM

The reason I brought this up is because I have a wizard who didn't have the feat, so I charged him something like 1 gp/mission for them, and he complained.
This is a pain, but not because it doesn't make sense. Sure, it's logical to have to pay a regular fee for components, but at no level is 1gp worth enough to make a difference. It's small enough that the player shouldn't mind, which means it's small enough that the DM shouldn't need to make them pay.

The logical solution is to assume that the wizard found one more gp than he otherwise would have, which he then paid for more components.

Pex

2014-05-27, 10:34 PM

Yes I know that but RAW is stupid. Do you expect me to believe that an item that holds 2lbs (less than a kilo) has inside it four hundred live spiders, fity dragon scales, and ninety thousand tons of bat guano and sulfur?
It makes no sense, and thus i do not allow it in my game, nor should anyone as far as I believe. The Image of the wizard with countless pouches around his waste is quintisensial for me, ever since I read Raistlin Majere's introduction in Dragons of Autumn twilight.

But I also always use the Curse of the Magi optional rule from dragonlance campaign setting, so I am a bit harsh towards wizards :P

But we want to play Dungeons & Dragons not Accounting & Filing. It's a game. Exacting minutiae of detail is not necessary and often detrimental.

Kaeso

2014-05-28, 07:07 AM

For situations when a sorcerer is thrown in a jail without their component pouch maybe.

I believe that sorcerers should have this feat from level one. The idea is that sorcerers learn of their magic by accident, rather than intense study. Maybe I'm just completely disconnected from most of humanity, but I doubt that young boys would randomly throw around pieces of bat guano and accidently create a firebal.

mashlagoo1982

2014-05-28, 09:51 AM

HighWater

2014-05-28, 09:59 AM

...and now I want to create an Illusionist who constantly walks around naked but "wears" illusionary clothes simply because he/she can.

Maybe the clothes are too restrictive.

Imagine how the willsave goes on that one:

"I disbelieve that outf-OH-GOD-WHY?!?!"

atemu1234

2014-05-28, 10:02 AM

Imagine how the willsave goes on that one:

"I disbelieve that outf-OH-GOD-WHY?!?!"

This reaction depends on race.

mashlagoo1982

2014-05-28, 10:10 AM

This reaction depends on race.

I could actually see this character making a living as a "tailor".

His patrons would still wear undergarments, but this would allow for more elaborate outfits. Maybe something nobility would use on formal occasions...?

Rubik

2014-05-28, 10:10 AM

This reaction depends on race.One word:

Mialee.

atemu1234

2014-05-28, 10:23 AM

One word:

Mialee.

Less OH GOD WHY
and more OH GOD YES.
For some of us, at any rate.

Rubik

2014-05-28, 10:34 AM

Less OH GOD WHY
and more OH GOD YES.
For some of us, at any rate.Only if you're Ted the Mind Flayer.

atemu1234

2014-05-28, 10:36 AM

Only if you're Ted the Mind Flayer.

Eh... Maybe, maybe not.

Captnq

2014-05-28, 11:44 AM

But we want to play Dungeons & Dragons not Accounting & Filing. It's a game. Exacting minutiae of detail is not necessary and often detrimental.

Actually, I found if you get rid of that damn pouch and force the wizard to keep track of his Material Components, it's an excellent way to help keep an overpowered PC in check.

Ah. So you brought a 15th level wizard/ultimate magus/incantrix on your raid into hell and brought one pouch. Well, it has enough components for the casting of each spell you currently have memorized ONCE. I hope you can find a way to replenish it on the fifth layer.

Wizards are actually not over powered, if you actually enforce all the rules...
Then again, who plays a wizard past 5th level?
Raise your hand if you have actually see someone play a 9th level WIZARD, not a wizard 5/Insert PrC of Power Here 4

Piggy Knowles

2014-05-28, 11:46 AM

I played a single-classed 9th-level wizard just last year, oddly enough. The DM didn't like multiclassing.

Rubik

2014-05-28, 11:53 AM

Wizards are actually not over powered, if you actually enforce all the houserules...Fixed that for you.

I played a single-classed 9th-level wizard just last year, oddly enough. The DM didn't like multiclassing.That's the best time to play a druid or artificer, since they do single-classing best.

Piggy Knowles

2014-05-28, 12:11 PM

That's the best time to play a druid or artificer, since they do single-classing best.

If my intention was to play the best possible single-classed build, I might have done exactly that (although I suspect from levels 13 through 16, the wizard would still outpace the druid). But I wanted to play a wizard, so I did.

(Actually, I had wanted to play a dragonfire adept, but the DM didn't allow it. Wizard was my backup.)

I didn't take Eschew Materials, though. The DM thought that not only were spell components overly cumbersome, but that spellbooks were too much as well. He allowed all wizards to just cast spontaneously. From the ENTIRE WIZARD SPELL LIST. (But DFA was somehow too broken.)

dascarletm

2014-05-28, 12:15 PM

If my intention was to play the best possible single-classed build, I might have done exactly that (although I suspect from levels 13 through 16, the wizard would still outpace the druid). But I wanted to play a wizard, so I did.

(Actually, I had wanted to play a dragonfire adept, but the DM didn't allow it. Wizard was my backup.)

I didn't take Eschew Materials, though. The DM thought that not only were spell components overly cumbersome, but that spellbooks were too much as well. He allowed all wizards to just cast spontaneously. From the ENTIRE WIZARD SPELL LIST. (But DFA was somehow too broken.)

The Übermensch...

I would suspect one would need to intentionally not ruin the game in that situation.

Diarmuid

2014-05-28, 12:39 PM

Edit - Bleh, nm...should read whole thread rather than first page and try to respond to something from first page heh.

Urpriest

2014-05-28, 12:47 PM

Ah. So you brought a 15th level wizard/ultimate magus/incantrix on your raid into hell and brought one pouch.

You didn't, though, so this doesn't happen. Instead, you brought your ridiculous, implausible pile of pouches, and have enough, because they're cheap enough that you can do that if you're in a game that cares about it.

Besides, not having access to components changes the spells a Wizard has access to. It doesn't mean they have access to weaker spells, since whether or not a spell requires material components has no connection to its power.

Piggy Knowles

2014-05-28, 12:52 PM

The Übermensch...

I would suspect one would need to intentionally not ruin the game in that situation.

I spent most of my time buffing the VoP monk, who subsequently became the party's main damage dealer. It all balanced out.

Story

2014-05-28, 12:54 PM

Actually, I found if you get rid of that damn pouch and force the wizard to keep track of his Material Components, it's an excellent way to help keep an overpowered PC in check.

Ah. So you brought a 15th level wizard/ultimate magus/incantrix on your raid into hell and brought one pouch. Well, it has enough components for the casting of each spell you currently have memorized ONCE. I hope you can find a way to replenish it on the fifth layer.

Wizards are actually not over powered, if you actually enforce all the rules...

First off, that's actually a houserule, as mentioned above. You can nerf anything with houserules if you want to but that doesn't mean the actual game isn't unbalanced (see Oberoni).

Second, are you banning people from carrying multiple components? What's stopping them from just stocking up?

Kantolin

2014-05-28, 01:01 PM

Actually, I found if you get rid of that damn pouch and force the wizard to keep track of his Material Components, it's an excellent way to help keep an overpowered PC in check.

Having played a wizard under these rules before, I do not agree.

All it really did was result in my spending a health chunk of out of game time making lists of what I needed, and then dragging the party along while I go down my checklist. When arriving at my checklist, I just get 'plenty' to do things. If we're in a gauntlet where I have to cast a ton of spells, I'm much more likely to run out of spells than I am to run out of components.

I mean, if you were then trapped somewhere that you couldn't ever replenish your spell components no not even then mwa ha ha, then that's most likely to be a scenario where 'You all wake up and are in prison and you are missing your armour, weapons, spellbooks, and spell component pouches'.

That said, if the goal is that you actually want to say 'Sorry wizard, you aren't allowed to cast spells' (Because there are no spellcasters in the abyss! None! Mwa ha ha!), then you may as well just ban the wizard and save yourself some trouble. Or possibly remove one of the wizard's bonus/regular feats and replace it with eschew materials.

So do not suggest 'it suddenly balances out a wizard if they have to make a spreadsheet in order to play their character', as it doesn't. Although this does mean that some people will say, 'Oh, I don't really want to spend a lot more out of game time than anyone else on my character', since presumably no other class requires the player to do extra chores like that. And if this becomes even mildly annoying, then the party wizard will just take eschew materials and skip this whole mess (Or are you banning that too?)

(Relatedly, do you force fighter-types to roleplay through working out every morning, or bards to roleplay through their singing practice, or the like? As in my group, we do have those things happen, but they are more 'I'm up at dawn doing push-ups'. Our wizards are usually 'I'm up studying my spells', but could be 'I'm gathering spell components' instead :P)

I suppose as an addition, does the DM measure out how many of what spell components enemy wizards have? That would be a truckload more work as a DM and there is no way I'd do that, but I could totally see, "Nono, we're in the abyss so it's impossible to get [bat guano] as per the DM's own statement, and we know this guy hasn't left the abyss in forever, so he probably has very little..." or something. Or killing him and taking his spell components, which would require a specific tally of what spell components he has... yigads would I not do this as a DM. Do you guys do this? That sounds crazy. Doing this to spellbooks themselves takes a bit of work already. This then makes enemy wizards a touch easier as it means all of them almost certainly will have eschew materials, which is even more incentive for the party wizard to take eschew materials and skip this whole rot. :P

tl;dr: Making wizards keep track of individual spell components does not help balance, it just makes the wizard's player do extra homework, from personal experience. If the goal is 'wizards cannot cast spells', you can do this a number of ways. If either of those become particularly annoying to a player, you will also have to ban eschew materials (and probably more things).

pwykersotz

2014-05-28, 01:06 PM

Because I actually prefer actual cosmic challenges to begin with? If we're playing mythic, legendary, one in a few billion heroes the likes of which only show up every few centuries if you're lucky the opposition should actually be a legitimate threat to the world as we know it. Anything less brings questions of why the several mid to high mid level NPCs in any given city isn't taking care of it.

And I get that. There's a place for games that are closer to RAW. But advocating that it be the norm is a bridge too far. Every wizard...heck...every PERSON having access to a 5gp artifact/unique and priceless item collection pouch undermines the very definition of the word artifact or the word unique. If these extreme RAW interpretations are adhered to slavishly, it may as well be a computer game exploit where you cheat yourself infinite stats. "I'm just clicking the buttons, the game lets me do it, so it's not cheating".

ryu

2014-05-28, 01:22 PM

And I get that. There's a place for games that are closer to RAW. But advocating that it be the norm is a bridge too far. Every wizard...heck...every PERSON having access to a 5gp artifact/unique and priceless item collection pouch undermines the very definition of the word artifact or the word unique. If these extreme RAW interpretations are adhered to slavishly, it may as well be a computer game exploit where you cheat yourself infinite stats. "I'm just clicking the buttons, the game lets me do it, so it's not cheating".

When the enemy has access to the same tools and is built and played with that in mind it's not a bug. It's a feature. Anything less feels like holding back, and I just hate intentionally making myself weaker. The only thing we don't allow is Pun-Pun with different justifications in and out of game. In game he already exists, is the overdeity of the setting, and instagibs people trying to get manipulate form. Out of game it's because there's no functional way to adjudicate who wins when both sides are Pun-Puns. Also each having the Ex ability I Win is more boring than the string of plans, minions, layered spell effects, and contingencies tier one play brings. The latter has some real complexity and depth. The former doesn't.

Story

2014-05-28, 02:07 PM

Just because something is an artifact doesn't necessarily mean it's an artifact that does anything. The other things in the SCP are more problematic.

RSSwizard

2014-05-28, 02:08 PM

Arcane Focus is NOT affected by eschew materials in any way. But I like to think that it is, and unless the DM bothers me about it I try to slide by without them, it isn't something that I mention (unless its a real frigging cool arcane focus and it helps make roleplaying fun trying to get someone to craft the doohicky for me).

Ive never agreed with the material component stuff for spells. Always considered it more fluff text than anything, and the intended novelty of it was lost. Only when the component is expensive did it make sense (like those 100gp pearls everyone needs all the time).

====

In fact in a homebrew d&d edition I never finished I was going to make it to where if it had a Material component, it just referenced your own "personal mojo bag". So unless it had a specifically mentioned material component that was rare or expensive, you just grabbed your mojo bag and cast the spell with that... the "M" of V/S/M was not explicitly defined. And each castor had their own mojo bag they put together themselves.

I made it to where Eschew Materials specifically said you didn't need to have the bag, so if you were divested of your equipment and jailed you could still cast. It also cut the value or amount of a spell component in half for casting a spell, keeping in mind that with fewer feats in the game they were stronger with solid meaty benefits.

====

This homebrew took 3.5 and basically simplified it down to 2nd edition. It was like 3.5, except that the feats list was real small and each class had its own small set of feats similar to how rogues have rogue tricks. But the feats were more powerful and comprehensive to compensate. Basically the tweaking/min-maxing was built into each class automatically.

Another thing I did was i got rid of Gold in the game. Instead whenever you needed to make something magical that costs gold piece value . . . you actually have to Dissolve the gold into it and the gold is destroyed (this is similar to Essentia in 4E). It turns into corroded copper, as the magic is stripped from the material reducing it to a lesser material.

Which means all the Silver got real frigging expensive and Silver was the new Gold (and silver already has a variety of good uses by itself). Gold was hard to get ahold of to make magic stuff out of and it was a quest to go get it, and it was one reason that the dwarves (or the Orcs, if you're a bad guy) were even more highly respected. I thought it was brilliant.

icefractal

2014-05-28, 02:20 PM

Even in the most high-power, everything goes type of game, I wouldn't say that "infinite artifacts from a spell component pouch" is any kind of desirable. It's not even a "trick", much less some kind of cool scheme. It's just "poor wording means all characters are infinitely powerful now, lol"

For that matter, it's not like you can really play D&D to win anyway. By RAW:
One wish means NI wishes, within the space of two rounds if you do it right.
NI wishes mean NI minions which are all arbitrarily powerful.
There are ways to do this at 1st level

So if you're really "not holding back", then you start the game, and two rounds later every single square inch of the planet is an epically-powerful construct loyal to you. At the very least.

Except, everyone else can also do that. So arguably, you start to attempt that and get vaporized by NI readied actions.

Anyway, it irks me when people try to "slightly" use infinite-power tricks to pretend they're not causing a degenerate game-state. Like "every random goblin pulling a Staff of Power from their pouch and snapping it would be silly, but me having the eyebrow of a god in there is totally legit." Or, "I'll use this infinite loop, but I'm only choosing to triple my power with it, so it's all good."

Optimizing within the bounds of finite power can be a lot of fun, and lead to some interesting Tippy-verse style constructions. Wandering over into NI territory because you feel like you should be able to do X and then pretending that finite numbers still means something just seems ridiculous.

ryu

2014-05-28, 02:24 PM

icefractal

2014-05-28, 03:06 PM

Well, ok. I'm curious then - how do you resolve a conflict between two arbitrarily large forces of creatures that are each arbitrarily powerful and are getting resupplied at an arbitrary rate?

RSSwizard

2014-05-28, 03:24 PM

Well, ok. I'm curious then - how do you resolve a conflict between two arbitrarily large forces of creatures that are each arbitrarily powerful and are getting resupplied at an arbitrary rate?

It becomes like Mass Combat rules from Pathfinder/Chainmail.

Both parties as they are AT START are compared to each other. Combat is not done by physical confrontation but by spells.

Barring that, roll Initiative and whoever wins is the victor. The less discrepancy involved the higher the collateral damage is (so if the winner's initiative is much higher, it may not cause much collateral damage at all. Initiative is a good barometer for this because it means that they will have an edge more often).

In the event of a draw, comparison does not go to initiative/dex modifiers but to Spellcraft/Knowledge Arcana ranks. If they're still equal, they end up going somewhere else to fight via Plane Shift and probably get intervened on by some deity critters from the plane they're intruding on.

VoxRationis

2014-05-28, 03:28 PM

Just because something is an artifact doesn't necessarily mean it's an artifact that does anything. The other things in the SCP are more problematic.

Is that to say that ancient Netheril or whatever had long-lost ways of making things that do nothing? I'm sorry, but that's a little hard to swallow. It has to do something; you can't just call a pebble an "artifact" and call it a day.

ryu

2014-05-28, 03:41 PM

Is that to say that ancient Netheril or whatever had long-lost ways of making things that do nothing? I'm sorry, but that's a little hard to swallow. It has to do something; you can't just call a pebble an "artifact" and call it a day.

Actually that would explain why they collapse. They spent time MAKING the pebble artifacts rather than just getting them from their pouches.

VoxRationis

2014-05-28, 03:55 PM

I assume that was being tongue-in-cheek.

ryu

2014-05-28, 04:20 PM

I assume that was being tongue-in-cheek.

Well you have to find some reason for the ultimate magical civ to collapse. I posit some form of incompetence, and this might well be enough.

Doug Lampert

2014-05-28, 04:25 PM

Is that to say that ancient Netheril or whatever had long-lost ways of making things that do nothing? I'm sorry, but that's a little hard to swallow. It has to do something; you can't just call a pebble an "artifact" and call it a day.

It aids in casting the ritual which caused the total destruction of the (Redacted) race, even to the extent that their very name and existence is now forgotten.

Or: It anchors the world allowing magic to work at all, if all are destroyed then magic will fail, which is why Bob the Great, archwizard extraordinaire enchanted the world so that EVERY spell component pouch has an infinite number of them! Ha! Take that destroyers of magic!

Or: It exists as a trap to prevent excessive use of Disjuntion and millions were created and scattered over the world by a forgotten mageocracy that didn't like a mere ninth level spell ruining their day.

Or: Someone once took "Craft Artifact" as a skill and noticed that if they made useless artifacts the artifacts had zero cost and they could produce NI of them in one round, so they did.

Or: Someone took "Artifact Infested" as a flaw, and each artifact if hit by a Polymorph Any Object can become, A CHICKEN! But nothing else.

Or make up your own explanation, useless artifacts aren't actually hard to explain. Used for a now obsolete purpose is perfectly reasonable in fact.

TSED

2014-05-28, 04:44 PM

To get back on topic:

There is a very specific use for Eschew Materials. If you are starting play with a diminutive or fine sized caster, spell component pouches are probably way too heavy for you. If you're diminutive or fine and have a strength of 2 or less (likely), you cannot actually keep a SCP in your light load.

So there's that. Small sizes are also pretty great for casters, so, you know.

Chronos

2014-05-28, 05:10 PM

ryu

2014-05-28, 05:21 PM

No offense, RSSWizard, but if you're resolving combat entirely by the result of the initiative roll, why bother playing D&D? Why not just play craps to begin with? You've abandoned most of the richness of the game.

Because craps assumes actually gambling money and requires a properly laid out table made specifically as a craps table?

Synar

2014-05-28, 05:37 PM

:smallsigh:

No, the problem is that those numbers are arbitrary high. So in fact, either you consider they are infinite (and scratching your head about denumbrability), which the game can't handle, or you halt the game because you won't stop until your power is infinite. After all, since infinite loops are allowed,you can have infinty actions, so all of this take one round... that never finishes.

Furthermore, even if you pretend this work because casters accept to tacitly break the game only a little because of guilt, this is no longer roleplay. Absolutely normal pouches containing infinity items and artifact which can be drawn an infinite number of time in 6 seconds (so in less than 6 second, you dropped more chickens than exist in the planet. No, you dropped chicken with a total mass superior to the mass of your planet. Those chicken don't need to come from anywhere right?) and convocating an infinite number of archons (as powerful as lesser gods, so only a handful should probably exist, but TO doesn't care) (which all agree to serve you because whatever) breaks so hard any setting, fantasy flavor, and suspension of disbelief you might as well be burning banners in the sky with "suspension of disbelief" written on them to show how much you care about it.

I'm not even sure you could actually roll play it. I'm not sure you can play such a thing. I don't understand where are all the complex layered plans, contingency, and T1 tricks when anyone (including peasants) can buy a spell component and just destroy the universe by dropping chickens or bat guano and creating a black hole because of arbitrary quantity of mass. Gods help the world if someone rips open the pouch-I guess what would happen since the mass is arbitrary high, the attraction force is too, and the time needed to take everything to you is arbritrary low, so can only be zero, everything come into a point instantly, and your wizard don't get to use contingencies since this is instantanous. Every plans of existence with a gate or a portal opened (that you just opened before as a preparation) is also sucked in. Yes, even the gods. Even light. Even incorporeal creatures, shadow and ethereal ones. Everything is a point, and only the sealed demi-plans without any entry may have survived. Any connection to another destroyed plan will destroy it too. Is tippy-level optimization? Is it your definition of fun? Explain to me how do you use complex plans when everyone has arbtitrary power?

EDIT:Ninja'd.

So why not playing dices? Without gambling? Oh, this is not fun when there are no stakes? But why is what you propose different? Are you sarcasing since the start?

ryu

2014-05-28, 05:53 PM

Like I said before the equipment to play dice properly actually costs more than what we're doing here. It also doesn't have an ongoing canon of increasingly silly events to enjoy on the side. Interactive gurren lagann is hard to compete with in game terms.

Synar

2014-05-28, 08:29 PM

ryu

2014-05-28, 08:34 PM

Take two dices. Roll them and let your adversary roll them. Compare the results. There, you played dices.
:smallsmile:

And I've no idea what the second part of your sentence mean.

And I'm not arguing that you are only now playing dice, that would be rude. I'm arguing that either the game you play is different from the game you describe (in a way or another, as there are contradiction), or there is something I do not understand and am curious for an explanation.

Gurren Lagann is an anime about breaking physics and logic in hilarious ways to win epic scale battles. Interactive Gureen Lagann is putting that principle into play with a relatively simple rules base if we use the method for adjudication given earlier. In other words have you ever experienced the card game munchkin? It's the same general principle that makes that game more fun than non-gambling poker.