question on somatic component, materials, focus and improved pact weapon

[Red Bear]

so Improved pact weapon (hex blade ) says:
You can use any weapon you summon as a spell casting focus

form the SRD: a spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components or to hold a spell casting focus but it can be the same hand that he uses to perform somatic components

questions
1) does it mean that if you have the spell casting focus you don't need materials?
2) can an hex blade with improved pact weapon then cast with no problems with sword and shield?

[Sigreid]

1. Unless the component is called out as having a cost, the focus eliminates the need for the focus.
2. Yes, same as a cleric using an emblem set in his shield. This let's the warlock have both hands full and still cast spells that dont have a component that has a noted cost.

[Thunderbird]

It is worth noting that both a Hexblade with Improved Pact Weapon and a Cleric with his holy symbol on his shield can cast spells that have a (no cost) material and a somatic component, but if the spell has only a somatic component you must have a free hand to cast anyway (unless you have the Warcaster feat).

Many DMs might not care about it though.

[Red Bear]

1. Unless the component is called out as having a cost, the focus eliminates the need for the focus.
2. Yes, same as a cleric using an emblem set in his shield. This let's the warlock have both hands full and still cast spells that dont have a component that has a noted cost.

so casting with sword and shield is totally doable by most casters? I thought it was a major feature of the "war caster" feat

[RSP]

so Improved pact weapon (hex blade ) says:
You can use any weapon you summon as a spell casting focus

form the SRD: a spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components or to hold a spell casting focus but it can be the same hand that he uses to perform somatic components

questions
1) does it mean that if you have the spell casting focus you don't need materials?
2) can an hex blade with improved pact weapon then cast with no problems with sword and shield?

From a strictly RAW reading, it allows the weapon to replace M components with no associated cost, but doesn't impact any casting that doesn't contain an M component.

The rules state a free hand is needed for S components and that a free hand is needed for M components; and there's a rule that if a spell has an M component, the same hand using the M can be used for the S component.

So RAW, if the spell has an S component and no M component, then you would still need either a free hand or Warcaster (which specifically allows the S component to be accomplished while holding a weapon or shield) to cast.

I don't know how many DMs care about these rules though, so check with yours regarding their requirements.

[RSP]

so casting with sword and shield is totally doable by most casters? I thought it was a major feature of the "war caster" feat

foci allow the M component, Warcaster allows the S component. If both are needed, they can be the same hand, if only S is needed Warcaster is still required, RAW.

Note: Warcaster does nothing for M components.

[Red Bear]

I am the DM, I'm trying to decide what to do. Thank you for all your answers, I guess It makes the most sense to allow it

[Sigreid]

I am the DM, I'm trying to decide what to do. Thank you for all your answers, I guess It makes the most sense to allow it

More than that, it's one of the biggest reasons to spend a precious invocation on improved pact weapon.

[Asmotherion]

so Improved pact weapon (hex blade ) says:
You can use any weapon you summon as a spell casting focus

form the SRD: a spellcaster must have a hand free to access a spell's material components or to hold a spell casting focus but it can be the same hand that he uses to perform somatic components

questions
1) does it mean that if you have the spell casting focus you don't need materials?
2) can an hex blade with improved pact weapon then cast with no problems with sword and shield?

Yes and Yes.

You only need materials for spells with a cost, and/or that are consumed at the casting.

That said, the basic idea of the invocation is that it replaces any need you'd have for a Focus or Components, other than those with a listed Cost. At the same time, you can go Sword and Board with no Fear of needing to Switch.

[Tanarii]

You only need materials for spells with a cost, and/or that are consumed at the casting.
Components consumed with no material cost can be replaced with a focus just fine. The line about providing for each casting if they are consumed is a standalone and separate rule (in its own paragraph) unrelated to replacing with a focus, ie it's describing if you are using components at all. It doesn't mean that it requires consumable components with no cost instead of a focus.

[JackPhoenix]

Components consumed with no material cost can be replaced with a focus just fine. The line about providing for each casting if they are consumed is a standalone and separate rule (in its own paragraph) unrelated to replacing with a focus, ie it's describing if you are using components at all. It doesn't mean that it requires consumable components with no cost instead of a focus.

Nope, it's part of the same rules, despite the formating. You can't replace consumed components with focus or component pouch. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/15/material-component-and-spellcasting-focus/)

[Millstone85]

Nope, it's part of the same rules, despite the formating. You can't replace consumed components with focus or component pouch. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/15/material-component-and-spellcasting-focus/)It is also in the compendium.
If a spell’s material components are consumed, can a spellcasting focus still be used in place of the consumed component? No. A spellcasting focus can be used in place of a material component only if that component has no cost noted in the spell’s description and if that component isn’t consumed.

[Tanarii]

Nope, it's part of the same rules, despite the formating. You can't replace consumed components with focus or component pouch. (https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/01/15/material-component-and-spellcasting-focus/)


It is also in the compendium.Thats nice. I know of no table that rules it that way, which means no AL table in multiple locations, and a few cons I've visited. So clearly this is not a widely accepted tweet.

Focus, and most definitely component pouches, replace any non-cost material component. Clearly another case of JC snap-judgement towards a strict rules lawyering interpretation of wording instead of common sense & 5e design intent. (ie I don't agree with him. :smallwink:)

[Millstone85]

Thats nice. I know of no table that rules it that way, which means no AL table in multiple locations, and a few cons I've visited. So clearly this is not a widely accepted tweet.

Focus, and most definitely component pouches, replace any non-cost material component. Clearly another case of JC snap-judgement towards a strict rules lawyering interpretation of wording instead of common sense & 5e design intent. (ie I don't agree with him. :smallwink:)While it started as a tweet, it is now in an official document.

But I can easily imagine it getting ignored. After all, what is a DM supposed to do with a consumed component without a cost? Give it a cost, or let component pouches never run out of the stuff, without penalty for using a spellcasting focus.

[RSP]

While it started as a tweet, it is now in an official document.

But I can easily imagine it getting ignored. After all, what is a DM supposed to do with a consumed component without a cost? Give it a cost, or let component pouches never run out of the stuff, without penalty for using a spellcasting focus.

I've found, regardless of table, components are the rule most ignored by DMs (with lighting rules coming in second, but this is more DM dependent). At best they usually come down to: you can't dual wield without a feature that lets you (such as weapon as a focus or Warcaster, and handwaiving the fact they are different rules), and making sure the party has the gold for components for reviving fallen party members.

[Tanarii]

While it started as a tweet, it is now in an official document.Grumble grumble. :smallyuk:


But I can easily imagine it getting ignored. After all, what is a DM supposed to do with a consumed component without a cost? Give it a cost, or let component pouches never run out of the stuff, without penalty for using a spellcasting focus.Pretty much. It may say you need it, but that means the player just says "sure I picked some up last time we were back in town and now it's in my component pouch." It weights nothing official and costs nothing official, so clearly it's infinitely supplied by the component pouch, with periodic restocking. Logic! Or at least something doing a good job of faking it. :smallbiggrin:

Honestly, this entirely changes my view of 5e spell casting and logistics tracking. I'm going to have to through every spell now and see which ones have consumable components not covered by the focus and component pouch. And figure out restocking rules. And warn players they can't just use donjon with the "costly component" filter turned on to figure out spells that require extra effort any more. It's a game changing ruling for spell casters. Brings back a real old school feeling to casting.

Edit:
Okay so ... this is actually a fairly meaningless ruling.

There are arguable 0 or 3 spells in the PHB that consume components that are no cost.
Cordon of Arrows (says ammunition is destroyed in the text, not "consumed".)
Glove of Invulnerability (it says M component shatters, not "consumed")
Simulacrum (snow or ice, implied in text it's required as a part of creating it and can't be replaced with a focus.)

There are many components that seem like they should be consumed (pinch of this or that, drop of blood or water, burning incense) that aren't specified as consumed. So they aren't covered by this rule.

My favorite was Armor of Agathys requiring a (not consumed) cup of water. That's gotta be fun to keep in your component pouch without spilling. :smallamused: