Crystalline Chronicle and Removing Components

[Silpharon]

The Crystalline Chronicle item includes the following in its description:



When you cast a wizard spell, you can expend 1 charge to cast the spell without verbal, somatic, or material components of up to 100 gp value.

Should I read that as:
1) without one of verbal, somatic, or material components...

Or

2) without any verbal, somatic, or material components...

Any interesting interactions with subtle metamagic?

[Unoriginal]

The Crystalline Chronicle item includes the following in its description:



Should I read that as:
1) without one of verbal, somatic, or material components...

Or

2) without any verbal, somatic, or material components...

The second, I would say.



Any interesting interactions with subtle metamagic?

I mean it replaces Subtle Spells for wizard spells. Dunno if you'd consider that interesting.

[Amnestic]

The Crystalline Chronicle item includes the following in its description:



Should I read that as:
1) without one of verbal, somatic, or material components...

Or

2) without any verbal, somatic, or material components...

Any interesting interactions with subtle metamagic?

I read it at the first reading, not the second.

[Silpharon]

The second, I would say.


I read it at the first reading, not the second.

Glad I'm not alone in thinking this is unclear. I think the reason 'or' is used instead of 'and' could be to cover the fact that most spells do not contain all three components.

[Silpharon]

As with any RAI interpretation, context is key. Looking at the Subtle Metamagic description, we see the word any is explicit:


When you cast a spell, you can spend 1 sorcery point to cast it without any somatic or verbal components.

So given the lack of any in the Crystalline Chronicle's description, I'm going to rule that the item only removes one of the three components.

This does allow good use with Subtle spell to remove material components, making such spells fully undetectable (and uncontested with Counterspell).

[Unoriginal]

Glad I'm not alone in thinking this is unclear. I think the reason 'or' is used instead of 'and' could be to cover the fact that most spells do not contain all three components.

Indeed, if "and" was used, then the Chronicle could *only* be used when all three components are present.

[Chronos]

I would rule that it removes all three, but that's just a ruling: I agree that it's unclear and could be interpreted either way.