Greetings to all...
Except in the the case of elaborate, ritual-based spells (eg. Spiritwrack, the various summoning & enslavement spells, etc) I have never found much use for spell components in my games.
For one, they are often difficult to obtain and, therefore, prevent someone from casting a spell that they "know" if they don't have the components.
Also, many components are subject to rotting (unless continuously magically preserved - which, in itself, would be a huge pain in the ass) and therefore would have to be replentished regularly - which leads back to the first problem.
I like the idea in concept, but in actual game play I've found it to be impractical.
What about you?
Only certain spells.
Rituals and the like always have to have components, and certain high level spells such as Wish and Comet Storm.
Other than that it's just plain tedious, not to mention it also can rob the player of much of his character's abilities.
D&D is the most fair when everything happens some of the time. Wizards are the best class, and dealing with / keeping track of / occasionally losing their spell books and spell components is a part of the price that makes them fair. I use spell components because wizards don't need any extra help ruling D&D.
Spell components are one reason why i've always disagreed with the whole MUs are overpowered argument in ad&d. They were a check on that power. Early game balancing, if you like.
Then again, it isn't much fun to have these great abilities that you can't use 'cos you've been in the wilderness for a month.
Connundrum, thy name is spell components.
Unless the component is very expensive or magical, generally no. For most games, I like to minimize book keeping and keep focus on the action. For the same reason, I don't usually track mundane ammo and I don't make them pay every day expenses or charge them a monthly amount based on lifestyle.
Exceptions are made for unusual circumstances, like a wizard taken prisoner and stripped of all their gear or someone intentially stealing all of their spell components.
There are a few spells, like stoneskin, where the cost is a balancing factor. Aging is as well.
Hah!
One of my most infamous games started with the players losing all their gear, and being taken to the gaol. This included the magic-user's spellbook.
That's the main component for spells in my game! The player then resolved to make Trip attacks against every opponent encountered.
Quote from: Blackhand;492574Hah!
One of my most infamous games started with the players losing all their gear, and being taken to the gaol. This included the magic-user's spellbook.
That's the main component for spells in my game!
That's pretty much how I do it too in D&D.
We had a game where the MU's spellbook was stolen by some random scumbags while they were camped out and forgot to post a look-out. It took them about two days to recover it and punnish the theives. Meanwhile, the MU was screwed.
In my AD&D games, I've long taken the route that 3e did: if the component had a specified GP cost, then it was required for casting. Otherwise, no, I just figured they were fun color. I always thought it would be a fun and interesting rule to enforce, but my players always disagreed (of course).
Auroroa's Whole Realms Catalogue for 2e had all the spell components from the PHB (not sure about the later books like Tome of Magic, etc.) priced out. Hmmm...I'm gearing up for an AD&D game in the next month or so....
Clerics, of course, always need to have their holy symbol.
1e's rules for druidic mistletoe are really cool and flavorful, but I never used them. That might be handy; druids can get insanely powerful starting at mid-levels.
BTW, here's an example of a really elaborate spell component:
Repulsion - 7th level MU spell (PH pg 86)
"The material component of this spell is a pair of small magnetized iron bars attached to two small canine statuettes, one ivory and one ebony."
Awww, c'mon! Where are you going to get that? :rolleyes:
Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492583BTW, here's an example of a really elaborate spell component:
Repulsion - 7th level MU spell (PH pg 86)
"The material component of this spell is a pair of small magnetized iron bars attached to two small canine statuettes, one ivory and one ebony."
Awww, c'mon! Where are you going to get that? :rolleyes:
Like KenHR, I believe this was just fun color. The Flava.
I just assume that you have it for casting the spell, and if you wanna describe how you use the components that's great.
Since most of the time learning the spell costs money, add a little more in there to represent the cost of these items being made or found during downtime.
Unless you want to write an adventure about it...which I don't. Otherwise I'd have to write a new one every time someone wanted ammunition.
I can go either way with spell components. As cranewings pointed out, they are an important balancing point against a wizard's potential power.
Quote from: Blackhand;492590Like KenHR, I believe this was just fun color. The Flava.
I agree wholeheartedly.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;492594I can go either way with spell components. As cranewings pointed out, they are an important balancing point against a wizard's potential power.
I don't know about the ballancing aspect... In D&D, a 15th level MU has enormous power, but it takes time to apply. By way of comparison, a 15th level Monk could make short work of said MU in a one-on-one situation.
The D&D spell casters can amazing things including destroying entire cities (eg. the Tsunami Wu-Jen [MU] spell in Oriental Adventures), but if somebody can get to them, they're not too tough unless they have crazy protection spells in place.
Only when it seemed like fun for the campaign. In D&D I've done it both ways and enjoyed both ways. In High Valor it isn't required, but most people want to do SOMETHING to minimize the setback, and special components are apart of advance preparation that works. However, they're never the same thing twice for High Magic. Low magic is more, fixed, but doesn't do as much.
I have always wanted to use them. Whenever I've played a wizard in the past, I tried to keep track of them - because although they're rarely useful for things other than casting spells... you never know when a magnet might come in handly.
Or... I dunno, sometimes it's useful to know that the spellcaster is carrying around live spiders.
I'm thinking that I'll make the casters in my upcoming campaign write down the components in a "component bag" list. Just a list of the components, separated by what spell they're used for. That way, if any really odd situations come up, they'll at least know what they've got in their component bag. Put a reasonable baseline number next to each component, that's how many he always has when he leaves the house - at least that many, probably more. This number is up to him, but it needs to reasonably fit in whatever conveyance he's got.
Then, if something happens in the game that would create a resource-management situation - the wizard is trapped in a dungeon for more than a few days or on a long overland trek, at the beginning of the situation, he goes down his component list and rolls dice in proportion to his baseline. If he normally carries around 10 balls of bat guano, he'd roll a d10 to see how many extras he happened to have at the moment the resource-strapped situation started.
Kind of simulates the "oh, crap - how many of those do I still have? I don't remember! *rummage, rummage*"
And no bookkeeping except when bookkeeping becomes important.
Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492601I don't know about the ballancing aspect... In D&D, a 15th level MU has enormous power, but it takes time to apply. By way of comparison, a 15th level Monk could make short work of said MU in a one-on-one situation.
The D&D spell casters can amazing things including destroying entire cities (eg. the Tsunami Wu-Jen [MU] spell in Oriental Adventures), but if somebody can get to them, they're not too tough unless they have crazy protection spells in place.
Personally I never had much of an issue with spellcasters and their power level. But it is a very campaign and group specific thing I think. If someone is having issues with balance and spellcasting, components are a good way to do it.
I think the best way to reign in spells and their power is to limit which ones are available in your campaign in the first place.
Tsunami too much?
Don't allow it.
Quote from: Blackhand;492611I think the best way to reign in spells and their power is to limit which ones are available in your campaign in the first place.
Tsunami too much?
Don't allow it.
Yep. There's never been a wish spell in my campaigns, not that I've ever seen a group get high enough in level that it would be an issue. Wishes are embedded in magical items.
Another balancing factor in 1e that's often overlooked is the amount of time it takes to memorize a spell (this got watered down severely in 2e). I don't have the books to hand here at work, but I remember calculating that an arch-mage (an m-u capable of casting spells up to level 9) would need something like 6 weeks of uninterrupted time to memorize their entire complement of spells. So there's lots of prepwork involved.
Quote from: Kaldric;492607I'm thinking that I'll make the casters in my upcoming campaign write down the components in a "component bag" list. Just a list of the components, separated by what spell they're used for. That way, if any really odd situations come up, they'll at least know what they've got in their component bag. Put a reasonable baseline number next to each component, that's how many he always has when he leaves the house - at least that many, probably more. This number is up to him, but it needs to reasonably fit in whatever conveyance he's got.
Interesting idea.
I could also go for components if they were limited in nature. Say, fifteen interchangable "items" neccessary to cast fifteen spells. To cast the spell, you have to pull the energy from the item - which disappears.
Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492617Interesting idea.
I could also go for components if they were limited in nature. Say, fifteen interchangable "items" neccessary to cast fifteen spells. To cast the spell, you have to pull the energy from the item - which disappears.
My buddy Kevin used to use a generic "component bag" that cost 5 gp or so; you had to have that on you to cast spells. I thought that was a good idea, maybe increasing the cost as more powerful spells became available.
I like your 15 component idea a lot, though. That would be an interesting project, correlating spells to components and such.
Quote from: Blackhand;492611I think the best way to reign in spells and their power is to limit which ones are available in your campaign in the first place.
Tsunami too much?
Don't allow it.
Yes, and a very good point. A lot of GMs seem to think they have to allow ALL the spells listed simply because they are there. If a spell has proven in the past to be unballancing or the GM simply doesn't want it, there's no reason it has to stay.
I've excluded certain spells before and players have never had an issue with it.
I've never been a fan of all spell components evaporating after you use them. I mean, unless it's a diamond or something that is worth money AND specifically states that it is used up, I prefer to think of these things as foci.
Except, you know - live spiders. Those are plentiful enough (except in the dead of winter) not to really worry about.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;492610Personally I never had much of an issue with spellcasters and their power level. But it is a very campaign and group specific thing I think. If someone is having issues with balance and spellcasting, components are a good way to do it.
I use goblinoids, giants, and humanoids for about 90% of my npcs, so in my games certain types of wizards can be game breaking. I tend to use a lot of house rules to balance wizards back instead of mixing up the badguys to negate his memorized spells. Wizards are op if they know what's coming, so you either need house rules or random monsters in my opinion.
When playing D&D, I always assume that what's in the PHB is dead common. If there's stuff in there the players can break - I fix it so it doesn't destroy the campaign.
Anything not in the PHB enters the campaign at my discretion. I like the Wizard's Spell Compendium from 2e, there's not much that's not in there, and it's got a rarity system that I use with fair results.
I think a better way of implementing components is to have them as enhancements to the spell. So if you want to go to the time and trouble of getting them, then they have a concrete spell effect. They still vanish after the spell is cast, but the MU can have a bag of tricks up his sleeve for special occasions. For normal casting he needs nothing.
So, for example - Spider Climb, Component: Giant Spider web, Cost: 100 GPs, Effect: Lvl+2 for Duration purposes
Magic Missile, Component: +1 Bolt or Arrow per missile required upto your maximum, Cost (?dunno off top of head), Effect: +1 damage per missile
You could come up with several per spell and come up with super combos that'd cost you a fortune but be quite funky.
I've done this with Rolemaster spells in the past and called them catalysts.
I usually say that if you go to the trouble of actually using components, it effectively "maximizes" the spell effects; max duration, max damage, etc. (still based on your level of course). That way if the player WANTS to take the trouble to buy and track his components, there's a payoff, but if not, magic still works like normal.
And you HAVE to have a spell book and you HAVE to scribe new spells in it, not just automatically learn them at every level. You can cast without a book, but only memorized spells, and if you DON'T have your book after you fire off your spell - sorry, Charlie.
Scrolls are extremely valuable - not just as one-shots, but for the party's mages to use them to scribe in their books. They'll even write down ones far above their current level so they'll have them once they get there, that kinda thing.
Quote from: One Horse Town;492647I think a better way of implementing components is to have them as enhancements to the spell. So if you want to go to the time and trouble of getting them, then they have a concrete spell effect. They still vanish after the spell is cast, but the MU can have a bag of tricks up his sleeve for special occasions. For normal casting he needs nothing.
So, for example - Spider Climb, Component: Giant Spider web, Cost: 100 GPs, Effect: Lvl+2 for Duration purposes
Magic Missile, Component: +1 Bolt or Arrow per missile required upto your maximum, Cost (?dunno off top of head), Effect: +1 damage per missile
You could come up with several per spell and come up with super combos that'd cost you a fortune but be quite funky.
I've done this with Rolemaster spells in the past and called them catalysts.
Nice, but that brings us back to the original problem: book keeping of the components. Players will just buy in bulk, same as before.
The incentive will quickly lead this to be the "standard" - not having the components will be seen as inferior and to be avoided, since it's not the maximum potential allowable by the spell.
In fact this might be worse, because now you have to keep track of what is essentially two different versions of the same effect.
Quote from: Blackhand;492653Nice, but that brings us back to the original problem: book keeping of the components. Players will just buy in bulk, same as before.
The incentive will quickly lead this to be the "standard" - not having the components will be seen as inferior and to be avoided, since it's not the maximum potential allowable by the spell.
In fact this might be worse, because now you have to keep track of what is essentially two different versions of the same effect.
Well, you could make the components as difficult to acquire as you like. Maybe you need a sample of a web spun by Lolth - good luck buying that in bulk. I'd probably treble duration for that. ;)
We typically only require some of the costlier ingredients - incense, pearls, gemstones and such - and avoid the rest. But it turns out there is something in enforcing component-hunting to a 't' if the time required to do it doesn't disrupt the game. It adds a layer of challenge to playing a M-U.
Quote from: Blazing Donkey;492583BTW, here's an example of a really elaborate spell component:
Repulsion - 7th level MU spell (PH pg 86)
"The material component of this spell is a pair of small magnetized iron bars attached to two small canine statuettes, one ivory and one ebony."
Amazingly enough, this precise component has come up in the 3.0 FR game I am playing in. We were in Bumfuck, Calimshan (~large enough city to have a significant bazaar, but bit of a backwater), and when the party wizard tried to obtain something like that, you could just sense the merchants' mouths dropping with a silent "WTF is this guy smoking?!"
Afterwards, he was very happy he could obtain components for
globe of invulnerability and
lightning bolt.
Some good points raised in this thread....
I have used spell components before. Like the encumbrance rules, I have found the rules for components to be tedious to track and usually not that rewarding in terms of game play.
Nah, I don't use them. Mages are already difficult enough to play in my fantasy settings, adding spell components to the mix would just make them unplayable.
Regards,
David R
For me it depends on the game.
My homebrew fantasy setting doesn't really have spell components for the most part (though the weather and location can be important).
But if I were doing something more fairy tale/horror I'd include them and make them mandatory... though creative proxies are allowed... and witches/warlocks usually have a crew of minions to send out looking for the stuff.
Also, requiring components sets up all sorts of scenario possibilities for finding some rare substance... including stealing it from some other magician (or retrieving stuff another magician stole from you).
I do.
There are rules for casting without in our system, but if the spell calls for them, it is assumed they are part of the focus.
Wonderful way to keep the party gold supply in check.
(1) Expensive components can create difficult decisions, so I'll use those without exception. (If there's a GP cost, you've got to pay for the component.)
(2) For generic components, I've always just assumed that there's a "generic spell component bag" which is being maintained by the PC. It only becomes an issue if the PC is separated from their spell component bag (which has frequently forced out-of-the-box thinking and creative spell use).
(3) I have had some decent mileage with powerful spell components that provide a bonus. Like, say, a properly prepared red dragon's tooth can give your fire-based spells +1d6 damage. Making them a bennie makes them more interesting to the PCs.
Quote from: One Horse Town;492647I think a better way of implementing components is to have them as enhancements to the spell. So if you want to go to the time and trouble of getting them, then they have a concrete spell effect. They still vanish after the spell is cast, but the MU can have a bag of tricks up his sleeve for special occasions. For normal casting he needs nothing.
I really like that idea and am going to henceforth incorporate it in my games.
Quote from: Simlasa;492669But if I were doing something more fairy tale/horror I'd include them and make them mandatory... though creative proxies are allowed... and witches/warlocks usually have a crew of minions to send out looking for the stuff.
Also, requiring components sets up all sorts of scenario possibilities for finding some rare substance... including stealing it from some other magician (or retrieving stuff another magician stole from you).
This, a thousand times this. It helps that I'm running a fairy tale/horror thing right now of course.
In the past, I've vacillated between "only need components for big/weird stuff", "you're assumed to have most components", and "keeping track of components is mandatory." It works any of those ways.
However, it does change the tone of things. And in a campaign where I require components, I do allow substitutions - from sub-par to better-than-usual.
Quote from: VectorSigma;492735And in a campaign where I require components, I do allow substitutions - from sub-par to better-than-usual.
'So what could go wrong if I substitute bull testicles for badger testicles in my fertility spell?'
I use them as do my players. It is a rule that I implement to all my players...
I love 'em! They are built in plot hooks! :D
Need bat guano for the castle mages for an upcoming barbarian horde attack? Well, unfortunately the bat cave fertilizer wagon has not arrived yet for the routine new crop planting. What is holding them up? Can we get at least enough guano in time before the castle siege? See... exciting! And that's just merely poo!
But then, I also love the bookkeeping -- especially since I force the players to do it and I check periodically. Yes Virginia, I'm like the IRS, I do PC audits. They're fabulous good fun. :p Encumbrance issues enforce renting mules, wagons, teamster hirelings, etc. which means spending money and enmeshing my players deeper into the game world's society (whether they like it or not, mwa ha ha!). Weapon/armor repair and spell components do a similar thing. And all that maintenance can be flipped over from being "negative" (GM stick) into opportunities (GM dangling a carrot) or, even better, new PC goals (player initiative).
All in all it allows me to be lazy without having to retread another bad story cliche ("We gotta save the world? Again?"). It's the same reason I encourage investments into bases of operations instead of wanderers with "infinite bags of holding." One just plays out more interestingly for me and those I run games for.
Quote from: Simlasa;492741'So what could go wrong if I substitute bull testicles for badger testicles in my fertility spell?'
LOL
I have had a few players try to make Potions and for those I definitely require them to get all the components (usually I'm the one who has to make up the list of components they need).
If the players substitute something in the recipie with something else, there are usually unpleasant and hilarious consequences...
QuoteSo what could go wrong if I substitute bull testicles for badger testicles in my fertility spell?'
QuoteI use them as do my players. It is a rule that I implement to all my players..
Heh. Thought this was a direct reply, first time. Hur hur.
Spell Components are in place to bring down the power level of the spells. If you aren't using them, then you are allowing the higher power spells to be used at a level much lower than their power level should be used.
Quote from: greylond;493030Spell Components are in place to bring down the power level of the spells. If you aren't using them, then you are allowing the higher power spells to be used at a level much lower than their power level should be used.
This is true but most of the components are mundane and most D&Dish worlds have a high enough level of magic that there would be established suppliers of the common, low level components. Most players would diligently keep track of buying and never lack components except in unusual circumstances. The net effect is a bunch of bookkeeping that has no effect on play. Most players want immersion of the heroic aspects of play over the tedious aspects.
As a general rule, if there is an obvious optimal solution, rather than making players jump through hoops, I assume they are competent and move on instead of wasting time. I think a key aspect of roleplaying is decision making with partial information. If there the costs/payoffs of a decision are such that one outcome is a no brainer, it's not really a decision worth making.
It's only when there are real tradeoffs that a decision is worth considering. Like suppose the group is going on a long expedition where every bit of weight matters and a given spell's components weigh a pound per casting. Or the cost of components is non-negligible for the wealth of the character so it actually affects their spending decisions.
Quote from: Nicephorus;493050This is true but most of the components are mundane and most D&Dish worlds have a high enough level of magic that there would be established suppliers of the common, low level components. Most players would diligently keep track of buying and never lack components except in unusual circumstances. The net effect is a bunch of bookkeeping that has no effect on play. Most players want immersion of the heroic aspects of play over the tedious aspects.
As a general rule, if there is an obvious optimal solution, rather than making players jump through hoops, I assume they are competent and move on instead of wasting time. I think a key aspect of roleplaying is decision making with partial information. If there the costs/payoffs of a decision are such that one outcome is a no brainer, it's not really a decision worth making.
It's only when there are real tradeoffs that a decision is worth considering. Like suppose the group is going on a long expedition where every bit of weight matters and a given spell's components weigh a pound per casting. Or the cost of components is non-negligible for the wealth of the character so it actually affects their spending decisions.
I don't know.
I play a very social-heavy, roleplay game. (it is also not D&D, which most of this thread seems to rest upon.) So the procuring of the rare and semi-rare items that are needed for spells is part of the social aspect of the game, as well as part of the balancing act for keeping.
Quote from: LordVreeg;493097I don't know.
I play a very social-heavy, roleplay game. (it is also not D&D, which most of this thread seems to rest upon.) So the procuring of the rare and semi-rare items that are needed for spells is part of the social aspect of the game, as well as part of the balancing act for keeping.
It also depends on the assumptions of the world. D&D usually winds up as a modern market driven world in medieval costume, with magic filling in as tech. But if magic is rare and the flow of goods is quite limited, then procuring anything out of the ordinary will take effort. But there is still the practical aspect that it's a game where we spend hours simulating weeks of the characters' lives and we can't focus on everything they do so we have to choose what kind of game to have.
Kind of what I was saying before. Any rare/costly components or foci, those are worth explaining and expending resources.
The mundane or weird but easy to get components, they're occasionally interesting if they can be used in interesting ways, otherwise they're only interesting in a scarcity situation.
So, I want rules where scarcity situations can arise, but proper planning can mitigate those situations - maybe not entirely, but somewhat. I want to keep the individual weird components, and certainly the rare/costly ones are intended to be a limiting factor on certain spells.
Stick Golem (http://celtricia.pbworks.com/w/page/14956361/Stick%20Golem)
See, we also use spell success rules, and not only do we have components, and rules that allow a reduced success% without them, but many spells, we allow the caster to increase their success% by spending more.
I was brought up on B/E D&D so no, I don't usually use components. I do however like the idea from Majestic Wilderlands of components being used for making rituals, and them just being a generic cost (ie. 10gp for "components" for any 1st level spell).
RPGPundit