Is there an errata, official statement or whatever saying that Dragons can cast spells as if they had the Eschew Materials feat (or that they effectively have it as a bonus feat) anywhere?
Or must they go around with a pouch?
I am not sure if there is an official rule anywhere but just for thematic reasons i would go for dragons having the eschew materials as a bonus feat
Dragons cast spells as sorcerers, so it would follow that they would have eschew materials as a bonus feat as soon as they can cast spells. In older editions, they didn't need spell components, either.
Is there an errata, official statement or whatever saying that Dragons can cast spells as if they had the Eschew Materials feat (or that they effectively have it as a bonus feat) anywhere?
Or must they go around with a pouch?
I'm relatively sure dragons get spell progression as a sorcerer, but they're spells are spell like abilities. The "spells as a sor" thing is just so not every *insert dragon color here* have all of the exact same spells.
|
I'm relatively sure dragons get spell progression as a sorcerer, but they're spells are spell like abilities. The "spells as a sor" thing is just so not every *insert dragon color here* have all of the exact same spells.
Not really. They're so much "like a sorcerer" that addtional sorcerer levels stack with their inherent sorcerer ability. Also, the spell-like abilities have a caster level equal to the dragon's HD, where the sorcerer spells have a caster level based off the dragons's age category.
Just out of curiosity if the OP's question revolves around the Form of the Dragon line of spells
No, it is about Dragons as the creatures they are.
I'm relatively sure dragons get spell progression as a sorcerer, but they're spells are spell like abilities. The "spells as a sor" thing is just so not every *insert dragon color here* have all of the exact same spells.
Spells and spell-like abilities, altough similar, are two different things, and dragons have them both. Spells, in the case under discussion, are normal spells that require all their components to be cast, unless otherwise specified.
As sorcereres they have eschew materials by default so there's no reason to list it as a monster feat.
Any monster that can cast spells from the list of a class but has only racial HD and not real levels of that class doesn't get any of the class features of that class (Eschew Materials as a bonus feat, in this case), unless otherwise noted. See Rakshasas, for example; they cast spells as Sorcerers but don't get Eschew Materials nor any bloodline feature. Or Solars, who cast like Clerics but don't get domain powers, Channel Energy or anything else.
I can't see anything in the books about Dragons getting Eschew Materials or any other kind of mention about a needlessness of material components. Add to it that I too recall in 3.5 edition (or maybe an older one) something saying that Dragons do not need low-price material components (altough at present I can't find where it was written in 3.5), and that's why I'm asking if any guy from the Paizo staff ever said a word about it.
Just out of curiosity if the OP's question revolves around the Form of the Dragon line of spellsNo, it is about Dragons as the creatures they are.
I'm relatively sure dragons get spell progression as a sorcerer, but they're spells are spell like abilities. The "spells as a sor" thing is just so not every *insert dragon color here* have all of the exact same spells.Spells and spell-like abilities, altough similar, are two different things, and dragons have them both. Spells, in the case under discussion, are normal spells that require all their components to be cast, unless otherwise specified.
As sorcereres they have eschew materials by default so there's no reason to list it as a monster feat.Any monster that can cast spells from the list of a class but has only racial HD and not real levels of that class doesn't get any of the class features of that class (Eschew Materials as a bonus feat, in this case), unless otherwise noted. See Rakshasas, for example; they cast spells as Sorcerers but don't get Eschew Materials nor any bloodline feature. Or Solars, who cast like Clerics but don't get domain powers, Channel Energy or anything else.
I can't see anything in the books about Dragons getting Eschew Materials or any other kind of mention about a needlessness of material components. Add to it that I too recall in 3.5 edition (or maybe an older one) something saying that Dragons do not need low-price material components (altough at present I can't find where it was written in 3.5), and that's why I'm asking if any guy from the Paizo staff ever said a word about it.
Eschew materials only covers spell components less than 1G, but not anything more expensive or foci. So even if they have the feat (or something mirroring it) they would still have to carry around pouches depending on which spells they chose.
However if I am correct (and I'm not saying I am) that would cover the need for them to carry anything and still have full "Casting"/spell like ability function.
Eschew materials only covers spell components less than 1G, but not anything more expensive or foci. So even if they have the feat (or something mirroring it) they would still have to carry around pouches depending on which spells they chose.
Indeed.
Having Eschew Materials (or any equivalent ability) would make them able to avoid only the expensive material-requiring spells (that for a hoard-lover creature should be a pain to use) and still have full spellcasting ability without having to go around with a pouch at their neck that (other than being a bit ugly and disharmonic to look at) if lost or stolen would limit their abilities.
The 3.5 Monster Manual had a section on "Spells", which was not included in the Pathfinder Bestiary. It said:
Spells
Sometimes a creature can cast arcane or divine spells just as a member of a spellcasting class can (and can activate magic items accordingly). Such creatures are subject to the same spellcasting rules that characters are, except as follows.A spellcasting creature that lacks hands or arms can provide any somatic component a spell might require by moving its body. Such a creature also does need material components for its spells. The creature can cast the spell by either touching the required component (but not if the component is in another creature’s possession) or having the required component on its person. Sometimes spellcasting creatures utilize the Eschew Materials feat to avoid fussing with noncostly components.
So, if the same rules are followed, a Dragon can have the components somewhere on its body (embedded in its hide, for instance), rather than having a spell component pouch as such.
Edit: The 3.5 Draconomicon claims that Dragons and other creatures with innate spellcasting do not need material components, citing the Monster Manual as its source. However, the MM actually says the opposite, as seen in the quote above. In any case, it seems that the writers of the Draconomicon, at least, thought Dragons shouldn't need material components.
The 3.5 Monster Manual had a section on "Spells", which was not included in the Pathfinder Bestiary. It said:
Spells
Sometimes a creature can cast arcane or divine spells just as a member of a spellcasting class can (and can activate magic items accordingly). Such creatures are subject to the same spellcasting rules that characters are, except as follows.A spellcasting creature that lacks hands or arms can provide any somatic component a spell might require by moving its body. Such a creature also does need material components for its spells. The creature can cast the spell by either touching the required component (but not if the component is in another creature’s possession) or having the required component on its person. Sometimes spellcasting creatures utilize the Eschew Materials feat to avoid fussing with noncostly components.
So, if the same rules are followed, a Dragon can have the components somewhere on its body (embedded in its hide, for instance), rather than having a spell component pouch as such.
Edit: The 3.5 Draconomicon claims that Dragons and other creatures with innate spellcasting do not need material components, citing the Monster Manual as its source. However, the MM actually says the opposite, as seen in the quote above. In any case, it seems that the writers of the Draconomicon, at least, thought Dragons shouldn't need material components.
You are completely technically correct.
However I never liked the "embedded in it's hide" thing. It annoys my sense of "realism." Yes I know, the irony is palpatable since we're talking about dragons.
I know we're talking about dragons and it can work however the DM wants. But how does the dragon keep his components from falling out from under a scale while he moves? What if his expensive spell component falls/oozes/is squeezed out of his scale while he's fighting and isnt available when he needs it? If I were a dragon I'd be concerned about such things. having a colossal creature have a spell component pouch makes more sense to me than "the component is wedged under his armpit scales." Perhaps expensive Foci are pined/pierced/glued under a scale somewhere, but not components which are consumed in the casting. It's just doesnt strike me as practical.
Again, It's your world I'm just pretending to be an elven wizard in it. thats my 2C
Quite frankly, I only worry about the rules for PCs and let the bestiary handle the rest, if the Bestiary says that dragons cast spells than they do so. It's not my problem to see if dragons are obeying the rules for PC's if the entry says they do it, they just do it. I generally go by the rule that Dragons define their own rules as the most magical creatures on the world. They're not bound by the same rules as mere mortals.
agreed.
Again, It's your world I'm just pretending to be an elven wizard in it. thats my 2C
Well, in my campaigns everybody essentially has a free "Eschew Materials" anyway. This is the Rules forum, though, so rules quotes seem more relevant than how things work in my world :)
Seems an aspect of this thread needs to be clarified (don't read this with harsh tones, it's just a clarification to make the thread stay on its rails): I'm not interested in how everyone deals on his own with draconic spellcasting or with any other thing. As Are said, this is the Rules Questions section, and I'm interested in written rules (wether in the published books or in the forums by someone from Paizo's game designers team) and the margin of interpretation that they may have in some cases.
Because, you know, in "my world" Dragons may be feral and stupid beasts with no spellcasting ability at all, or instead Godly Forces who can cast anything at will and with no component. But no one cares about my world.
Dragon, 2 wings, 2 arms, 2 legs, 1 head, 1 tail.
Question = Since Dragon have 2 arms, why would they need Eschew Materials feat ??
Yes, it would be nice. But they have arms, so they could carry a spell component pouch and use the contents, just like any other magic user.