I would consider foci (aside from holy symbols for a divine caster) to be a form of material component, just one that isn't consumed.
So, I'd say it does eliminate the need for non valuable foci.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Focuses are not material components. That is why the rules differentiate them. Eschew Materials won't remove the need for the focus.
Focuses are not material components. That is why the rules differentiate them. Eschew Materials won't remove the need for the focus.
This. Eschew materials only affects material components. Not Foci. Though, luckily you only need one foci as it is not consumed.
I do believe foci are covered by Eschew Materials.
If Eschew Materials does not cover unpriced foci, then Ultimate Equipment has an error in its Sorcerer's Kit. That kit does not include a spell component pouch, even though a number of common sorcerer spells of levels 0 and 1 have focus components and thus would require them if Eschew Materials does not cover foci.
Then again, the Summoner's Kit also lacks a spell component pouch even though summoners do not get Eschew Materials by default.
Eschew materials does not cover Foci. the feat specifically says Material component. A focus is something else. Bolded references below.
For example contingency requires a Verbal, Somatic, material, and Focus. For sake of argument i'm ignoring the fact that the focus is above 1gp. lets just pretend that it's 1 copper instead.
the thing with the M is the only thing Eschew Materials covers. It does not cover, Somatic, Verbal, or Focus. There are other feats for those things.
It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Eschew Materials:
You can cast many spells without needing to utilize minor material components.
Benefit: You can cast any spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less without needing that component. The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1 gp, you must have the material component on hand to cast the spell, as normal.
Contingency
School evocation; Level sorcerer/wizard 6
CASTING
Casting Time at least 10 minutes; see text
Components V, S, M (quicksilver and an eyelash of a spell-using creature), F (ivory statuette of you worth 1 Copper (price changed for demonstration purposes)
EFFECT
Range personal
Target you
Duration 1 day/level (D) or until discharged...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am certain that Eschew Materials covers foci.
While it is true that an overly literal interpretation of the rules does not allow foci to be covered, it is also true that of all the sorcerers in the NPC Codex not a single one is carrying a spell component pouch, yet most of them cast mage armor before combat as well as other spells which require foci.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It may have been the intent to cover foci, but the RAW says it doesn't.
It's not being overly literal to interpret "material components" to only mean material components. It is a distinct game term from focus, after all.
Let's remember that sorcerers have Eschew Materials as a bonus feat. Doesn't change the fact that foci are not listed, however.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lakesidefantasy, here are the relevant quotes:
Eschew Materials
You can cast many spells without needing to utilize minor material components.
Benefit: You can cast any spell with a material component costing 1 gp or less without needing that component. The casting of the spell still provokes attacks of opportunity as normal. If the spell requires a material component that costs more than 1 gp, you must have the material component on hand to cast the spell, as normal.
Nothing in Eschew Materials about ignoring a Focus component.
Components
A spell’s components explain what you must do or possess to cast the spell. The components entry in a spell description includes abbreviations that tell you what type of components it requires. Specifics for material and focus components are given at the end of the descriptive text. Usually you don’t need to worry about components, but when you can’t use a component for some reason or when a material or focus component is expensive, then the components are important.
Verbal (V): A verbal component is a spoken incantation. To provide a verbal component, you must be able to speak in a strong voice. A silence spell or a gag spoils the incantation (and thus the spell). A spellcaster who has been deafened has a 20% chance of spoiling any spell with a verbal component that he tries to cast.
Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.
Material (M): A material component consists of one or more physical substances or objects that are annihilated by the spell energies in the casting process. Unless a cost is given for a material component, the cost is negligible. Don’t bother to keep track of material components with negligible cost. Assume you have all you need as long as you have your spell component pouch.
Focus (F): A focus component is a prop of some sort. Unlike a material component, a focus is not consumed when the spell is cast and can be reused. As with material components, the cost for a focus is negligible unless a price is given. Assume that focus components of negligible cost are in your spell component pouch.
Divine Focus (DF): A divine focus component is an item of spiritual significance. The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character’s faith. The divine focus for a druid or a ranger is a sprig of holly, or some other sacred plant.
If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).
Nothing in the Components section that indicates a Focus is the same as a Material Component.
Unless you can show somewhere that Foci are the same as Material Components then Eschew Materials does not allow you to bypass Foci.
I admit, the rules are the rules, but by the same token and a purely literal reading of the rules a sorcerer without the requisite foci cannot cast spells that require them, therefore none of the sorcerers in the NPC Codex can cast mage armor as well as other spells listed in their stat blocks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I admit, the rules are the rules, but by the same token and a purely literal reading of the rules a sorcerer without the requisite foci cannot cast spells that require them, therefore none of the sorcerers in the NPC Codex can cast mage armor as well as other spells listed in their stat blocks.
I have seen wizard NPC statblocks with no component pouch. Sometimes things get overlooked. Actually I only know of about 1 wizard, in any official adventure I have ran that had a spell component pouch listed, and I can't even recall which one that was.
So not having the component listed in an NPC statblock is not an indicator of a rule.
I am sure there are a few statblock that call for spells requiring expensive spell components(more than one GP), but that component is not in the statblock.
Many GM's just handwave it just like they would for someone with a component pouch.
The way to fix this would be to change the feat so that it works just like the component pouch or just say the sorcerer does not require any focus that cost less than ___. ____ will likely be 1 gp.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It may have been the intent to cover foci, but the RAW says it doesn't.
It's not being overly literal to interpret "material components" to only mean material components. It is a distinct game term from focus, after all.
On the other paw, foci definitely seem to be a subset of Material Components.
While a strict reading of the rules tells us that foci do not count as material components, I think the intent is that sorcerers can cast spells "from the blood" as it were.
Focuses are pretty similar to material components, in that both are found in the spell component pouch, both are physical materials.
Also, note the feat False Focus. It uses the same language as Eschew Materials, but it seems that it was meant to replace foci as well. Or at least that is what I read the flavor as. Since it is hard to impersonate a priest if you sill need to fiddle with bits of leather.
So: I think that the intent of Eschew Materials and False Focus is that they are both there to replace all material/foci components that are not there for balance pourposes.
Wow, I was not expecting that not a single wizard in the NPC Codex is listed with a spell component pouch.
Regardless, Senko, I never give my sorcerers spell component pouches and I have never experienced a sorcerer unable to cast mage armor and the like because they didn't have the requisite foci.
I may be wrong, but I believe the vast mojority of players consider foci to fall under Eschew Materials. If you follow the advice found here, and take the strict rules interpretation, you may find youself in the minority on this issue.
On the other hand, I may have just found myself in the minority here.
The advice here is not to follow the strict rules interpretation. We are just saying what the rule is. I don't know of anyone that runs it that way however.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, I was not expecting that not a single wizard in the NPC Codex is listed with a spell component pouch.
Regardless, Senko, I never give my sorcerers spell component pouches and I have never experienced a sorcerer unable to cast mage armor and the like because they didn't have the requisite foci.
I may be wrong, but I believe the vast mojority of players consider foci to fall under Eschew Materials. If you follow the advice found here, and take the strict rules interpretation, you may find youself in the minority on this issue.
On the other hand, I may have just found myself in the minority here.
This is the Rules forum. The only correct answers here are the actual rules. And by the actual rules, focuses are not material components, and therefore Eschew Materials has no effect on them.
Yeah, it's pretty well covered that focus components are not material components.
In my games, you need the focus even if you have Eschew Materials, per the RAW.
While a strict reading of the rules tells us that foci do not count as material components, I think the intent is that sorcerers can cast spells "from the blood" as it were.
Focuses are pretty similar to material components, in that both are found in the spell component pouch, both are physical materials.
Also, note the feat False Focus. It uses the same language as Eschew Materials, but it seems that it was meant to replace foci as well. Or at least that is what I read the flavor as. Since it is hard to impersonate a priest if you sill need to fiddle with bits of leather.
So: I think that the intent of Eschew Materials and False Focus is that they are both there to replace all material/foci components that are not there for balance pourposes.
RAW, False Focus won't let you skip on Foci either, but then that's not why it's good anyway. Everyone should just spend the 5 (or 25 if your paranoid like me) on the Spell Component Pouch(es).
It's really a question of attention to details.
A given character will certainly go to the extra trouble of providing herself with the inexpensive material focus needed to cast important spells. A given player, however, will probably not dig deep enough into the minutiae of their spell list to actually write down in their list of equipment a small scrap of boiled leather.
Do you require players to track their rations, waterskins and other mundane expenses or risk accidentally dying of hunger and thirst? This is a similar example.
So, even though the feat "eschew materials" doesn't explicitly cover focii, it seems reasonable to assume that the character knows her magical requirements sufficiently to provide herself with the requisite (inexpensive) focii to cast her spells.
Anything else is anal retentive behaviour on the part of the DM in question.
Do you require players to track their rations, waterskins and other mundane expenses or risk accidentally dying of hunger and thirst?
You mean you don't do this? But it's in the RAW, even if only in the form of the Cost of Living rules.
If my players's characters aren't paying for their lively hood, or using magic/Survival skills to meet their needs, they're gonna' die.
|
Just to clarify this came up recently where a Dm ruled eschew materials didn't cover focuses whereas I've always considered it did since they're a material component even if they're not a "material component". I've no intention if arguing with the dm on this (their game, their rules) I just wanted to see how the larger community interpreted this. Seems like people are on both sides of the fence as to the issue. Still I think I'll keep using it to cover foci in my games. I can't see it making a big difference if eschew materials also illuminates things like a piece of cured leather and it seems a little silly to imagine a sorcery carrying around a foci pouch. On the other hand I'll definitely have to include this in my house rules to tell the players at the start section just in case I have someone who plays the other way.
|
|
Do you require players to track their rations, waterskins and other mundane expenses or risk accidentally dying of hunger and thirst?You mean you don't do this? But it's in the RAW, even if only in the form of the Cost of Living rules.
If my players's characters aren't paying for their lively hood, or using magic/Survival skills to meet their needs, they're gonna' die.
Ever tried giving a PC a food allergy? Wonder how long until the PC figured out they have a gluten intolerance...?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you require players to track their rations, waterskins and other mundane expenses or risk accidentally dying of hunger and thirst?You mean you don't do this? But it's in the RAW, even if only in the form of the Cost of Living rules.
If my players's characters aren't paying for their lively hood, or using magic/Survival skills to meet their needs, they're gonna' die.
P1:"I'm going to attack the orc with my sword."
DM:"Okay, roll your attack with a -2 penalty."P1:"What, why?"
DM:"You're dehydrated, you haven't said you were going to drink anything this whole game."
P2: "I'm going to sneak around the orcs to attack from behind next round"
DM: "Okay, roll stealth with a -4. You haven't changed or washed your clothes in a week and stink terribly."
P3: "I'll cast Bless."
DM: "You can't, you're unconscious because you didn't specify that you were breathing."
Hmm, what about monstrous creature who cast sorcerer spells? Faerie dragon, spells known: silent image, focus (bit of fleece). Are you guys ruling that faerie dragons are flying around with material component pouches for their foci?
No, just like NPC wizards don't even have spell component pouches. It is just handwaved.
Do you require players to track their rations, waterskins and other mundane expenses or risk accidentally dying of hunger and thirst?You mean you don't do this? But it's in the RAW, even if only in the form of the Cost of Living rules.
If my players's characters aren't paying for their lively hood, or using magic/Survival skills to meet their needs, they're gonna' die.
Maybe at low levels, but later in the game no. The money, time, and storage needed to have "more than enough" is going to make running out of supplies basically a non-factor. I do track arrows because I have run out before and I know how annoying it can be to not have them, and it can be a game changer until more are found.
I personally believe that eschew materials is supposed to simply make you not need a component pouch, so i'd have to say it does cover foci.
I prefer the:
P1: "I'm going to attack the orc with my sword."
DM: "Ok, roll your attack with a -2 penalty because you haven't said that you've used the bathroom all day, and you really, really have to go."
P1:Did somebody cast Irresistible Dance on you?
P2:No, I just really need to go. Hurry up the fight!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is interesting how many people are using statements like 'believe' when this is the rules forum.
RAW: As shown in this post Eschew Materials does not cover Foci.
House Rule: Eschew Materials does cover Foci.
This is the rules forum, if you are going to go against RAW when RAW is this clear at least please state that you are doing so as a house rule when you state your opinion.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is interesting how many people are using statements like 'believe' when this is the rules forum.
RAW: As shown in this post Eschew Materials does not cover Foci.
House Rule: Eschew Materials does cover Foci.
This is the rules forum, if you are going to go against RAW when RAW is this clear at least please state that you are doing so as a house rule when you state your opinion.
RAW and RAI are two types of rules paradaigms. RAW is easy to identify, if we were all here on the Rules Forum answering only RAW questions there would be very few threads and fewer comments.
RAI is much harder to narrow down, if we could get Devs on here regularly answering RAI questions it would be much easier but since we don't we debate them.When debating RAI, it is often a good idea to preface your interpretation with "I believe..." unless you are intimately familiar with the Dev that wrote it.
RAW has already been answered, only thing left is to debate RAI. If someone doesn't wish to debate the RAI with us they are under no obligation to do so.
|
It is interesting how many people are using statements like 'believe' when this is the rules forum.
RAW: As shown in this post Eschew Materials does not cover Foci.
House Rule: Eschew Materials does cover Foci.
This is the rules forum, if you are going to go against RAW when RAW is this clear at least please state that you are doing so as a house rule when you state your opinion.
So, am I to assume that in your games, Faerie dragons and naga are flying and slithering around with component pouches for their respective foci?
You know, because RAW?
I dont see why not. I think it would be cool to see them with fanny packs. Although the Naga doesnt exactly HAVE a fanny but I'm sure they'd work things out.
It is interesting how many people are using statements like 'believe' when this is the rules forum.
RAW: As shown in this post Eschew Materials does not cover Foci.
House Rule: Eschew Materials does cover Foci.
This is the rules forum, if you are going to go against RAW when RAW is this clear at least please state that you are doing so as a house rule when you state your opinion.
So, am I to assume that in your games, Faerie dragons and naga are flying and slithering around with component pouches for their respective foci?
You know, because RAW?
I have already answered this. It is an oversight just like NPC wizards not having spell component pouches at all. The feat needs to be errata'd for the rules to work correctly just like those NPC statblocks or those wizards cant really cast all of those spells.
Or perhaps wizards of non-humanoid races don't necessarily cast magical spells in exactly the same way, and some don't have need of foci. A naga is a lot more inherently magical than a human.
Not according to the rules they aren't.
And perhaps Sorcerers don't necessarily cast magical spells in exactly the same way as Wizards, and don't have need of foci. A Sorcerer is a lot more inherently magical than a Wizard.
Not according to the rules they aren't.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...If focuses were material components, then they would M (material component), with the added note they they are not consumed.. They are F (focus)...a completely different type of component than material components.Are there Material Components that aren't consumed when used?
And if there are, how are they then not a Foci at that point?
That's my point. If a focus was a material component, then it would be classified as such, and would simply have a note saying that it was not consumed. But no such material components exist.
As such, the ability to ignore material components does NOT let you ignore foci.