if I cast a spell and choose for it to come through my familiar, would I still have to do verbal and somatic components? what about material? would people be able to see the casting? could it still be counter spelled?
From the Sorcerer class page,
Because you’re a sorcerer, you can usually replace material components with somatic components, so you don’t need to use a material component pouch.
I interpret this to mean that whenever a sorcerer casts a spell that requires a material component (without a cost), then they can choose to replace that component with a somatic one. From the listing on spell components, this means that the spell would keep the manipulate trait, but one important thing would change: the spell no longer requires you to have a hand free to retrieve and manipulate the material component.
Now, if a fighter takes the sorcerer dedication, then from the dedication page,
You cast spells like a sorcerer.
I interpet this to mean that the fighter also gains the ability to replace any material component with a somatic component, and that as a consequence the fighter can cast sorcerer spells without needing a hand free.
Is my interpretation correct?
While holding a quarterstaff, can you cast an immediate action spell with somatic components (such as Saving Finale) while ending his turn holding the staff in two hands?
I have a player that claims that you’re able to, the logic being that you can switch to from a two-handed to holding it in one hand as a free action and you can take "one or more free actions while taking another action normally" according to D20pfsrd and switching from a two-handed to a one-handed stance is a free action according to FAQ.
The logic behind not being able to do it is that you’re not able to begin casting the spell if you don’t have a free hand.
The Kraken, according to the monster manual, can "Understand Abyssal, Celestial, Infernal, And Primordial But Can’t Speak, Telepathy 120 Ft." The Kraken also does not have hands. It seems as if the Kraken can barely cast any spells at all. Can these factors be somehow overcome or explained away, ideally whilst staying within the basic 5e rules?
The Guardian model described in the Arcane Armor feature of the Armorer Artificer includes "Thunder Gauntlets":
Each of the armor’s gauntlets counts as a simple melee weapon while you aren’t holding anything in it…
If the Artificer holds tools for a material component of a spell, the description above doesn’t apply. However, if the armor itself is used as the focus (assuming it’s an Infused Item), the Artificer is effectively holding a weapon in each hand.
To deal with this, must the Artificer have taken the Warcaster feat (to allow performing the somatic component of a spell while holding a weapon)? Or can the Thunder Gauntlets be considered "sheathed" when not attacking with them?
(Note: All Artificer spellcasting requires a material component, so performing a somatic-only spell is not an concern.)
I was thinking of making a character that has no hands, and was wondering if there’s any way to get around somatic components of spells. I made a list of all the spells that dont have somatic components, and they’re not that great, mostly.
In Dungeons & Dragons, many sentient beings or devices could learn spells &/or rituals. But who is able to perform somatic components normally done by a humanoid of 3′ to 6′ height? Previously StackExchange has suggested this is up to the DM – is such a ruling sufficient here?
- Oozes: ambulatory… possibly with pseudopods – is this enough detail?
- Fae: if only 3" tall (6-7 cm) are their hands still large enough?
- Magic items / animated parts: would an animate embossed cameo within a ring, necklace or coin be enough?
- Sentient / Awakened creatures: octopi, trees, wolves or squirrels: do paws, branches & tentacles count?
- Do gesturing images within mirrors (possibly up to full humanoid size) also count?
- Handicapped: how many fingers/thumbs can one lose and still cast spells?
- Is giving this ability to illusions, be they permanent, programmed or projected, a logical yet terrible precedent?
Obviously these are all answered just by knowing how much one needs move to trigger somatic components. I cannot find this answer, even in previous versions of D&D.
As stated in the title, I’ve read about casting spells with somatic component with two-handed weapons here.
The thing is that the Xanathar’s warlock invocation [Improved Pact Weapon] says that you can treat a weapon as a spellcasting focus. So the thing is, could I cast a spell of that type (fireball) with my two-handed crossbow?.
Thank you in advance.
The War Caster feat (PHB, p. 170) allows a player to avoid the somatic requirement of spells when casting. However, since you can drop a weapon for free and then pick it up as a free interaction, you can completely avoid the somatic requirement while still keeping a weapon equipped at the end of your turn.
Action economy used as follows:
- Drop weapon (free)
- Cast somatic spell (1 Action)
- Pick up weapon (Movement/free one-object interaction)
War Caster does have some additional perks, but considering other Feats (like Resilient) exist, War Caster seems almost useless.
I’ve discussed this with fellow players, and the consensus is that doing this works within the RAW, but it’s also silly to abuse the action economy in this way.
Is there a consensus on whether this sort of abuse of the action economy is allowed (i.e. not simply up to the DM) when using RAW?
Example: Wizard is silenced. He wants to cast a spell from a scroll. The spell normally requires a verbal and somatic component. Can he cast it?