This entry is part 1 in the series Some Arcane Assembly Required
Series Logo ATGMs 32 Some Arcane Assembly Required

I guess it was inevitable – sooner or later there was going to be a question that was simply too big for a single blog post in response. And, of course – because I normally break such up into multiple questions when necessary, in advance – it was going to be an article that snuck up on me when I wasn’t looking…

Ask the gamemasters

This question comes from GM Roy, who wrote:

“I need some inspiration to create cool names for spell components.

I have 5 [scales of rarity = Mike]:

  • Common (flesh, breath, water, dust)
  • Uncommon (earth from a cemetery, humanoid blood)
  • Rare (head of a Medusa, Minotaur’s horn, black dragon blood)
  • very Rare (Essence of the ghost of a mass murderer, Adamantium armor forged in hell by a celestial), and
  • Unique (The Tear of the ancient God of death, Essence of the Terrasque).

I need a lot of these, Where can I find some?”

The short answer, of course, is to create them yourself.

GM Roy hasn’t stated why he needs a lot of them, and there are some elements of his rarity scale that also merit closer examination. Some GMs don’t track spell components at all, so the question needs to be asked as a preliminary, “Why bother with spell components at all?”

Part One of this massive ATGMs response, “The Sales Pitch,” is intended to examine that question, and look at some of the other infrastructure questions like the rarity scale. Part Two, “Sourcing Parts,” will then look at principles for generating spell components to fill the various categories. And then, Part Three, “Tab A into Slot B,” will contain a number of examples (mostly from the Rarer end of the scale) and how Spell Components can become game rewards and plot points in their own right.

Contributors

IanG Avatar I’ve relied heavily on past discussions regarding D&D/PFRPG with Ian Gray and in D&D and the Zenith-3 campaign with Nick Deane for these comments. I tried to get together with them to solicit specific contributions before this article went to publication but we couldn’t seem to get the timing right over Christmas/New Year. Other players in both campaigns have also contributed here and there to the question, but those are dwarfed by these two contributions. On top of that, I did a fair amount of research on the net, in the process gaining contributions from a number of other GMs – some of whom may not have even heard of Campaign Mastery! I’ve been very careful to include links back to these sources everywhere that I’ve sourced contributions. Nick-Avatar

ATGMs-Mike

Spell Components – The Controversy

It doesn’t take much research to discover that spell components are one of the most controversial subjects out there, at least in terms of D&D / Pathfinder. Heck, people can’t even agree on what they are – though this is sometimes the result of defining them in terms of their possible origins, and failing to take into account the evolution in style and genre through successive generations of D&D. But before I can discuss them intelligently, I first have to know what I’m talking about (and so do you, or you won’t understand what I’m saying) – so exactly what are Spell Components?

In-Game

In-game, Spell Components are simple. They come in two varieties – “Material Components” which form part of the construction of energies known as a “Spell”, and a “Spell Focus” which is an item used to bind Verbal and/or Somatic and/or Material components and/or XP into the energy patterns known as a “Spell”. It’s impossible to get any more detailed without getting stuck down the blind alley of “What is Magic?”, a question that I might look into some other time.

But beyond the realm which contains the game, the “game world” if you will, there lies another realm, an insubstantial place of sights and sounds and mind, inhabited by shadowy projections of and extensions of figures alien to both the game plane of existence and the real world. Figures called “players” and “GMs” who are never present in the flesh, but who manipulate individuals within the game world as playthings and puppets, beings rarely visible to the inhabitants of the game, more powerful than Gods. And this Metagame Zone has its own reasons for things, its own rules. Within this zone, Spell Components are seen as something completely different.

Metagame I: Balance Mechanisms

Some think of Spell Components as mechanisms for the maintenance of some ethereal cosmic Balance, making some spells easier to cast than others, and forcing Mages and other spell-casting character classes to spend time obtaining the necessary components on a regular basis. This perception forces players to keep track of exactly what components a given individual has access to, because if they run out of the Material Component, the spell cannot be cast.

This is a lot of bookkeeping which can be a pain to keep track of. Nevertheless, in some instances, this is the correct interpretation, and hence spell components can be a metagame device employed to restrict the availability of certain spells, and to soak up character wealth. In the vast majority of cases, however, this metagame function doesn’t hold water, certainly not having enough substance to justify the effort required to track component usage.

The key to discerning which Spell components are considered justified by this function alone is an examination of the Metamagic Feat, “Eschew Material Component”. If the component can be rendered unnecessary by means of this Metamagic Feat, then that component is not included for reasons of “Game Balance”.

Metagame II: Flavor Content

Others view the fact that many of the spell components are relatively common as a means of imparting flavor to the spell-casting process, flavor with a determinable impact on the game world. The use of particular components can enable an enemy to deduce what spell is about to be cast, making counter-spells a practical consideration. Being clever and nimble, able to hide and/or disguise spell components thus confers a definite advantage in arcane combat or ritualized arcane duels. Spell components, and the way they are handled, can therefore be a reflection of the broader social context of the spell caster, and hence a way to bring that social context to life for the players who manipulate the inhabitants of the game world. To many GMs, this alone is enough to justify the existence of the trivial spell components – those not intended specifically as a balance mechanism.

Metagame III: In-Jokes

As one respondent to a discussion of the subject on the suggests, quoting from the Dungeonomicon (which is described by Treasure Tables, the precursor to Gnome Stew (and archived by the Gnomes), as “a lengthy thread on the WotC forums that attempts to justify, explain and tweak dungeons, along with a variety of other fantasy RPG staples”),

Material components are a joke. I’m not saying that they are metaphorically a joke in that they don’t act as a consistent or adequate limiting factor to spellcasting, I mean that they are actually a joke.

Material components are supposed to be “ha ha” funny. The fact that even after having this brought to your attention, you still aren’t laughing, indicates that this is a failed attempt at humor.

Most material components are based on technological gags, when you cast “scry” you are literally supposed to grab yourself a “specially treated” mirror, some wire, and some lemons – which is to say that you make a TV set to watch your target on and then power it with an archaic battery. When you cast “see invisibility” you literally blow talc all over the place, which of course reveals invisible foes. Casting “lightning bolt” requires you to generate a static charge with an amber rod and some fur, “tongues” requires that you build a little Tower of Babel, and of course “fireball” requires that you whip up some actual gunpowder. Get it? You’re making the effects MacGyver style and then claiming that it’s “magic” after the fact.

–excerpt from “Dungeonomicon”

Setting aside the fact that in-jokes don’t need to be funny (and often aren’t), I don’t agree with the above. Magic components may have started as an in-joke when the game was first created, but over successive generations of rules, the game slowly began to take itself more seriously just as did the hobby. While legacies of this aspect of the origins may linger and echo as a nod to the history of the game, this metagame perception makes two mistakes that are fatal to its argument.

First, it confuses the individual case with a collective description. This particular spells’ material component description may be a joke, but that doesn’t mean that the general principle or purpose of Spell Components is a joke, or is even included for no other reason than as a joke delivery system. And second, in most cases (if not all), it’s not necessary to actually make the effects “MacGyver style” to cast the spell, merely to have the components for doing so – a horse of an entirely different color.

Disturbingly, I find these comments excerpted on a number of d20 Wikis that purport to contain the rules of the game. This in turn demonstrates a problem that undermines the credibility of these sites as hosts and arbiters of the rules: not everything said by someone on a WOTC Forum is Canon (not even if said by a WOTC representative), and should not be treated that way. At best it can be a proposed interpretation. Errata are official, forum discussions are not (thought they may lead to something official). D&DWiki.org, I’m looking at you here, though you are far from alone, as a quick Google search for “Dungeonomicon” quickly demonstrates – and at least you told me where you were getting the content from, which puts you at least one half-step above those that don’t!

GMs can replace all the lingering silliness in specific spells’ components without affecting the central question one iota. Yet people persist in treating superficialities as substance. Specific Material Components may be in-jokes; Material Components in general may be jokes (as in “pathetic”), something that has not yet been determined by this article; but the general principle of whether or not spells should require material components is not a joke.

Metagame IV: Historical Legacy

A more balanced view thinks of Material Components as a Historical Legacy, a leftover from earlier editions of D&D, now reduced to the status of optional rules. But again, this confuses origins with purpose, and says nothing about why spells should have Material Components in a D&D / Pathfinder game.

Metagame V: Unnecessary Bookkeeping

If we accept that, with the exception of a restricted number of examples, Material Components do not effectively restrict the casting of spells (except under unusual circumstances), the question then becomes, are they really necessary at all? Certainly, several of my players would argue that they are a waste of time, because the materials in question are so common. Nor would they be alone, as the introduction of the Spell Component Pouch demonstrates. To Quote from the 3.5 Player’s Handbook, “A spellcaster with a Spell Component Pouch is assumed to have all the material components and focuses needed for spellcasting except those that have a specific cost, divine focuses, and focuses that wouldn’t fit in a pouch.” The Pathfinder Core Rules uses virtually the same descriptive language.

This seems a tacit acknowledgement that Spell Components are more bookkeeping trouble than they are worth; certainly, if a GM wants to employ Spell Components as anything more than flavor, he needs to either restrict or eliminate this standard item from the equipment list available for purchase.

The Spell Component Pouch

Is the Spell Component Pouch a golden bullet to explaining what Material Components are – and how they should be employed within the game system? Not really; it simply provides a mechanism by which the GM who wants to ignore Material Components can do so. Certainly the spells still list Material Components, which seems strange. Nowhere that I could find is there a discussion of Spell Components as an optional rule (thought I’m sure that someone will point it out to me if I have missed it), but neither is there any discussion of the implications of the Spell Component Pouch, or the suggestion that the GM might not want it to be available.

It’s almost as thought these parts of the rulebooks had different authors and editors and that there was little or no communications between them.

If you think about the Pouch as something with effectively unlimited quantities of the required material components, the only value to Material Components in game terms and from the GMs point of view is that if the pouch gets stolen, and if the spellcaster doesn’t have a spare, then he will be restricted to casting only those spells for which the components are at hand, or which do not require Material Components at all – unless he has the Eschew Material Components Metamagic Feat, of course.

There’s not much value there. These possibilities seem so remote that I can’t believe the authors of the respective game systems kept material components included as part of the spell descriptions simply to accommodate this improbable circumstance.

Inadequacies

There are other problems with the Spell Component Pouch concept that bear examination.

This is a non-magical item that can hold infinite amounts of anything that is described as a material component (with exceptions) provided that a singular example of the item in question is small enough to fit into the pouch. That seems blatantly unrealistic, and extraordinarily generous. There are no rules about replenishment, no rules about item availability, and the assumption seems to be made that unless it has been assigned a specific purchase price within the spell description, it is going to be quite commonplace.

There’s nothing about variations in the contents, just as there is nothing about variations in the spell components listed in most of the spell descriptions. As I said earlier, it seems to be about nothing but ignoring the need for most Material Components. Nor is there any description of how the Spell Component Pouch affects the daily routine of the mage.

And none of this is helped by the absence in the official rules of a simple listing of the spell components outside of the spell descriptions. (There’s one ).

There is another effect, too – the existence of this item severely undermines the metamagic feat, Eschew Material Component. Why would you bother taking this ability when there is such an effective Mundane solution at hand?

Fixing The Concept

Let’s contemplate the benefits of “fixing” the concept of a Spell Components Pouch for a moment.

  • Greater Realism.
  • Source Of Roleplay.
  • Material Components become relevant.
  • Spells can become more interesting through variations.
  • Daily routines are more than memorizing spells.
  • Characters Interact with the environment in more ways.
  • Eschew Material Component becomes valuable.

That’s a lot of benefit for one change (or group of related changes) to one item. Of course, these changes must also provide a way to avoid the most vexing complaints about Material Components, seeking out a half-way house between total irrelevance and the minutia of tracking every component individually. In other words, the Spell Components Pouch still has to represent a solution to the problem of tracking components.

Limited uses

The most obvious change is to confer limited uses on the pouch in some fashion that entails minimal paperwork.

There are four ways that I can see to achieve this. The first is to have the player keep a list of the spells that use Material Components that he’s cast since the pouch was last restocked. Each spell only has to be listed once, number of castings can be tracked with a check-mark. When the character reaches the limit defined by the GM, he no longer has the components needed for that spell.

The second approach is to use a list of all spells that the character knows – he’s got that anyway, or should – and simply make check-marks next to the spell each time it gets cast. Too many check-marks and the material components for that spell have been exhausted.

My third alternative is to have a limited number of slots in the pouch, which the character can fill to his specifications. If he wants to fill it with 20 Fireballs (or whatever the limit is), that’s up to him – but if he doesn’t list that spell amongst the pouch contents, he doesn’t have what he needs to cast the spell. Presumably, the pouch will be refilled to exactly the same specification each time. This is the most paperwork-intensive approach at first glance – but a second glance taking into account the presumption that pouch load-out will change only when needed makes it more practical.

And the fourth is that pouch slots hold one spell-level worth of Material Components, rather than one spells-worth. So a Fireball (3rd level spell) uses three slots. I don’t personally recommend this option, but it’s worth mentioning.

Pouch Variations

As soon as you get restrictions of the third variety, you enable variations. A mage might have a stealth load-out in a pre-packed pouch, and a fireball load-out, and a cold-weather load-out, and all sorts of variations. There is as much work entailed in doing these as the player wants to employ.

All this adds up to a second restricting factor on mages, but one that they can leverage in advance to at least some degree. They are already restricted in the number of spells they can memorize; now they need to keep track of how many spells they have material components for.

If this is deemed excessively burdensome on mage characters, you could abstract it further. Instead of holding only 3 fireballs, the pouch could contain the components for 6 Fire-spells, or 8 divination spells, or whatever. Organizations can be characterized by the load-outs they provide their members in standard spell pouches. As GM, you find yourself with a whole new tool for imparting color and characterization to the game world.

For me, that added bonus is enough of an advantage to make the third alternative preferable over the others, but others might prefer the elegance of one of the first two.

The Spell-casting process

This also introduces a new step into the spell-casting process – for prudent mages, anyway: looking around for naturally-occurring Material Components rather than drawing on the stockpile in the pouch.

This can introduce a new strategic element of choice into combats – if a location has the components for “Burning Hands” on tap, the mage can either use the lower-powered spell and not draw on his pouch, or can cast “Fireball”, eating into his stockpile of Material Components, for example. Spellcasting becomes more than point-and-shoot.

No GM who gives a character a firearm would also give them infinite ammunition. They might hand-wave the replenishment of expended ammo, but that’s as far as it goes. Why should mages expect to be treated any differently with their “ammunition”?

Exclusions

Exclusions should remain the same as now.

The Daily Routine

Some ingredients may be routinely available around camp. The player should specify which of these he is gathering routinely; these slots can be considered auto-refilling except under unusual circumstances that prevent the character from carrying out their normal routine.

Top-ups in town

This should be relatively trivial. Some components will be more expensive than others, but an average price will be good enough – 1 think something like 1sp per slot, others may think more. To some extent this decision is dependent on the social setting and on how you choose to limit the Spell Component Pouch.

However, the mage still needs to find somewhere that sells spell components, and make a shopping trip to that place, in order to refill his pouch. This can be a 30-second almost-handwaved encounter, or it can be a way for the GM to give information to the players about anything from the local economy to local gossip.

The Spell Component Pouch as a plot device

On top of that, the Pouch itself becomes available as a plot device beyond simply having it stolen. Shonky operators may try to skimp on Spell Components (while making it inobvious that they have done so – instead of a ball of bat guano, it might be cow dung with a thin layer of guano wrapped around it, for example). Some items might, from time to time, become rare and hard to find. Players can go exploring for a fresh source of something, or to recruit Dwarven Miners who can work a mine more efficiently / less expensively than humans. By focusing attention on material components just a little bit more, instead of erasing components from consideration, the Spell Component Pouch can become a rich source of new plotlines.

Spell Focus vs Material Component

The primary difference between a Spell Focus and a Material Component is that one gets used up by the spellcasting process while one does not. But another way of thinking about limitations on material components might be somewhere in between these “all or nothing” extremes. Why not Material Components that are good for three uses instead of one? Maybe costing four times as much (you always pay a premium for convenience) or more (and for rarity)?

When you introduce limitations, you introduce ways to exploit or evade those limitations. But there’s one big assumption, a general principle, that needs to be accepted before this can be applied: the substitution of material components.

The substitution of material components

So, why not? Why can’t anything flammable be considered the Material Component for a Fireball spell? This ties back into the concept of Pouch variant load-outs and specialist organizations offering specific Component Pouches.

Why can’t alternatives that aren’t so dramatic as the “rare upgrade” have minor effects? Again considering fireball, some could be slow-burning but harder to ignite, some might be more prone to splash while others produce a more tightly-confined flame – there’s as much room for spell variations as you can invest effort. And that, in turn, permits mages to customize a “signature” pattern of spell use, further individualizing them. All you need to do is assume that the characteristics of the component are analogous to the effects of the spell cast when using it as a component. The default listing remains the standard, of course, against which all variations are measured.

But for this to work, we need a scale of uniqueness, so that we compare only like with like, analogous with analogous. Anything falling outside the spell component’s place on that scale falls into the category of a “multi-use” material component.

Is That A Material Component In Your Pouch, or are you just unhappy to see me?

Spell component pouches can’t hold anything higher on the rarity scale than “Very Common” items except with GM permission, and certainly can’t be automatically or semi-automatically restocked even if they are so permitted. These components are increasingly hard-to-get, and that makes them increasingly unreasonable for such conveniences.

Component Rarity

And so, at last, I think I understand the context of GM Roy’s question. If it isn’t exactly what I’ve described, it will be something similar. He wants to populate a scale of rarity so that it can be utilized for modifying existing spells or creating/converting new ones. With that context understood, I can move on to considering the actual examples that Roy has offered, which is the only form of definition he’s provided as to each of the scales.

GM Roy’s Examples

GM Roy’s examples are great because they clearly articulate the general principle that he used, and show that he’s put some thought into the scale that he’s offering: General to Specific to Specific and Dangerous, and so on. For example, Water to Blood to Black Dragon Blood. While I like the general principles of increasing specificity, I think that there are problems with some of his actual choices, and that the jumps are a little too small in some cases and too high in others.

Let’s look (briefly) at each of his suggestions:

Common

James lists four examples of common Material Components: Flesh, Breath, Water, and Dust. I would include things like candles, salt, leather, copper, even silver, and – in the D&D / Pathfinder universe – Gold. Plus Wood, Nails, Salt, and so on. Anything, in fact, that you could reasonable expect to buy in any common country fair or marketplace from no-one in particular, or that the typical caster would have with him. Nothing on this list should cost more than a silver piece and most would cost less per spell use.

Common items would be readily replenished in the Spell Components Pouch.

Uncommon

There are only two examples of “Uncommon” material components provided, which makes it a shame that I have to disagree with one of them. James suggests “Earth From A Cemetery”, which is absolutely fine, but then suggests “Humanoid Blood”, which I would contend is no more rare than Flesh, even assuming that the latter includes animal skins, hides, or meat. To qualify for “Uncommon” status, the blood should have to be provided by an Uncommon creature.

Other things which I think fall into this category include Inhaled Breath, Spring Water, Swamp Water, Emerald or Ruby Dust or shards, the flesh or blood of an Uncommon creature, Platinum, and Spices. In addition, depending on the campaign setting, Tropical plants such as tomatoes or banana skins or bamboo might qualify.

I would also tend to include Bat Guano and Amber Sticks and the like, and candles or inks of a specific color, or candles that burn a specific color.

Uncommon elements can’t be replenished at just any marketplace, but would be generally available in larger towns and most cities – though there might be a small wait on some items.

Rare

James offers three examples of things that represent this category: The Head Of A Medusa, The Horn of a Minotaur, and the Blood of a Black Dragon.

I have no problem with any of these; all three are essentially body parts of Rare creatures. Some spells might permit the blood from any breed of Dragon, that’s up to the GM. I would also include gemstones of at least 5gp value, diamond dust, and possible Adamantium. If it’s dangerous to obtain, or if it’s reasonably freely available in an extremely unusual environment, such as Ethereal Vapor, or Breath of a Djinn, or Water from one of the Waterfalls of Elysium, I would categorize it as Rare.

Rare items include samples of anything that is inherently valuable and that aren’t waste products (that’s why ruby and emerald dust don’t fit this category) – (Diamonds are rare enough that even the dust falls into this category), and anything that is inherently dangerous to obtain, or that involves travel to other realms of existence.

Very Rare

There are two examples offered in this category, and I disagree with both. They seem too specific to fit into the very rare category. Take the first – “Essence Of The Ghost Of A Mass Murderer”. I would argue that the “Essence Of A Ghost” is rare enough and dangerous enough to obtain that this alone is enough to qualify for “Very Rare” status; tacking on the extra requirement that the ghost be that of a mass murderer elevates the component rarity into the “Unique” category.

Similarly, the second example offered, “Adamantium Armor Forged In Hell By A Celestial” also goes too far. “Adamantium forged in Hell” or “Adamantium Forged by a Celestial” would both be rare enough to qualify for this category; any substance that qualified in all three categories should be unique. Certainly, I don’t think Adamantium Armor forged in Hell by a Celestial is going to be any less uncommon than Leather Armor forged in Hell by a Celestial.

Also in this category would be items that would be inherently dangerous to obtain or hard to find AND which require extra-planar travel to retrieve. “Blood of a Celestial”, “Eyes Of A Demon”, and so on, would qualify. Also falling into this category are items with an inherent worth of more than about 50gp, such as larger gemstones, or gemstones carved with a particular scene or symbol. Toss in unusual items like a shrunken head or a cursed monkey’s paw, and the category begins to look complete.

Very rare items would however include for the first time anything that is metaphysical, the obtaining of which is entirely likely to be a side-quest at the very least, and possibly a full adventure. The Blood Of A Tree, the Heart of a Mountain, Bottled Lightning, and so on. Care is needed not to include anything that should reasonably be so rare as to be effectively unique, however – for example, “A bone used as anatomy by three individuals”. At first glance, this should fit the general criteria laid out for “Very Rare” but actual examples would be so unusual as to qualify each as unique.

Unique

I’ve already indicated the sort of thing that should be in the “Unique” category. But I have another general principle to expound: As a rule of thumb, “Very Rare” items will have at most one unknown attached to them. If you have to process something and the knowledge of how to perform that processing is known, but the location of the something is unknown, or if the location is known but the process needs to be discovered, it qualifies as a Very Rare item; “Unique” will refer to a specific individual of immense power (a God, A Demon Prince, a Devil Lord), whose location is unknown, or will involve two unknowns. What’s more, they should be reasonable items for any individual in question to posses.

Unfortunately, under these guidelines, there are problems for both the examples that James offers within this category. “The Tear Of The Ancient God Of Death” – assuming that there was an Ancient God Of Death (who is therefore not the current one), he’s not likely to be the type to go around shedding tears, unless that is specifically woven into his mythology (“he mourns for all those whose souls he releases from mortal confinement” for example). Since no such mythology is mentioned, taken at face value, this is an unreasonable item to demand.

The other suggestion is “Essence Of The Terrasque” – but this falls squarely into the definitions of Very Rare. So i don’t think it fits here, either. But that’s all right, since we have derived several examples that do belong, and defined the difference between very rare and “unique”.

Then too, there’s the term itself. I would like to incorporate an extra step between “Very Rare” and “Unique” so that the latter are reserved for when it really is necessary to make things a little more difficult for the PCs. I would call this intermediate value “Exotic” and just about everything that’s been said about the “Unique” category should get applied to “Exotic” instead. This reserves “Unique” for those legendary and mythical objects that are definitely an adventure in their own right to obtain. This elevates “Unique” items to Material Components that are valued as much for their spiritual, metaphysical, inspirational, and symbolic values as for their actual function. “Unique” is for Excalibur, or a branch of Yggdrasil, or the Skin of the Midgard Serpent or the Horn Of Cornucopia.

Applying The Component Rarity Scale

Accepting the principle of component substitution opens up a lot of scope for minor roleplaying opportunities. “We’re out of Bat Guano, but I can let you have a beeswax candle, a flask of mineral oil, a lump of coal, a sheaf of straw, or a patch of cloth smeared with tar.” Which material component you use is then up to you.

Most will be valid for more than one spell. Coal is dark, solid, and burns. It can also be used to write or draw, though charcoal offers finer control. So any spell where the functional characteristic of the material component matches one of these could function with a piece of coal as its material component. This “deregulation” of spell components adds color and flexibility, and compensates for some of the restrictions placed on the Spell Component Pouch earlier, with a little ingenuity.

What is needed is some way to establish a relationship between spells and the rarity of Material Components that may be required. I have devised just such a system, with a view to establishing the components required for (a) variations on existing spells, (b) permanent castings of spells, and (c) creating original spells for the game world (or importing them from other sources – for example, I have a huge writeup of the spells from a fantasy roleplaying computer game that is not based on a tabletop RPG to the best of my knowledge that I always intended to one day convert to D&D.

The way this system works is to determine a base level according to the power level of the spell, then adjust that level to accommodate various parameters of spell construction. Some of the resulting Material Components may be at odds with those officially listed. In such cases, you have the choice of either perpetuating the established standard of rarity, or altering the material component to one that is consistent with the rest of the system.

If you choose the first of these options, you will also want to designate some rationale by which the mages of the game world justify the discrepancy – which may or may not have nothing to do with the truth, of course!

I would add that three common components would add up to one uncommon component, for those spells which have multiple requirements. Two components are not hard enough to come by to achieve this increase in rarity.

Base Component Rarity 0-3rd Level

So, for the common, low-level spells – anything 3rd level or less – I would specify a base Component Rarity of “Common”. These spells are (relatively) easy to cast and should rely on relatively easily obtained ingredients.

Third-level spells are the crunch point; these are the first spells that are generally effective and powerful enough to remain part of the caster’s regular repertoire thereafter. Some might argue that rather than specifying the uppermost reaches of the Common Materials, they should be based on Uncommon ingredients. This is another choice that each GM must make for themselves, but it will make a big difference to the availability of spells like Fireball and Lightning Bolt.

Again, an argument can be made that such an impact means that the proposed mechanics are producing the metagame benefits described earlier, and making the change palpable to the players. For example, Eschew Material Component really becomes quite useful and demonstrably effective with the increase in rarity of required components for these ubiquitous spells. And there are always ways around the limitation if it really binds.

On the other hand, it could be argued that work-a-day spells like these should be most minimally affected simply because of their ubiquitous nature. This is an argument based on the players experiencing minimal disruption to their established understanding of the rules the majority of the time – in other words, you make 3rd-level spells minimally affected by the changes simply because they are so frequently the spells of choice.

Make your own choice. My personal preference would be to keep the players aware of the change by putting 3rd level spells up a category, while my players would vote (and not just for their character’s benefit) for it to remain where I have allocated it. As a concession to them, and to make the whole system palatable, I would accept the 3rd=Common categorization, and so that’s why those spells are included here.

Component Rarity 4th-6th Level

These are not spells that tend to get cast every day even by mages who know them. They are also significantly more powerful than 2nd and 3rd level spells, and this is (from memory) where the first of the “Mass” spells reside. With that difference in spells should come a difference in component rarity, so for that reason, everything up to 6th-level spells gets a base rarity rating of “Uncommon”.

I’ve already discussed the potential controversy over the lower limits of “uncommon materials”, so it should come as no surprise that there is a similar land-mine of contention lurking at the top end. Should 6th-level spells be “Uncommon” or should they be “Rare”?

If you have chosen to make 3rd level spells “Uncommon” then I would consider moving 6th level spells into the “Rare” category – but would probably not do so even under those circumstances. Others might disagree.

Component Rarity 7th-9th Level

7th to 9th level spells are rarely cast, even by mages who know them; they really are a step up in nastiness from those that come before. Based on the definition offered above, I think it appropriate that “Rare” should be the material components Base Category for these spells.

Creating/Importing Spells

Having established the base component rarity, you’re now ready to look at the process of prototyping new spells, whether you’ve created them, or you are importing them from an outside source. The following adjustments should be carried out in strict sequence. If an adjustment would move you beyond the scope of the rarity scale (ie less than Common or more than Unique) that adjustment is not permitted.

1. Prototyping Spells

Casting a prototype spell requires a material component rarity that is two steps higher than indicated, and costs the caster 200XP per casting (more at the the GM’s discretion) or double the existing xp cost of the base spell, whichever is higher. The three patterns are:

  • Common -> Uncommon -> Rare
  • Uncommon -> Rare -> Exotic
  • Rare -> Very Rare -> Exotic

Prototyping is when you are creating a variation on an existing spell, for example a fireball that uses cold effects instead of heat. This is different from using some energy substitution technique (I’ve seen a number of variations on this) because the end result is going to be a standard spell just like any other, with the change fixed within the spell description. It also applies when creating a new spell except that the GM will rule from the spell description you supply what spell level he thinks the base spell will be by comparing it in effectiveness and requirements to other spells of that level.

2. Casting Cost in XP

If you wish to negate the additional casting cost in XP imposed on a Prototype Spell, you can do so at the expense of increasing the Rarity Level of the Material Component required. A +1 increase reduces the excess to half the indicated amount, a +2 increase reduces it to one-quarter the indicated amount, and a +3 increase reduces the extra xp requirement to zero.

The above might seem vaguely worded; that’s to accommodate spells which already have an XP cost built in. If the only XP cost is the 200XP listed above, then the amounts are +1 level -> 100XP, +2 levels -> 50XP, +3 levels -> 0 XP.

If the Base spell already cost 1000xp, then the base increase in casting cost is double that, to 2000XP, for a total casting cost of 3000XP. +1 rarity level halves the increase to +1000xp, +2 halves it again to +500XP, and +3 removes the extra, leaving only the XP cost of casting the base spell.

Note that it may not be possible to both prototype a spell AND remove its XP casting cost in one pass. If the only XP casting cost is the result of this process, once the spell has been prototypes with intact XP casting cost, a variant can then be prototyped in which the spell effects are exactly the same (hence skipping step 1, and enabling you to go to this step with the variant Base Spell).

3. Permanent Effects

Sometimes, you don’t want to cast a variation, you just want to make the effect permanent. Other times, you might want to do both. Either way, Permanence (in addition to any requirements from the game mechanics) requires a material component two rarity levels higher.

4. Somatic Substitution

If the base spell does not have a Somatic requirement, you can include such a requirement to reduce the Material Component one step towards Common. If the base spell already has such a requirement, tough luck – it’s presumed to already be taken into account.

5. Verbal Substitution

If the base spell does not have a Verbal requirement, you can include such a requirement to reduce the Material Component one step towards Common. If the base spell already has such a requirement, you can’t, it’s presumed to be already taken into account.

6. Casting Time Substitution

Multiplying the casting time by 3 after moving it one step up the Casting Time Scale permits one step reduction in Material Components. This can quickly transform spells that would normally take seconds or minutes into rituals taking hours. This adjustment can be carried out multiple times in succession.

The “Casting Time Scale?” What’s That?
Highly unofficial, it goes instant/free action – standard action – round – minute – hour – day – week – year. Conditions are similar to those when memorizing spells – no adventuring, minimal activity on anything else, certainly no spellcasting, etc. The time scale assumes that once you hit a total of 1 day or more, 10 hours per day are consumed with sleep, eating, etc; and not counted toward completing the casting. These can be eschewed at the caster’s will to cut the effective time required down when he’s facing a deadline, but if he falls asleep (or equivalent) during the spell casting, the spell fails and he has to start all over again.

The starting point is always the casting time of the base spell. So a spell that has “standard action” as its casting time goes up to 3 rounds for -1 level, 9 minutes for -2 levels, 27 hours for -3 levels, 81 days for -4 levels, 243 weeks for -5 levels, and 729 years for -6 levels. A spell that has “2 minutes” as it’s casting time (and I’m not aware of any) would yield 6 hours for -1 level, 18 days for -2 levels, 54 weeks for -3 levels, and 162 years for -4 levels. (The GM should permit generational casting efforts for anything that exceeds the lifespan of the casting mage).

Alternatively, the casting time can be reduced by increasing the component rarity, though this is rarely done as an easier mechanism is built into the system.

7. Spell Focus

An increase in component rarity of 1 step permits the Material Component to become a focus for the spell that is not consumed each time the spell is cast, at the GM’s discretion. This is not permitted if the base spell already has a mandated focus.

The First Draft

The first draft of the spell is now defined and ready to cast. Spells can be cast with an aborted effect for refinement and reliability purposes, and – it is presumed – for spellcaster training purposes as well. This costs one step less on the time chart as actually casting the spell would.

Spell Reliability

The spell has an initial reliability equal to the intelligence of the mage plus his caster level, expressed as a percentage. Clerics and Druids may substitute Wisdom for Intelligence.

Additional spellcasters of the appropriate type, of a level sufficient to cast the spell, and who have knowledge of any metamagics incorporated into the spell, may contribute to the spell design and thus improve the reliability. No more mages may participate than 1/2 the primary researcher’s INT, rounding up, which is lost from the initial reliability, but each such mage working under the supervision of the primary researcher adds half his caster level or half his INT, whichever is lower, to the reliability total, to a maximum of 50%.

Spell Refinement: Subsequent Drafts

Each time the spell is cast for refinement purposes, the primary researcher rolls against the spell’s reliability. On a failure, the attempt counts for nothing and produces no improvement.

If the spell succeeds, a modified draft is created which has two differences from the previous draft:

  1. Casting time is averaged with the average for the base spell (round down);
  2. Reliability improves by half the lead researcher’s INT, plus 1 for each subordinate researcher meeting the criteria established above (round up).

Refinement doesn’t have to be a continuous activity, it can be interrupted by periods of adventuring. Prototype spells can be cast for-real if so desired (but the prototyping casting time reduction doesn’t apply). A refinement step can be abandoned part-way through with no penalty beyond having to start that step again when the mage returns to his research.

Spell Finalization

When the casting time is reduced to that indicated prior to any adjustments in step (2) above, the spell is 100% reliable (Saves excepted). All that remains is one for-real casting of the spell, under appropriate field conditions (GM’s decision as to appropriateness). Once that casting is complete, the spell is considered complete and ready to be copied into any other spellcaster’s spell-book (or equivalent), placed in a scroll, used to enchant an item, etc.

The Net Effect

New spells start off unreliable and get more reliable. It’s harder to cast a permanent effect or to place a permanent effect into a magic item that it is to simply cast the spell; it requires either more time or rarer materials, or both. Spells take time to develop and refine. At the GM’s discretion, he may permit the recovery of partially-researched spells (ie they are first draft or later, but the research needs to be completed before the spell is fully functional. Lower-level PCs may occasionally be hired to work on a spell, or to prevent anyone from interrupting the research process if they aren’t the right type of spellcaster. There are a whole heap of plot possibilities that result.

Epic Spells

Epic level spells won’t exist in every campaign. Based on the effect of these spells, the GM should use the prototyping rules above to select between Very Rare, Exotic, and Unique components; the caster of the spell has no say in what the rarity level should be (though he can argue his case to the GM). Spell creation time should also be taken into account through considering the time scale involved. Regardless of the character level of the PC, these should never be “easy” – though the difficulty is going to be a relative thing depending on the character’s level.

As a rule of thumb, the longer the spell is to last, the rarer the material component should be; the longer the spell takes to cast, the lower the material component should be.

Always remember that the primary goal is not to bind the character’s hands, it’s to use these spells as a springboard to further adventure and add enhanced flavor to the game. The mechanics of creation of such spells suck a lot of the roleplaying life out of the campaign; these should serve to put at least some of it back.

Component substitution for Enhanced Game Flavor

I’ve already hinted at this, but want to take it a step further. When a spellcaster refills his Spell Component Pouch, he specifies what spells he wants to be able to cast out of it (even if that specification is “all of them”); that doesn’t necessarily mean that the components in the pouch at the time of delivery will be exactly those in the rulebook, it just means that the components can be used to cast the spell requested, if that is within the limits of the Pouch.

It’s quite likely that as soon as the pouch is refilled, the spellcaster will want to examine the contents and see just what he’s got. Frankly, I can’t think of much that is more dull. There are three ways to handle this:

  1. Hand-wave it, telling the character what he needs to know just before he commits to casting a spell as though he already knew it, thus sparing everyone at the table the mundanity;
  2. Institute a rule that says that spell components removed from the pouch have to be used in a certain period of time or they “go off” somehow. This implies that the components have been prepared somehow, and so the character should get some additional benefit (-1 to saving throws to resist or something), and that the price should inflate accordingly.
  3. Get the player actively involved in coming up with variations for approval by the GM. If it’s his idea, he can’t really complain about it, can he? Then deal with the actual contents by written list, possibly (and preferably!) after the day’s play.

Component substitution as Metamagic Vehicle

The GM can offer as part of a reward a component that is one step beyond the usual in rarity, such that it automatically infuses the spell with a Metamagic effect even if the caster doesn’t know the Metamagic in question, and without further cost to the player in terms of spell levels. Where possible, this may even stack with metamagics included by the casting player. This does require some decisions to be made in advance by the GM.

Component substitution as a Limited Focus

Alternatively, or in addition, an extra step in rarity might permit the Material Component to serve as a Limited Focus, permitting multiple castings of the spell before it is consumed. (If combined with the Metamagic Option above, this should be two steps in rarity – one for the metamagic, and one for the demi-focus status).

Concluding Thoughts

Material Components don’t have to be bugbears of tedium, and they can be a rich source of color, flavor, and adventure – while taking the falls-flat-all-the-time humor and silliness out of the equation (unless you want to keep it, of course). All it takes is a little compromise and creativity. And remember that despite the systems of first resort on this subject being D&D / Pathfinder, the general principles here should be applicable to almost any magic system in any game.

I realize that this doesn’t really answer GM Roy’s question, but I felt it to be a necessary first step in making the answer relevant to more readers.

Next time, I’ll go a step closer to answering his question in “Some Arcane Assembly Required – Pt 2: Sourcing Parts”.

I have to thank my fellow GMs for their time and their insights. While I’ve done most of the talking (hopefully without misrepresenting their views) I could not have done it without their past comments and contributions. Much appreciated!

About the contributors:

ATGMs-Mike
Mike:
Mike is the owner, editor, and principle author at Campaign Mastery, responsible for most of the words of wisdom (or lack thereof) that you can read here. You can find him on Twitter as gamewriterMike, and find out more about him from the “About” page above.

IanG Avatar
Ian Gray:
Ian Gray resides in Sydney Australia. He has been roleplaying for more than 25 years, usually on a weekly basis, and often in Mike Bourke’s campaigns. From time to time he GMs but is that rarest of breeds, a person who can GM but is a player at heart. He has played many systems over the years including Tales Of The Floating Vagabond, Legend Of The Five Rings, Star Wars, D&D, Hero System, Gurps, Traveller, Werewolf, Vampire, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, and many, many more. Over the last couple of years he has been dirtying his hands with game design. He was a contributor to Assassin’s Amulet, the first time his name appeared in the credits of a real, live, RPG supplement. Recently he has taken to GMing more frequently, with more initial success than he was probably expecting, based on his prior experiences.

Nick-Avatar
Nick Deane:
Nick also lives in Sydney. He started roleplaying in the mid-1980s in high school with a couple of friends who got him into D&D. That group broke up a year later, but he was hooked. In late ’88 he found a few shops that specialized in RPGs, and a notice board advertising groups of gamers led him to his first long-term group. They started with AD&D, transferred that campaign to 2nd Ed when it came out, tinkered with various Palladium roleplaying games (Heroes Unlimited met Nick’s long-term fascination with Marvel’s X-Men, sparking his initial interest in superhero roleplaying), and eventually the Star Wars RPG by West End Games and Marvel Super Heroes Advanced Set. This also led to his first experiences with GMing – the less said about that first AD&D 2nd Ed campaign, the better (“so much railroading I should have sold tickets”). His second time around, things went better, and his Marvel campaign turned out “halfway decent”. That group broke up in 1995 when a number of members moved interstate. Three years later, Nick heard about what is now his regular group while at a science-fiction bookstore. He showed up at one of their regular gaming Saturdays, asked around and found himself signed up for an AD&D campaign due to start the next week. A couple of weeks later, He met Mike, and hasn’t looked back since. From ’98 he’s been a regular player in most of Mike’s campaigns. There’s also been some Traveller and the Adventurer’s Club (Pulp) campaign, amongst others. Lately he’s been dipping a tentative toe back into the GMing pool, and so far things have been going well.

Nick is unique amongst the GMs that Mike knows in that he has done some PbP (Play-by-post) gaming, something Mike neglected to include in an article on the evolution of RPGs and was quite rightly taken to task over (the article was updated within 24 hours to correct the omission).

“I’ve played spellcasters in a number of games and systems. In Mike’s original Fumanor campaign I played a cleric-monk hybrid and later a druid, while in the spin-off, Seeds of Empire, I have run a lawful good Orcish War-priest throughout the campaign. I’ve also played spellcasters in a couple of superhero games – a couple of Marvel campaigns from 1988-1995, and my modern-Norse spellcaster Runeweaver in Mike’s current Zenith-3 campaign for getting on for a decade. I mention this at Mike’s request because it, more than my GMing experience, is how I have been able to contribute to this topic.”



Discover more from Campaign Mastery

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.