Thursday, February 02, 2012

D&D Spell Components: A Lament


A few months ago I wrote a lament about DnD Alignments. I’m going to turn this into a mini-series for Socratic Design: lamenting design aspects of games I grew up with that I wish were explored and perfected by indie games. In light of the news about DnD 5e, I think this series is quite relevant. Today, I’m going to talk about Spell Components.

Specifically, I’m referring to material components. The verbal and somatic were just kind of “meh” to me, but material components piqued my interest. As I stated last time, I came late to AD&D2e, and my group used books from OD&D to AD&D1 to AD&D2 and tried to reconcile them all somehow. As I poured over these manuals trying to learn the system, spell components jumped out at me. I saw them as a flavorful (colorful) addition to spell casting and a way to balance out wizards. In Rolemaster (my first RPG), Mages are really powerful once they get to 6th or 8th level. Icebolt was a brutal spell.

When I actually got to play DnD for the first time, spell components were entirely ignored by the group. The wizard never had to buy any, we never had to quest for any, and even when we would be captured and restrained, he could cast his spells. It was disappointing. When I switched colleges my sophomore and junior years, I found other DnD play groups. None of them used spell components either. Once I started going to conventions like Origins and GenCon, I found that most players around the country routinely ignored the spell component requirement. “Why was it in there then?” I wondered. It’s probably a better question than I thought at the time.

Anyway, I believe that material components for spells is a game mechanic full of potential. I’ve written before on how I think Magic could be used in RPGs. I’m going to expand on those ideas a bit here. In that older article I suggested that Magic could be used to accomplish one of three goals. I’m going to delve into Answer 3C: “Magic is used as Color to enhance the description of the Setting.”

I’ve written before that mechanics should work in a way that reinforces what the game is about (i.e. its thematic elements). For me, material spell components can accomplish this very well. Think about the scene in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire where Lord Voldemort is restored. The spell requires a ritual and physical components to do something. Each of those components is significant in a thematic and resonate way. It’s more than just pixie dust you bought at the local general store while on your adventure. Those items are meaningful to the characters, the story, and the setting. They enhance the importance of the spell-casting and required work and sacrifice for the characters to attain.

Take also how magic in Middle-earth seems to require physical objects to work. Gandalf turns pinecones into fireballs in the Hobbit. Galadriel can see the future in her water basin in The Lord of the Rings. All this stuff reinforces that the characters have a deep connection to the world and that the mundane can be special.

A roleplaying game that took advantage of spell components (and made them a critical function of actual play) wouldn’t have to worry about balancing powerful spells mechanically. Those spells could just require rare components that must be quested. You can’t just go to Ignacio’s Curio Shop in Freeport and buy what you need. Spell power could also scale up if the mage used rarer, purer, or more personal items as components. It would also enhance the system for creating magical items since that subsystem could share mechanics with the spell casting subsystem.

I never got to play in a game where spell components meant anything to the players on any level: not in theme, not in challenge, not in exploration, not in any way, shape, or form. I think that’s a shame. I feel games that support all three creative agendas could easily incorporate material components into their mechanics and improve both the color and effect of their system. I hope someday somebody does, ‘cause I’d be the first to line up to buy it.




Jerry said...

We’ve had some good stuff in our game over components. In their home world, sorcerors need to keep a low profile. They’re not illegal, per se, but they’re untrusted and unwelcome.

So when he needs new “tiny carved arrows” for example, for his mage bolts, he has to find an underground component merchant—often trying to sound out carvers in the marketplace to find out if they can make whatever spell component he needs that he can’t find. He’s also always planning ahead, on what spells does he plan on learning and what rare components do they need? And then looting the carcasses/ruins for those components. As a player, he loves the resource management aspect of D&D (when it comes to components and hit points; he hates keeping track of what his character is carrying).

On the other hand, the other sorceror in the group hates them. In Gods & Monsters characters get a specialty every two levels; I made up a specialty of “doesn’t need material components” for her, and she immediately took it. Which also ends up being kind of cool, because in a world where material components are normally needed she can get some spotlight by not needing them; the other sorceror player is a much more experienced gamer and often ends up being the “main” sorceror because of it.

Troy_Costisick said...


The feat you created for the second sorceror player illustrates my point nicely. Because accumulating material components is not properly incentivized and presented in D&D, players are always looking for work-arounds.

The other player who does use the spell components is just exploring the color of the system because that's his thing. But it's my experience that those types of players are rather rare. Given the choice of dropping the material component rules altogether or dealing with them according the rules in the book, most players choose to drop them. It's natural, because there's no good reason not to.

Thank you for sharing your experiences! I think it helps to have some actual play anecdotes to illustrate a point :)



Diogo de Souza said...

Hi, Troy

Sorry for the off-topic comment, but I'd like to ask you to take a look at my comment on your post of "When should a character die", where I ask for your permission to translate it into portuguese and post it on my site (with full credits, evidently).


Troy_Costisick said...

Heya Diogo,

I totally missed your comment, and I am very sorry. You have my full permision to translate anything I have written on Socratic Design and any of the attachments such as my Blasted Sands setting into Portugese so long as you make it available for free. :)



Davids Flys said...

This is my first time i visit here. I found so many interesting stuff in your blog especially its discussion. From the tons of comments on your articles, I guess I am not the only one having all the enjoyment here keep up the good work

agen sbobet terbaik, ion casino terpercaya

Lisa Sunee said...

I strongly agree with your post above. thank you very much, I will share to my friends also. taruhan bola terpercaya