User talk:Mqs/Greater Eschew Materials

I don't believe that XP should be Eschewed. How would eschewing GP interact with expensive foci? Would expensive material components be partially reduced, e.g. paying on 400gp for Stoneskin? --Randy (Talk) 18:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I would not have it affect foci. They are not consumed -- foci have never been a problem for me as a player or that I've heard from others. Partial reduction seems feasible, but I would probably make it all or nothing. In flavor, you need a single 5000 GP diamond -- not misc. diamonds worth up to 5000 GP. (So balance, yes -- partial reduce; flavor and thematically, no -- do not reduce.) --Mqs 18:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree about foci. To decide between a) balance - partial reduction, and b) theme - no reduction, I would need to check out costly material components for spells. If costs fluctuate wildly I would favor option a with the right amount, otherwise I would lean towards option b. --Randy (Talk) 18:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

You could make it like one of the crafting feats from Ebberon and just say that expensive componenets and foci cost 25% less. That seems reasonable to me. If foci seems a bit off, then have it effect MC only. --Askewnotion 20:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The purpose, though, is not to make a 100 GP spell cost 75 GP, or a 25 GP spell (Hail of Stone) cost 19. It's to make it such that you can cast those spells without any cost whatsoever. Since Eschew Materials is typically itself an undervalued feat, the high-ish value of this is worth it. This is why I'm in favor of not having it subtract anything at all from spells that cost more than its threshold. Perhaps I could rephrase it as such:

"Spells with costly material components of XX GP or less have their instead require a focus of the same type and value. As a focus, the item is not consumed when casting a spell."