Can you cast spells with verbal components if you have no tongue?











up vote
21
down vote

favorite
3












A situation occurred where a cheeky Bard spoke afoul one too many times in the presence of some seriously bad hombres, and as a result, he got half his tongue cut out.



Now I'm not familiar with how much having a partial tongue interferes with speaking, but the table argued that he can say some words with great difficulty.



This thread in particular that goes into the details of casting while underwater concludes that you ultimately can, RAW, cast spells underwater, arguing that the sound produced in your larynx is the same sound produced above water, it just becomes garbled as soon as it hits the water.



Moreover, here's what the PHB says about verbal components:




Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can’t cast a spell with a verbal component.




So, we need Mystic Words to be spoken. Does pronunciation affect the casting? How much does intelligibility affect the casting? To extrapolate this, do characters with poor accents suffer in a similar regard if our bard cannot cast verbally due to his terrible pronunciation? The thread above dictated that you don't even need to be understood, simply the correct pitch and resonance needs to be met.



Is the bard doomed or can he mumble his way around the battlefield?










share|improve this question
























  • Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
    – NautArch
    Nov 19 at 20:25






  • 1




    They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 19 at 21:20










  • are you the DM or a player?
    – rpgstar
    Nov 20 at 3:21










  • I am a player in the group
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 20 at 5:54










  • Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
    – Nzall
    Nov 20 at 8:13















up vote
21
down vote

favorite
3












A situation occurred where a cheeky Bard spoke afoul one too many times in the presence of some seriously bad hombres, and as a result, he got half his tongue cut out.



Now I'm not familiar with how much having a partial tongue interferes with speaking, but the table argued that he can say some words with great difficulty.



This thread in particular that goes into the details of casting while underwater concludes that you ultimately can, RAW, cast spells underwater, arguing that the sound produced in your larynx is the same sound produced above water, it just becomes garbled as soon as it hits the water.



Moreover, here's what the PHB says about verbal components:




Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can’t cast a spell with a verbal component.




So, we need Mystic Words to be spoken. Does pronunciation affect the casting? How much does intelligibility affect the casting? To extrapolate this, do characters with poor accents suffer in a similar regard if our bard cannot cast verbally due to his terrible pronunciation? The thread above dictated that you don't even need to be understood, simply the correct pitch and resonance needs to be met.



Is the bard doomed or can he mumble his way around the battlefield?










share|improve this question
























  • Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
    – NautArch
    Nov 19 at 20:25






  • 1




    They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 19 at 21:20










  • are you the DM or a player?
    – rpgstar
    Nov 20 at 3:21










  • I am a player in the group
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 20 at 5:54










  • Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
    – Nzall
    Nov 20 at 8:13













up vote
21
down vote

favorite
3









up vote
21
down vote

favorite
3






3





A situation occurred where a cheeky Bard spoke afoul one too many times in the presence of some seriously bad hombres, and as a result, he got half his tongue cut out.



Now I'm not familiar with how much having a partial tongue interferes with speaking, but the table argued that he can say some words with great difficulty.



This thread in particular that goes into the details of casting while underwater concludes that you ultimately can, RAW, cast spells underwater, arguing that the sound produced in your larynx is the same sound produced above water, it just becomes garbled as soon as it hits the water.



Moreover, here's what the PHB says about verbal components:




Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can’t cast a spell with a verbal component.




So, we need Mystic Words to be spoken. Does pronunciation affect the casting? How much does intelligibility affect the casting? To extrapolate this, do characters with poor accents suffer in a similar regard if our bard cannot cast verbally due to his terrible pronunciation? The thread above dictated that you don't even need to be understood, simply the correct pitch and resonance needs to be met.



Is the bard doomed or can he mumble his way around the battlefield?










share|improve this question















A situation occurred where a cheeky Bard spoke afoul one too many times in the presence of some seriously bad hombres, and as a result, he got half his tongue cut out.



Now I'm not familiar with how much having a partial tongue interferes with speaking, but the table argued that he can say some words with great difficulty.



This thread in particular that goes into the details of casting while underwater concludes that you ultimately can, RAW, cast spells underwater, arguing that the sound produced in your larynx is the same sound produced above water, it just becomes garbled as soon as it hits the water.



Moreover, here's what the PHB says about verbal components:




Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can’t cast a spell with a verbal component.




So, we need Mystic Words to be spoken. Does pronunciation affect the casting? How much does intelligibility affect the casting? To extrapolate this, do characters with poor accents suffer in a similar regard if our bard cannot cast verbally due to his terrible pronunciation? The thread above dictated that you don't even need to be understood, simply the correct pitch and resonance needs to be met.



Is the bard doomed or can he mumble his way around the battlefield?







dnd-5e spells spell-components






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 20 at 6:41









V2Blast

18.1k248114




18.1k248114










asked Nov 19 at 20:17









Nicbobo

1,153529




1,153529












  • Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
    – NautArch
    Nov 19 at 20:25






  • 1




    They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 19 at 21:20










  • are you the DM or a player?
    – rpgstar
    Nov 20 at 3:21










  • I am a player in the group
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 20 at 5:54










  • Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
    – Nzall
    Nov 20 at 8:13


















  • Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
    – NautArch
    Nov 19 at 20:25






  • 1




    They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 19 at 21:20










  • are you the DM or a player?
    – rpgstar
    Nov 20 at 3:21










  • I am a player in the group
    – Nicbobo
    Nov 20 at 5:54










  • Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
    – Nzall
    Nov 20 at 8:13
















Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
– NautArch
Nov 19 at 20:25




Related on Can a mute warlock make normal use of the voice of the chain master class feature?
– NautArch
Nov 19 at 20:25




1




1




They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
– Nicbobo
Nov 19 at 21:20




They’re all level 7, and there’s an artificer, a Cleric, a Ranger and a fighter.
– Nicbobo
Nov 19 at 21:20












are you the DM or a player?
– rpgstar
Nov 20 at 3:21




are you the DM or a player?
– rpgstar
Nov 20 at 3:21












I am a player in the group
– Nicbobo
Nov 20 at 5:54




I am a player in the group
– Nicbobo
Nov 20 at 5:54












Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
– Nzall
Nov 20 at 8:13




Related question on Worldbuilding: worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/107123/…
– Nzall
Nov 20 at 8:13










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
35
down vote



accepted










Ask your DM



Unfortunately, there really isn't any RAW for how to handle damaged tongues or even being mute. For the most part, and except for an optional damage rule from the DMG, there really aren't RAW mechanics for PCs losing body parts.



And all of this is dependent on how a DM defines the disability.



If they rule that the character is mute, then they are effectively under the Silence spell. If it is somewhere in between mute and full speech, then they'll have to make a ruling on how that will affect the Bard.



Workarounds



If the DM does rule that the character is either a mute or their speech is damaged enough to affect Verbal components, then there are some remaining options.



Cast Regenerate



This is the most obvious solution. Either have a party member or a hired caster cast Regenerate to regrow that tongue. Once regrown, all is back to normal.



Dip Sorcerer for Subtle Spell



If regenerating is not an option and they'd like to be able to cast some verbal component spells, then dipping into sorcerer would allow this. However, the downside is needing to forego bard progression in order to do this and this will require a minimum 3 level dip in order to get the Subtle Spell metamagic that would allow bypassing of verbal components.



Simply avoid verbal component spells



This is by far the least attractive option because there are only a few spells under the entire bard list that don't require a verbal component.



This happened at my table, here's what we did and how the players reacted:



In one game I was playing in, this happened to one of the PCs. Our DM ruled that they could not cast a spell with verbal components and they suffered this until we were able to regenerate their tongue.



From a player perspective, the 'maiming' of a PC was awful. It was awful when/why it happened and it was awful for them to have to deal with it for a day until our other cleric could prepare Regenerate. If you are the DM (or anyone reading who is a DM), I would be very wary about mutilating your players and giving them negative mechanical affects. It removes a lot of fun and adds a lot of table issues that can otherwise be avoided.






share|improve this answer






























    up vote
    7
    down vote













    I think it's DM's call



    Long vowel sounds and a few consonants do not require much (if any) lingual movement: B,F,H,K,M,P,R,V,W and so could conceivably be uttered without being hindered by a partially missing tongue.



    Since there are no rules governing the actual words for the spells and the caster has free mouth movement otherwise, a case could be made that some spells would be entirely unaffected by the half-missing tongue, others minimally so. Which ones would be a DM call.



    Additionally, the rule states "specific pitch and resonance," and a tongue definitely affects resonance. However, not all mouths/tongues are alike and the fact that there are many casters, each with a unique voice and aural characteristics, suggests that a caster who has a mutilated or missing tongue could/should relearn how to form the necessary sounds for producing the magical energy given their new oral arrangement.






    share|improve this answer




























      up vote
      3
      down vote













      Ultimately it's up to the DM, but it should carry some consequences other than making the character useless. Something similar to wild magic could be employed. It makes the character weaker in some aspects, but the character is not severely held back until regeneration is available. The implementation can vary from occurring on certain spells only, stopping after several successive successes, occurring on all spells, occurring on a cast by cast basis with no remedy other than regeneration, etc.



      Depending on the type of character being played, the wild magic table could be altered to make it more applicable. If the character is particularly stealthy and avoids combat, the spells could range more into that type of magic. The backfires could prevent magic stealth and disguise from working properly, but there wouldn't be a punishment like fireball on self.



      It really depends on how far you'd like to punish the player for doing something that they shouldn't have, but keep in mind that it will not be enjoyable for a character to lose all of their powers or be limited in a way that is a direct debuff instead of a workaround.






      share|improve this answer










      New contributor




      Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.

























        up vote
        1
        down vote













        As a GM, I would rule that this situation would prevent the character from casting spells with verbal components. Frankly, this seems obvious and uncontroversial. If you didn't want to give them this limitation, you shouldn't have had someone cut their tongue in half.



        Regarding the linked answer about casting underwater, I would say the difference is that in that case, the character is still able to pronounce the words, regardless of whether anyone can perceive them. In the case of your bard, the character is unable to properly pronounce the magic words, and this in my opinion renders them unable to cast spells with a verbal component.



        As mentioned in other answers, there are various avenues the character can pursue to undo the damage or mitigate its effects.






        share|improve this answer




























          up vote
          0
          down vote













          On RAW part, I have nothing to add to answer by NautArch.



          At my table, I would use and abuse the description of verbal component itself:




          Verbal (V)



          Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of Silence, such as one created by the Silence spell, can’t Cast a Spell with a verbal component.




          Emphasis mine. Thus, I would allow Bard to use his spellcasting focus instrument in place of actual words, assuming he is sufficiently good at getting specific pitch and resonance. After all, Wizard who can't even sing Mary Had a Little Lamb in tune can do it with his voice, why wouldn't maestro be able to do it with his instrument?



          I tried it in earlier edition. In 3.5 description of verbal component was way less forgiving, but once upon a time we tried it. Bard wasn't able to cast anything language-dependent, of course. It was a hindrance enough to teach him a lesson, but it didn't render him useless. Still, that was hindrance enough that pretty soon rules and events was bent and ignored to allow him to heal and talk normally, if maybe little funny (fluff, no mechanical effect).






          share|improve this answer




























            up vote
            0
            down vote













            It's basically DMs wits against the players. Don't be shy about a hard campaign, because the DM has to be equally sophisticated and they'll probably tire if they can't do it either. So keep all options open in gameplay, explore dialog (which will test the DMs wits especially), and try your luck a few times.






            share|improve this answer





















            • What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
              – NautArch
              Nov 20 at 18:56











            Your Answer





            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
            StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
            StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
            });
            });
            }, "mathjax-editing");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "122"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














             

            draft saved


            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135916%2fcan-you-cast-spells-with-verbal-components-if-you-have-no-tongue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes








            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            35
            down vote



            accepted










            Ask your DM



            Unfortunately, there really isn't any RAW for how to handle damaged tongues or even being mute. For the most part, and except for an optional damage rule from the DMG, there really aren't RAW mechanics for PCs losing body parts.



            And all of this is dependent on how a DM defines the disability.



            If they rule that the character is mute, then they are effectively under the Silence spell. If it is somewhere in between mute and full speech, then they'll have to make a ruling on how that will affect the Bard.



            Workarounds



            If the DM does rule that the character is either a mute or their speech is damaged enough to affect Verbal components, then there are some remaining options.



            Cast Regenerate



            This is the most obvious solution. Either have a party member or a hired caster cast Regenerate to regrow that tongue. Once regrown, all is back to normal.



            Dip Sorcerer for Subtle Spell



            If regenerating is not an option and they'd like to be able to cast some verbal component spells, then dipping into sorcerer would allow this. However, the downside is needing to forego bard progression in order to do this and this will require a minimum 3 level dip in order to get the Subtle Spell metamagic that would allow bypassing of verbal components.



            Simply avoid verbal component spells



            This is by far the least attractive option because there are only a few spells under the entire bard list that don't require a verbal component.



            This happened at my table, here's what we did and how the players reacted:



            In one game I was playing in, this happened to one of the PCs. Our DM ruled that they could not cast a spell with verbal components and they suffered this until we were able to regenerate their tongue.



            From a player perspective, the 'maiming' of a PC was awful. It was awful when/why it happened and it was awful for them to have to deal with it for a day until our other cleric could prepare Regenerate. If you are the DM (or anyone reading who is a DM), I would be very wary about mutilating your players and giving them negative mechanical affects. It removes a lot of fun and adds a lot of table issues that can otherwise be avoided.






            share|improve this answer



























              up vote
              35
              down vote



              accepted










              Ask your DM



              Unfortunately, there really isn't any RAW for how to handle damaged tongues or even being mute. For the most part, and except for an optional damage rule from the DMG, there really aren't RAW mechanics for PCs losing body parts.



              And all of this is dependent on how a DM defines the disability.



              If they rule that the character is mute, then they are effectively under the Silence spell. If it is somewhere in between mute and full speech, then they'll have to make a ruling on how that will affect the Bard.



              Workarounds



              If the DM does rule that the character is either a mute or their speech is damaged enough to affect Verbal components, then there are some remaining options.



              Cast Regenerate



              This is the most obvious solution. Either have a party member or a hired caster cast Regenerate to regrow that tongue. Once regrown, all is back to normal.



              Dip Sorcerer for Subtle Spell



              If regenerating is not an option and they'd like to be able to cast some verbal component spells, then dipping into sorcerer would allow this. However, the downside is needing to forego bard progression in order to do this and this will require a minimum 3 level dip in order to get the Subtle Spell metamagic that would allow bypassing of verbal components.



              Simply avoid verbal component spells



              This is by far the least attractive option because there are only a few spells under the entire bard list that don't require a verbal component.



              This happened at my table, here's what we did and how the players reacted:



              In one game I was playing in, this happened to one of the PCs. Our DM ruled that they could not cast a spell with verbal components and they suffered this until we were able to regenerate their tongue.



              From a player perspective, the 'maiming' of a PC was awful. It was awful when/why it happened and it was awful for them to have to deal with it for a day until our other cleric could prepare Regenerate. If you are the DM (or anyone reading who is a DM), I would be very wary about mutilating your players and giving them negative mechanical affects. It removes a lot of fun and adds a lot of table issues that can otherwise be avoided.






              share|improve this answer

























                up vote
                35
                down vote



                accepted







                up vote
                35
                down vote



                accepted






                Ask your DM



                Unfortunately, there really isn't any RAW for how to handle damaged tongues or even being mute. For the most part, and except for an optional damage rule from the DMG, there really aren't RAW mechanics for PCs losing body parts.



                And all of this is dependent on how a DM defines the disability.



                If they rule that the character is mute, then they are effectively under the Silence spell. If it is somewhere in between mute and full speech, then they'll have to make a ruling on how that will affect the Bard.



                Workarounds



                If the DM does rule that the character is either a mute or their speech is damaged enough to affect Verbal components, then there are some remaining options.



                Cast Regenerate



                This is the most obvious solution. Either have a party member or a hired caster cast Regenerate to regrow that tongue. Once regrown, all is back to normal.



                Dip Sorcerer for Subtle Spell



                If regenerating is not an option and they'd like to be able to cast some verbal component spells, then dipping into sorcerer would allow this. However, the downside is needing to forego bard progression in order to do this and this will require a minimum 3 level dip in order to get the Subtle Spell metamagic that would allow bypassing of verbal components.



                Simply avoid verbal component spells



                This is by far the least attractive option because there are only a few spells under the entire bard list that don't require a verbal component.



                This happened at my table, here's what we did and how the players reacted:



                In one game I was playing in, this happened to one of the PCs. Our DM ruled that they could not cast a spell with verbal components and they suffered this until we were able to regenerate their tongue.



                From a player perspective, the 'maiming' of a PC was awful. It was awful when/why it happened and it was awful for them to have to deal with it for a day until our other cleric could prepare Regenerate. If you are the DM (or anyone reading who is a DM), I would be very wary about mutilating your players and giving them negative mechanical affects. It removes a lot of fun and adds a lot of table issues that can otherwise be avoided.






                share|improve this answer














                Ask your DM



                Unfortunately, there really isn't any RAW for how to handle damaged tongues or even being mute. For the most part, and except for an optional damage rule from the DMG, there really aren't RAW mechanics for PCs losing body parts.



                And all of this is dependent on how a DM defines the disability.



                If they rule that the character is mute, then they are effectively under the Silence spell. If it is somewhere in between mute and full speech, then they'll have to make a ruling on how that will affect the Bard.



                Workarounds



                If the DM does rule that the character is either a mute or their speech is damaged enough to affect Verbal components, then there are some remaining options.



                Cast Regenerate



                This is the most obvious solution. Either have a party member or a hired caster cast Regenerate to regrow that tongue. Once regrown, all is back to normal.



                Dip Sorcerer for Subtle Spell



                If regenerating is not an option and they'd like to be able to cast some verbal component spells, then dipping into sorcerer would allow this. However, the downside is needing to forego bard progression in order to do this and this will require a minimum 3 level dip in order to get the Subtle Spell metamagic that would allow bypassing of verbal components.



                Simply avoid verbal component spells



                This is by far the least attractive option because there are only a few spells under the entire bard list that don't require a verbal component.



                This happened at my table, here's what we did and how the players reacted:



                In one game I was playing in, this happened to one of the PCs. Our DM ruled that they could not cast a spell with verbal components and they suffered this until we were able to regenerate their tongue.



                From a player perspective, the 'maiming' of a PC was awful. It was awful when/why it happened and it was awful for them to have to deal with it for a day until our other cleric could prepare Regenerate. If you are the DM (or anyone reading who is a DM), I would be very wary about mutilating your players and giving them negative mechanical affects. It removes a lot of fun and adds a lot of table issues that can otherwise be avoided.







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited Nov 20 at 0:46









                Adeptus

                20.6k357104




                20.6k357104










                answered Nov 19 at 20:32









                NautArch

                50.8k6178341




                50.8k6178341
























                    up vote
                    7
                    down vote













                    I think it's DM's call



                    Long vowel sounds and a few consonants do not require much (if any) lingual movement: B,F,H,K,M,P,R,V,W and so could conceivably be uttered without being hindered by a partially missing tongue.



                    Since there are no rules governing the actual words for the spells and the caster has free mouth movement otherwise, a case could be made that some spells would be entirely unaffected by the half-missing tongue, others minimally so. Which ones would be a DM call.



                    Additionally, the rule states "specific pitch and resonance," and a tongue definitely affects resonance. However, not all mouths/tongues are alike and the fact that there are many casters, each with a unique voice and aural characteristics, suggests that a caster who has a mutilated or missing tongue could/should relearn how to form the necessary sounds for producing the magical energy given their new oral arrangement.






                    share|improve this answer

























                      up vote
                      7
                      down vote













                      I think it's DM's call



                      Long vowel sounds and a few consonants do not require much (if any) lingual movement: B,F,H,K,M,P,R,V,W and so could conceivably be uttered without being hindered by a partially missing tongue.



                      Since there are no rules governing the actual words for the spells and the caster has free mouth movement otherwise, a case could be made that some spells would be entirely unaffected by the half-missing tongue, others minimally so. Which ones would be a DM call.



                      Additionally, the rule states "specific pitch and resonance," and a tongue definitely affects resonance. However, not all mouths/tongues are alike and the fact that there are many casters, each with a unique voice and aural characteristics, suggests that a caster who has a mutilated or missing tongue could/should relearn how to form the necessary sounds for producing the magical energy given their new oral arrangement.






                      share|improve this answer























                        up vote
                        7
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        7
                        down vote









                        I think it's DM's call



                        Long vowel sounds and a few consonants do not require much (if any) lingual movement: B,F,H,K,M,P,R,V,W and so could conceivably be uttered without being hindered by a partially missing tongue.



                        Since there are no rules governing the actual words for the spells and the caster has free mouth movement otherwise, a case could be made that some spells would be entirely unaffected by the half-missing tongue, others minimally so. Which ones would be a DM call.



                        Additionally, the rule states "specific pitch and resonance," and a tongue definitely affects resonance. However, not all mouths/tongues are alike and the fact that there are many casters, each with a unique voice and aural characteristics, suggests that a caster who has a mutilated or missing tongue could/should relearn how to form the necessary sounds for producing the magical energy given their new oral arrangement.






                        share|improve this answer












                        I think it's DM's call



                        Long vowel sounds and a few consonants do not require much (if any) lingual movement: B,F,H,K,M,P,R,V,W and so could conceivably be uttered without being hindered by a partially missing tongue.



                        Since there are no rules governing the actual words for the spells and the caster has free mouth movement otherwise, a case could be made that some spells would be entirely unaffected by the half-missing tongue, others minimally so. Which ones would be a DM call.



                        Additionally, the rule states "specific pitch and resonance," and a tongue definitely affects resonance. However, not all mouths/tongues are alike and the fact that there are many casters, each with a unique voice and aural characteristics, suggests that a caster who has a mutilated or missing tongue could/should relearn how to form the necessary sounds for producing the magical energy given their new oral arrangement.







                        share|improve this answer












                        share|improve this answer



                        share|improve this answer










                        answered Nov 19 at 20:38









                        Rykara

                        1,090212




                        1,090212






















                            up vote
                            3
                            down vote













                            Ultimately it's up to the DM, but it should carry some consequences other than making the character useless. Something similar to wild magic could be employed. It makes the character weaker in some aspects, but the character is not severely held back until regeneration is available. The implementation can vary from occurring on certain spells only, stopping after several successive successes, occurring on all spells, occurring on a cast by cast basis with no remedy other than regeneration, etc.



                            Depending on the type of character being played, the wild magic table could be altered to make it more applicable. If the character is particularly stealthy and avoids combat, the spells could range more into that type of magic. The backfires could prevent magic stealth and disguise from working properly, but there wouldn't be a punishment like fireball on self.



                            It really depends on how far you'd like to punish the player for doing something that they shouldn't have, but keep in mind that it will not be enjoyable for a character to lose all of their powers or be limited in a way that is a direct debuff instead of a workaround.






                            share|improve this answer










                            New contributor




                            Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                            Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                              up vote
                              3
                              down vote













                              Ultimately it's up to the DM, but it should carry some consequences other than making the character useless. Something similar to wild magic could be employed. It makes the character weaker in some aspects, but the character is not severely held back until regeneration is available. The implementation can vary from occurring on certain spells only, stopping after several successive successes, occurring on all spells, occurring on a cast by cast basis with no remedy other than regeneration, etc.



                              Depending on the type of character being played, the wild magic table could be altered to make it more applicable. If the character is particularly stealthy and avoids combat, the spells could range more into that type of magic. The backfires could prevent magic stealth and disguise from working properly, but there wouldn't be a punishment like fireball on self.



                              It really depends on how far you'd like to punish the player for doing something that they shouldn't have, but keep in mind that it will not be enjoyable for a character to lose all of their powers or be limited in a way that is a direct debuff instead of a workaround.






                              share|improve this answer










                              New contributor




                              Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                              Check out our Code of Conduct.




















                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote










                                up vote
                                3
                                down vote









                                Ultimately it's up to the DM, but it should carry some consequences other than making the character useless. Something similar to wild magic could be employed. It makes the character weaker in some aspects, but the character is not severely held back until regeneration is available. The implementation can vary from occurring on certain spells only, stopping after several successive successes, occurring on all spells, occurring on a cast by cast basis with no remedy other than regeneration, etc.



                                Depending on the type of character being played, the wild magic table could be altered to make it more applicable. If the character is particularly stealthy and avoids combat, the spells could range more into that type of magic. The backfires could prevent magic stealth and disguise from working properly, but there wouldn't be a punishment like fireball on self.



                                It really depends on how far you'd like to punish the player for doing something that they shouldn't have, but keep in mind that it will not be enjoyable for a character to lose all of their powers or be limited in a way that is a direct debuff instead of a workaround.






                                share|improve this answer










                                New contributor




                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                Ultimately it's up to the DM, but it should carry some consequences other than making the character useless. Something similar to wild magic could be employed. It makes the character weaker in some aspects, but the character is not severely held back until regeneration is available. The implementation can vary from occurring on certain spells only, stopping after several successive successes, occurring on all spells, occurring on a cast by cast basis with no remedy other than regeneration, etc.



                                Depending on the type of character being played, the wild magic table could be altered to make it more applicable. If the character is particularly stealthy and avoids combat, the spells could range more into that type of magic. The backfires could prevent magic stealth and disguise from working properly, but there wouldn't be a punishment like fireball on self.



                                It really depends on how far you'd like to punish the player for doing something that they shouldn't have, but keep in mind that it will not be enjoyable for a character to lose all of their powers or be limited in a way that is a direct debuff instead of a workaround.







                                share|improve this answer










                                New contributor




                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                share|improve this answer



                                share|improve this answer








                                edited Nov 20 at 8:41









                                NathanS

                                20.1k686212




                                20.1k686212






                                New contributor




                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                answered Nov 19 at 22:15









                                Hawk

                                391




                                391




                                New contributor




                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.





                                New contributor





                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                                Hawk is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                                    up vote
                                    1
                                    down vote













                                    As a GM, I would rule that this situation would prevent the character from casting spells with verbal components. Frankly, this seems obvious and uncontroversial. If you didn't want to give them this limitation, you shouldn't have had someone cut their tongue in half.



                                    Regarding the linked answer about casting underwater, I would say the difference is that in that case, the character is still able to pronounce the words, regardless of whether anyone can perceive them. In the case of your bard, the character is unable to properly pronounce the magic words, and this in my opinion renders them unable to cast spells with a verbal component.



                                    As mentioned in other answers, there are various avenues the character can pursue to undo the damage or mitigate its effects.






                                    share|improve this answer

























                                      up vote
                                      1
                                      down vote













                                      As a GM, I would rule that this situation would prevent the character from casting spells with verbal components. Frankly, this seems obvious and uncontroversial. If you didn't want to give them this limitation, you shouldn't have had someone cut their tongue in half.



                                      Regarding the linked answer about casting underwater, I would say the difference is that in that case, the character is still able to pronounce the words, regardless of whether anyone can perceive them. In the case of your bard, the character is unable to properly pronounce the magic words, and this in my opinion renders them unable to cast spells with a verbal component.



                                      As mentioned in other answers, there are various avenues the character can pursue to undo the damage or mitigate its effects.






                                      share|improve this answer























                                        up vote
                                        1
                                        down vote










                                        up vote
                                        1
                                        down vote









                                        As a GM, I would rule that this situation would prevent the character from casting spells with verbal components. Frankly, this seems obvious and uncontroversial. If you didn't want to give them this limitation, you shouldn't have had someone cut their tongue in half.



                                        Regarding the linked answer about casting underwater, I would say the difference is that in that case, the character is still able to pronounce the words, regardless of whether anyone can perceive them. In the case of your bard, the character is unable to properly pronounce the magic words, and this in my opinion renders them unable to cast spells with a verbal component.



                                        As mentioned in other answers, there are various avenues the character can pursue to undo the damage or mitigate its effects.






                                        share|improve this answer












                                        As a GM, I would rule that this situation would prevent the character from casting spells with verbal components. Frankly, this seems obvious and uncontroversial. If you didn't want to give them this limitation, you shouldn't have had someone cut their tongue in half.



                                        Regarding the linked answer about casting underwater, I would say the difference is that in that case, the character is still able to pronounce the words, regardless of whether anyone can perceive them. In the case of your bard, the character is unable to properly pronounce the magic words, and this in my opinion renders them unable to cast spells with a verbal component.



                                        As mentioned in other answers, there are various avenues the character can pursue to undo the damage or mitigate its effects.







                                        share|improve this answer












                                        share|improve this answer



                                        share|improve this answer










                                        answered Nov 20 at 0:53









                                        Dave Costa

                                        1212




                                        1212






















                                            up vote
                                            0
                                            down vote













                                            On RAW part, I have nothing to add to answer by NautArch.



                                            At my table, I would use and abuse the description of verbal component itself:




                                            Verbal (V)



                                            Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of Silence, such as one created by the Silence spell, can’t Cast a Spell with a verbal component.




                                            Emphasis mine. Thus, I would allow Bard to use his spellcasting focus instrument in place of actual words, assuming he is sufficiently good at getting specific pitch and resonance. After all, Wizard who can't even sing Mary Had a Little Lamb in tune can do it with his voice, why wouldn't maestro be able to do it with his instrument?



                                            I tried it in earlier edition. In 3.5 description of verbal component was way less forgiving, but once upon a time we tried it. Bard wasn't able to cast anything language-dependent, of course. It was a hindrance enough to teach him a lesson, but it didn't render him useless. Still, that was hindrance enough that pretty soon rules and events was bent and ignored to allow him to heal and talk normally, if maybe little funny (fluff, no mechanical effect).






                                            share|improve this answer

























                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              On RAW part, I have nothing to add to answer by NautArch.



                                              At my table, I would use and abuse the description of verbal component itself:




                                              Verbal (V)



                                              Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of Silence, such as one created by the Silence spell, can’t Cast a Spell with a verbal component.




                                              Emphasis mine. Thus, I would allow Bard to use his spellcasting focus instrument in place of actual words, assuming he is sufficiently good at getting specific pitch and resonance. After all, Wizard who can't even sing Mary Had a Little Lamb in tune can do it with his voice, why wouldn't maestro be able to do it with his instrument?



                                              I tried it in earlier edition. In 3.5 description of verbal component was way less forgiving, but once upon a time we tried it. Bard wasn't able to cast anything language-dependent, of course. It was a hindrance enough to teach him a lesson, but it didn't render him useless. Still, that was hindrance enough that pretty soon rules and events was bent and ignored to allow him to heal and talk normally, if maybe little funny (fluff, no mechanical effect).






                                              share|improve this answer























                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote










                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote









                                                On RAW part, I have nothing to add to answer by NautArch.



                                                At my table, I would use and abuse the description of verbal component itself:




                                                Verbal (V)



                                                Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of Silence, such as one created by the Silence spell, can’t Cast a Spell with a verbal component.




                                                Emphasis mine. Thus, I would allow Bard to use his spellcasting focus instrument in place of actual words, assuming he is sufficiently good at getting specific pitch and resonance. After all, Wizard who can't even sing Mary Had a Little Lamb in tune can do it with his voice, why wouldn't maestro be able to do it with his instrument?



                                                I tried it in earlier edition. In 3.5 description of verbal component was way less forgiving, but once upon a time we tried it. Bard wasn't able to cast anything language-dependent, of course. It was a hindrance enough to teach him a lesson, but it didn't render him useless. Still, that was hindrance enough that pretty soon rules and events was bent and ignored to allow him to heal and talk normally, if maybe little funny (fluff, no mechanical effect).






                                                share|improve this answer












                                                On RAW part, I have nothing to add to answer by NautArch.



                                                At my table, I would use and abuse the description of verbal component itself:




                                                Verbal (V)



                                                Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of Silence, such as one created by the Silence spell, can’t Cast a Spell with a verbal component.




                                                Emphasis mine. Thus, I would allow Bard to use his spellcasting focus instrument in place of actual words, assuming he is sufficiently good at getting specific pitch and resonance. After all, Wizard who can't even sing Mary Had a Little Lamb in tune can do it with his voice, why wouldn't maestro be able to do it with his instrument?



                                                I tried it in earlier edition. In 3.5 description of verbal component was way less forgiving, but once upon a time we tried it. Bard wasn't able to cast anything language-dependent, of course. It was a hindrance enough to teach him a lesson, but it didn't render him useless. Still, that was hindrance enough that pretty soon rules and events was bent and ignored to allow him to heal and talk normally, if maybe little funny (fluff, no mechanical effect).







                                                share|improve this answer












                                                share|improve this answer



                                                share|improve this answer










                                                answered Nov 20 at 9:06









                                                Mołot

                                                4,99112556




                                                4,99112556






















                                                    up vote
                                                    0
                                                    down vote













                                                    It's basically DMs wits against the players. Don't be shy about a hard campaign, because the DM has to be equally sophisticated and they'll probably tire if they can't do it either. So keep all options open in gameplay, explore dialog (which will test the DMs wits especially), and try your luck a few times.






                                                    share|improve this answer





















                                                    • What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                      – NautArch
                                                      Nov 20 at 18:56















                                                    up vote
                                                    0
                                                    down vote













                                                    It's basically DMs wits against the players. Don't be shy about a hard campaign, because the DM has to be equally sophisticated and they'll probably tire if they can't do it either. So keep all options open in gameplay, explore dialog (which will test the DMs wits especially), and try your luck a few times.






                                                    share|improve this answer





















                                                    • What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                      – NautArch
                                                      Nov 20 at 18:56













                                                    up vote
                                                    0
                                                    down vote










                                                    up vote
                                                    0
                                                    down vote









                                                    It's basically DMs wits against the players. Don't be shy about a hard campaign, because the DM has to be equally sophisticated and they'll probably tire if they can't do it either. So keep all options open in gameplay, explore dialog (which will test the DMs wits especially), and try your luck a few times.






                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    It's basically DMs wits against the players. Don't be shy about a hard campaign, because the DM has to be equally sophisticated and they'll probably tire if they can't do it either. So keep all options open in gameplay, explore dialog (which will test the DMs wits especially), and try your luck a few times.







                                                    share|improve this answer












                                                    share|improve this answer



                                                    share|improve this answer










                                                    answered Nov 20 at 16:59









                                                    Cedric

                                                    1475




                                                    1475












                                                    • What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                      – NautArch
                                                      Nov 20 at 18:56


















                                                    • What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                      – NautArch
                                                      Nov 20 at 18:56
















                                                    What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                    – NautArch
                                                    Nov 20 at 18:56




                                                    What do you mean by DM wits against the players?
                                                    – NautArch
                                                    Nov 20 at 18:56


















                                                     

                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded



















































                                                     


                                                    draft saved


                                                    draft discarded














                                                    StackExchange.ready(
                                                    function () {
                                                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f135916%2fcan-you-cast-spells-with-verbal-components-if-you-have-no-tongue%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                                    }
                                                    );

                                                    Post as a guest















                                                    Required, but never shown





















































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown

































                                                    Required, but never shown














                                                    Required, but never shown












                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Required, but never shown







                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Plaza Victoria

                                                    Puebla de Zaragoza

                                                    Musa